University of Virginia Library

Honor Spirit

After reading your editorial of
January 13th on the subject of
"take-home" examinations, I think
it necessary to raise the following
question: Can there truly be a spirit
of Honor at this University when
students are not given the opportunity
to exercise that Honor?

The issue which I raise goes
beyond the desirability of the
"take-home" exams themselves;
whether or not I wish teachers to
give such tests is not the case in
point. However, many students
may feel that they could do much
better on a test in the relaxed
atmosphere of their own room, or
the library, or anywhere else they
choose to work on it. Free from the
pressures of time and examination-room
regimentation, it is not unlikely
that numerous individuals
would discover their minds to be
clearer and sharper for a given test.
Of course, others might not feel
this way, and this should also be
taken under consideration.

In your editorial, however, I
seemed to sense a feeling that the
Honor System would not be effective
unless the students are continually
reminded of their responsibilities
within it, and are furthermore
protected from too great a
temptation to cheat. This attitude
seems to contradict the very heart
of the Honor System here at
Virginia. Of what value is one's
personal integrity if one cannot be
trusted in a situation which, admittedly,
involves great temptation?
Do we not want students at this
University who are capable of acting
honorably when the temptation
is great to do otherwise? And
perhaps more to the point, do we
have such students, or are we just
kidding ourselves?

Here I must draw a line between
those regulations which are primarily
directed at preventing careless
mistakes, and those which
would restrict the freedom inherent
in our Honor System. Certainly the
checking of library books and the
requiring of identification cards at
sports events, both of which were
mentioned in the editorial, reflect
no discredit upon any student's
integrity. But to oppose "Take-home"
examinations on the
grounds that this involves too great
an opportunity for the students to
cheat, is to admit that too many of
our students are sorely lacking in
honor. Our Honor System can be a
meaningful instrument for personal
freedom only when it is exercised
out of the free will of the individual.
Otherwise it becomes mere
obedience to judicial rules.

In conclusion, I recognize that
the temptation involved in "take-home"
examinations are great. And
yet our Honor System becomes a
reality only as it applies to situations
in which there is an element
of temptation. As for those who
would cheat on such an examination,
they will eventually be discovered
and reported. If not, they
are only hurting themselves. I, for
one, do not feel that more "take-home"
examinations would lead to
any significant rise in cheating. But,
it this were to be the case, might we
not then ask ourselves: Is there
really an Honor System at Virginia?
For the true test of a man's honor
comes not when he is shielded from
temptation, but only when he is
exposed to that very temptation...
and overcomes it.

For this reason, I feel that it is
wrong to oppose the spread of
"take-home" examinations for fear
that this give students too great an
opportunity to cheat, and that they
could not handle this responsibility.
An alternative would be to explore
the desirability of "take-home"
examination, through a poll of
student and faculty opinion. Let
your decision be based on the
practical feasibility and desire for
such examinations, not on the fear
that our Honor System is not
strong enough to meet this challenge.