In light of a survey conducted in 2000, where 45 percent of Duke University students admitted cheating more than once and 37 percent admitted falsifying lab data, Duke administrators have recently sought more aggressive policies in strengthening their honor code.
As The New York Times reported last month, the new regulations hope to deter first-time offenders by requiring students to report violations of the honor code.
Sound familiar?
The honor code, which was introduced at Duke in 1993, may be a foreign concept for some students, but for Princeton students, it's nothing new — the honor code has existed at the University for over a hundred years.
Still, times are changing, and many colleges are reevaluating their honor codes. Unlike some schools across the nation, where the question is whether or not to establish an honor code, for those who already have honor codes, like Princeton, the question becomes whether they should modify existing codes.
Cornell University rewrote its honor code in 2000 to address increased usage of the Internet in academic work, requiring teaching assistants and freshmen to take courses on academic integrity. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, too, is currently assessing the value of publishing academic violations in the daily campus newspaper without revealing any names and using the symbol "XF" on the university's transcript to indicate that the student failed the course because of cheating.
Reexamining the Honor Code
At the University, there also has been talk about the role of the Honor Code and its effectiveness.
Professor John Fleming, who serves as one of four faculty members available to the committee as advisors, expressed concern that the Honor Code no longer plays the same role for students today that it did for students when the Honor Code was first established in 1893.
"I am quite concerned both for a lack of understanding and lack of widespread support for the honor system," he said. "I have discovered that students often do not know what is covered and what is not covered by the Honor Code.
"That is not that I think there are large numbers of people who would cheat or would not think that cheating is wrong, but I think there are increasingly numbers of people who feel uncomfortable with the aspect of the code that involves turning people in," he said.
The voluntary nature of the code requires a widespread consensus among students that the Honor Code is a vital part of the University and that consensus no longer exists, Fleming said.
"Under these circumstances, it is possible, a remote possibility, but it is possible that the Honor Code could just wither," he said.
On the other hand, molecular biology professor Edward Cox, also a faculty advisor to the Honor Committee, said he believes that the Honor Code is effective. Cox attributed its success to undergraduate involvement throughout the entire process.
"People realize the consequences of their actions," he said.
Tempting as it might be to cheat, in order to get better grades, Cox said, students are more hesitant to cheat knowing that their peers expect them to uphold the Honor Code.
"You don't feel that way [tempted] when you're hauled before a committee of your peers and judged," he said.
Another faculty advisor to the committee, James Sturm, acting interim dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science, echoed Cox's confidence in the Honor Code. He cited only one case where he suspected a student of violating the Honor Code, throughout his 17 years of teaching at the University.
"From my limited exposure teaching electrical engineering classes, as little as I have seen, something must be working," he said. "I don't know if it's the Honor Code or the nature of the students in the first place, with or without the Honor Code," he said.
Sturm explained, however, that his experience may not reflect that of other professors, especially in different departments, which require papers rather than or in addition to written exams.
Dean Marianne Waterbury, who sits on the Committee of Discipline and is an advisor to the Honor Committee, said that she, like Cox, feels that the Honor Code is effective.
"We certainly emphasize the Honor Code and keep reminding students of the importance of academic integrity," Waterbury said.
Freshmen receive letters from Dean Kathleen Deignan and the Honor Committee chair before arriving on campus, constant reminders are given to adhere to Rights, Rules and Responsibilities and undergraduates are again reminded of the gravity of the Honor Code before Dean's Date, she said.
Waterbury added that she did not see what more the administration could do to increase student awareness of the Honor Code, except to continue reminding students of its weight at the University.
Reexamining the Honor Committee
Currently, two distinct groups evaluate alleged violations of the Honor Code. The jurisdiction of the Honor Committee, composed entirely of undergraduates, is restricted to in-class examinations. The Committee on Discipline, made up of both students and faculty members, examines violations in all other areas, including plagiarism in essays, problem sets, term papers and lab reports.
