Parent alert...About the Honor Code

Colleges and Universities A-Z Princeton University
101

<p>“Whitman College Director of Studies Cole Crittenden GS ’05 will replace Hilary Herbold GS ’97 as associate dean of undergraduate students…”</p>

<p>[Crittenden</a> GS ?05 named associate dean of undergraduate students - The Daily Princetonian](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/04/21/25937/]Crittenden”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/04/21/25937/)</p>

<p>Anybody happen to notice this in the Daily Princetonian on April 21? Dean Herbold was in charge of the Honor Code and discipline issues and they fired her…my bad…she “resigned” (headline word in the Prince: page 3) to become a social worker…yeah right…this is a validation that there is something going on with the way discipline is (was) being handled at Princeton that change became necessary.</p>

102

<p>So just to add a slightly different perspective here, though I realize this thread is old:</p>

<p>I was (am?) a prospective student choosing between Yale, Princeton, and Columbia. Eventually I eliminated Columbia and was choosing between Yale and Princeton. To be totally honest, Yale had a slight advantage for me, but my interviewer really sold me on Princeton–and just so you know there’s no other factors here, the only relation I had to any of the three schools was that my dad went to Columbia.</p>

<p>There were little differences between the schools. Princeton has a “sprint” football team (Yale doesn’t), and I love football but am too small to play Varsity at College, so that really interested me. I preferred living in a city that wasn’t as nice as Princeton, NJ, because I was worried about living in a bubble. Princeton was far more beautiful, in my opinion. But Yale sort of clicked with me, for whatever reason.</p>

<p>The biggest difference, as I’ve said on other threads, was the Eating Clubs vs. Yale’s Residential College system (of which I prefer the Colleges), and I don’t mean to turn the conversation to that. But I got the honor code letter in the Princeton packet as well, and I thought of it as a small negative. What scared me was the idea of turning my fellow classmates in for cheating–which doesn’t appear to be the problem here.</p>

<p>As a prospective student who literally told Princeton no yesterday, I feel like I’m close enough to my decision process to tell you all how reading this thread would have affected my decision between the two schools. This system sounds horrifying. Paysthebills did little more than introduce a problem he perceived. What really scared me was the article from the Prince, and reading the comments.</p>

<p>It sounds like the problem with the system is not the setup, but the atmosphere. Everyone who has had a problem with it accuses the system of reflecting a “guilty until proven innocent” attitude towards accused students. I like that the Honor Code reflects taking responsibility for yourself to act in good faith. Its a true value of mine. </p>

<p>The problem is that the idea of “holding yourself to a higher standard” or whatever you’d like to call taking responsibility for your own integrity is clearly obliterated by the way they execute the code. What is an Honor Code, in reality, if when you are accused you’re immediately assumed guilty until you can prove yourself innocent? That’s the opposite of an Honor Code! What part of it asks students to take responsibility for themselves, other than installing an Honor Board made up of students–but what we see with Harvard is that there’s absolutely no difference between whether your board is students or faculty if the students have no actual control over the board. Sure, you can say the students govern their own Honor Code. But am I understanding it correctly that they are not elected by the students, but chosen in a different fashion?</p>

<p>I haven’t spent any time at any College or University. I attend a small, rural, public school and have never heard of College Honor Codes before this year. This is my perspective on the Princeton Honor Code. If I had read this information before I made my decision, my decision probably would not have been nearly as difficult as it was. And some other Pre-Frosh might disagree–I think its very good that this thread is here with both viewpoints represented.</p>

103

<p>For those who have chosen Princeton, you now have four years to CHANGE the Honor Code. This is not a SMALL element in your life. You sign a pledge on every exam and paper. That student you elect as your class president is YOUR JUDGE AND JURY, not just the grade deflation, toilet paper advocate. </p>

<p>Did you know that there aren’t enough members on the HC to have a hearing AND an appeal by DIFFERENT people? What court in this country allows appeals to be heard by the same jury?</p>

<p>Did you know that the Honor Committee CHOOSES the supplemental members other than class presidents? What comes to mind when a jury selects other jurors? Does diverse points of view come to mind? I don’t think so…</p>

