In response to a recent spate of plagiarism cases at the University, several members of the Honor Committee have introduced various proposals this fall that are aimed at improving educational resources available to students and ensuring that the integrity of the trial process is maintained aboard Semester at Sea voyages that are managed by UVA and include students from other schools.
Misrepresentation versus misquotation
JJ Litchford, vice chair for community relations on the Honor Committee, has drafted a resolution seeking to redefine “plagiarism” in the Committee’s Green Book, an educational manual detailing the standards and policies of UVA’s Honor Code.
Litchford’s proposal attempts to clarify plagiarism, particularly with regards to paraphrasing, which is where most students face honor allegations. Litchford wants to emphasize the deliberate intent of a student, rather than focusing on improper citation, which often is a product of unfamiliarity with correct research methods. “The current definition is distractingly centered around citation,” says Litchford.
Barbara Pierson and Brent Routman, parents of expelled students on the Semester at Sea, have both addressed the Committee this fall, urging them to focus on intent when determining guilt. However, a central criticism of the proposal is the greater level of subjectivity that comes with determining the intent of a student. The proposal was slated to be voted on November 8, but due to proposed changes, it was expected at press time to be revisited at a later date.
The Community of Trust at sea
In 2006, UVA became the new academic sponsor for the 80-year-old Semester at Sea (SAS) program.
Two years later, Mark Gruntz and Allison Routman, students at California Baptist University and Ohio University respectively, were found guilty aboard an SAS voyage for allegedly plagiarizing movie plot summaries from Wikipedia. They were sent home. This incident triggered a debate on whether UVA’s stringent Honor Code has a place in the SAS program, where not all students are familiar with the single-sanction policy. Additionally, these students are not qualified to fulfill the duties of the Honor Committee, which is not aboard ship, making it difficult to replicate the Community of Trust found on the Charlottesville campus.
In Gruntz and Routman’s case, a panel of professors assumed the Committee’s role in investigating and sentencing the students.
Seeking to address these limitations, David Truetzel, chair of the Honor Committee, has proposed a two-trial system for SAS. Under this model, a student convicted of an honor offense at sea has 30 days to request additional proceedings in Charlottesville.
“We can give [students] what we have here, but we can only do that if they’re here,” said Truetzel. “The process on the ship is appropriate for what is going on aboard the ship, but it’s not good enough to kick someone out of UVA.” In general, student opposition to the proposals does not appear to be prevalent. “I haven’t felt like there is a huge movement one way or the other,” said Truetzel. The Cavalier Daily reports that committee voted 20-0 in favor of Truetzel’s proposal.
C-VILLE welcomes news tips from readers. Send them to news@c-ville.com.