The Academic Honor Principle at Dartmouth is a failure. It's time to end the utopian experiment begun with its adoption on Feb. 13, 1962 and continued to this day. Unless major reforms are adopted, it is only a matter of time before Dartmouth is humiliated by a mass cheating scandal of the sort suffered recently by the US Naval Academy. Think it can't happen here? It already has.
Over a year ago, Professor Emeritus Jeffrey Hart's English 68 class was the subject of just such a scandal. Hart admitted that perhaps 15 students had cheated on his mid-term but refused take any action. One student, cited anonymously in The Dartmouth, claimed the number was closer to 60. Many people criticized Hart -- and rightly so -- but the more serious problem of the students' unwillingness to turn in cheaters went largely ignored.
The harsh reality is that the vast majority of students are simply unwilling to enforce the honor code. Most students I have spoken to feel it would be the height of arrogance to accuse their fellow students of cheating. They inevitably point out the innumerable ambiguities to each case and the difficulty of knowing for sure whether or not cheating is going on. Not surprisingly, few students seem comfortable with the notion of taking on the responsibility of directly confronting someone or reporting their suspicions to a professor.
We should also recognize that some students today choose to abide by a different set of ethics than that espoused in the honor code. These people would never "rat" on a fellow student and many even see this as a strength of their character. The concrete loyalty bonds of friendship, brotherhood, sisterhood or other affiliation may also trump abstract notions of academic honor.
The Committee on Standards process itself is a major contributing factor to the problem of unreported honor code violations. The rules say that if a simple majority of COS members believe a student is "more likely than not" to have cheated, then the student is guilty. This absurdly biased evidence standard fosters the perception, deserved or undeserved, that reporting one's suspicions to a professor equals kicking someone out of Dartmouth, even if that someone turns out to have been innocent.
The administration and faculty haven't helped matters by keeping the COS process so secretive. Choosing to ignore the Dartmouth Review's arguments why David Shamberger '95 was wrongly convicted by the COS merely fosters the perception among students that the process is unfair. Is the COS really just a kangaroo court that turns every accusation it gets into a conviction? The administration would do far better to simply show us how the system is working fairly than to remain silent. Anything is better then continuing to let the Review do all the talking.
Restoring a perception of fairness to the COS process will not, however, be enough to save the Academic Honor Principle if students aren't willing to face up to the responsibility of living by it and enforcing it. Ask yourself if you are willing to turn in or confront your fellow students. If you answer no, the honor code system has failed.
Most Dartmouth students will never cheat, but it is precisely these students who will suffer most if the honor code system continues to exist without significant reform. The Committee on Instruction's recent survey of student attitudes towards the honor code was a good start, but it remains to be seen what changes will be proposed. Anything short of abandoning the honor code and returning to proctored exams should be viewed with skepticism by the Dartmouth community. The alternative is to wait for another mass cheating scandal after which all of us, not merely those responsible, may be viewed with skepticism by the rest of the world. Don't take my word for it, just ask any recent Naval Academy graduate.