<p>Did you know that a voting member of the Honor Committee hearing YOUR case sees the evidence against you IN ADVANCE. What student at Princeton DOESN"T prepare? What jury sees evidence in advance? Does Pre-judging come to mind…it’s called prejudice.</p>

<p>Did you know that Honor Committe members pledge confidentiality but ARE permitted to write about their experiences (names omitted) on their graduate school/job applications as testimony to their own virtue. They CAN get ahead on the backs of people they judge. There is no pledge of SILENCE, just confidentiality.</p>

<p>Did you know there is no consequence when those who testify against you say something IN THE HEARING that is not true?</p>

<p>Did you know that the rights and rules outlined in the Rights, Rules and Responsibilities are not “necessarily” followed?</p>

<p>Did you know that there is no “judge” ensuring that the processes are properly executed DURING the process? </p>

<p>Did you know that a FRESHMAN can judge the integrity of your work? A freshman, three months out of high school…How much “training” is even possible? (the first hearings are after Fall midterms.)</p>

<p>Did you know that the standard for conviction is “overwhelmingly convincing evidence” not “no doubt.” Therefore, these students can kick you out, even though they have doubt of your guilt. Also, one committee member can CONVINCE another, it’s not just about the evidence. Guilt or innocence involves a “discussion” by the Honor Committee of the evidence. Therefore, ONE member can CONVINCE another. Remember how these members are selected (see above)?</p>

<p>Did you know that for the Honor Committee either you are innocent or are kicked out (even with doubt…see above). For a black or white punishment, the standard should be higher–“no doubt” or the punishment should have more latitude to comprehend DOUBT such as a zero on the exam or probation or retake the exam or…some other enlightened LEARNING OPPORTUNITY. But how do you feel about ONE MISTAKE AND YOU’RE OUT?</p>

<p>Did you know that take home exam and plagiarism cases ARE heard by the Honor Committee (all students) not necessarily the Committee on Discipline? (student, faculty and deans) Find out which circumstances…Did you know that an econ major can judge plagiarism on a FRENCH paper WRITTEN IN FRENCH!!! or a math proof, or computer code, or quantum mechanics!!! How about a physics major judging a paper written in Russian. Forget that last example, science majors on the HC are VASTLY outnumbered by lawyer wannabe’s. Mostly TOWER…</p>

<p>Review the initial interrogation process…AKA the ambush. Tell me there is a presumption of innocence. Tell me they treat you as they would the university President or Dean…as an innocent person deserving respect…</p>

<p>You have four years and it will TAKE four years…enough time to at least TRY to make a change. Look at the referendum approved in recent voting…the ONLY change they could come up with is to eliminate the “alternate” status and permit 12 fully functional members instead of 9 plus three alternates…That’s all the change they proposed!!! Change will take courage and fortitude. GO TO PRINCETON AND MAKE A DIFFERENCE or prehaps become it’s next victim.</p>

104

<p>Way to undermine your credibility, pays. For someone complaining about lawyer wannabes, that’s a totally lawyer-wannabe list, complete with empty, self-contradictory rhetoric. It is also very poorly thought-through, and not at all clear about what you want.</p>

105

<p>^Well I’m not a lawyer so I have more difficulty seeing through his self-contradictory rhetoric. Besides, what is the point of posting all this stuff unless you have some real interest in what is going on with the honor code. There are much easier ways to make Princeton look bad if that is his only goal.</p>

<p>I just think this is the wrong place to get people involved in how to fix the honor code. There must be a more effective way to go about getting the changes you feel are so necessary.</p>

106

<p>I am afraid of this school. I don’t know what to do to preserve anonimity since I fear retaliation, so I can’t go to them privately. The internet record lasts forever so bringing this to the Daily Prince is not prudent. As a good newspaper, you can’t print without an identity. If there is another safe avenue for this tell me.</p>

<p>The resolution of these issues will not change my experience. It’s over…done. As I said in the very beginning: ASK QUESTIONS. Examine the Honor Code deeply and thoughtfully. Understand it in all its dimensions. I’m merely listing some of those dimensions where improvements can be debated. There is a lot here for someone’s cause celebre. These students want to make a difference, this is certainly one way to do it. This forum appeals to highly motivated readers who care about their university experience…fertile ground for making a change.</p>

