This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/20/us-universities-honour-code-exams

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Will a student lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do? Will a student lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do?
(40 minutes later)
Across Britain the exam season is in full flow. Schools are in the middle of GCSE, AS and A-levels, while universities host finals. At many institutions, though, one issue dominates: how to tackle cheating.Across Britain the exam season is in full flow. Schools are in the middle of GCSE, AS and A-levels, while universities host finals. At many institutions, though, one issue dominates: how to tackle cheating.
Colleges spend thousands of pounds and professional teaching staff spend hours rooting out those who have plagiarised from the internet or, in some cases, bought entire essays. So imagine a college where students sit their exams unsupervised, take responsibility for timing them and for handing papers in afterwards and are trusted not to check the answers with a quick glance at the textbook. At Williams College in Massachusetts, all this is standard practice.Colleges spend thousands of pounds and professional teaching staff spend hours rooting out those who have plagiarised from the internet or, in some cases, bought entire essays. So imagine a college where students sit their exams unsupervised, take responsibility for timing them and for handing papers in afterwards and are trusted not to check the answers with a quick glance at the textbook. At Williams College in Massachusetts, all this is standard practice.
Williams, where I recently served as a visiting professor, is one of a group of liberal arts colleges in New England, including Amherst, Wesleyan, Bennington and Smith. Described as "potted ivy" they share a small student body (Williams has 2,000 students) along with high academic standards, and an honour code. When I first heard of the honour system, I assumed it to be something like a motto, a guideline without real application. What I discovered amazed me. Williams' honour code was adopted in 1971. It is short, and essentially asks that students do not cheat, lie or plagiarise material. Agreeing to sign it is a condition of entry. It is the duty of students to report violations, which are in turn heard and handled by a student honour committee, responsible for determining guilt or innocence and deciding the penalty.Williams, where I recently served as a visiting professor, is one of a group of liberal arts colleges in New England, including Amherst, Wesleyan, Bennington and Smith. Described as "potted ivy" they share a small student body (Williams has 2,000 students) along with high academic standards, and an honour code. When I first heard of the honour system, I assumed it to be something like a motto, a guideline without real application. What I discovered amazed me. Williams' honour code was adopted in 1971. It is short, and essentially asks that students do not cheat, lie or plagiarise material. Agreeing to sign it is a condition of entry. It is the duty of students to report violations, which are in turn heard and handled by a student honour committee, responsible for determining guilt or innocence and deciding the penalty.
My faculty colleagues all supported it, couldn't imagine teaching without it and were surprised to hear there was nothing similar in the UK. "Basically, it means I assume they don't cheat," a professor of biology told me. Overwhelmingly, cases of cheating are reported by other students, not by staff members.My faculty colleagues all supported it, couldn't imagine teaching without it and were surprised to hear there was nothing similar in the UK. "Basically, it means I assume they don't cheat," a professor of biology told me. Overwhelmingly, cases of cheating are reported by other students, not by staff members.
Staff appreciated being freed of a responsibility that takes up time better spent teaching. Any professor suspecting plagiarism is duty bound to report it. But each case is handled from start to finish by students – who are, let's face it, better placed to deal with claims of internet plagiarism than, say, a middle-aged literature professor.Staff appreciated being freed of a responsibility that takes up time better spent teaching. Any professor suspecting plagiarism is duty bound to report it. But each case is handled from start to finish by students – who are, let's face it, better placed to deal with claims of internet plagiarism than, say, a middle-aged literature professor.
In the UK, most college lecturers I've talked to laughed at the idea that an honour system could work here – though it was laughter born of despair. Some British newspapers have called it a "cheaters' charter", but if the honour code works well in the US, why shouldn't it work in Britain? In the UK, most college lecturers I have talked to just laughed at the idea that an honour system could work here – though it was laughter born of despair. Some people have even called it a "cheaters' charter", but if the honour code works well in the US, why shouldn't it work in Britain?
Northumbria University has introduced a student pledge, but declined to call it an honour code or make it obligatory or legally binding – thus rendering the exercise redundant. The system must be binding, with breaches punishable; and the more educational establishments that buy into it, the better it works. A professor from Haverford College (where the honour system is treated with reverence) told me of a prospective student who had signed the code but attempted to take up a place at a preferred college. Haverford advised the second college that the student had signed the code and the offer was withdrawn. It was a matter of honour.Northumbria University has introduced a student pledge, but declined to call it an honour code or make it obligatory or legally binding – thus rendering the exercise redundant. The system must be binding, with breaches punishable; and the more educational establishments that buy into it, the better it works. A professor from Haverford College (where the honour system is treated with reverence) told me of a prospective student who had signed the code but attempted to take up a place at a preferred college. Haverford advised the second college that the student had signed the code and the offer was withdrawn. It was a matter of honour.
Far from being some kind of liberal opt-out, the honour code has its origins in the military – the code of the West Point cadets ("A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal or tolerate those who do") being the most famous. Perhaps British universities, far from being tougher, aren't tough enough. The main reason honour codes work is because they create a sense of community that students buy into. This is perhaps the reason they come down hard on each other. Because when you cheat, you're no longer seen as cheating the system: you're cheating your friends. Maybe that's a lesson British university students need to learn.Far from being some kind of liberal opt-out, the honour code has its origins in the military – the code of the West Point cadets ("A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal or tolerate those who do") being the most famous. Perhaps British universities, far from being tougher, aren't tough enough. The main reason honour codes work is because they create a sense of community that students buy into. This is perhaps the reason they come down hard on each other. Because when you cheat, you're no longer seen as cheating the system: you're cheating your friends. Maybe that's a lesson British university students need to learn.
• Follow Comment is free on Twitter @commentisfree• Follow Comment is free on Twitter @commentisfree