Honor System cases have recently arisen when misunderstandings occurred between instructors and students over interpretation of course ground rules. We offer the following suggestions in an attempt to minimize future confusion. As a general guideline, instructors should explicitly state what activities are prohibited under their course rules. Students should seek clarification if any course ground rule seems vague or confusing.
HOMEWORK: Unless told otherwise, students may assume that collaboration on homework is permitted and unrestricted. This means that, for example, students may divide the task of doing a problem set. Thus, a student will actually work only some of the problems and literally copy the rest from other students' papers. As this borders on plagiarism, it should be decided whether such collaboration is allowed. If totally or nearly independent work is expected, this fact and the degree of independence should be made explicit.
We strongly advise that collaboration policies be distributed to the students in writing and worded so as not to admit multiple interpretations. For example, the statement ``No student shall turn in homework which he does not understand'' might lead to different degrees of collaboration. Many students believe that they understand a problem if they can reconstruct it entirely on their own; others ``understand'' it if they can follow the solution line-by-line with no comprehension of the overall method and no ability to do it again on their own. An example of an unambiguous policy statement is ``Students may discuss the problems verbally, but no student may look at another student's written work, whether the writing is the final paper ready to turn in, intermediate scratch work, or even a single equation. This restriction does not apply to written notes taken during lecture.'' An unambiguous policy permits students to help one another understand the course material and homework but prohibits the outright copying which can occur when no policy is stated.
TAKE-HOME TESTS: All take-home tests and quizzes should be stapled shut. Invariably, when a test is handed out unstapled, some students see the problems accidentally and gain an unfair advantage over the rest. Some examinations contain heavy line drawings which can easily be seen through the back, even when the exam is properly stapled. Such exams should have an extra blank page at the end to block the drawing, else students who hide the exam in a drawer before taking it might be at a disadvantage with respect to those who see the drawing before taking the test.
If an examination is closed-book, students should be so informed in writing via an item on the exam instruction sheet which is visible when the exam is stapled. For open-book exams, the instructor should consider whether all books, past tests, and others' notes are permissible aids and state which materials are acceptable. With regard to limited-time exams, it should be decided whether breaks are allowed. If so, the length, nature, spacing, and activity allowed during these breaks should be made known. As a reminder to students, it would be wise to briefly list any restrictions on the cover of the test.
Some professors give full or partial credit for work done after the time limit. Such work is usually separated from that done during the allotted time by a line and appropriate labelling. If this practice is to be allowed, it is essential that it be explained in detail, so that no student will be disadvantaged (especially those who may not be aware of the possibility of credit for overtime work).
IN-CLASS EXAMINATIONS: Proctoring is prohibited as described in Section 8, page 3 of the Institute Faculty Handbook. However, it is permissible for instructors or their assistants to appear occasionally and be generally available during an exam to answer questions, if necessary.
PAST ASSIGNMENTS AND TESTS: Most undergraduate houses maintain files of past tests, quizzes, and homework assignments in a given course. The graduate houses do not maintain house files; however, individual students may have such papers in their possession. Students might also feel tempted to look at previous lab write-ups or essays belonging to their friends. If the consultation of such materials is forbidden, this should be explicitly stated. If their usage is permitted, any restrictions as to the extent of this usage, e.g., the outright copying of an old assignment, should be made clear.
GRADING TESTS AND ASSIGNMENTS: Students are not permitted to observe the grading of tests or assignments. To avoid any problems, please do not make these papers readily accessible during this time.
PLAGIARISM: Although students appreciate the meaning and gravity of plagiarism, they may be unsure as to what constitutes plagiarism in a given discipline, as those things which are considered part of the general body of knowledge differ. Most students understand that they must footnote a block of text lifted verbatim from another work; some may not know that other sources of information (e.g. a person's orally communicated ideas) must be cited. Consequently, instructors are encouraged to illustrate with examples any precautions they may give against plagiarism.
LAB REPORTS: Any restrictions as to where and when the work may be done should be clearly explained. After-hours work, working on the write-up at home, the extent of collaboration, if any, and the usage of computational aids, such as computers, should be considered.
TEACHING ASSISTANTS: In order to be fair to all and avoid confusion, teaching assistants should interpret course rules and requirements in the same manner as the instructor. Divergence in interpretation in the past has led to unfortunate results and has sometimes been unfair to students. Therefore, it is important that teaching assistants understand what is required of the students and are informed of any changes made in course rules or their interpretation.
SPECIAL POINTS: On occasion, it may be convenient for instructors to place other stipulations on the work done in their courses. (Example: ``Students should avoid canned programs and write their own integration routines.'') Any stipulations made with regard to course work become incorporated within the Honor System; a violation of these rules can be a violation of the Honor System, and become the concerns of the Board of Control and the Graduate Review Board. Often, too, it is good to remind students that such actions as removing reserve books early or keeping them late are not in keeping with the spirit of the Honor System.
SUSPECTED VIOLATIONS: Faculty, as well as students, share in the responsibility to protect the Honor System. It is to the advantage of all concerned to report strong suspicions. Even if suspicions might be misplaced, it is far better that an innocent person undergo investigation and be acquitted of wrongdoing than remain under a cloud. If a person is guilty, failure to report that person compromises the Honor System. As the authority to administer the Honor System has been delegated to the student body, it is contrary to Institute policy for instructors to deal with suspected infractions unilaterally. Examples of unacceptable actions include punitive grade changes or revealing the suspects' identities to any person other than the appropriate Honor Chairman. Such actions only serve to undermine the Honor System and are detrimental to us all.
If you suspect someone of an Honor System violation, report your suspicions to the BOC Chair (undergraduates) or the GRB Chair (graduate students); take no other action.
The current Institute Personnel Directory contains the names and phone numbers of the BOC and GRB Chairs under the heading Honor System. Since new individuals take office Spring Quarter, the listings may sometimes be out of date. Consequently, you should contact the office of the Dean of Students to find the current BOC Chair, and the office of the Dean of Graduate Studies for assistance in locating the current GRB Chair.