University of Virginia Library

Honor Guidelines

I hope all of you have had the opportunity to read the additional
appeal procedure instituted into the Honor System which was
submitted to The Cavalier Daily by the present Honor Committee and
printed in the Wednesday, March 11 issue. We feel that it will
strengthen the system by serving as a further guarantee for fairness to
all. I would like to take this opportunity to provide you with more
information concerning the development of this change.

Since last spring the Honor Committee has been concerned, aside
from trials, with several key areas of the system which we felt merited
re-examination. We felt the terrific need to establish some means by
which to gauge student opinion. That the Honor System has lasted so
long and worked so effectively has largely been attributable to its
periodic adjustment to changes in student attitudes. We felt that once
such a mechanism could be established, the Honor Committee could
proceed to sample student opinion with respect to certain features in
the system, one of which was the question of a further appeal process.
As one of the articles in the recent series about the Honor System has
stated, a mechanism has been agreed upon by this year's Committee,
after having extensively considered varied alternatives. That proposed
mechanism is a scientific poll, done under the auspices of a professional
agency, which would question 600 to 800 members of the student
body.

Along with our desire to determine student sentiment so that
particular changes could be considered and then presented to the
student body for a vote, we have felt one specific area which warranted
high priority consideration was that of a possible further appeal. As a
result of numerous comments and requests which we had received
regarding this particular feature, it appeared to us that the Honor
Committee was of the opinion that such a change was so important that
its implementation should not be delayed unnecessarily. For the last
several months, therefore, the Honor Committee was of the opinion
that such a change was so important that its implementation should not
be delayed unnecessarily. For the last several months, therefore, the
Honor Committee has deliberated at great lengths over the best form of
a further appeal. In considering various alternatives we paid particular
attention to effecting a durable and sound appeal procedure, keeping all
steps and procedures completely in the hands of students, and, of
keeping the system and its procedures as easy to understand by all
students as possible. We feel that we have achieved these goals with this
change, copies of which are available in the offices of the student
government.

As one can tell from the modifications on the Blue Sheet, in a
typical honor trial, six school presidents will serve along with five
school vice-presidents. As such, the Committee will be composed of one
member from each of the ten schools of the University, plus an
additional vice-president from the school of the accused. On an appeal
for good cause, the Committee will be composed of the four school
presidents and five school vice-presidents who did not serve on the
original trial, as well as the secretary of the school of the accused. Thus,
they will constitute a ten-member Committee with one member from
each school of the University - none of whom heard the original trial.

I should also note on behalf of the Honor Committee that we feel
strongly that the simplicity and generality of "good cause," the grounds
by which an additional appeal may be granted, is a key feature of the
further appeal process. Rather than be encumbered and limited by
strict and specified rules, the Honor Committee felt it was more within
the spirit of the Honor System to incorporate general grounds for an
appeal which would allow the accused and the Honor Committee more
flexibility in determining the necessity for a further appeal.