THE HONOR SYSTEM.
For eighteen years after the opening of the institution, honesty at the
written examinations was sought to be secured by the strict surveillance
of a committee of three professors. This was often found to be ineffectual.
In June, 1842, Judge Henry St. George Tucker, Professor of Law, offered
the following resolution, which the Faculty at once adopted:
Resolved, That in all future written examinations for distinction and
other honors of the University, each candidate shall attach to the written
answers presented by him on such examination a certificate in the following
words: "I, A. B., do hereby certify, on honor, that I have derived no
assistance during the time of this examination from any source whatever,
whether oral, written, or in print, in giving the above answers."
This was the beginning of the honor system at this institution. In
subsequent years the pledge was extended so as to preclude the giving
as well as the receiving of assistance. The system has been in operation
since 1842 without interruption. Its wisdom and its beneficial results
have been abundantly demonstrated. Its administration imposes no burden
upon the Faculty. Experience shows that the students themselves are its
sternest guardians and executors. Violation of examination pledges has
been of rare occurrence. In every case the culprit has been quietly but
promptly eliminated without need of faculty action.
The spirit of truth and honor, thus fostered in the examination-room,
has gradually pervaded the entire life of the institution, and all the relations
between student and professor.
It is not believed to be essential to the honor system, nor indeed to
be right, to expose the examinee to unnecessary temptation. The student
is regarded as one to be shielded from such influences and to have his
honorable tendencies carefully reinforced, and not wrecked. Hence the
examination is held in one place, and is conducted by the professor in
charge of the course or by one of his subordinates. Conversation among
the candidates and absence from the room are discouraged. They are
cautioned to avoid even the appearance of evil. These safeguards have
been found to be in entire harmony with the absence of espionage. The
fact that the candidate is not suspected, has been found to lead always
to the avoidance of conduct which would give rise to suspicion.
