Survey: UVa faculty tepid about honor system

By Aaron Kessler
Published: December 27, 2006

It has been called the “third rail” of University of Virginia politics. But the “single sanction” has been singled out once again as the largest problem facing UVa’s honor system.

In the most comprehensive survey ever done of the university’s faculty and teaching staff on the honor system, the single sanction - the policy whereby an honor offense leads only to one penalty, expulsion - stands out as the dominant factor among those expressing reservations with the system.

The survey, conducted by UVa’s Center for Survey Research at the request of the student-run Honor Committee, took about a year to complete. It asked faculty a variety of questions related to their knowledge, support and experience with the honor system.

The results reveal lukewarm support among faculty for the current system, with only about 1 in 3 faculty members saying they “strongly support” the current honor system. The level of support was even less among teaching assistants, where only 1 in 4 expressed strong support.

However, a plurality of those surveyed - about 36 percent - said they supported the idea of the system, but had reservations about the current processes in place. They want to see changes.

Those who responded by expressing “support, but with reservations” about the honor system were asked to elaborate on their concerns in narrative form.

Of those who wrote about their misgivings, 53 percent of their responses focused on the single sanction, according to the survey’s report.

One instructor called it “Byzantine.” Another said the single sanction “deformed” the process. Yet another said it “effectively prevents any punishment in most cases even when the student clearly committed an offense.”

As one instructor recounted with regard to a cheating case he brought to the Honor Committee: “Clear evidence of cheating was demonstrated and the student essentially admitted it during the trial. The student was found not guilty despite this. Although I was not told anything about the jury deliberations, I suspect that the jury did not feel comfortable with the single sanction and found the student innocent despite clear guilt.”

Another wrote: “It is a lose/lose proposition. Either the student is found guilty and expelled, which hardly makes me feel positive, or found innocent, in which case they get away with cheating. Nearly all my complaints are rooted in the single sanction system.”

About a third of those asked to explain their concerns didn’t answer the question, leaving it blank; therefore the percentage of all those asked the question - regardless of whether they responded - was 35.9 percent. But of those who answered, the majority cited the single sanction.

Alison Tramba, chairwoman of the Honor Committee, said it was not surprising the single sanction should be mentioned as a concern.

“We know there’s been a lot of ongoing debate among the students and the faculty with regard to it,” she said.

Tramba said the Honor Committee is looking at the drawbacks and benefits of the current policy, and there are alternative proposals being drawn up for consideration.

“They are still very much in development at this point,” Tramba said. She doubted any alternative proposal would be ready in time for the student elections in March.

Part of the reason for delay is that discussion of the single sanction is still a lightning rod, splitting the Honor Committee just as it has the wider university community. Those pushing for change have butted up against a powerful constituency of alumni and current students who see anything less than expulsion as an erosion of honor at UVa.

The reformers, however, argue the single sanction has alienated many faculty and students who say one punishment doesn’t fit all crimes - and as a consequence students who are caught lying, cheating or stealing are getting away with no punishment at all, while those deserving of a second chance risk getting expelled on a first offense.

Tramba said the Honor Committee has sometimes avoided the single sanction topic because of the passions it stirs up.

“There is a core group of committee members who want change, and others on the committee who don’t,” Tramba said. “I’m trying to make sure the sanction has not been the sole focus, as … sometimes debate over it can take over all the work of the committee.”

Ken Schwartz, a UVa professor of architecture and chairman of the Faculty Senate, said the Senate is “eager to engage in conversations” about the new survey, but that faculty members want to first give the Honor Committee a chance to respond to the report. That response will come next month, in a written reply authored by the committee.

“In deference to the students, I’ve been waiting to see what they have to say first,” Schwartz said.

Thomas Guterbock, director of the Center for Survey Research, was the study’s principal investigator. He said the overall results of the survey could lend themselves to several interpretations.

“The results present a mixed picture,” Guterbock said. “The findings will likely give both supporters of the [honor] system and those opposed to it something to point to.”