University of Virginia Library

Conservative Attitude

Several Committee
members were impressed by
the prevailing conservative
attitude toward the System
expressed by first-yearmen in
last week's meeting
Commerce School President
Alan Botsford commented
that he was "less worried about
the downfall of the System
coming from pressures for
change from within than I
would have been before we
went through the dorms."

Mr. Botsford noted an
"intangible pride" among the
first-year class "that at
least the System covers every
student here 24 hours a day."

Engineering School
President Tom Phillips
remarked that aside from some
hesitancy to turn in a close
friend, most first-year students
"want to see the System
tightened up."

"Overwhelming support
and enthusiasm for the
System" was observed by
College Vice-President and
Committee Vice-Chairman
Mark Warner. He estimated 90
to 95 per cent approval of the
System among the students
with whom he talked.

Dean of Students Robert T.
Canevari told The Cavalier
Daily that many students
comment on the Honor System
both negatively and positively.
The Office of Student Affairs
then conveys these sentiments
to the Honor Committee. Mr.
Canevari stated, "During the
first semester those of us in
this office were beginning to
hear some negative comments
concerning the System..."

Following the recent
dormitory visits, Mr. Canevari
met with Mr. Peerman and Mr.
Botsford. He noted that they
were "very enthusiastic about
the outcome of the visits. They
felt it had been very
informative for the Committee
and also helped the students,
themselves, better understand
the System."

Much has been said and
written about the declining
radicalism of American college
students and the Honor
Committee's recent dormitory
visits contribute to mounting
evidence that the attitudes
toward the University's Honor
System are also caught up in
the fabled "swing back of the
pendulum."

Mr. Phillips asserted that the
System "reached an all time
low" in effectiveness in 1970.
"At that time," he continued,
"it was a very popular thing to
do to degrade everything, and
that included the Honor
System. Things were in such
bad straits that we even had a
substantial number of
counselors not supporting the
System."

He felt that the University
has "come out of this lack of a
responsible attitude."

Mr. Warner mentioned the
cyclical nature of social trends
and proposed that the end of
the Vietnam War and the
tightening American economy
have affected the attitudes of
University students toward the
Honor System. Without the
war to occupy their thoughts
and emotions many students
have become "more
goal-oriented and hence more
conservative."

The University has always
had its share of Cassandras
with respect to the System's
effectiveness; but the voices of
optimism have been much
more audible in recent months.
Mr. Warner theorized that,
excepting the problem of
business "rip-offs," the System
is "probably working as well as
it ever has."

Several Committee
members pointed to the large
number of students who have
left the University without a
trial–six since last April–as
indicative of renewed
acceptance of the System.
"Leaving under a cloud," a
fairly frequent occurrence until
about five years ago, had
become a very rare
phenomenon. Mr. Peerman also
noted that most of this year's
accusations have been made by
upperclass students.

Mr. Botsford stated that he
viewed last spring's referendum
on the sanction issue as a
turning point. He labeled it
the "beginning of a year of
more confidence in the System
than we've seen recently." The
prospect of a vote on such an
important aspect of the System
led more students to give the
entire package more thought.

College Dean Irby B.
Cauthen Jr. expressed
optimism for the System's
continued contribution to
University academic life. "So
far as I can tell the Honor
System is working most
satisfactorily, despite some
evident strains from time to
time on the dedicated students
who make up the Honor
Committee. As a professor, I
expect my students to abide by
its provisions, and I believe
they do. As a dean, I take the
word of our students as truth."

Assoc. Economics Prof.
Kenneth G. Elzinga, who
delivered this year's address to
new faculty, made the
following comments upon the
state of the System: "Given
the frailties of the human
vessel, I think the Honor
System works astonishingly
well. Of course, it is also a
fragile institution because it
serves a transient group of
individuals. Each generation of
students has to decide for itself
whether the Honor System is
worthwhile.