Notes from the desk

Author: JAKE A. KUIPERS - OPINIONS EDITOR

Faculty undermine the honor code

We were made to sign it before we even arrived. Once here, we participated in discussions about it. We have scrawled it at the bottom of our essays and tests repeatedly each semester, and we have taken great pains to make sure we are not in violation of it. Above all, we have respected it. What I am referring to, of course, is the Middlebury College academic honor code. Before arriving at the College, incoming students see the honor code as the holy grail of academic life. Upon arriving on campus, however, students see it is not as rock solid as previously believed. It doesn't take long for students to realize that professors practice different policies in terms of the honor code. And different honor code policies that vary by department and professor have a significant effect, loosening students' once deep appreciation and respect for that code.

Of course, this is not to say that professors don't care if students plagiarize or cheat. They are certainly all in agreement on that issue. However, inconsistencies arise regarding each professor's application of the honor code among his or her students. One professor will refuse to grade student work unless the exact honor code phrase is written and signed. Another will let, "I didn't cheat" pass as the honor code. Still another does not care if you do not write or sign a word of it. According to the Academic Honesty Statement, professors do not have to require students to write and sign the honor code. And, as long as plagiarism and cheating are not tolerated, perhaps professors shouldn't have to. However, the inconsistencies that result from the varying applications of the honor code not only confuse students as to the letter of the law, but also give them mixed signals on how they should interpret the significance of the code.

Professors may not realize that they set the tone for how students interpret the gravity of the honor code. The variations that occur during the administration of examinations are another example of how the inconsistency of the faculty undermines what the code is supposed to stand for: a bond of trust between students and professors. One professor will not allow you to begin an exam until she has left the room. Another professor will stay in the room and proctor the exam himself. However, the fact is that a professor or any other type of proctor is not allowed to be present during an examination. When our own professors violate Middlebury's academic codes, how are we expected to uphold our end of the agreement?

Having variation during these situations tells students that some faculty do not take the honor code as seriously as they might. Though I doubt it, their actions seem to suggest that perhaps we are expected to let certain tenets of the code slip, as well. A faculty that shares a consistent attitude and policy towards the honor code will strengthen that code's significance among the student body, as well as our desire to uphold its mores.