After receiving a graded test back in class last week, I wondered how many of the students swarming the professor at the end of class to discuss their grades would complain about being marked too high.
With the budget sequestration looming Friday, threatening the nation with across-the-board spending cuts that would fail to address the long-term debt problem, political pundits abound who are castigating Congress for its inability to compromise.
Anonymous forums are among the Internet’s grimmest landscapes. Academically oriented websites like ratemyprofessors.com are pitched at a more sophisticated level than their non-academic counterparts — such as gossip forum Collegiate ACB, a dark younger cousin of Rate My Professors — but students still post with venom, often to the exasperation of professors who dare to give grades below a B-minus.
The Food and Drug Administration exists to regulate products and protect consumers from ingesting dangerous substances.
In an op-ed published Monday, second-year honor advisor Nick Hine writes that “anti-honor rhetoric has its roots in common misunderstandings … Kyle Schnoebelen’s denigration of the Honor Committee represents a larger problem in the overall honor debate” (“Reforming a perspective,” Feb.
This semester has brought to light, for me, a topic that was never really talked about during my first year — suicide.
Weed-out classes are familiar territory for most college students. Many have taken at least one such course either to fulfill major requirements or graduation requirements.
As a former student juror for an honor trial, I would like to respond to the recent article in The Cavalier Daily regarding the attendance of jurors (“Four jurors miss hearing,” Feb.
The University Board of Elections’ decision to alter the text of a proposed amendment to the Honor Committee’s constitution before voting started Monday raises questions of fairness.
In the last few weeks the Honor Committee’s Restore the Ideal proposal has sparked an unprecedented wave of conversation about the University’s honor system.
Fair warning: This column is about honor. By the time this article runs, voting on the proposed reforms of the honor system will be under way and The Cavalier Daily’s incessant coverage on honor will likely be winding down.
A few short years ago, I left the house I had grown up in and moved my familiar belongings into an unfamiliar room at the school of my dreams.
In recent weeks, the United States Postal Service has found itself short on profit. To compensate for its losses, the agency plans to launch a new clothing line, ready for wear in 2014. The USPS has been struggling since the beginning of 2006, when it cut annual costs by about $15 billion and reduced the size of its workforce by 28 percent.
Monday we published Tim Thornton’s last column (“Highs and lows,” Feb. 24). Thornton was our ombudsman for more than four years.
Today, students will begin voting on a proposal to reform the honor system. As is proper given the ideal of student self-governance, the choice belongs to students and students alone.
This is my last column for The Cavalier Daily. I’ve been the paper’s ombudsman for more than four years, offering critiques and advice to the staff and trying to explain journalism to readers.
Although I have been involved with the honor system since my first semester at the University, until this year I have never supported the concept of an all-Honor Committee jury panel.
I was disappointed by the Managing Board’s lead editorial endorsing the Honor Committee’s proposal (“An ideal worth restoring,” Feb.
Voting is among the few things that, at least in the U.S., can’t be done well online. Election Day was onerous.
Though he’s no Ed Jenkins — who drained nearly $3,000 into a failed campaign for Student Council president last year — for second-year Engineering student Steven Harris, running to be an Honor Committee representative has proven expensive.
