Potential modifications to the Honor Code and the committee behind them

Stanford’s Honor Code was final up to date in 1997, earlier than computer systems and synthetic intelligence sources have been prevalently out there to college students. After requires reform from the Stanford neighborhood, the Vice Provost for Scholar Affairs (VPSA) created the Committee of 12 (C12), a bunch of 12 Stanford-affiliated college students, college and employees, to supply suggestions on the Honor Code, Judicial Constitution and Course of and Basic Normal based mostly on the wants of scholars within the current day.

Initially created in 2019, the Committee of 10 (C10), composed of 4 college students, 4 college and two employees voting members, was charged to replace the Honor Code. Resulting from unexpected delays, together with the pandemic, a 2022 cost was made to re-establish the committee because the C12. C12 now consists of 5 college students, 5 college and two employees voting members in an effort to “diversify illustration, lower the workload on particular person committee members and improve flexibility.”

The change in personnel numbers arose from undergraduates feeling underrepresented with the unique C10 in the course of the pandemic. In keeping with C12 scholar co-chair Jamie High quality, a sixth-year PhD scholar in Trendy Thought and Literature who served because the non-voting Board of Judicial Affairs (BJA) liaison throughout C10’s cost, the unique committee’s 4 scholar members consisted of two undergraduate and two graduate college students. Now, the C12’s 5 full-time college students embody two undergraduate and three graduate college students. Nevertheless, considerations of illustration stay from the committee persevering with to have solely two undergraduates when different Stanford neighborhood representatives elevated in quantity with the general progress within the committee dimension.

All members have been chosen by Nominations Fee (NomCom), a bunch of undergraduate and graduate college students that appoints college students to varied college committees.

As C12’s work got here to a conclusion in the course of the Winter quarter of 2023, the committee ready a handful of beneficial amendments to the Honor Code. This checklist will probably be introduced earlier than the Board of Judicial Affairs (BJA), Undergraduate Senate (UGS), Graduate Scholar Council (GSC) and School Senate for approval in the course of the first two weeks of April earlier than going to College President Marc Tessier-Lavigne.

Many of those suggestions emerged from concepts that got here up in conferences with college students, college and peer establishments over the previous few years concerning the implementation and interpretation of the Honor Code, in line with C12 member and Math Director of Undergraduate Research Brian Conrad. The C12 compiled a considerable amount of potential suggestions, an inventory lengthy sufficient such that “it’s not the case that every one the suggestions [being made] are going to be put up for a vote this 12 months,” Conrad stated.

C12 hosted constant workplace hours at some point of the winter quarter to be taught extra about neighborhood members’ ideas in regards to the Honor Code. The committee additionally organized scholar focus teams to facilitate dialogue in regards to the Honor Code, judicial constitution and course of and Basic Normal in a bunch setting. High quality hosted all the main focus teams and described them as “superb.”

“They’re scheduled to be an hour lengthy, [but] we’ve had focus teams go for 2 and a half hours with folks actually all for sharing their ideas, as a result of these are conversations that don’t actually have a spot elsewhere proper now,” High quality stated. “And our hope is that possibly that’s a chunk of Stanford tradition that we are able to look in direction of altering.”

Along with beneficial modifications to the Honor Code to mirror superior know-how and sources, C12 members have mentioned the discrepancies between how Stanford and peer establishments report educational integrity. In keeping with Conrad, instances at Stanford are summarized yearly, however aren’t publicized.

“Talking for myself, one of many suggestions goes to be that [academic integrity cases] needs to be publicized,” Conrad stated. “If dishonest is happening right here, it needs to be one thing that’s public-facing… If this stuff are saved out of view, there’s much less strain to enhance the state of affairs.”

Proctoring can also be a subject that’s usually disputed and is mentioned within the Interpretations of the Honor Code. At present, course instructors might not be current within the room throughout a written examination except at the start of the examination time to distribute and clarify the check, share further data and reply questions occasionally all through or accumulate examination papers on the conclusion of testing time. Instructors and instructing assistants are additionally allowed to enter the testing room if college students report particular dishonest incidents in an effort to examine.

By having the Honor Code in tandem with un-proctored sit-down exams, Conrad stated that “the premise for the Honor Code was [to have] student-reporting of friends, however this doesn’t occur.”

