Current procedure: Hearing
In the hearing, witnesses provide information about the possible violation that has been observed and are questioned by the committee. Next, the student in question is called before the committee. The student in question is urged to choose a peer representative who will be present throughout the hearing. Only a current undergraduate member of the University community who is not a member of the Honor Committee may serve as the peer representative. The peer representative may ask questions of all witnesses. Though investigators do not participate in deliberations, they will have an opportunity to contribute information pertaining to the investigation following each witness’ testimony. At the conclusion of all testimony, the investigators may, in the presence of the peer representative, present a summary of the case. Before the committee begins deliberations on guilt or innocence, the peer representative and the student in question will have the option of delivering a final defense summary to the committee. The identities of the student in question, student reporting witnesses and any other student witnesses are kept completely confidential. This helps to insure that honor code-related cases will not lead to prejudice outside the hearing room.
The only adequate defense for a student accused of an honor code violation is that his or her actions did not, in fact, constitute a violation. In determining whether an honor code violation has occurred or the severity of such a violation, the committee may take into account whether the student should have reasonably understood that his or her actions were in violation of University policy and/or exam room procedures. Neither the defense that the student was ignorant of the regulations concerning the exam nor the defense that the student was under pressure at the time the violation was committed is considered an adequate defense.