University of Virginia Library

For Honor System

Candidates Seek Consensus

What do you think should be the scope of
the System?

David L. Morris (JP)

Our System cannot function without a
consensus of honor among our student
generation as to what behavior is unmistakably
reprehensible. Such a consensus can
only be defined in a continuing dialogue
between students and the Honor Committee.
Ours is a system based upon a participatory
democracy. Eleven men cannot legislate a
consensus of honor among 10,000.

How is the Honor Committee to determine
this consensus of honor within the University
community? Surely it is the Committee's
function to reflect, rather than to dictate,
student opinion.

A random survey based upon a statistically
accurate sample of the student body would
seem to be the most effective means of
determining student opinion as to what
constitutes a dishonorable act under our
system. For the Honor Committee to become
divorced from student opinion would inevitably
result in a system less effective and less just in
the eyes of the students.

J. Michael Murphy (VPP)

Determination of the scope of the Honor
System, taking into consideration the need for
a "consensus of honor" and the legal problems
involved has been one of the Honor Committee's
most difficult problems from year to year.

Any change in the scope of the system can
be disastrous if there is not widespread support
for it. Therefore to most effectively and
objectively determine the opinion of the
students in opinion poll should be made by the
Honor Committee under professional supervision.

From this we could determine whether the
problems were mainly from ignorance of the
system or from basic disagreement with its
principles.

Using the results of this poll and the fruits
of open discussion, a decision must be made on
whether we must narrow the scope. While I
favor the all-encompassing system if it works, a
system with a narrower scope might be an
unavoidable change in the future. The System
cannot work, regardless of its scope, if the
students don't support it.

What do you think should be the penalties?
Do you favor lessening the single-penalty
standard? What effect do you foresee if that
action is taken? How would you determine
penalties if they were not absolute?

David L. Morris (JP)

The question of scope and penalty are
inseparable. In many ways the single penalty of
dismissal is perhaps the heart of our Honor
System. It serves to reflect the consensus of
honor the community evaluation of the
seriousness of the offense.

The Honor System will continue to be
effective with this severe penalty it... its scope
includes solely that behavior that our student
generation will not tolerate, and ... it retains
the continued acceptance of a consensus of our
student generation.

I personally feel that the scope, not the
penalty, must be periodically redefined so as
not to violate a sense of balance between
offense and penalty.

If student sentiment were to reject the
validity of the single penalty, only then would I
favor the adoption of an alternate system the
first offense, one-year suspension; second
offense, dismissal. I am definitely opposed to a
system of graduated penalties assigned arbitrarily
and subjectively by the Honor Committee.

J. Michael Murphy (VPP)

Lessening the single penalty standard would
remove an important safeguard in our Honor
System. That is the fact that when there is a
shadow of a doubt in any honor trial the
severity of the penalty prevents the Committee
from making any sort of a compromise verdict.

This seems vital to protect the individuals
who are accused of an Honor offense.

On the other hand, I can well understand
the reluctance of many students to turn in a
fellow student for an Honor offense.

This substantial number of students, who
with justification and reason question the single
penalty, seriously effect the operation of the
system. To continue to ignore the intelligent
criticisms of the penalty will ultimately
eliminate the major portion of the support for
the system.

We must begin immediately to reconcile the
differences between the two groups by
discussion and debate if indeed we desire to
maintain the Honor System.