baggins

First off, before I say anything, I don't plan to cheat or beat the system in any unfair way so don't start blasting me with "well cheating is wrong and you shouldn't do it..."

Well my sis goes to UVA and she started telling me about the extremely strict honor code. So I didn't really care because I'm not planning to do that stuff anyway but now its starting to bug me a little. A kid who was a Rodman scholar just recently got expelled for something that in my opinion wasn't even cheating. He was supposed to turn in a test for regrading but accidentally spilled stuff all over it so he made a copy of the pages and wrote down exactly what was on the original copy and turned it in. Well the TA suspected something so he asked if all the answers were the same and of course the kid said yes. So the kid got scared and emailed the professor explaining everything. The next day he got a letter about a trial. He explained everything at the trial and was still expelled because he lied to the TA which he didn't. I think this is taking it overboard. This kid was extremely smart and will not be able to get into other good schools because of what happened. I think they should have just given him a 0 for the test or even the class but not kick him out.

Globalist

Here's an article about that honor trial in the Cavalier Daily.

http://www.cavalierdaily.com/CVArtic...26471&pid=1420

sv3a

The case is a little bit more involved than what you were told. This guy allegedly spilled liquid over his test after receiving it back, and wanted to regrade. He said he believed the teacher&TA didn't add up the points correctly. He covered up the answers and the points given to each question, since they were supposedly wet, scanned it into his computer, and then printed out a new copy. He says he copied the answers and points directly as they were in the original test, but the teacher and the TA remember him receiving 0 points on the last question, rather than the credit he received on the this one. Additionally, Gilday turned this new copy of the test in without telling the teacher at all what had happened. Instead, he says that because they were not supposed to discuss 'changes' due to the strict regrading policy, he didn't approach her about the fact that it wasn't even the original test. Also, he says he threw away the original test.

When the teacher asked him about her suspicions, he got defensive and asked her if she was questioning his honor, while denying he changed the paper. A few hours later, he finally emailed her detailing everything that had truly happened, because he 'felt guilty'. The jury believed that this did not count as a conscientious retraction (which it isn't) and that Gilday had deliberately lied to his professor about the test to preserve whatever grade had appeared on his submitted regrade test and to hide the fact that the test wasn't even the original copy.

Many students who are thrown out on honor charges will be able to get into another good school, provided their credentials are worthy. If this wasn't the case, then there would be no controversey because then ALL schools would have such a strict honor policy. Rather, schools with less strict honor policies will be more accepting. The majority of the university, as evidenced by attempts to change the system, believe in the single sanction, and many professors and TAs use it extensively in their classes.

tigerlilly4588

wow..that sounds exremely irrational.

Just from what I read in the article, I think a suspension would have been the logical consequence. I heard of a student at another school w/a similar situation, and his accusation was more clear-cut..he actually changed his answers. He got a suspension for a semester. An expulsion for a lesser offense, to me, does not seem rational.

sv3a

In the Honor system, there is no 'lesser offense'. Everything guilty results in expulsion, as long as it meets the criteria of act, intent, and seriousness/triviality, as decided by the jury

soccerguy315

from the link and the description by sv3a, this seems well deserved.

I agree with teh decision that was made. All he had to do was submit the wet/ruined test.

this is an extremely lame reason. This is a policy so you can't argue about your test, not explain special circumstances.

sv3a

Yeah, that along with the 'throwing away' the original test, getting very defensive once asked about why the test seemed different (and, of course, lying), 'feeling guilty' once he knew he was being suspected, and so on all give considerably suspicion to Gilday's true intentions.

On a side note, Gilday was actually a Jefferson Scholar as well...

cavalier302

Wow, a jeff scholar? Hmm...

Globalist

Man, that sucks.

tigerlilly4588

I understand, but that doesn't mean I have to agree w/it. No question, the student was rightfully found guilty, but I think the Honor Code is way too harsh.

cavalier302

Not really, tigerlilly. You still have to meet intent and seriousness criteria, meaning you can't get kicked out for trivial offenses. Other schools that have no honor codes still have provisions for kicking out cheaters, so don't think UVA is unique.

TRH3114

He is also the Rodman President.

germanicus

I disagree. You can argue about your test, you just need to submit your argument in writing. This professor may have gotten tired of students being rude and indignant and hoping to bully/charm their way into a better grade. Why bother with that sort of nonsense?

amnesia

that's dumb
at harvard and yale they don't care. most politicians lie cheat steal anyway

baggins

Well that article does change things. That kid shouldn't have changed something on the test and he should have kept the ruined copy. I guess he does deserve it for changing the test because he knew about the policy. Thats all they talk about at UVA. The honor code is everywhere so there is no reason for him not to know what the consequences would be if he cheated.