[Note: The graphic at right was created by 2006 Uni graduate and former OG editor/co-founder Angelina Liang.]

AFTER MANY Student-Faculty Advisory Committee meetings, faculty and student discussions, and diligent Gargoyle updates, an honor council has been instituted as Uni High’s new method of dealing with academic dishonesty.

The new honor policy will be probationary, meaning basically that this is a trial run.

At the end of the school year, the faculty will get together and discuss how they thought the new policy worked, work out any problems that arose, and decide on a course of action for the
following year.

HOW WILL IT WORK?

As of now, the new system will apply only to the infractions listed in Section 7.10 of the Student Handbook and will work like this:

A teacher or administrator who believes that a student is guilty of cheating will notify the student of the allegation. The student will then respond to the accusation and either work it out with the teacher, take the matter to the assistant principal, or request that the situation be reviewed by a student honor council.

• If the student chooses to devise a solution directly with the teacher:
The consequences will be decided by the teacher and student. The proof that academic dishonesty did occur and the resulting consequences will be reported to the assistant principal so that he/she may compile an official record of cheating for future reference.

• If the student goes directly to the assistant principal:
The assistant principal will choose from a variety of punishments, including but not limited to a grade of zero on the assignment, placement on disciplinary probation, a failing grade in the course, or possible dismissal from school based on the decision of an appointed disciplinary review committee.

• If the student chooses a hearing in front of the honor council:
A random number generator will be used to pick six students, one from each grade, subfreshman through junior, and two seniors. After ensuring that there is no conflict of interest within the jury, a lunchtime hearing will take place. The honor council will hear the accusation by the teacher, the defense by the student, and the testimony of up to five witnesses for both. The honor council will deliberate and decide on the best course of action. This decision will act as a recommendation to the administrators, who will ultimately be responsible for picking a disciplinary action.

WHY THE CHANGE?

This final policy is very similar to the draft completed last March, the only difference being a stricter set of procedures and guidelines for all honor council hearings.

The new honor policy is also accompanied by the honor code, drafted and put into effect last year.

The honor code is based on the core values of respect, honesty, and accountability. Each student pledges to uphold these values and to maintain Uni’s supportive and challenging academic environment.

The new benefits of this system are many-fold, according to supporters.

First of all, through the honor code, the new policy incorporates a set of well-defined parameters regarding acceptable student behavior and teaches students what sorts of conduct are expected from them.

Second, the new set of options for students who have been accused of cheating allows for a sliding scale of consequences. Smaller infractions can be punished with more lenience, whereas more serious infractions can be dealt with accordingly.

Previously, the punishments for each infraction were pretty well set in stone. A first offense resulted in a mark of zero on the assignment, a second resulted in a failing grade, and a third resulted in possible dismissal based on the decision of an appointed disciplinary review committee.

“It takes the off the pressure caused by the three-strike system,” said assistant principal and SFAC member Sue Kovacs. “Now, there are more options and more opportunities for discussion.”

“Students often feel that teachers or administrators are too unfair,” added SFAC's president, senior Eunice How. “I think the honor council will be well-utilized. I know people in the past have been unhappy with their punishments. The honor council will just provide more options for those who don’t want their fate to lie in Kovacs’ hands.”

Finally, the new system stresses that teachers try to educate students about academic dishonesty, what is allowed and what isn’t.

“Minor cheating is a teachable moment,” said Kovacs. “Teachers can coach their students on how to help each other on homework without copying. They can let their students know exactly what is and isn’t allowed. That way students will understand the limits, will know why they got punished, and learn better ways to deal with homework.”

PROBLEMS ON THE HORIZON?

However, possible problems could arise from the use of a student honor council. While a system is set in place so that there aren’t jury members with a conflict of interest regarding the accused student, it is possible that friends or enemies could end up on the council.

“Uni is so small; everyone knows each other,” said How. “It is fairly easy for people to be biased by what they see or what they hear. It just isn’t likely that there will be a jury without any bias or previous impressions.”

Another possible issue may come from the accused student’s ability to remove a member from the jury if they feel it to be necessary. The spot will then be randomly filled. However, the student could continue to remove jury members until they feel they have a more lenient or friendly jury.

“Hopefully, if a student starts to continuously remove jury members, that will act as a red flag to administrators,” said Kovacs. “Even so, I think that the Uni community is smart enough and honest enough that having a friend on the honor council wouldn’t really give an accused student an unfair advantage.”

But, what do students think about being judged by other students? The final problem with the honor council system is the possible discomfort that a trial by peers may incite.

“It seems possible that the students on the honor council might not know the full range of possible punishments the same way someone like Kovacs would,” said senior Karen Woodley. “They may not know the system well enough to go over all the options and come up with the best solution.

"Also, the honor council doesn’t allow room for as much input from the accused. If Kovacs punishes a student, the student can talk to her about it, protest the punishment, maybe ask for an alternative. The honor council sets up more like a true trial, where the jury’s verdict is final.”

Admittedly, Woodley may have a point. According to Kovacs, in universities and colleges with honor council systems, a student jury has been shown to be less lenient than teachers or administrators when it comes to punishing students accused of academic dishonesty.

Still, many believe that this new honor policy is a step in the right direction for Uni High.

“Deep down, gifted kids know it’s dumb to cheat,” said Kovacs. “I think that if this system successfully teaches students what is expected, then everyone will finally come to that realization.”