<p>
I do not think anyone is saying the Princeton process is perfect … what college discipline/academic integrity process is perfect? I’d also bet the vast majority of college students would rather be judged by peers than profs and administrators. (FYI - IMO the best make-up of the panel would be a mix of students, profs, and administrators).</p>
<p>paysthebills that proves our point. If this has happened, it is an extraordinary event. In other words, the system works remarkably well to fail only once in recent memory.</p>
<p>“There is a reason for an appeal process and it’s not because this committee of kids is perfect.”</p>
<p>Mission Accomplished: clear consensus that kids aren’t perfectand that processes can have flaws.</p>
<p>Histrionic verification of the obvious.</p>
<p>Kei</p>
<p>So what do you say to an innocent kid? OOOPS, my bad…sorry I ruined your life…</p>
<p>I mean, pretty much. What else can you do? Make amends, if possible. There could be a lawsuit. If proven innocent, then obviously his or her record would be cleared. Luckily as you pointed out, we can assume that it’s a very effective system that has only been proven to fail one in the recent memory of faculty and staff. </p>
<p>The committee of students is not perfect. The appeal process was created in order to try to ensure that if the students were biased or unfair, the decision could be appealed. Checks and balances.</p>
<p>Also, I believe that in the majority of cases, students would be more likely to sympathize with the accused, and not be as harsh as faculty members (who have been practicing rigorous academic work for decades) in deciding boundaries of academic integrity.</p>
<p>I’m a current student and know of several cases I consider egregiously mishandled by the Honor Committee. In fact, based on some clues in this thread I think I may know the specific case to which paysthebills is referring, and if so it is a truly dismaying punishment of someone innocent.</p>
<p>The Honor Committee does a good and thorough job with its area of expertise, but that expertise is directly limited to simple in-class exam cheating. Go much past that into nuanced issues of plagiarism and it gets far, far more complex, better dealt with by faculty. In those situations where such nuanced questions get referred to the Honor Committee, the worst results tend to occur.</p>
<p>Either way, the bottom line really is that there is no true protection of rights in disciplinary processes at a private college. Know that going in.</p>
<p>Finally, somebody believes I’m not a nutcase, making things up to attack Princeton. I’m just trying to open your eyes to another reality that most people don’t know about. Ask questions. Understand this system. Make an informed decision and appreciate what’s at stake.</p>
<p>I think students would be more harsh than the profs. Younger people do not have the life experience to sometimes see the gray areas.</p>
<p>This reminds me of a similiar thread about W&L honor code. The experience discussed was horrific for the student involved and kicked out of school by his peers.</p>
<p>I would really like some specifics, if that’s possible. I find it very hard to believe that an Honor Committee engaged in a “truly dismaying punishment of someone innocent” in a situation where experienced faculty would not have considered the student’s conduct plagiarism. What kind of “nuances” are we talking about, that students treated harshly, but faculty would let slide? How does such a case get to an Honor Committee in the first place? Why isn’t faculty opinion that specific conduct isn’t plagiarism not definitive, either at the Honor Committee stage or on appeal from the Honor Committee?</p>
<p>So far, this story does not make sense.</p>
<p>Can’t talk about specifics without violating confidentiality. But yes, experienced faculty testimony was overruled by inexperienced students. This is the Honor Committee (all students) not the Committee on Discipline which is typically associated with this issue and contains students, faculty and deans as judges. This was not the typical HC case. It’s in these atypical cases, where things can go awry.</p>
<p>Well, I don’t think you are telling the whole story. To say the least.</p>
<p>I did a little looking at the Prince, and have a few comments:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Clearly there is something going on, some real issues, and some real confusion. Princeton’s internally-developed definition of “plagiarism” goes well beyond what the word means in the outside world, although mainly, it seems, as part of the jurisdictional divide between the Committee on Discipline (which is responsible for plagiarism) and the Honor Committee (which is responsible for cheating on exams). The respective jurisdictions of the Honor Committee and the Committee on Discipline are possibly not capable of being understood by anyone who is not involved with them on a daily basis. It looks like a lot of what I would consider cheating is called plagiarism, and some plagiarism is defined as cheating, but it’s clearly more complicated than that. It’s also unclear which is the “better” forum, but the COD seems to have much more flexibility in the range of punishments it metes out. In any event, the OP here (who is recognizably also a commenter on the Prince articles) is not alone in his unhappiness, although he is idiosyncratic in what how he assigns blame.</p></li>
<li><p>If the Honor Code works as well as the Prince’s web site, it is desperately in need of an overhaul.</p></li>
<li><p>Complaints about the Honor Committee are the obverse of all the boasting Princetonians do about how undergraduate-centric Princeton is. There is a downside to telling college students that the world revolves around them: sometimes they take that seriously. But it’s a sad commentary to attack the Honor Committee for not having faculty on it – the whole point of Honor Codes is that they reflect self-enforced student standards, not faculty standards. And, on the whole, perhaps because of its membership and perhaps because it has less flexibility in punishments, the Honor Committee seems to be more lenient than the Committee on Discipline.</p></li>