While both committees each receive approximately 20 to 25 alleged academic violations a year, the Committee on Discipline publishes its cases annually in a formal report released on its website, while the Honor Committee does not publicly disclose its rulings.
Upon report of a suspected Honor Code violation involving in-class examinations, two members from the Honor Committee are appointed to conduct an investigation and to try to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant a confidential hearing.
According to the honor committee's current chair, Catherine Farmer '03, summaries of these hearings are submitted in a report to President Tilghman. The names of students are withheld in the case of a non-guilty verdict, but released in cases where students are found guilty. Besides this report to the President, the inner workings of the Honor Committee remain a mystery.
During his term as Honor Committee chair, Justin Browne '01 proposed that the committee be more open about its proceedings and findings by making case summaries available to the public, through Firestone library.
Browne also proposed other reforms, such as creating a Defense Advocate Pool to help defend accused students and expanding the committee's jurisdiction to include both in-class and take-home examinations. The Defense Advocate Pool was created that semester, but the two other reforms were not implemented.
Farmer said that the committee has discussed the idea of making its cases public.
"It is something we have considered, and we have cautiously looked at it," she said.
Farmer also emphasized the importance of keeping the confidentiality of students who are found guilty and are suspended, but who will eventually return back to campus.
The policies recommended for UNC Chapel Hill might not be appropriate for Princeton, which is much smaller, she said. Yet, Farmer said she is cautiously open to the idea.
"Students on campus view the Honor Committee as very secretive. And while maintaining confidentiality is what we do, at the same time, there is no reason for us to be secretive outside of maintaining the confidentiality of the students involved," she said.
Cox expressed similar concerns. Releasing statistics on the number and types of cases, and the number of people found guilty and suspended might be helpful and would be reasonable, he said.
"Anything more than that would not serve any purpose whatsoever," Cox said.
At the same time, he stressed that releasing more information than that might compromise the honor committee's commitment to maintaining students' confidentiality.
On the other hand, Waterbury said she sees no reason not to publicly release detailed case information, provided that students' names are withheld.
"Whether the Honor Committee would want to do something similar [as the Committee on Discipline does], it's not necessarily a bad thing to do," Waterbury said.
"It is something that has not come up as a topic of conversation, but as long as the names and identities are not discernable, there is no reason not to describe the kinds of violations that have occurred in the last three years and say that these were the penalties that ensued," she said.
Fleming also alluded to the idea that the Honor Committee could pursue other changes to improve its effectiveness.
"[The Committee] is a fine statement of an ideal of academic integrity," he said. "It is also the only real manifestation of genuine student power or symbolic or illusory power at Princeton."
My hope is that the Honor Committee can cooperate in a fashion as to command not the acquiescence but the active support of all students," he said.
While Farmer said that the Honor Committee is working on certain changes to the Honor Code, she offered no comment on the specifics of these changes.
Read More
Students weigh in on changes to hours at Murray-Dodge Café
Eojin ParkMurray-Dodge’s hours have been cut nearly in half. Previously, Murray-Dodge was open from 3 p.m. to midnight every day. Amid other closures of campus cafes, its hours have been reduced to 4:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. daily.
Murray-Dodge’s hours have been cut nearly in half. Previously, Murray-Dodge was open from 3 p.m. to midnight every day. Amid other closures of campus cafes, its hours have been reduced to 4:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. daily.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson reflects on path to the Supreme Court in campus lecture
Isaac Bernstein and Justus WilhoitAt Princeton’s Harlan Lecture, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson discussed her journey to the Supreme Court, the power of dissenting opinions, and the importance of inspiring future generations.
At Princeton’s Harlan Lecture, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson discussed her journey to the Supreme Court, the power of dissenting opinions, and the importance of inspiring future generations.
Student employment in flux as University navigates budget cuts
Kian PetlinThe future of student employment remains uncertain amid budget cuts, with impacts ranging from reduced hours to staffing shortages.
The future of student employment remains uncertain amid budget cuts, with impacts ranging from reduced hours to staffing shortages.