I applaud Robert Baldwin’s critique of the Jason Smith honor trial that appeared yesterday (“In defense of Jason Smith,” 4/6/2009). Specifically his point about non-triviality lacking precedent sheds light on the recently failed referendum to make the honor system a multi-tiered system and how Smith could have benefited from such a system. Similar to the way in which the Honor Committee instituted a slanderous, dishonest campaign to ensure the failure of the referendum this spring, now the Committee has committed another unjust act against our community in the form of the precedence Smith’s case represents: the potential for a primary witness in an honor trial to also be an officer in the committee itself. We must ask ourselves as members of the community of trust just how many injustices we can tolerate from the Committee. If we are unable to change honor through the democratic process due to the Committee’s demonstrated skill at deceiving our community then we must ask if it is necessary to change the terms of its authority through other means.
Read More
LETTER: The Jefferson Council understates faculty criticism of the presidential search
By Jeri Seidman | 7 hours agoThat is factually inaccurate. In fact, faculty did protest.
A statement by 211 concerned faculty on the presidential and provost search committees
By Concerned Faculty | October 4, 2025As members of the faculty, we remind the Board that, at the end of the day, an academic community is an exercise in shared governance for the good of the whole.
LETTER: Embrace medicinal herb gardens on Grounds
By Jane Mattimoe | October 2, 2025I do love the gardens around the Lawn, which feature small smatterings of herbs, but something more extensive and scientific would be of great benefit to Grounds.