<li><p>I am stuck by the irony of how poorly concerns about honor and privacy mesh. To really work well, the Honor Code would have to be the subject of constant discussion, and violations made public. That’s the only way for students to really be educated about what “honor” means, and it’s the only way for those administering the code to learn when they may be venturing beyond what their fellow students believe. But modern privacy concerns essentially make that impossible, and ensure that Honor Code enforcement will appear arbitrary, technical, and unfair . . . and indeed that it will BE arbitrary, technical, and unfair.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Here is a link to a recent (3/5/2010) opinion pieice in the Daily Princetonian by a Junior (class of 2011). </p>
<p>[An</a> unfair honor code - The Daily Princetonian](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/03/05/25349/]An”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/03/05/25349/).</p>
<p>Timely.</p>
<p>read the comments at the end of the piece…very interesting contributions to this debate.</p>
<p>For those of you who might still be interested in this issue, the Harvard Crimson has run a series of stories just recently about academic dishonesty at Harvard and how well the school’s Administrative Board works in handing out punishments. The conclusion of a just-completed review by the administration is that there is a problem and that changes need to be made.</p>
<p>Interestingly, they’re giving serious consideration to adopting an Honor Code system based on Princeton’s model as an improvement over their current system. According to the articles excerpted below, there is widespread unhappiness among both students and faculty members at Harvard regarding academic dishonesty and disciplinary proceedings.</p>
<p>The original poster in this thread might look a little hyperbolic after reading the stories about the situation at Harvard. In fact, the Harvard Crimson editorial board opined that “*ncreasing student input would be a fundamentally positive development in reforming Harvards disciplinary process.”</p>
<p>[A</a> Better Board | The Harvard Crimson](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2010/3/23/board-ad-students-report/]A”>A Better Board | Opinion | The Harvard Crimson)</p>
<p>Read the following three articles and the statements from current students in the comments section. I’ve come away feeling that Princeton’s system (while always subject to improvement) is actually quite good and is even being considered as a model by Harvard administrators and students.</p>
<p>Note that these articles are quite long (and well-written) and I’m excerpting just a small number of key passages in each. They all deserve a closer reading and Harvard administrators and students deserve a good deal of credit for their honest self-criticism.</p>
<hr>
<p>[Ad</a> Board Grapples with Plagiarism | The Harvard Crimson](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2010/3/22/academic-dishonesty-ad-cases/]Ad”>Ad Board Grapples with Plagiarism | News | The Harvard Crimson) = Article 1 of 3</p>
<p>"As a result of the past decades technological advancements, cheating has become more difficult to identify and assess, and professors have grown increasingly reluctant to turn cases over to the Administrative BoardHarvard Colleges disciplinary bodystating that the punitive measures are too inflexible.</p>
<p>In light of the growing disconnect between faculty and the Ad Board, some administrators worry that many cases of academic dishonesty are not reported or even identified.</p>
<p>Theres ample reason to think we have a real problem, says Dean of Undergraduate Education Jay M. Harris. We certainly assume that the cases that are brought to the Ad Board are the tip of the iceberg.</p>
<p>Pforzheimer House Resident Dean Lisa Boeswho, like all resident deans, sits on the Ad Boardsays that from her experience, faculty members will sometimes choose to handle cases of academic dishonesty themselves as they feel the Colleges disciplinary actions may be too severe.</p>
<p>These instances are widespread, Boes says, and College administrators worry that inconsistent handling of academic dishonesty cases is unfair and results in uneven outcomes.</p>
<hr>
<p>[Forced</a> Withdrawals Come Under Fire | The Harvard Crimson](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2010/3/23/students-withdrawal-required-college/]Forced”>Forced Withdrawals Come Under Fire | News | The Harvard Crimson) = Article 2 of 3</p>
<p>"Every year, an average of 70 Harvard students face a requirement to withdraw [N.B. this is about three times as many as at Princeton each year] the Ad Boards most common response to cases of academic dishonesty and a relatively standard response to serious academic failures.</p>
<p>College administrators say that withdrawal offers students a valuable opportunity to take a step back to reflect on their life goals and time at Harvard. But students like Anna and Jeff point to an array of potential problems in the withdrawal process, such as the punishments lack of relevancy to the original infraction, the sudden loss of health services at the University, and the pervading sense of isolation it instills.</p>
<p>The Board mainly receives feedback on the withdrawal process through personal statements that students are required to submit to be considered for readmission to the College. But these evaluations may not be entirely reliable.</p>
<p>I wrote all this [explicative deleted] about how I realized what a luxury academic study was, Jeff says of his readmission statement. It was true to a certain extent…but I absolutely omitted everything I thought [the Ad Board] didnt want to hear.</p>
<hr>
<p>[Administrators</a> Discuss College Honor Code | The Harvard Crimson](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2010/3/24/honor-code-students-academic/]Administrators”>Administrators Discuss College Honor Code | News | The Harvard Crimson) = Article 3 of 3</p>