<p>I have no animus toward anyone who wants to study the law, but homogeneity of thought does not make for rich decision-making. Diverse analysis and problem-solving ultimately yields stronger, more confident solutions.</p>

107

<p>Its worth posting here because despite what others have said, they absolutely do not fully explain the honor code to the Prospective Students. They send a single paper to us in our packet that vaguely explains what it is and then talks about how important it is to the community.</p>

108

<p>re. #104</p>

<p>I do not have experience with the Princeton honor code but have attended a school with a similar honor code and am close to someone on the disiplanary board at a college. Paysthebills has raised some legit concerns about Princeton’s process but also raised a lot of red herrings. Many of the items cited in #104 are common to most (virtually all?) similar boards.

  • There is not a judge overseeing the process
  • The burden of proof is typically something like “very likely” as opposed to" beyond reasonable doubt" … btw - the burden used by Princeton and other schools is similar to the burden used by our civil courts … it’s not exactly unheard of.
  • Personally I much prefer the board sees the evidence before the hearing starts. Most boards are not set up like a US court with the prosection and defense the only ones allowed to raise issues … the boards tend to run more like English courts where board members can ask questions and help to (hopefully) figure out the truth. If I was on the hot seat and innocent I believe it can only help if the board members have more time to review the evidence … it gives the board members to think about the evidence (including my story and evidence) and formulate the questions they want to ask.</p>
109

<p>I think that it’s worth my trying to wrap this up a bit. I’m a recent alumnus (2006) never posted before (a friend pointed me here). There is a lot of good to be taken from this conversation, but there are also misunderstandings. </p>

<p>First, the original poster is correct—all prospective tigers should read up on the honor code. To me, it’s one of the things that makes Princeton special. Read it, and ask people on campus (and alums) about it. Talk to people. There’s nothing wrong with information, so long as your get it from many sources to minimize bias.<br>
A few things for prospective applicants to know—the honor code is something that, en masse, does a lot of good. By placing the responsibility on students, it removes the faculty from the first line of defense against cheating. Tests are unproctored. Faculty and TA’s leave the room during exams—no one’s walking up and down the aisles, no one’s watching your eyes to see what you’re doing. It removes a huge burden from those taking (and frankly giving) tests—the adversarial environment in most classes during exams just isn’t there. This isn’t true at other schools (I have first hand knowledge from people on the faculty side at other Ivy League institutions), where faculty and TAs are put in “police” roles during exam time. </p>

<p>In reality, however, you don’t think about the honor code 99.99% of the time. Don’t cheat, don’t plagiarize, and the overwhelming odds are that it won’t be an issue. The paranoia that I’m seeing doesn’t really play itself out on campus—there’s a bit of ‘nothing to hide, nothing to fear’ ism, that, while not good for courts of justice, are fine for the overwhelming majority of students going about their day-to-day lives, learning and living on campus. See examples below. Mostly, I didn’t think about it.
That said, like any other review institution, it has its flaws. People have been wrongly convicted (though most aren’t expelled for academic violations, most were given a year or more off). And frankly, we thought it inflexible. If convicted, the minimum punishment, IMHO, was too severe, and if anything, pushed some people I knew not to report folks (the mental justification went something like “do I really want that person to get a year off for THAT? That seems disproportionate.”) There are issues with the system. They are rare and unusual (and it sounds like a few have cropped up recently), but they exist. As do travesties of justice at any peer institution, or in the court systems as a whole. Is it unfair? Yes. Can it be changed to make it better? Perhaps. Is there a straight-forward and mature conversation to be had on-campus about what the changes look like? Absolutely. And I encourage you to have it (and bring in the alums!). Last time I checked, though, the Deans had final say. And we can argue until the cows come home whether Deans ever changed it, the honor system goes through the administration. And thus the final responsibility, by definition, lies there. </p>

<p>So, here’s my take to perspective applicants (besides for enjoy the next four years):

