In his guest viewpoint (“A wolf in sanction reform’s clothing,” 2/10/2009), Justin Starr demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the proposal by Hoos Against Single Sanction. Starr would have us believe that the purpose of the proposal is to punish every trivial, meaningless white lie that students commit daily at the University. He purports that the Honor Committee, under the rule of the proposal, would conduct a veritable witch hunt to convict students guilty only of common mistakes. What Starr fails to recognize is that his nightmare of an honor system is the current reality: every semester, honor convicts students guilty of nothing more than haphazard mistakes or oversights. The proposal from HASS would serve only to penalize these students with something less than a termination of their education at the University. Rather than imposing a one-size-fits-all punishment of being expelled from school, the proposal would require honor juries to consider multiple options so that the punishment can fit the crime. Any reasonable person would agree that a system more forgiving of minimal offenses would be in the best interest of any student at this University.
Read More
VEGA: In defense of President Jim Ryan
By Keoni Vega | June 5, 2025Should the raucous Jefferson Council and related conservative groups succeed in their effort to oust President Ryan, the University will enter a new phase that will be unrecognizable to most of its current students and staff.
GILLIKIN and JOHNSON: U.Va., please rescind your Federal Executive Institute bid
By Steven L. Johnson and Matthew Gillikin | April 29, 2025By withdrawing its competing bid and endorsing the Charlottesville City Schools’ bid, the University has a high-profile opportunity to strengthen its partnership with Charlottesville City Schools.
BAKER, FRIDLEY, LIEU: We should re-examine Inclusive Access textbooks on Grounds
By Susannah Baker , Chloe Fridley and Brighton Lieu | April 11, 2025This appearance gives a fooling impression that Inclusive Access is the cheapest, best option for students, when in reality, the program is misleading in cost, accessibility and privacy.