<p>"According to Dean of the College Evelynn M. Hammonds, faculty and adminstrators have begun preliminary discussions about the adoption of an honor code at Harvard.</p>
<p>Despite the uncertainty surrounding the form and details of a potential Harvard honor code, one thing remains certain: many College administrators are looking for a way to combat academic dishonesty at Harvardwhich Harris recently called a real problemand they hope that an honor code may be the solution.</p>
<p>All the research shows an honor code does reduce plagiarism and academic dishonesty, Bowman says. But beyond just combating academic dishonesty, Harris says the College is hoping to promote a better community of learning.</p>
<p>Both [Dean of the College] Hammonds and Undergraduate Council President Johnny Bowman acknowledged that Princetons honor code could be a model Harvard might opt to emulate."</p>
<p>This is an interesting series of articles. Notice, the Ad Board at Harvard is a Faculty Board and this study is one that serves the faculty since professors have grown increasingly reluctant to turn cases over to the Administrative BoardHarvard colleges disciplinary bodystating that the punitive measures are too inflexible.</p>
<p>Faculty members will sometimes choose to handle cases of academic dishonesty themselves as they feel the Colleges disciplinary actions may be too severe. Over one-third of cases before the Ad Board result in required withdrawal. Yet the Ad Board also offers disciplinary probation, and admonish. Some faculty members seek other options such as course withdrawal. Undergraduate Dean Jay M. Harris suspects that faculty members are bypassing the Ad Board because of this shortfall in the range of possible outcomes resulting in the same infraction yielding different consequences, depending on the faculty member, and wants to bring an end to this parallel system and bring about more consistency. The theory is that with a broader array of punishments, the parallel system with languish and the Ad Board can be more comprehensive.</p>
<p>But so far, this is faculty talking to each other. Id be curious to hear what students, who received a zero on a suspicious test feel about no longer having that outcome and instead get the opportunity to go before the Ad Board. Consistency works well for faculty, but how do the students feel about it? How do they feel about being judged by Faculty members who consider getting kicked out of school as an opportunity to retreat . Tell that to an employer describe it as you would oooh summer camp. Who are these faculty members? What planet are they on? a retreat yeah.</p>
<p>Part III once again describes faculty and administrators have begun preliminary discussions about the adoption of an honor code at Harvard. Where are the students in all of this? The Committee to Review the Ad Board recommends altering the role of the Student Faculty Judicial Board and renaming it the Student-Faculty Administrative Board where Students would have to opt to have their cases heard by this second academic board. NOWHERE have I read about adopting Princetons ALL STUDENT Honor Committee. Harvard is looking to ADD students, not remove all faculty.</p>
<p>Students are only in school for four years and all their institutional knowledge and experience is shallow. At Princeton there is no judge or wise person ensuring fairness during the hearing, throughout process, offering procedural judgments and the instructions or the standards for judgment appropriate to each unique circumstance. ( A dean reviews things but only when its over.) This role of judge or keeper of order and fairness is a student as HC Head, not an experienced adult. The HC head in certain cases might only have two years of experience. The HC applies what they have seen before to what they see in any future case. If they have never seen it before, the Honor Committee makes it up as they go along because thats all they can do. Since there are only nine members of the HC and 3 alternates, some HC members may have NO EXPERIENCE ever (like freshmen or a new alternate). Even seniors may not necessarily have three years of experience since some quit. Since the quorum for each hearing is 7 members, Princetons 12- member Honor Committee is too small for an appeal by new members. For what is at stake, and its not the opportunity for two semesters at summer camp, students deserve more stewardship and more wisdom to decide their fate. </p>
<p>I think faculty-student boards with parity are better than all student or all faculty boards because faculty can provide the knowledge, wisdom and continuity necessary for a fair process and fairer outcomes and students can learn from those willing to teach.</p>
<p>Think of the student committee which makes a mistake and condemns a person, who then in despair does something horrible. Does any university administration want to place that burden solely on the shoulders of its thoughtful students?</p>
<p>just curious, paysthebills - do you think we should do away with juries? Leave the decision to experts, since juries can’t possibly have the experience necessary?</p>
<p>Like it or not, one of the distinguishing features of the most famous honor systems is that they are adopted by students and entirely administered by students. That’s clearly the case at UVa and West Point, and at least nominally the case at Princeton.</p>
<p>Juries are a poor analogy – they are very constrained, and judges take decisions away from juries all the time. Jurors are treated like idiots in the legal system.</p>
<p>I’m inclined to believe that paysthebills is simply a ■■■■■. Maybe it’s just me.</p>
<p>Having read this thread, I have reached two conclusions.
<p>2) paysthebills believes a college education is a $200,000 investment that lands you a good job. He does not understand what university life or education is actually life. If he had his way, allegations of plagiarism would be heard by legal courts and subject to the same legal restrictions and rights as criminal trials.</p>