Honor System

The proposed honor system to which President Dickey referred in his radio talk was laid before the Faculty Council by the Undergraduate Council Academic Committee on January 14, and was met with two hours of lively debate. One week later the Faculty Council passed by a substantial majority vote the motion introduced by Prof. Robin Robinson '24 on behalf of the Faculty Council's Committee on Examinations:

"That the Faculty Council of Dartmouth College approve the revised constitution of the proposed Honor System; and that it recommend this constitution to the Faculty for approval, subject to prior ratification of it by the undergraduate student body...

This initial hurdle of faculty sanction having been successfully taken, the next step is student approval or disapproval of the Honor System Constitution. However, one highly controversial point (Section IV, Article IV) is a matter of heated discussion. This is the stipulation that any student knowing of a violation of the honor system would be duty bound to report the offender. It was suggested, therefore, by the Faculty Council that further revisions in Section IV, Article IV, be undertaken by the Committee on Examinations, working with the Undergraduate Council Academic Committee, before the Constitution is brought before the undergraduate body for approval, and then to the entire faculty for ratification.

One code of ethics seems to come into conflict with another as soon as a student is asked to report a violator. That undergraduates are seriously mindful of this conflict was brought out when a favorite Great Issues lecturer, Prof. Henry S. Commager of Columbia University, was detained after his talk to the seniors and asked to give his opinion on Dartmouth's proposed honor system, including the reporting clause. Professor Commager clarified a prevailing impression when he said, "It's this reporting clause and its assumption that honor won't work that worries me."

Other parts of the Honor System Constitution, meeting with little expressed opposition, include the requirement of the student's' signature, upon matriculation, to the pledge: "I, the undersigned, have read the Constitution of the Honor System. I understand the obligations. I realize the plea of ignorance will not be accepted by the Honor Council." With a minimum osupervision during examinations, the student would also write on his paper at the conclusion "of the period, "I pledge my honor that I have neither given nor received aid on this examination."

Penalties would be carried out by an Honor Council and would range from recommendation of a failing mark for work proved to be dishonest, to separation from college. Disciplinary action, with the name of the offender omitted, would be publicized in The Dartmouth. The Honor Council, an essential executive group for carrying out the system, would consist of nine students, representing Palaeopitus, classes, and other groups.