It is clear that many University students break the honor code. You could probably find this out by conducting a University-wide survey or using some equation, but all you really need to do is to take a look around when you are taking your next exam in a huge lecture hall. Now I am not saying that everyone at the University cheats, but I think most people would agree with me that the vast majority of cheating that does occur goes unreported. This scenario is only likely to continue. In a 2008 Honor Committee survey, only 44 percent of respondents said that they would report an honor case if they witnessed a clear violation. So why is this the case? There are probably many reasons.
One possible explanation is that the process takes a long time. It is simply just not worth it to most people to spend months bringing someone up on an honor violation. No one wants to spend a ton of his own time to bring up an honor charge against someone they probably don't even know. The drawbacks simply outweigh any perceived benefit, if you can even call it that.
The last time there was a referendum on eliminating the single sanction, the referendum failed, but barely. So, if a little less than half of the student body is against the single sanction or thinks it should be changed for whatever reason, it is unlikely that most of these students will bring honor charges against another student. No one wants to get someone kicked out of school. And yes, you can say that it really isn't the fault of the person bringing the honor charge, but that of the student who violated the honor code. However, though this may be true, it still won't make anyone feel better about the situation. In that same 2008 Committee survey, 62 percent of respondents said that "uneasiness about possibly causing the dismissal of another student" would deter them from reporting a case. These are the signs of a broken system.
There is also a perception that a large percentage of violations go unreported. If there really is rampant cheating at the University, then is does seem unfair that only a tiny fraction of students are punished? Those who are punished face the ultimate penalty of expulsion, while at the same time more egregious violations can and do go unnoticed.
So what is the answer to this problem? Obviously, it is beyond the scope of the Committee to police the University. No one wants that. But perhaps we should consider the age-old argument of whether or not single sanction is effective at promoting and enforcing a community of trust. If almost two-thirds of the student body would not report an honor violation because they don't want to be responsible for getting someone expelled from the University, then we start to have a system that is unenforceable. Allowing for a tiered punishment system would eliminate some of the guilt students might fear for reporting someone and thus cause more people to report cases. If more cases are reported, then students might think harder about breaking the honor code, especially if it is much more likely that they will get caught than it is now.
Ultimately it is up to the members of the University community to ensure the honor code's survival. We would all like to think that everyone will follow the honor code because they believe it is a just and moral system, but this isn't always the case. If single sanction was not a deterrent for reporting cases, then more cases might be reported. If students think they have a better chance of getting caught, then they might think more carefully about their actions regarding academic honor. This together would create a greater sense of accountability and would go a long way toward restoring our community of trust.
Megan Stiles' column appears on Wednesdays. She can be reached at m.stiles@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | 3 days agoThe implications and revelations of the lawsuit should inspire greater transparency at the University in order to ensure that financial aid is properly and equitably distributed.
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | 5 days agoThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | April 25, 2024Instead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
