For those who have not had a chance to read through the student handbook, there are four principles, grouped as the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities that guide student behavior: the Statement of Intellectual Responsibility, the Statement of Respect for Persons, the Statement of Freedom of Expression and Dissent and the Statement of Student Rights. The two major principles that seem to permeate the Amherst atmosphere are that "every person's education is the product of his or her intellectual effort and participation in a process of critical exchange" and that "respect for the rights, dignity and integrity of others is essential for the well-being of a community."
While I do believe that these statements lay a good foundation concerning the responsibilities of the student body here at Amherst, they are buried in the handbook, read aloud just once at orientation and then reiterated only before exams start. The passive attitude toward these principles does not foster an environment conducive to fulfilling the aims of our school.
At the Association of Amherst Students (AAS) meeting on Oct. 7 after a discussion about recent destructive behavior by Amherst students, the Senate voted to create an ad hoc exploratory committee to look into community building, the current disciplinary policy and honor codes at peer institutions. AAS President David Bugge '04E noted that "the ad hoc committee was not charged to deal specifically with the creation of an honor code, but rather to address the larger issues of campus-wide student respect and responsibility." Ian Shin '06, the only senator to vote against the creation of the committee, but who is serving on it anyhow, said that "an honor code can work, but [only if] we solve the basic problems that called for its institution in the first place."
We're on the right track by finally looking into the topic through this committee, but it's imperative that the AAS thoroughly considers the creation of an actual honor code. It will raise the bar for our academic and social responsibilities, as it has done in many other colleges around the country.
The University of Virginia (UVA) and Haverford College are two institutions that have comprehensive honor codes. Haverford takes great pride in their system which advocates "mutual understanding" and "engaging others in dialogues that yield greater awareness ... to create an atmosphere conducive to learning and growing." This is achieved through orientation activities, the signing of the honor pledge card and regular meetings to discuss what the code means and how to act responsibly.
Students at UVA, according to Honor Committee Chair Christopher Smith in an online statement, "live in an atmosphere unfettered by distrust and temptation." Through active participation and awareness of the honor system, they learn to hold themselves accountable for all their actions whenever and wherever they represent themselves as students of the University. Infringement of the honor system can come with severe consequences, as was seen a few years ago when Professor of Physics Louis Bloomfield realized that over 100 students in the past decade had plagiarized their term papers. Current students were expelled and students who graduated had their diplomas revoked. The school's reaction shows how seriously they believe in what Prof. Bloomfield calls "the community of trust."
Wesleyan University and Williams, Middlebury, Colby, Bowdoin, Hamilton and Connecticut Colleges all have honor codes. A number of the other NESCAC schools have or are looking into the establishment of such an institution. It is vital, therefore, that Amherst does not fall behind.
We must not only seriously consider creating an honor code at Amherst, but actually establish one. Many of these colleges have students sign a pledge-similar to Haverford's-either at the beginning of the academic year or with each major academic assessment. Wesleyan goes so far as to include a multi-page description and discussion of what plagiarism is in their honor code.
Across the country, according to three studies done by the Center for Academic Integrity (CAI) in the early '90s, at least one out of every four college students has cheated more than once. More importantly, these studies showed that there were significantly fewer students who cheated at schools with honor codes. According to a 1993 study, 53 percent of students at schools without honor codes admitted that they had cheated once, while only 29 percent did so at schools with honor codes.
Now it may seem as though that statistic is more reflective of the students themselves. Those who wouldn't cheat are more likely to go to a school with an honor code. But it's not that simple. I believe that most of those who cheat once do not see themselves as "cheaters." By having an honor code that is respected by both the students and the faculty, it could be enough of an extra hurdle to convince a student not to cheat.
There's no time to lose on this issue. Cheating has been on the rise here at Amherst. From 1990 to 1998, there were only five cases reported each year. Compare that with 16 cases in 1999 and 19 in 2000. The number of instances of cheating is probably much higher, as professors might not realize it is occurring and at times may even overlook it. The College Council reported: "While much of this behavior is deliberate and, on occasion, highly organized, some of it reflects a diffuse ignorance of what counts as cheating (on problem sets, tests and lab reports) or as plagiarism (on essays and exams)." It is clear that the College needs to educate the student body about issues concerning cheating and intellectual responsibility.
Rutgers University Professor Donald McCabe, who has done extensive research in this subject and helped to found the CAI, expressed his belief in the Colgate University newspaper that not only must a school have an honor code, but that "it is critical to create a dialogue between students, faculty, and administrators about the honor code." That is why I was pleased by the recent AAS decision to create an ad hoc committee. It's the first step toward the creation of a dialogue about respect.
So, where should we go from here? The school must create an honor code that concisely explains what it means to be a good student at Amherst and a responsible citizen beyond graduation. It should describe the criteria used to examine possible infringements of the code (I would suggest something similar to UVA's: the act, the intent and the seriousness). We should be required to sign a pledge at the beginning of each year and before each examination period. But most importantly, more discussion is imperative.
President Tom Gerety said that "we in the liberal arts colleges believe that teacher and student must stand face to face in the many conversations that are the work of the both ... because the best teaching is conversation." We must, as a community of students and faculty, regularly and thoroughly discuss what respect and responsibility mean to the College. We need a formal and permanent dialogue and we need it now.