  1. Do read about the honor code. And the anti-cheating policies at every school you’re looking at.
  2. Do ask people on campus what it means to them, and what they think of it.<br>
  3. Make the decision to attend or not based on a multitude of factors—I would never dream of not going to Princeton out of fear that I’m going to do everything right and wake up one morning expelled. The odds are just too low.
    If you go:
  4. Don’t cheat. It sounds simple, but I can’t tell you how many times that advice isn’t heeded. The C in the class is better than the suspension.<br>
  5. Know the rules for class. Most of the academic integrity issues that I came across were people who didn’t follow the rules (ie, people who used calculators when it said NO CALCULATORS or brought notes into class when it said CLOSED BOOK). Along those lines, when it doubt, footnote it on papers. Certain classes have strict rules about cooperation and use electronic scanners to check for plagiarism. Know which classes those are (some profs even tell you, but ask upperclassmen), and be extra careful about how you work with people. Phrases like “I just want to have a look at your notes” and “Could I just see how you’re thinking about this” can lead to problems in certain classes (what was COS 126 come to mind) where they look at the people’s homework to check for similarities, particularly on a campus where everyone wants to share. Know which classes that’s no ok in, and pull a Nancy Reagan—just say no. </p>

<p>Though anything’s possible, most of the academic integrity issues that I heard about where someone was “innocent” had a story. Someone asked to “borrow someone’s notes.” Someone was “being stalked, and the stalker changed the exam after the fact”. Someone “happened to come up with the same argument” in the same order, using the same language, as in the recently-published article in a peer reviewed journal. This isn’t to say that innocent people don’t get screwed—it happens wherever mere mortals administer justice ([Innocence</a> Project - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_Project]Innocence”>Innocence Project - Wikipedia)). But to fear Princeton because of the honor system to me sounds both vaguely paranoid and downright ridiculous.</p>

110

<p>[Parting</a> shots - The Daily Princetonian](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/04/29/26035/]Parting”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/04/29/26035/)</p>

<p>Greg Burnham offered this suggestion…</p>

<p>… a thought on the Honor System. There has been much concern in the past year over how the Honor Code is enforced, with the most frequent complaints being that the system is opaque and draconian. However, from what I can tell, it’s a very little known fact that the student body can, completely of its own accord, change the Constitution of the Honor System. Specifically, to quote the Honor Committee website, the Constitution “can be changed by a petition of 200 students followed by a three-fourths vote in a student referendum.”</p>

<p>For all the concern, I’m surprised that we don’t see more action along these lines — 200 signatures is nothing! And, call me cynical, but I don’t have a hard time imagining us voting ourselves less harsh punishments. (And to be fair, our typical punishments are much harsher than those at most of our peer institutions.) Some variant of “First violation: fail the test, academic probation; second violation: expulsion” might well garner a three-fourths majority vote. But less important than the specific change is recognizing that we have the ability to effect any change that we can agree upon. Should the trial process be more transparent? Should we even call it an “Honor” Code? The questions are ours to debate, answer and institute.</p>

<p>It’s worth mentioning the Committee on Discipline as well. Though as far as I can tell, it doesn’t have a constitution, I think it would become unreasonable for the COD to mete out year-long suspensions for cheating on take-home tests if the Honor Committee ceased to do so for in-class exams. That is, changing one would probably force the hand of the other, and we do have the power to change one.</p>

<p>I claimed that these two topics were mostly unrelated, but there’s at least one common thread: In both cases we have an issue that troubles many of us, and in both cases, there are actions that we could take to improve our lot. Acknowledging this might be daunting: If, in two years, the Honor System hasn’t changed and the precise meaning of “A-grade work” is still a mystery, we’ll have, in part, ourselves to blame. On the other hand, if we do successfully fight the fact that it’s easier to whine than to act, then we’ll have something to be proud of. If there’s a moral here, it’s that Princeton is ours, and we forget this at our peril.</p>

111

<p>I was reading the honor code letter in the matriculation forms, and I came upon this statement: “The only adequate defense for a student accused of an Honor Code violation is that the action in question does not, in fact, constitute a violation.”</p>

