University of Virginia Library

Question Honor System

Candidates Seek Student Dialogue

This is the first of a series of articles on
candidates for the Presidency of the College.
Each candidate was asked to answer, in writing,
questions dealing with the Honor System.

The first question for today is:

Do you think the Honor System is still
working well? Does it have full support? If not,
why? What can be done to maximize student
support?

David L. Morris is a third-year student from
Charlottesville. He is an English major, and is
running as the candidate from the Jefferson
Party.

His answer to the first question was:

Our Honor System is perhaps the most
outstanding at any university in the U.S. and, in
that relative sense, our System is "working
well." Relative to past years, however, student
respect for our Honor System has declined as
criticism - both conceptual at legal has
grown.

The increasing one-sidedness of the dialogue
between the Honor Committee and the student
body becomes more evident during one's latter
years at the University. This lack of meaningful
dialogue often breeds indifference as the Honor
Committee seems more and more distant and
isolated from the students.

Animated By Proclamations

The Honor System appears to be animated
more by proclamations from the Committee
than by the enthusiasm of the University
community. Student support for the System
can be maximized only through a constant
dialogue based on surveys and student polls,
printed communications, using such media as
The Cavalier Daily, and continuing clarification
of the workings of our System.

J. Michael Murphy is a third-year student
from Memphis, Tennessee. He is a government
major and is running as a candidate from the
Virginia Progressive Party.

His answer to the first question:

I do not think that the Honor System is
working as well as it has in the recent past, the
wide-spread support that it once maintained.
But I do feel that support can be maximized
with more open, realistic approach which takes
into account the problems of today.

Lists Reasons

There are many reasons for a lack of full
support; the increasing communication problems,
"personal morality," and the fundamental
disagreement over the scope and penalty of the
system.

Due to its long held shroud of secrecy, the
Honor Committee has failed to produce a
consensus of honor. What percentage of
students who are dismissed are drafted? What
kind of problems do students encounter in
getting into other schools, or finding jobs after
dismissal? What are the alternatives to a single
penalty and why aren't they openly considered?
Such questions as what can be done to
alleviate the problem of students who feel
alienated from the system, are constantly
ignored.

Now is the time that we must find answers
to these questions. With the Honor System
under fire from a student body of 10,000, what
will happen when the University increases
rapidly? Will the system be any more justifiable
to fifteen or twenty thousand students than it
is now?

We do not strengthen the system by blindly
affirming it. We can make it stronger only by
questioning it and justifying every principle
within it.

The second question for today is:

Should the System extend to the faculty?
Why or why not?

Mr. Morris answered as follows:

Our Honor System should never be extended
to include members of the faculty. If
faculty members were to live under the System,
they would be entitled to a significant role in
its administration.

It would be most difficult, if not impossible,
to reach a consensus of honor among both
student and faculty considering the different
conditions under which each groups lives.

It is impossible for the student body to
require that the faculty assume the responsibilities
of an honor system under which they have
not voluntarily requested to live.

Most importantly, however, inclusion of the
faculty would necessarily result in a loss of
total student control probably the strongest
and most jealously guarded attribute of our
Honor System since its inception.

Parallel System

Mr. Murphy answered the second question
as follows:

Yes, it should in that the faculty should
initiate an honor system somewhat parallel to
ours, possibly with a Faculty Committee on
Ethics to be concerned with any misdealings
between a faculty member and a student. I
cannot favor mere extension of our present
system to include the faculty. If we did that,
who would sit on the trial? — faculty or
students? Or both? What power would the
students have to dismiss a faculty member?

However, there is the need for the students
to feel that the faculty is governing itself by the
same spirit of honor as themselves. For this
reason, establishing or reviving a Faculty
Committee on Ethics could be a successful step
in bringing faculty and students together under
a uniform system which applies the same
standards of honor to all members of the
University community.