Alyna Lu ’26 stated that the potential for student-reporting, mixed with scholar stresses about particular person work, can dissuade college students from dishonest and dealing with scrutiny from friends in a visual area.

“I believe everyone seems to be simply stressing about their very own examination. They don’t have time to consider dishonest or trying up data as a result of we’re [often in] an auditorium the place you see everybody and everybody sees you,” Lu stated. “In order that heightened sense of concern of in the event you cheat, that others are going to know, [bars cheating].”

High quality acknowledged the stress revolving across the subject of proctoring and student-reporting: “There’s plenty of query marks concerning why we might need a neighborhood tradition [where] college students are basically being requested to snitch on one another. So I can say that what we wish to advocate just isn’t an instantaneous resolution to that exact query, however as a substitute, extra analysis.”

As such analysis might reveal views that oppose — and assist — proctored examination environments, Lu stated that she appreciates the sensation of autonomy drawn from unproctored exams and likewise advocates for its continuation. She stated that the presence of instructors in examination rooms may heighten check anxiousness in order that some college students aren’t in a position to carry out to their full potential.

“I really feel like at Stanford, plenty of our autonomy has been taken away in points of social life, [but] school is meant to be a spot the place we’re allowed to turn out to be adults and expertise that sort of that maturity,” Lu stated. “So so as to add in proctoring, it feels such as you’re placing us below strict surveillance and treating us like highschool college students [again].”

However, scholar considerations with the prevalence of dishonest have led some to assist the implementation of proctoring, since “there’s plenty of dishonest on the college,” in line with Austin Bennett ’25.

Personally, I don’t actually see a draw back to [proctoring], however I do suppose there are downsides to not having it,” Bennett stated. “That being stated, I’d like Stanford to discover choices for reconciling [proctoring] with points like [test anxiety].”

In keeping with Conrad, C12’s main objective is to discover a steadiness between efficient penalties that advocate for tutorial integrity prioritization and affordable consideration for the immense strain college students might really feel throughout exams.

“The very fact is, simply because someone feels plenty of strain isn’t a legitimate excuse to cheat,” Conrad stated. “On the identical time, there may nonetheless be the sensation that the enjoying discipline just isn’t degree inside a given class and other people could make errors that they remorse instantly, and the way forward for their life shouldn’t be utterly distorted as a result of they make some mistake.”

Within the curiosity of leveling the enjoying discipline throughout departments, Bennett stated that he advocates for larger standardization and readability concerning how potential Honor Code violations are addressed.

“Some departments will report college students with none type of intermediate measure, which I don’t suppose is correct. I believe it’d be good for instructors to have a dialog with accused college students first, as a result of generally it’s only a miscommunication,” Bennett stated.

Bennett stated that dishonest is “poisonous” to the Stanford neighborhood and needs to be addressed in a good, standardized method.

“Points as reduce and dry as dishonest on a check needs to be reported,” Bennett stated. “I believe {that a} tradition of dishonest is basically poisonous to the college and places college students who’re working arduous within the lessons at a extreme drawback.”

Given the breadth of views and views on the Honor Code, the C12 has additionally labored to usher in scholar voices by working intently with the BJA and UGS, in line with UGS Co-Chairs Aden Beyene ’24 and Amira Dehmani ’24.

“Our objective because the UGS is to make sure the fairest path for college students. We need to cut back stress whereas rising assist from college and college sources,” Beyene and Dehmani wrote. “We very a lot consider college students needs to be met with grace and care and that there needs to be a holistic course of when addressing situations of educational dishonesty with an final objective of studying from errors and receiving the assist wanted to succeed.”

C12 has labored on garnering suggestions from the Stanford neighborhood to know what suggestions will be made to finest handle Honor Code considerations for college students, college and employees. By way of this advice course of, the committee additionally hopes that discussions in regards to the Honor Code can turn out to be extra open amongst college students and school alike.

“I might love for us to have insurance policies and procedures that college students consider in and so they really feel are literally going to serve them and are going to teach them within the ways in which they need and have to be educated,” High quality stated. “Fairly than viewing them as both one thing to keep away from or one thing to make enjoyable of or ignore or extra to the purpose one thing that they suppose is solely punitive. And I can say, as a scholar to different college students, that that is a lot better than what we had earlier than.”