Letters

The Cheating Problem

WHEN I MATRICULATED, THE HONOR code was made very clear. As I recall, just accepting the invitation to attend the College was accepting the requirement to respect the honor code. That some students don't know the code or understand their responsibility to report infractions ["A Matter of Principle," July/Aug] indicates that the College should be matriculating better students (not just on scores) or doing a better job of making the code clear (perhaps a required meeting with a faculty advisor). Every violation must be dealt with harshly. I expect more of Dartmouth students. The honor code should never come into question.

Mountain View, Californiamichael@buchanan.cncdsl.com

AS A MEMBER OF THE CLASS THAT entered with the new honor code in 1962, I was at first startled by the data presented in Rick Greens article. In the first four years of this policy's existence, I cannot ever recall seeing any cheating, hearing about any, nor speaking about it with anyone. I did not cheat, nor did my friends, as far as I know. It wasn't an issue in college, and it had not been while I was in high school, because I was taught, like my peers, mostly by example, that cheating was simply wrong.

So much for my nostalgic, self-righteous indignation—the world has changed. As Mr. Green points out, "A succeed-atany-cost society has changed the nature of cheating," and herein lies the problem. The problem Green explores does not start on campus. It starts in the high-expectations society we have all created. Don't get me wrong, I'm for achievement, but we, the parents, have to be role models of honesty and integrity for our children.

By all means, Dartmouth should rein-vigorate its honor code, ask students to sign a pledge every year and such. But let's not kid ourselves. If college freshmen don't know the difference between right and wrong at age 18, when such values are generally in place by about age 10 or earlier, even in our more complex world, they will not suddenly learn these moral values in a few discussions during freshman year-although such discussions are fine. Dartmouth cannot change society, but it could begin to communicate a more sophisticated view of what constitutes a good record on which to apply to Dartmouth.

No easy solutions here. But each of us must make our dent if the "honor" in an honor code is to have substance.

West Harford, Connecticutelgindj@aol.com

COLLIER'S MAGAZINE IN 1949 published an article about college cheating I wrote in collaboration with classmate William B. Jones. Bill and I visited some 30 colleges and universities, interviewing officials about cheating by students. (Only Notre Dame insisted there was no cheating there.) One of my assignments was to get the views of John Sloan Dickey '29, then president of Dartmouth. I asked him why Dartmouth had no honor system like the much-touted program at Princeton. He replied (as best I can recall): "Honor systems are not real life, and real life is what I believe hjher education must prepare graduates for. If you cheat in real life, I believe eventually you will be caught and be subject to the consequences—possibly arrest with a fine or even prison, certainly some measure of disgrace. Honor systems strike me as artificial, as though the conduct society expects its members to observe is somehow inadequate and needs refinement. I like to think our students respect our rules and practices here at Dartmouth. If they choose to cheat, not only are they the losers, but we will take every measure to assure they do not remain here to cheat again."

Paradise Valley, Arizonammwcor@aol.com

Numbers Game

THIS LETTER IS INSPIRED BY THE interview with retiring athletic director Dick Jaeger ["We've Got to Go For It," July/Aug] about the difficulties in inducing blue chip athletes to come to Dartmouth. I can sympathize with the coaches' frustrations, with the professors seeking out gifted scholars and with the administrations pursuit of diversity in admissions, but I think that the effect of the three objectives is in some respects unfortunate. I feel that those who have to be talked into coming to Dartmouth sometimes, perhaps often, arrive feeling that the College owes them, rather than the reverse. In many cases such candidates displace a candidate of similar ability who has set his or her heart on Dartmouth.

The same week that brought the July/August issue of DAM brought a mailing from the Dartmouth Fund noting the pronounced decline in alumni giving, which is now far below Princetons. I suspect that this dismaying situation maybe a result of the policies to which I take exception.

Fairfield, Connecticut

I HOPE THE SUCCESSOR TO RETIRING athletic director Dick Jaeger '59 will take his (or her) job less seriously. The business of a university is scholarship, not beating Harvard or Yale in football.

Boston, Massachusettssthurer@bu.edu

The Vision Thing

I AM ALARMED BY PRESIDENT Wrights assertion that "the Dartmouth community has a vision" and that it is expressed in the newly released strategic plan ["The Gift of Education," May/June]. Just whose vision are we talking about here? The Dartmouth community that I know is a great deal larger and more diverse than the likely group that has had a say in this work in progress. That the College sought broad input into its plan is commendable, but to brand that vision as community-wide seems, at the very least, a bit premature, and destined to further alienate those not consulted. If the strategic plan is such a solid piece of work, then why dress it in sheep's clothing?

Secondly, in listing the plan's priorities, no mention was made of improving communication and relations with the very segment of the Dartmouth community that is being asked to fund this vision. If the president's aim is truly for a "stronger statement of support from our graduates," then some repair work is in order. The low numbers of alumni who support the College financially do not reflect the deep loyalty and love we have for Dartmouth. They do, however, reflect the dismay of many at the policies and priorities of the institution. Yet, it appears as if the College is making little or no effort to bridge this widening chasm. If our only effective vote is our money, is it necessary to withhold funds from the place we hold so dear in order to regain our position in the Dartmouth community? Sadly, I fear for my College if its future rests on greater support from a group that does not even rate a mention.

Nantucket,Massachusettshutchs@attbi.com

Limited Access

BY REFUSING TO ALLOW PEOPLE from outside his own class to see the Al Qaeda recruitment video he had acquired ["Heaven and Hell in the Middle East," July/Aug], professor Dale Eickelman '64 sends a very clear message: Students at Dartmouth cannot be trusted to think for themselves. All information about the Middle East must be filtered through me, The Professor, so that students may be certain to arrive at the "correct" (i.e., non-judgmental) conclusions. Such an attitude, while common enough in instructors who assign their own books for the courses they teach, is actually antithetical to the spirit of a good liberal arts college.

Minneapolis, Minnesotagoodo179@umn.edu

QUOTE/UNQUOTE "If college freshmen don't know the difference between right and wrong at age 18, they will not suddenly learn these moral values in a few discussions during freshman year. DAVID JOHNSTON '66