Follow us on Instagram
Try our daily mini crossword
Subscribe to the newsletter
Download the app

USG approves changes to Honor Code unanimously

The USG unanimously approved a proposal Tuesday requiring the Honor Committee to consider whether a student "should have reasonably understood that his or her actions were in violation of the Honor Code" when determining penalties for cheating.

The amendment, which took effect immediately, lists reasonable knowledge of the code as an extenuating circumstance, which may reduce a punishment from suspension to probation.

ADVERTISEMENT

"I think there are many cases in which students for whatever reason may break the rules without knowing they're doing it, and unless its written in the constitution, you have to be punished," Shaun Callaghan '06, USG vice president, said.

"I think this institutionalizes some type of fairness for people who are unaware of a certain regulation or rule they were violating, and it gives flexibility to the Honor Committee."

Ignorance of the Honor Code will not be a legitimate excuse, but the committee will consider instances such as when a student did not know he was violating a teacher's policy on an exam.

Censure option

The amendment also allows the committee to suspend a student "with censure." The words would appear on the offending student's transcript to mark a particularly serious offense.

The censure option allows the committee to penalize students who have committed an offense more serious than those that usually merit a one-year suspension, but not severe enough to deserve a two-year suspension.

'Intent'

The amendment was prompted by a failed undergraduate-wide referendum last year that would have required the Honor Committee to consider a student's intention when determining penalties.

ADVERTISEMENT

Some students were opposed to the referendum's use of the word "intent," arguing that the Honor Committee could not determine a student's true intent.

"We thought with the word 'intent' we'd be having to get into the heads of the students," Honor Committee Chairman Eli Goldsmith '04 said, emphasizing that intent could not be determined by concrete evidence. "We don't like to judge students, we judge actions."

The amendment is modeled after the Committee of Discipline's constitution, which considers reasonable understanding of the Honor Code when penalizing students.

The Honor Committee approved the amendment unanimously April 25.

Subscribe
Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »