Philosophy of the Honor System
Every community, either through accident or conscious design, adopts certain levels of accepted conduct. With unfortunate frequency, the standards adopted officially and unofficially by academic communities are founded on a "lowest common denominator" of human behavior. It is considered a fact of life at many colleges that intensive proctoring, special examination booklets, and energetic suspicion on the part of the faculty are required to achieve some semblance of honesty in the majority of students.
The Caltech community has the privilege of disregarding these pessimistic traditions. The name given to our communities official -- and practiced -- ethical code is the "Honor System." The Honor System embodies our mutual trust and respect.
The Honor System makes Caltech a better and more enjoyable place to work and live because it affords to each person within the Caltech community the trust and freedom that honesty merits. As such, only one guideline is necessary to protect our community: "No member of the Caltech community shall take unfair advantage of any other member of the Caltech community." Because of its nature, this principle must apply to all of the community, everywhere within the community. It is not restricted to transactions of a purely academic nature between students and faculty, but also binds students in their non-academic relations with any other member of the community.
On the other hand, the Honor System is not an administrative creation intended to ease the enforcement of university regulations or marginally decrease the chance of student cheating. A fundamental aspect of the Honor System is that the responsibility students display in their conduct must be met by trust from others. An example of this is Caltech’s official position on proctoring, which is not only held unnecessary, but is strongly discouraged under current faculty regulations. The bodies which deal with violations of the Honor System are also committed to promoting an atmosphere of trust and confidence. As it should be, honesty is a two-way street at Caltech.
It must be stressed that the responsibility for the maintenance of the Honor System lies with each student. In particular, this responsibility includes determining any possible consequences of our actions. We have accepted such responsibility in the belief that only by regulating our own conduct can we successfully promote a high standard of individual integrity.
The Honor System was not imposed upon the students and it will not be removed by any hand other than our own. Consequently, any necessary interpretation and enforcement is our duty and is performed by students. Members of the community must always bear in mind that their actions and attitudes directly influence a proud and valuable trust which many generations of students have kept. The rewards of life under the Honor System are considerable; the responsibilities at times may be heavy and serious. The obligations have been met successfully in the past, and only we can insure that they will continue to be met.
Living Under the Honor System
The Honor System is an agreement between members of the Caltech community, embodied in a single sentence:
No member of the Caltech community shall take unfair advantage of any other member of the Caltech community.
This principle, while extremely short, is the sole basis of the Honor System. The key words are "unfair advantage." Often, not taking unfair advantage is merely a matter of using common sense, showing respect and consideration for others and their privacy. But there are times when distinguishing fair and unfair courses of action will require a considerable amount of analytic thought. It is when one loses the habit of such thought that one's actions may come into conflict with the Honor System. Failure to realize the consequences of a course of action does not justify it. Remember that purity of motive, when unaided by awareness, will not necessarily guarantee purity of action. Note that no distinction is made between academic and non-academic areas. Stealing from another student is a violation, just as cheating on a physics test is, as will be explained further in the following sections.
It is important to realize that the Honor System covers every aspect of our interactions with members of the Caltech community. This is a larger body of people than a first glance may reveal -- in addition to undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty, the Caltech community also includes administrative and scientific support staff, campus maintenance and custodial staff, and in some instances other companies or institutions which have relations with Caltech. Consequently, it is impossible to give a set of comprehensive examples that displays every possible situation in which the Honor System must be carefully applied. Therefore, the purpose of the following discussion is to outline a few areas of life at Caltech and demonstrate how the principles of the Honor System should be considered.
I. Tests
Academic life at Caltech is very different from life at a high school or another college. The vast majority of quizzes and midterm or final examinations are take-home. Stapled-shut tests are picked up in class or at a professor's office. Printed instructions on the cover of the test specify the conditions under which it must be taken, including the time limit, reference materials allowed, and the due date. The test may be taken at any time and at any place the student wishes, as long as the instructions are followed. If there is any confusion concerning allowed references or time limits, it is your responsibility as a student to seek clarification from the professor or a teaching assistant.
Violating an exam policy takes unfair advantage of other students in the class and compromises the trust of the instructor. In particular, a student working on a take-home exam should not consult students or sources other than those permitted by the instructor. This includes adding photocopies of other references to one's course notes when the instructor allows only course notes during the exams.
Any work done after the time limit of an exam should be clearly designated as such by drawing a line beneath the work completed during the allowed time, labeling this line, and then continuing with the test, indicating the amount of extra time spent. Many professors will give some credit for this work.
II. Homework and Laboratory Assignments
The misinterpretation of homework collaboration policies has been a source of problems in the past. Most instructors state their policies at the beginning of each academic term. It is your responsibility as a student to get this information. If the policy is ambiguous, seek clarification from the instructor. Note that although collaboration on some assignments may be unrestricted, there is a fine line between exchanging of ideas and some forms of plagiarism. Violating a collaboration policy takes unfair advantage of those who abide by the restrictions placed on them and compromises the trust of the instructor.
In general, both student and instructor share the responsibility for clarifying any rules governing a particular course. When in doubt, a student should consult the instructor before proceeding.
These principles also apply to laboratory course work and research. Falsification or theft of results ("drylabbing") are serious acts of intellectual dishonesty, as is claiming undue credit for another's work or ideas.
III. Papers and Reports
Students are required to produce a large number of reports and research papers during their careers at Caltech. In collecting data and information, students need to actively avoid plagiarizing the work of others. Proper footnoting of source material and documentation of borrowed ideas are absolutely essential. Many professors are willing to show students how to correctly document their papers. Plagiarism, whether inadvertent paraphrasing or direct substitution, takes unfair advantage of any original authors, the instructor who incorrectly believes that the ideas are the plagiarist's, and other students who correctly footnote all sources.
IV. Library Usage
The operation of all Institute libraries is governed by the Honor System. At Caltech, students are not subjected to having their backpacks and briefcases checked before leaving the library. This valuable freedom has been maintained because the students respect the library rules and feel bound by the Honor System to do so. It is the student's responsibility to see to it that he or she is aware of all the rules applying to any library material used.
A person who keeps a three-hour reserve book for longer than the specified time takes advantage of others who need the book, particularly at critical times such as before a test. Anyone who removes a book without intending to return it, or who mutilates or defaces a book, is stealing from every library user in the community. There are also some people who do intend to return books but do not bother with checking them out. Such people ignore the possibility that the library might decide the book is lost and replace it; or that a student might badly need a book and want to contact the person who took it, and the library would be unable to locate the borrower.
V. Master Keys
In spirit of the Honor System, master keys allow members of the community access to a number of facilities including libraries, mailboxes, and classrooms. A student who uses a master key assumes responsibility for the legitimacy of his actions. Possession of a master key does not necessarily provide authorization for its use. Authorization to enter a non-public area consists of permission from the proper person to enter that particular room at that time.
Be aware that thefts, vandalism, and unfortunate accidents have occurred when Caltech master keys have come into the possession of people who were not members of the community. In addition, the security of many Caltech laboratories and rooms depends on the accountability of key possession, and is diminished by not reporting keys that are given to other students or lost. In light of this, students with master keys should be careful to consider Caltech's security and liability when using or circulating keys.
VI. Institute Property
Equipment, vehicles, and other property owned by the Institute are not necessarily available for unrestricted student use. Students need to be cautious to ensure that their actions do not lead to a restriction of student privileges.
VII. Practical Jokes and Pranks
Pranks ("RF's") and practical jokes have always been a part of undergraduate life at Caltech. Pranks, when planned with consideration for the rest of the community, can be very enjoyable. However, badly thought-out pranks can result in a reduction of student privileges, or may otherwise take unfair advantage of someone in the community.
When executing a prank, always keep in mind a number of issues. Will the receiver(s) of the joke think of it as humorous, or will they be upset? Will the joke possibly cause the destruction of property or the invasion of privacy? Could the prank cause a curtailment of student rights and privileges? Could it injure someone? Could it damage the position of the Institute, or cost the Institute money in reparations?
When pulling a prank as a house against another house, one must be particularly conscious of how the victim house members will react. One way to help make sure a prank against another house does not turn out badly is to notify the president of the house you are pranking before pulling the prank.
Whenever a prank is pulled, a note should be left informing the "victim" that he or she has been the object of a prank. The note should include the clear identity of the prankster(s) in case something goes wrong and the prankster needs to be contacted and in order to prevent misdirected retaliation. If no note is left, the person may misinterpret that situation and attribute the prank to theft or vandalism.
Finally, computer pranks should be treated extremely carefully. Computers and computer networks make it easy to affect many people -- it is important to consider the results of your actions carefully. Considering the importance of unrestricted computer and network access to a large portion of the community, the creation or spreading of damaging viruses, false email or newsposts, or other destructive programs, for example, may be a serious violation of the Honor System.
VIII. Traditions
House traditions, Ditch Day stacks, and other revered Caltech traditions are irreplaceable parts of student life. Unfortunately, these may occasionally get out of hand.
When acting as a part of a group, always think as an individual. Ask yourself many of the same questions that are relevant to a prank: Will this be fun for the participants, or upsetting? Will this destroy someone else's property, or invade someone's privacy? Could this cause harm to the community -- even those not directly involved?
When planning a stack or tradition-related event, always keep others in mind. Check your plans against Caltech's hazing policy or other relevant policies, and remember that those involved may react in unforeseen ways. (See the section on Laws and Institute Rules.)
IX. Computer Usage
Computing resources are scattered around campus and connected by a campus-wide network. Most resources are available 24 hours a day. Keys and lock combos are readily available. The use of computer resources is governed by the Honor System. Theft, damage (even minor damage, such as spilling water into a keyboard), or misuse of the equipment takes advantage of all the other users who will lose the use of the resources. Allowing unauthorized non-Caltech people access to the equipment reduces the amount of equipment available for Caltech users and may lead to thefts.
Use of computer accounts on the various computer clusters is also governed by the Honor System. Damaging system files or gaining unauthorized access to another user's files places other users at a disadvantage. Files located in user areas on disk should be respected as their personal property. Having the ability to gain access to another user's files does not imply having their permission to do so.
Many computers on campus have policies designed to allocate system resources (such as system disk space, memory, printers, modem lines) fairly and prevent unintentional damage to the system. Circumventing these policies may place other users at a disadvantage.
Because of the advances of networking it is very easy to communicate with other users on the computer system in a variety of ways. As with any interpersonal communications, it is important to think about how you are interacting with the person and whether you are using the computer to harass or victimize them.
Breaking into computers at remote sites could have serious repercussions for Caltech as an institute and result in reduction of some of the network computer resources available to us now.
X. Companies Unaffiliated with Caltech
At a first glance, one might think that it is impossible for a Caltech student to transgress the Honor System while interacting with someone outside the community. However, this is not true if that person or organization offers a service to the community that might be jeopardized by the student's actions.
These dangers are best illustrated by example. For instance, if a student chooses to abuse campus pay telephones and make free telephone calls he does not appear to have taken unfair advantage of the community at first glance. However, although the company operating those telephones will probably be unable to trace the person who actually made the calls, they might bill the Institute or refuse to operate pay telephones on campus. Therefore, the entire Caltech community would be put at a disadvantage by the student’s actions.
XI. Laws and Institute Rules
The laws of federal, state, and local governments are frequently more restrictive than the Honor System alone. Some activities against other members of the Caltech community, such as theft or assault, are clearly violations of both the Honor System and criminal laws, and as such may fall in both jurisdictions. Other actions which violate laws but have no immediate effect on the Caltech community may not be Honor System violations. Students are still responsible, however, for any consequences and penalties that result from their actions. The same is true for rules established by branches of the Institute.
This distinction does not mean that illegal actions are condoned by the Honor System. It is possible for some activities to have far-reaching consequences for Caltech that are not easily foreseen. For example, damage to the Institute's reputation, cutbacks of Institute funding or fines, and further restrictions are indirect ways that the entire community may ultimately pay for the actions of a few people. Students are urged to consider seriously the long-term ramifications of their actions beforehand.
XII. Interpersonal Relations
Violations of the Honor System do not always involve material or tangible advantages. Clear examples of this are unfair discrimination and invasion of another's privacy. An action that places a demonstrably unreasonable emotional burden on another person invariably results in taking unfair advantage of that person. Actions which harmfully degrade an individual or group, promulgate damaging rumors, or place someone in a situation where he or she feels threatened, harassed, or victimized may unfairly disadvantage members of the community.
In order to create a healthy living and studying environment for everyone, it is important to be aware of the effects one's actions will have on others.
XIII. Sexual Harassment
As described in the previous section, if a student’s actions place someone else in a situation where they feel threatened, harassed, or victimized, the student may be placing them at a disadvantage. For legal reasons, the Board of Control is not permitted to handle cases involving sexual harassment, however, BoC reps are trained to advise students who may have been sexually harasses and can help them decide how they want to handle the situation. If you do not wish to speak with a BoC rep, the Dean of Students Office has information detailing the Institute's policies and procedures concerning sexual harassment.
The Board of Control
Ideally, the Honor System should operate smoothly without any intervention. However, in practice, there are circumstances which prevent this. First, some people will not follow the Honor System; adequate measures must be taken to protect our community from them. Secondly, the intuitive sense of right and wrong upon which the Honor System so heavily relies does not always operate uniformly in complex situations.
The Board of Control (BoC) has been formed to help alleviate these problems. The BoC, a committee of undergraduates, is part of the Associated Students of the California Institute of Technology, Inc., and is chaired by the ASCIT Vice President. The duties and procedures of the Board are outlined in the ASCIT bylaws. (See the Bylaws section.) It is comprised of eleven students: the Chairman and the Secretary, who do not vote; a representative elected from each of the seven undergraduate houses; and two representatives-at-large, appointed by the Board from the entire student body.
No one remembers just how or when the Honor System and the Board of Control started, although they were fully operating in the early 1920's. The Board originally considered, in addition to its present duties, matters concerning tradition, such as disrespectful freshmen and smoking in front of Throop Hall. Once a Board of Control had to handcut an obscene joke from every issue of one year's Big T. In an effort to reignite class spirit, the Board once suggested that an annual freshman-sophomore competition be held; and the Board of Control Secretary added as an afterthought that a mud pit would be a good place for it. Eventually the Board of Control concerned itself only with violations of the Honor System, and a separate body, the Court of Traditions, was established to handle the rest. The latter is no longer even a memory.
The Board currently deals with violations of the Honor System committed by undergraduates, that is, situations in which an undergraduate has, either consciously or unconsciously, gained an unfair advantage over other members of the community. Each decision is made independently, as the Board does not act on precedent. Considering every case on its own merits, the Board tries to treat each person fairly, as well as protect the Caltech community as a whole.
The following sections describe the investigation of a potential Honor System violation as it is dealt with by the Board of Control. The accompanying figure illustrates the procedural flow between the different stages of the investigation.
Reporting Suspected Violations
No body is charged with surveillance under the Honor System; the Board of Control forms a judiciary body, not a police agency. This means that every member must share the responsibility of protecting the Caltech community and upholding the Honor System.
This is indeed a heavy obligation. It implies not only refraining from actions that may violate the Honor System, but also protecting our community from any who engage in such activities.
Unfortunately, this duty can cause a conflict of responsibility or divided loyalty, especially if you have seen a violation or strongly suspect that one has been committed. You are placed in the difficult situation of weighing your obligation to the community against your concern for the violator. You might be tempted to warn the suspected violator of the seriousness of his or her acts, thinking this to be a satisfactory solution to the dilemma. However, the suspected violator may be able to convince you that no violation has occurred when one may have. If you suggest that the person turn himself or herself in, you really have no way of verifying, nor are you likely to know, if the questionable action is repeated. You are also not aware of the past record the person might have, a factor which plays a significant role in the Board's decision concerning protection of the community. (See Protection section.)
Perhaps even more serious than these considerations is the possibility of contamination of evidence. If the person is warned about a Board investigation, evidence and testimony could be destroyed or altered, hindering the ability of the Board to discover the truth essential in making a fair decision.
The decisions of the Board are not intended to punish the violator in any way. If you are concerned that a possible Honor System Violation may have occurred, but find it difficult to report the situation to the Board of Control, please keep in mind that the BoC’s goal when dealing with students who have committed Honor System Violations is always to bring the violator to a place where they can live under the Honor System effectively. The decisions of the BoC are motivated by concern for the defendant as well as for the community as a whole. This is one of the most difficult areas of the Honor System for most students, however it is also one of the most important aspects of the Honor System.
In light of this, the Board has taken the position that it is the responsibility of every student to protect the community and the Honor System. Conscious failure to report suspected violations may be considered a violation itself.
If you do suspect that a violation has been committed, but are unsure what to do, talk with your house Board representative, or to any other member of the BoC. You may also report to the confidential answering machine at the number below:
The Chairman of the Board of Control can always be contacted at (626) 395-6200 (campus extension x6200) or by e-mail at boc-chair@ugcs.caltech.edu. The Secretary can be reached at extension x6236 or boc-sec@ugcs.caltech.edu.
In all cases, consider your personal responsibility to the Caltech community of which you are a vital part. It is far better to report a strong suspicion than to allow it to grow and compound. A case that is closed without a conviction vanishes from the records of all concerned.
Preliminary Investigation
When a suspected Honor System violation is brought to the attention of the Board of Control, a preliminary investigation is conducted by either the BoC Chair or Secretary and one other member of the Board. The Chair and Secretary then decide if the alleged incident lies within the jurisdiction of the Board of Control. To fulfill this duty, interviews are held with those directly involved in the matter reported. These may include teaching assistants, graders, professors, other witnesses, or defendants. After reviewing testimony and physical evidence (e.g., homework sets, tests, damaged property) the preliminary investigators decide if the case merits the attention of the remaining Board members. It is important to note that the preliminary investigators are not empowered to decide if the alleged offense actually constitutes a violation; this decision can only be made by the full Board of Control. If the matter at hand lacks sufficient evidence or is clearly not an Honor System issue, then the case may be dismissed by the preliminary investigators. If they feel that the offense may constitute an Honor System violation but cannot be properly and expeditiously handled by the Board of Control, then the investigation may be passed on to an appropriate organization such as the Office of the Dean of Students or the Office of the Director of Residence Life.
The Secretary will contact the necessary individuals and arrange for them to attend the preliminary hearings. If requested by the witness or defendant, another Board of Control member may attend the preliminary investigation in order to provide support or to explain the proceedings.
Since the Board realizes that personal interaction is extremely valuable in deciding any Honor System issue, the nature of the suspected violation or specific details of the case will not be revealed until the actual interview.
Throughout the interview process, it is the duty of any person interviewed to maintain absolute secrecy concerning the investigation.
At the conclusion of the interview process, the Chair and Secretary will decide if the case will be considered by the full Board of Control. If so, the procedures of a full case meeting will be explained to the witness(es) and defendant(s). The minutes taken during the preliminary interviews will then be passed along for the entire Board's consideration.
If the Chair and Secretary decide to dismiss the case, the interviewee(s) will be informed that the case is closed, and the Secretary will destroy any minutes recorded.
It is important to note that only when a case is completed may a defendant initiate discussion with others concerning his or her individual case, as outlined and regulated by the Board of Control bylaws. (See the Bylaws section.) Witnesses are bound to secrecy and can not divulge information concerning the investigation unless the defendant(s) initiate discussion. In all stages of the investigation, the Board strives to maintain the privacy of all those involved.
The Hearing
If the Chairman and Secretary deem it necessary to bring a case before the full Board, the Secretary schedules a time that minimizes conflicts for the Board members, defendants, and witnesses. Of the nine voting members on the Board, at least seven must be present at the hearing. Witnesses and defendants are told to wait by a phone during this time until called.
If the scheduling of a hearing prevents a witness or defendant from completing certain classwork, an application can be made to the Dean of Students to support a request for an extension of the due date.
If any individuals appearing before the Board feel that a particular member will be unable to render an unbiased judgment, they may request that the Chairman of the Board remove the member from the case.
In addition, if any member of the Board of Control is uncomfortable with working on a particular case or feels unable to render an unbiased judgment because of a personal relationship with the defendant, he or she is expected to remove himself or herself for the duration of the case.
When the Board meeting, it first presented with the case in abstract; no student names, no class names -- just a description of the violation involved. The Board may decide at this point that it is not appropriate for a full Board investigation, in which case all records of the preliminary investigation are eventually destroyed (see the bylaws section), and no further action is taken. Although the Chair and Secretary will usually only bring cases to the Board which they feel should be heard, this part of the hearing does give the Board a preliminary chance to look at the case in the most objective manner possible.
The defendant is allowed to be accompanied by a companion, who may witness any part of the hearing at which the defendant is present (at the discretion of the defendant). This companion is also sworn to secrecy about the case, even upon completion, as are the witnesses and the Board members themselves. All involved are asked not to reveal the meeting place of the Board. However, the defendant reserves the right to release information about the case upon completion of the investigation. If he or she chooses to do so, then the witnesses are also permitted to discuss the case. (See section 3, subsections (l) and (r) of the bylaws.)
The defendant may also request a "side-bar" with an individual member if he or she wishes to relate sensitive information that is difficult to tell to the entire Board. (See subsection (m) of Article VII, section 3 of the bylaws.)
The witnesses may request that their identities be kept from the defendant; the Board will make a sincere effort to do so, although it cannot always be guaranteed.
The following three subsections describe, in order, the three decisions that the full Board of Control will ultimately consider.
I. Determining the Violation
If the Board votes to hear a case, all the details of the preliminary investigation are revealed. The Board must resolve whether or not an Honor System violation has occurred. Copies of evidence, such as examinations and homework, are provided. Defendants and witnesses are interviewed once again -- this time by the full Board of Control.
Privacy is important, but the Board of Control may ask questions of anyone who can provide useful information. Teaching assistants, classmates, professors, and roommates may be consulted. Every relevant resource is considered.
A decision may be postponed for a few days if new evidence is forthcoming. Deliberation continues until the members of the Board are satisfied. If the facts are clear-cut, discussion might last an hour. Otherwise, it can take days.
After discussion, a voting member of the Board may move to dismiss the case. Members of the Board may vote if favor of the dismissal if they find the evidence insufficient, or if they determine that a violation has not occurred. If the motion passes, the records of the case are eventually destroyed. (See the bylaws section.) They are never brought to light unless new evidence arises concerning the same case.
Otherwise, a voting member of the Board may move to convict a defendant of an Honor System violation. The specifics of the violation are included in the motion. The Board votes, and the results are recorded in the minutes of the case. If the motion passes, the Board discusses further convictions and ways to nullify any unfair advantage taken.
II. Nullification of Unfair Advantage
If a defendant is convicted of an Honor System violation, the Board of Control will then determine what measures would best nullify any unfair advantage taken.
Decisions are made on a case by case basis, without precedent or pre-established penalties for specific violations. The decisions of the Board of Control are never intended as punishment. The purpose of nullification is to remove the unfair advantage gained. This may be accomplished through such actions as grade changes, monetary reimbursement, or letters of apology. In some situations, an Honor System violation may have no corresponding way to remove the unfair advantage. In these cases the Board may not recommend any steps for nullification, but this in no way diminishes the effects or seriousness of the violation.
For example, if a defendant has copied one isolated problem on an exam, the Board may decide to nullify the advantage by giving zero credit on that problem. However, if the copied problem allows the student to answer other questions or verify previous results, it is possible that credit will be removed for those problems as well.
III. Protection of the Community
After steps to nullify any advantage taken have been identified, the Board must decide if measures to protect the community from further violations are necessary and what these might be. This happens only if the Board has determined that an Honor System violation has indeed occurred. In many ways, this is the most difficult decision that the Board must make, because it has the most influence on the defendant's career. It is at this point only that the Board is made aware of any previous convictions of the defendant.
The title commonly given to the third decision is rather important: protection of the community. This is not an attempt to punish. It is an attempt by the Board to establish whether or not the defendant is likely to commit an Honor System violation in the future, and if so, to take appropriate action to protect the community. The Board can decide on any number of courses of action (protection of the community decisions have been known to be quite creative at times) The following decisions of the Board are common enough to discuss.
All students convicted by the Board are required to speak with the Dean of Students after the case has been closed. This is known as "review".
In addition, records of the case are kept and are available to future Boards when determining protection of the community if the student is convicted again. This alteration in the status of a student is called "probation." It is important to note that these records are only made known after a future conviction has been made and nullification determined, and thus are not allowed to influence these first two decisions.
The BoC might also require that a defendant have one or more discussions with members of the Board about the Honor System. This is often done when the BoC feels that the defendant does not understand certain aspects of the Honor System.
Suspension (leaving Caltech for one or more terms) generally indicates that the Board is of the opinion that the defendant committed the violation because of immaturity or inordinate pressure and would benefit from some time away from Caltech. Time spent in the outside world often relieves pressure and is intended to give a student a better perspective on the Honor System and its advantages.
The most drastic action that the Board can take is to place a student on indefinite leave. The Board resorts to this only in situations where it feels that the defendant will not ever be able live within the Honor System. This decision may or may not include a recommendation for persona non grata status (i.e., severing all ties with the Institute).
The Board is not restricted to these courses of action. It must be stressed that the decision is made in consideration of the defendant's demonstrated ability to abide by the Honor System. Although the gravity or magnitude of the violation committed as well as the existence of prior convictions are indicators of such ability, other factors are taken into account as well. Two defendants convicted of similar violations could receive different measures for protection of the community if the Board felt that the likelihood of their committing another violation differed.
Conclusion and Consequences of Investigation
If, at any time during the investigation, the case is dismissed or closed without a conviction, the records and any evidence will eventually be destroyed (see the bylaws section), and the individuals involved are released of all suspicion.
Upon completion of a hearing that results in a conviction, the Chair and Secretary of the Board of Control will inform the Dean of Students and the Associate Dean, if his or her presence is requested by the defendant, of the details of the investigation and the outcome of the three decisions. It is the responsibility of the defendant to arrange a meeting with the Dean(s) as soon as possible.
There are several purposes to this meeting. First, the Dean wants to know if the student felt comfortable with the proceedings of the case, the line of questioning, and his or her treatment throughout the case. This is done to ensure that students are not scared or intimidated during the case, and that they were treated with respect throughout the proceedings.
A second purpose of the meeting is to enable the Dean to review the final decision of the Board and to assess its implications. The Dean carefully explains the three decisions and discusses them with the student. At this stage the student may ask questions to clarify the implications of the decisions. Finally the Dean allows the student to voice any objections about the case or the final decision.
At the end of the meeting, the Dean decides whether or not to uphold the decision of the Board. The Board's decision, once delivered, is almost always upheld. However, the importance of the Dean must not be overlooked. It is the Dean's responsibility to make the final decision and to ensure that it is carried out. For these reasons, the meeting with the Dean is extremely important for both the student and the Board of Control: it is the appeals process for the Board of Control's decisions.
When a case is completed and a violation of the Honor System has occurred, the official records of the case are kept in the Board files. It is important to understand that these files are strictly confidential. Only the Chair and Secretary have access for the purpose of reviewing previous convictions of a defendant. If a defendant has any prior convictions, the previous files may be reviewed by the entire Board to aid in determining the protection of the community. However, these minutes will only be revealed after all motions for convictions and nullification are resolved.
The records of the Board of Control are never intended for public viewing, especially by outside agencies unrelated to Caltech. However, there has been some concern with outside companies and government agencies that request information about disciplinary action from the Dean's Office for clearance purposes. It has always been the policy of the Dean and the Board to keep all proceedings and decisions completely internal as far as the law will allow. To this date, the only instances where a Board decision was revealed concerned students placed on involuntary leave of absence. The Dean considers this to be a disciplinary action and will admit to such if directly questioned. Some institutions will ask the Dean, after a waiver allowing such has been signed by the student, if an applying student has been convicted of an academic violation while at Caltech. In these cases as well, the Dean will answer truthfully only as far as he is asked, protecting the student’s confidentiality to the greatest degree possible. A student's transcript, however, will never show any record of a Board of control investigation. Thus, no one except the Dean, the Board, and the student knows that a violation has occurred.
If You Are a Witness or Defendant
You will be requested to attend the preliminary investigation. If desired, you may be accompanied by a Board member of your choice. At the interview, you will be placed under oath and informed of the reason for your presence; you will be asked for any information that you have pertaining to the case. Keep in mind that a conscious failure to answers questions asked of you may be considered an Honor System Violation in itself. At the conclusion of all investigation, the Chair and Secretary will either dismiss the case and inform you of your responsibilities, or describe the next stage of the investigation -- the hearing. If a defendant feels that the Chair or Secretary are unable to deliver an unbiased decision, then a request can be placed with the Dean of Students to have either individual temporarily replaced.
During the board hearing you may periodically be asked to wait in another room while the Board deliberates in private. Defendants should read the associated bylaws for a description of the right to bring a companion to the hearing or for these periods of waiting. Please familiarize yourself with the pertinent bylaws and procedures of the full Board.
If you are a witness you will be asked to provide all relevant facts at your disposal concerning the case. These may include dates, times, or testimony of any actions observed. Since as a witness you will not know the full details of the case, please do not withhold facts asked for by the Board on the basis of irrelevance. The Board will decide which facts are relevant and which are not. Remember that Board members are sworn to secrecy concerning all facts revealed during a hearing.
The defendant is not told of the action decided upon, if any, to remove any unfair advantage taken until the Board is ready to present all of its findings. The Board will not inform any witnesses of its recommendations, unless they require action (such as a grade change) by the witness.
If you are a defendant you will be asked to explain any circumstances concerning the event or action in question. For example, in an academic case, this may include such information as where and when a particular homework set or exam was completed, and what references were used. You may also need to explain your reasoning and thought processes on certain problems. It is very important to realize that it is in your best interests to tell the truth while involved in a Board of Control hearing. If you have committed an Honor System, even though it might be very difficult for you to admit to doing so, it is best for you to tell the truth. Even if you contradict information you conveyed in the preliminary investigation or a prior meeting the full Board, it is in your best interests to tell the truth when before the Board of Control.
If you are a defendant you will probably not know when the Board has entered the protection of the community phase of deliberation. Protection of the community is not intended as punishment. Instead, your ability to function effectively under the Honor System will be assessed. Honesty throughout the proceedings will count heavily in your favor.
If you are a witness you will not know the protection of the community decision unless the defendant chooses to tell you. Remember that you are required to not divulge anything about the case (including its occurrence) unless the defendant permits discussion.
If the case does not result in a conviction all records will be destroyed, and no indication of the investigation will ever appear on your academic record. If there is a conviction, you will be required to meet with the Dean.
Questions and Answers
Q: Who can be investigated by the Board of Control?
A: The Board is in charge of dealing with suspected Honor System violations by undergraduates. The Graduate Review Board is responsible for cases involving graduate students. The Graduate Review Board may be reached through the Dean of Graduate Students or through referral from the Board of Control. Problems involving faculty members, staff, or administration should be brought to the attention of the Student Grievance Committee. Currently, the ombudsman for the student grievance procedure is the Vice President for Student Affairs. The officers and representatives of the Board of Control have further information and can assist with pursuing these other procedures.
Q: What can a person be investigated for?
A: Cases in which the Honor System may have been violated by an undergraduate student are investigated by the Board of Control. Obvious examples include cheating on exams, breaking homework collaboration policies, and non-academic actions such as theft or harassment. However, the Honor System is not limited to examples such as these; any action which places a member of the Caltech community at an unfair disadvantage may result in an investigation. Honor System violations do not necessarily entail material disadvantage; invasion of privacy and actions that cause others emotional distress are examples. Actions against people who are not direct members of the Caltech community may eventually become Honor System offenses if they result in action being taken against the Caltech community. In cases regarding pranks or two-party incidents, the Board will frequently try to resolve the problem outside of a full hearing by having the parties involved reach some sort of satisfactory agreement. Before carrying out a prank, it is expected that the people responsible consider the outcome of their actions as well a the reactions of those being targeted.
Q: Why is the Board so secretive?
A: The Board of Control investigations and hearings are conducted in secret to protect the individuals being investigated. In order to prevent the formation of an unfair bias or prejudice against those appearing before the Board, extreme measures are taken to ensure that details about particular cases do not become known to the community. The results of Board votes are kept confidential to prevent any conflicts between defendants and individual Board members. The Board is also secretive about where and when it meets to prevent speculation about people seen entering or leaving the meeting place.
Q: What can the Board do to a person?
A: If a person is convicted of committing an Honor System violation by the Board of Control, the responsibility of the Board is to nullify whatever advantages were taken by the individual. This would include actions such as giving no credit for homework, or exam problems completed in violation of the Honor System or requiring the person to provide compensation if property had been damaged. After nullification, the Board considers whether the person is capable of living under the Honor System in the future. Among actions that may result from this are placing the student on probation, having the student take leave of absence, or recommending the student for expulsion. See Protection of the Community section for more information.
Q: Why isn't a person informed in advance as to the reasons why he or she is being summoned for questioning?
A: The Board will frequently refrain from giving information to the person being summoned in order to prevent any tampering with evidence or comparing and changing or stories about the incident under investigation.
Q: Are the Board's decisions always carried out by the Dean?
A: The Board of Control acts as an advisory committee for the Dean, providing recommendations after investigating the case and coming to a decision. If the Dean feels that the Board's decision is not justified then he or she may choose to not follow it. However, it is only in very rare circumstances that the Dean will overrule a Board decision. Slightly more often he or she may ask the Board to reconsider its decision, though this too is rare. (See Statistics.)
Q: Is it an Honor System offense to not report a suspected violation?
A: Strictly speaking, yes. The Honor System is only effective as long as the members of the community uphold it. However, cases where violations are not reported will have to be investigated for special circumstances. The Reporting of Suspected Violations section has more information.
Q: What records are kept of cases?
A: In the case of a conviction, the records will contain the names of the defendants and the decisions of the Board, minutes of all proceedings connected with the case, and any physical evidence with bearing on the case. The minutes will also contain a summary of the ideas and concerns that were brought up during the investigation by Board members as well as testimonies of those interviewed. The records will only be consulted in the event of a future conviction of one of the defendants, or for purposes of preparing abstracts or computing statistics. If no conviction results, the evidence that accumulated during the investigation will be kept by the Board Secretary in case the investigation is re-opened. However, when a new Secretary is elected, all the evidence of the investigations that did not result in a conviction will be destroyed by the outgoing Secretary.
Q: Is it an Honor System violation to disobey Federal, State, or Local laws and Institute Rules?
A: Disobeying laws or Institute rules is not a priori a violation, but if the action results in placing other members of the community at an unfair disadvantage, it may become one. However, even though breaking a law or Institute rule might not fall within the Board's jurisdiction, it is expected that students be cognizant of such rules and comport themselves accordingly. Be reminded that the intent of legislation is often to protect people from unfair or dangerous actions in the first place, and Institute rules frequently uphold legal or insurance-related obligations. Students are still responsible to the appropriate bodies for the consequences of disobeying these laws or rules.
Statistics
The following statistics were compiled from records of the Board of Control.
Board of Control Statistics
|
Cases |
92-93 |
92-93 |
93-94 |
94-95 |
95-96 |
96-97 |
97-98 |
98-99 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dismissed by Chair |
5 |
22 |
5 |
6 |
* |
* |
6 |
9 |
|
Referred to Other Body |
3 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
* |
* |
* |
3 |
|
Dismissed by Board |
2 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
* |
* |
1 |
1 |
|
Leading to Conviction |
11 |
22 |
14 |
10 |
* |
27 |
21 |
22 |
|
Upheld by Dean |
11 |
18 |
14 |
10 |
* |
27 |
21 |
22 |
*unavailable data
Sample Investigation of the Board of Control
The abstract that follows is essentially fictitious. Use has been made of past reports and minutes of the Board of Control to illustrate procedures and methods of investigation. The specific facts are fictitious; the procedures, investigation methods, and items considered in arriving at a recommendation are exact and drawn directly from Board minutes of various meetings.
Report of a suspected violation/Preliminary Investigation:
Professor Robert Bradley, the instructor in charge of Physics 2, informed the Chair of the BoC that one of his graders, while correcting the term’s final exam, had noted a strong similarity between the two papers. Prof. Bradley commented on the remarkable similarity in the errors made in the two papers and stated that, on the basis of his experience, he felt that it was unlikely the papers both represented independent work.
Upon investigation, the chair and secretary found that the two students both lived in the same student house and were friends, though not roommates. Both men, when questioned by the chair, disclaimed knowledge of any reason for the similarity. Since the preliminary investigation had not eliminated suspicion that an Honor System violation was committed, the chair decided to bring the case to the full board. The two students were informed of the questions concerning their tests and were told that the Board would want to talk to them at a formal hearing. According to standard policy, the hearing was called as soon as possible.
The Hearing:
The BoC was convened and the chair and secretary presented the facts of their initial investigation, without revealing the names or houses of the suspects. The members of the Board then decided that the evidence warranted consideration of the case as a possible Honor System violation. The chair then revealed the names of the students involved, and they were talked to individually. From the testimony, the following sequence of events was constructed.
The tests were given out Friday afternoon and were due Monday morning. John, the first suspect, took his test Friday night and left Saturday at noon for San Fransisco, returning Sunday evening. On Monday morning, he was in a hurry, so he gave his exam to Fred, the other suspect, to turn in. Both Fred and John agreed that Fred received the test from John within ten minutes of the time it was due. Fred testified that he took his test Sunday evening. Richard, John’s roommate, was questioned about the activities of John and Fred over the weekend in question. What he recalled confirmed their testimony.
Both John and Fred were questioned closely about the content of their examinations. Although neither exam had received an excellent score, John’s explanation of his reasoning on the faulty answers was better than Fred’s. At this point, Fred, apparently shaken confessed to copying John’s Physics exam.
The board then met in closed session and decided unanimously to convict Fred of an Honor System violation for copying John’s exam.
The BoC was then faced with neutralizing the unfair advantage Fred had taken by copying John’s test. Because Fred had admittedly copied John’s entire exam, the Board decided that since none of the test represented Fred’s original work, he should receive no credit for the Physics 2 final.
The Board then needed to determine whether Fred could be expected to live under the Honor Code in the future. Fred was again called in and questioned about his attitude toward the Honor System and his reasons for cheating. It became clear to the Board that his actions were the result of immaturity. By his own admission, he had to cheat because of his failure to do any work in the class earlier in the term. He faced, and admitted, his cheating only when all of the evidence was overwhelmingly against him.
The Board was reluctant to abandon Fred by expelling him. The BoC also felt that since this was his only violation and it had been committed under severe stress, he merited another chance. The Board decided that a period of time away from Caltech might permit him to mature and get a hold of himself away from academic pressure. If, after such an absence, he wished to try to continue, the Board thought that he should be able to do so. Consequently, the Board voted to recommend a two term leave of absence.
Fred was informed of the Board’s decisions prior to the close of the hearing. He left without comment. The recommendation was approved by the Deans the following day.
The Board of Control Bylaws
The Board of Control is defined in Articles III, IV, and VII of the bylaws of the Associated Students of the California Institute of Technology (ASCIT), Incorporated. The bylaws below were current as of the time of publication of this handbook, but may be subject to change through subsequent student body elections.
ARTICLE III -- THE HONOR SYSTEM
section 1. No one shall take unfair advantage of any member of the Caltech community.
section 2. The Honor System as stated in Section 1 shall be the fundamental principle of conduct of all members of the corporation. It shall apply in all scholastic activities as well as to relations with other members of the Caltech community.
ARTICLE IV -- OFFICERS
section 3. Office of the Vice President: The Vice President shall, during absences of the President, assume the duties of that office. He shall act as chairman, without vote, of the Board of Control. He shall assist the President in coordinating the policies and activities of the Associated Students. His primary responsibility shall be to insure the continuance of the Honor system among the students. He must be either a junior or a senior in the fall term immediately following his election.
section 12. Office of the Secretary of the Board of Control: The specific duties of the Secretary of the Board of Control shall be determined by the Board of Control.
ARTICLE VII -- THE BOARD OF CONTROL
section 1. PURPOSES and DUTIES.
The Board of Control shall review all cases of alleged violations of the Honor System and shall make recommendations to the Dean of Students for action in those cases in which a violation is found to have been committed. All defendants will be asked if they wish the Associate/Assistant Dean of Students to participate in the Dean's review of the Board's recommendations. It shall be the duty of the Chairman to see that the student body is informed of the policies of the Board of Control. Violations of the Honor System may be brought to the attention of the Board by any member of the Caltech community.
section 2. MEMBERSHIP.
The Board of Control shall consist of the Vice President of the corporation, who shall act as chairman, and the following members: the Secretary of the Board of Control, two members appointed by the Board of Control, and seven members, one elected in each of the seven undergraduate student houses. Only registered undergraduates may serve as Board of Control undergraduates.
(a) The representatives from the houses shall be elected each year in accordance with the election procedures determined by the house.
(b) A candidate may declare his candidacy in any house, but all students shall vote in the house with which they are affiliated at the time of the election. Students not affiliated with any house may register to vote in the house of their choice. Students not registered nor affiliated with a house at the time of the election may not vote.
