The Honor Committee voted Dec. 5 to pass two new amendments that would redefine two of the three criteria that are used to evaluate whether an act is an honor offense. The proposals would not take effect unless approved by at least 60 percent of the student body.
The University characterizes an honor offense as a deliberate act of "lying, cheating or stealing which warrants permanent dismissal from the University." The amendments, if passed by the student body, would change these criteria from "act, intent and triviality" to "act, knowledge and significance."
The words "intent" and "triviality" are found throughout the constitution and would be altered accordingly.
The amendments are intended to better reflect the current definition of an offense, which states that the student in question "knew or should have known that the act in question would constitute an Honor offense," and that the "open toleration of such an offense would be inconsistent with the Community of Trust."
"A common criticism is that the [criteria] are not necessarily clear and that they seem too convoluted," Honor Committee President Charles Harris said.
He emphasized that the amendments would not change what is expected of students under the honor system.
"The proposal is instead intended to make these expectations more clear," he said. "The reason behind both of these changes is to establish a community standard and to clarify the rules."
The Committee passed the proposed amendments with the two-thirds majority required to approve a change.
"We are hoping that these changes help those involved in cases as well as our jurors to understand and interpret the definitions better in future cases," said Vice Chair for Trials Whitney Johnson. "There has been a lot of confusion around the intent clause in the past specifically, and we're hoping this will address that to some degree."
Prior to committee approval, Graduate Arts & Sciences representative Alexander Cohen proposed an alternative amendment that contained a more complex definition of intent. Other representatives expressed concern that students should not be allowed to claim ignorance of classroom policies or Committee policy, which would be detrimental to the honor system. Nevertheless, the Committee will bring these amendments before the student body as ballot referenda for the University-wide elections in February.
"I think that this is a positive change for the sake of clarity, while not changing much of what is substantively expected of students," Harris said.
The Committee and University replaced "reprehensibility" in the original Honor Constitution with "seriousness." "Triviality" then replaced "seriousness" in a 2006 election.
Read More
U.Va. researchers identify that HIV drugs can protect against Alzheimer’s disease
By Lauren Seeliger | 2 days agoDoctor Jayakrishna Ambati and his research team have begun work on a new drug called K9 which could treat and prevent Alzheimer’s.
Graduating students share their future plans as they enter the job market
By Nina Broderick | 3 days agoMany students find the Career Center to be a valuable tool during the job search and application process.
U.Va.’s Finals Weekend spotlights the achievement and service of the Class of 2025
By Leigh Bailey | 5 days agoIn University President Jim Ryan’s welcome address, he acknowledged the support of family members and friends present in the audience and beyond that played supportive roles in these graduates’ lives.
