Honor council changes parts of CPS

By Jennifer Shen     12/2/10 6:00pm

The Honor Council met Nov. 21 to discuss and ratify the Honor Council Consensus Penalty Structure that will take effect in the spring semester.Honor Council External Vice Chair Kaleb Underwood said that the Honor Council included "in violation" and "not in violation" as one of the factors that the Honor Council cannot consider in order to prevent charges held against a student pleading in violation, because the accused should always be allowed to make a defense. Underwood said that historically, a student's plea had been looked at in different ways, but as recent as in the past four or five years, it has become an unwritten rule that it should not be considered in determining the penalty.

The council also decided to replace "nature of the violation" with new specifications. Honor Council Chair Hilary Baker-Jennings said that when the nature of the violation was considered as a mitigating factor, it had repeatedly been because of a few specific reasons, namely the weight of the assignment, the amount of the assignment and the student's intent. The student's intent in this case may be misinterpreted given an unclear policy.

The new CPS also removed premeditation and collusion with other students as aggravating factors. Underwood said the Honor Council excluded premeditation because it was a slippery slope and hard to define. He added collusion with other students seemed unnecessary because it is often part of the violation itself and is also included in the definition of heinous violation.

---

---

Another notable change is mitigating and aggravating factors. The Honor Council combined these factors last year into one single list in the attempt to streamline the process and make the discussion go quicker. However, Underwood said the combination caused more confusion rather than simplifying the process, so they decided to separate the list into mitigating and aggravating factors again.

Jones College sophomore Anna Wright, who attended the discussions, said she believes these changes will be able to clarify confusions.

"As a freshman, I'm somewhat new to the Honor Code, and have found certain portions of it to be a little vague," Wright said. "I feel that these changes will provide necessary clarification for the student body as a whole."

One change that was proposed in the CPS discussion but was not included in the new CPS was the suggestion that disciplinary probation, such as taking away student's right to hold office, should be one of the penalties. It was dropped because the Honor Council did not have time to discuss it at the end. Underwood said more discussion on disciplinary probation is planned in the spring.

---