(c) The Board of Control shall appoint two members from the student body at large after ASCIT elections but before the new officers are sworn in. They shall assume office at the time the Vice President is installed. All applicants must be interviewed by the Board of Control.
section 3. RULES OF PROCEDURE.
(a) When a suspected violation of the Honor System is reported to the Board, the Chairman or Secretary, and one other Board member will conduct a preliminary investigation to examine all relevant facts. They may require any persons involved to discuss their knowledge of any information concerning the case. The Chairman and Secretary will determine whether or not the case will be brought to a hearing of the full Board.
(b) When a case is brought to a hearing of the full Board, the Board will make three decisions:
1. Whether or not an Honor System violation has been committed.
2. How to nullify the advantage that has been taken.
3. How to protect the Caltech Community.
(c) All persons appearing before the Board at a hearing or a preliminary investigation will be informed of the reasons for their presence.
(d) Persons who feel that they have been unfairly treated by any members of the Board or that their personal rights have been violated may make appeals to the Dean of Students.
(e) The preliminary investigators shall not have a vote on the Board.
(f) Seven (7) voting members of the Board shall constitute a quorum.
(g) In case of absence or disability of the Chairman, the Board shall select a temporary Chairman from among their number who, while acting as Chairman, shall not have a vote. In the case of absence of the Secretary, the Chairman shall appoint a temporary Secretary, who shall not have a vote, from among those who are present or past Board members. (see subsection (j).)
(h) If a Board member feels unable to render an unbiased judgment in a particular case, that member should disqualify himself. Furthermore, no member of the Board shall sit in judgment of his own case.
(i) If a defendant feels that particular Board members are unable to render an unbiased judgment, a request may be made to the Chairman or the Dean that those members not sit on the case.
(j) If made necessary by subsections (g), (h), or (i) in order to maintain a full quorum of the Board, the Board shall reserve the right to ask any past members of the Board of Control to serve on a case, contingent on a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the remaining voting Board members. In the case that full quorum is not met using all eligible current and past members, the Board reserves the right to ask the House Presidents to serve on the case. Each House President must be approved by a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the remaining Board members. All those serving on a case are bound to secrecy as stated in subsection (s). House Presidents who have served on a case are not considered current or former members of the Board of Control.
(k) Any person asked to attend a preliminary investigation may be accompanied by any Board member of his choice.
(l) A defendant attending a hearing of the full Board may be accompanied by any one member of the Caltech community of his own choosing. This person may accompany the defendant during waiting periods, and at any part of the hearing where the defendant is present. This person must not disrupt or interfere with the proceedings of the Board in any way, and shall be immediately removed at the Chair's discretion if such disruption occurs. This person will be bound by secrecy as set forth in subsection (s) for all witnesses.
(m) A defendant attending a hearing of the full Board may ask the Chair at any time for permission to hold a short, private discussion with a Board member of the defendant's choice. Any new information pertaining to the case revealed in this conference will be shared with the full Board. The member shall remain able to vote on the case.
(n) A three-fourths (3/4) vote of the voting members of the Board present shall be necessary for a decision of the Board.
(o) No decision of a previous Board shall be revoked, unless the Board is convinced that new evidence or changed conditions change the status of the original case, or upon recommendation of the Dean.
(p) Any records of the proceedings of the Board are to be kept only by the Secretary. The official minutes of proceedings resulting in convictions shall be kept by the Secretary in a minute book of the Board of Control. This book shall be kept under lock and key by the Dean of Students. The Chairman and Secretary shall have the sole power to get the minute book from the Dean, and shall do so only on official business of the Board. All other records shall be destroyed by the Secretary.
(q) The official minutes of proceedings resulting in convictions shall include the names of all persons concerned, the decisions reached by the Board with corresponding vote tallies, a description of any previous convictions, as well as the names of the members of the Board present.
(r) The Board of Control has the right to collaborate with the Graduate Review Board, the Dean of Students, and the Director of Residence Life.
(s) All those appearing before the Board, and the Board itself, are expected to maintain absolute secrecy regarding the case meetings of the BoC. Divulgence of any of the proceedings shall be considered a violation of the Honor System. Should the defendant wish to discuss the issues involved in his case with other, after his case has been completed, he may do so at any time, provided no portion of the case that concerns other defendants is made public without the permission of those persons. However, once the defendant initiates discussion, witnesses in e case are no longer bound to secrecy. If, in a particular case, the Board shall deem it wise to make known the proceedings of the Board, the Chairman shall be empowered to, upon resolution of the Board, to convey such information without disclosing the names of identities of any persons involved.
(t) When a case is reported to the Board by some member of the Community, the Board will inform this member that the case is being considered. If any grade changes or status changes are necessary, the appropriate faculty member of administrator will be notified of the need for such changes at the close of the case.
(u) OATH. The oath taken by all persons appearing before the Board of Control shall be: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."
Use of This Booklet
It is our hope that this booklet will serve as a resource for all members of the Caltech community, and specifically for undergraduates. The material herein is intended to be used as an educational tool for people living under the Honor System and to provide examples of its application. In addition, current procedures and practices of the Board of Control are described. The legal obligations of students and of the Board of Control are outlined in the Caltech Catalog and in the Bylaws of the Associated Students of the California Institute of Technology, Incorporated.
Acknowledgments
This publication has been prepared and published with the joint cooperation of the Associated Students of the California Institute of Technology, Incorporated, the 1991-92 Board of Control, and the Office of the Dean of Students. Its preparation has depended heavily on previous publications of ASCIT's Board of Control and upon material gained through their records. We gratefully acknowledge the efforts of the Boards of Control from 1988 to 1997 in carefully revising earlier versions of this publication. Special thanks are due the Office of the Dean of Students for its continuing support of our endeavors.
The manner of publication and format of this booklet has been designed to facilitate change. Only continued comment and criticism will enable us to best meet the needs of the community. Comments should be directed to:
Board of Control
c/o Dean of Students Office
MC 102-31
Caltech
Pasadena, CA 91125
or to any member of the Board of Control. Confidential messages can always be left at (818) 395-6200 (campus extension 6200). All comments will be gratefully received and suggestions for change will be seriously considered.