<p>That doesn’t sit well with me. What if I were accused of illegal collaboration or something similar but wanted to defend myself by arguing that I never committed the action in question in the first place? Doesn’t this sort of assume that the reporting witness is undoubtedly telling the truth and that I’ve done something that potentially violates the honor code even before I have the opportunity to say that I didn’t do anything?</p>

<p>Also, a student can be convicted without a unanimous vote from the honor committee? That’s just wrong.</p>

112

<p>A little background for posters who may not remember me from back when I was on CC more often: I’m a rising senior at Princeton and am good friends with many students on both sides of the Honor Code system, both peer representatives and committee members. </p>

<p>First, I can tell you that the students serving on the honor committee take their jobs very seriously. They are fully aware of what is at stake and are not “out to get” their fellow students. That said, committee members believe so strongly in the Code as an institution that they seem to have little desire to show reasonableness, compassion, empathy, etc. Take for example the scenario that a previous poster mentioned:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Because the Princeton Honor Code treats all violations equally, honor committee members don’t see the problem with suspending the above student, despite the fact that his behavior is not dishonorable at all. There seems to be a disconnect between the Code’s conception of honor and that of the student body.</p>

<p>From my perspective, there are two distinct problems with the Honor Code. The first is that the standard punishment can be too harsh in many cases. The punishment for the case that JHS described should be a warning or a zero on the assignment, not a one year suspension. If the Honor Code seeks to be more than a punitive instrument, then it must place more emphasis on helping students learn from their mistakes. This can be accomplished by adopting the standard that a ‘Prince’ columnist recently [suggested[/url</a>] – the first time you violate the code, you fail the assignment and are placed on academic probation while the second time you violate it, you are expelled. This would still deter students from cheating while not unnecessarily ruining their lives when they mess up.</p>

<p>The second problem with the Code is that it is riddled with procedural shortcomings. Two quick examples: First, honor committee members take turns serving as investigators. Imagine an analogous situation in our criminal justice system in which judges were also prosecutors. This arrangement makes the system seem biased against the accused and detracts from the legitimacy of the Code. Second, students can be called in for questioning by the committee without being told that they have been accused of a violation. There should be a Miranda-like standard in place that requires the committee to immediately inform students that they have been accused and to advise them of their rights.</p>

<p>The situation is certainly not as dire as paysthebills would suggest, but given what is at stake, the administration, the honor committee, and the student body have a duty to try to fix these problems. Repeating the tired refrain of “don’t cheat and you have nothing to worry about” just doesn’t cut it when students’ futures are at stake.</p>

<p>For those wishing to learn more about this issue, I’d recommend the following ‘Prince’ articles:</p>

<p>[url=<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/section/universityjustice/]Five”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/section/universityjustice/]Five</a> part series on Princeton’s Honor Code and Committee on Discipline](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/04/29/26035/]suggested[/url”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/04/29/26035/)
[Editorial</a> calling for an end to committee members investigating alleged violations](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/04/28/26018/]Editorial”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/04/28/26018/)
[Editorial</a> calling for a jury system similar to the one in place at UVA](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/04/19/25904/]Editorial”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/04/19/25904/)
[Editorial</a> calling for more lenient punishments](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/05/01/23616/]Editorial”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/05/01/23616/)
[Editorial</a> calling for a merger of the Honor Committee and the Committee on Discipline](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/05/04/23631/]Editorial”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/05/04/23631/)
[Editorial</a> calling for elimination of part of the Code that requires students to report suspected violators](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/05/08/23656/]Editorial”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/05/08/23656/)</p>

113

<p>Looking at the rough draft example, how common does that occur or was that case an exceptional one? I don’t want to be suspended for TWO YEARS because I forgot to add citations or something…</p>

114

<p>The Honor Code really isn’t a big deal, and it should definitely not make or break the decision to apply to or come to Princeton. It’s really not that different from most school, except we don’t need to buy scientific calculators because professors don’t want us programming stuff onto TI-89’s (UCLA makes students do this for some tests), we don’t need to show up to tests an hour early to get ID’d, we don’t need to feel awkward when the proctors are staring at us during tests, etc.</p>