Faculty Handbook

The Governance of Students

• Faculty Authority for Student Conduct and Discipline
• Statement of Goals for the Disciplinary System
• Policies and Structure of Disciplinary System
• Statement on Personal Conduct
• Notes on the Honor System

     University bylaws provide that "the Faculty shall be responsible for the academic regulation of students, for entrance and graduation requirements, for the approval and supervision of courses of study, for the recommendation of students for degrees, and for the discipline and government of the students and all student organizations. The Faculty may adopt such rules and regulations as may be necessary and proper for the discharge of their obligations."

     Washington and Lee is, above all else, an educational institution. The purpose of all our institutional activities, including our disciplinary proceedings, is to protect and promote our educational objectives.

     As an educational institution we aspire to create a special community in which mutual respect for the rights and autonomy of the individual balances our concern for the welfare of the community as a whole and the welfare of other individuals, at least in the negative sense that we do not consciously become the agent of harm to someone else. These aspirations inform and guide our honor system, as well as our other disciplinary systems.

     1. As provided in the University bylaws, the Faculty has authority over student disciplinary matters. To achieve a greater resonance between faculty views on various issues and the views of those immediately engaged in imposing disciplinary penalties, the Dean of Students shall report at the appropriate faculty meeting following the completion of all disciplinary actions. Such a report is for the information of the Faculty and not for formal action. Faculty members may request more information on such cases, and may, collectively or individually, express their approval or disapproval of the handling of such cases either to the Dean of Students or to the individual members of the disciplinary bodies.

     2. The disciplinary power of the University is independent of prosecutorial or judicial action; its exercise is neither demanded by pendency of state action nor prevented by the absence or failure of state action.

     3. At the Baccalaureate Day undergraduate faculty meeting, there shall be only two conditions required for faculty recommendation for a degree: (1) that the candidate has met the academic requirements for a degree, to which the University Registrar shall attest; and (2) that there are no Washington and Lee disciplinary proceedings pending against a candidate, to which the Dean of Students shall attest. (See also the University Student Handbook at http://campuslife.wlu.edu/freshmen/StudentHandbook.pdf )

     4. The Student Judicial Council (SJC) was created by authority of the Faculty of Washington and Lee to promote Robert E. Lee’s notion of individual responsibility. The SJC is comprised of ten elected justices – one from each undergraduate class (four), one from each law class (three), one elected at-large from the law school, the SJC Chair and the SJC Secretary, both elected by the student body. Alternate justices will be appointed by the SJC Chair. The SJC may appoint a non-voting adviser(s) as necessary. The SJC investigates and acts upon complaints of alleged student misconduct except for dishonorable acts that involve the general categories of lying, cheating, stealing, or other breaches of trust, which are under the jurisdiction of the Executive Committee, or acts that involve prohibited student discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct, or hazing, which are under the jurisdiction of the Student-Faculty Hearing Board (SFHB). The SJC’s jurisdiction extends to all conduct committed while a member of the Washington and Lee University community. The SJC is designed to affirm the student’s obligation to individual responsibility and to see that obligation fulfilled. Either the complainant or the accused may appeal a decision of the SJC or SFHB to the University Board of Appeals (comprised of the Dean of Students (or Associate Law Dean for Student Affairs for appeals related to SFHB cases), the senior faculty member of the Student Affairs Committee, and the President of the Executive Committee). (See also the University Student Handbook at http://campuslife.wlu.edu/freshmen/StudentHandbook.pdf )

     Admission to the Washington and Lee community carries with it certain obligations concerning personal conduct. Some of these obligations are specifically covered by the Honor System. Other less specific obligations concern the way we treat each other. Lee described the expectation at Washington College as "gentlemanly behavior." Today, we interpret this to mean civil, decent behavior designed to encourage mutual respect for our individual differences, desires, and ways of thinking.

     At Washington and Lee, we expect an atmosphere of civility and mutual respect to prevail. Instances of uncivil behavior involving students are most effectively dealt with in personal and informal ways, not by formal and judicial procedures. Therefore, members of the Washington and Lee community who believe themselves to have been objects of such behavior should first seek resolution by personal consultation with friends, faculty, designated advisors, or others who may intervene in the dispute. If such direct efforts do not resolve the matter, instances of uncivil behavior involving students may be reported to the Dean of Students. The Dean will take appropriate action by resolving the matter or referring the matter to the Mediator, or to other resources for informal resolution, or, in appropriate cases, to the designated judicial body.

     If informal resolution efforts are not successful or appropriate to the circumstances, one of three judicial bodies may conduct formal procedures on allegations of uncivil behavior, as follows:

• The Executive Committee manages the Honor System and hears cases of breaches of trust such as lying, cheating, and stealing.
• The Student-Faculty Hearing Board hears allegations of prohibited discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct, or hazing by students.
• The Student Judicial Council hears allegations of other types of student misconduct.

     Honor is the moral cornerstone of Washington and Lee University. Since Robert E. Lee’s presidency, the concept of honor has been the guiding principle of life at Washington and Lee. The commitment to honor is recognized by every student, faculty member, administrator, and staff member of the University. Providing the common thread woven through the many aspects of this institution, honor creates a community of trust and respect affecting fundamentally the relationships of all its members.

     The centrality of honor at Washington and Lee is contained in its Honor System, a legacy of Robert E. Lee. In accord with the University’s strong and long-standing commitment to student autonomy, the Board of Trustees has granted to students the privilege of overseeing the administration of the Honor System. This privilege includes the responsibilities of (1) defining dishonorable acts (now defined in terms of the categories of lying, cheating, and stealing, and other breaches of trust); (2) investigating and judicially managing honor hearings; (3) writing and revising the White Book, the Honor System policy and procedures manual; and (4) reporting directly to the Board of Trustees on the administration of the Honor System. The sole penalty for an Honor System violation is dismissal from the University. These responsibilities are administered by the Student Executive Committee, a group of students elected annually by their peers.

     Academic life is essentially shaped by the commitment to honor. Assuming that students will behave honorably, the faculty grants flexibility in the scheduling of most final examinations, and all are taken without supervision. Take-home closed book examinations are a common occurrence. The pledge, "On my honor, I have neither given nor received any unacknowledged aid on this paper (exam, assignment)," expresses the student’s promise that the work submitted is his or hers alone and that no unfair advantage has been taken of peers by cheating. Students’ dedication to honorable behavior in all their academic work creates a strong bond of trust among them and between them and the faculty. This student dedication and the bond that it engenders also provides the basis for the faculty member’s commitment to accepting a student’s word without question.

     The dedication to behave honorably is not confined to academic life. It is expected that students will respect each other’s word and intellectual and personal property in the residence halls and the Greek houses, on the playing field, in the city of Lexington, wherever Washington and Lee students take themselves. This principled expectation provides the foundation for the community of trust which students seek to create not only in the academic sphere but also in life outside it as well.

     The Honor System has been Washington and Lee University’s uniquely defining feature for well over a century. Thousands of students have lived under it while in residence, have been morally shaped by it, and as alumni and alumnae continue to be guided by it in their professional lives. Current students are as committed to it as were those who lived and studied here before them, and they maintain with firm conviction this distinctive ideal of the University.

     1. University bylaws provide the following in regard to the Honor System: "In keeping with cherished traditions, the Student Body shall have authority to determine the circumstances under which and the cause for which a student is to be dropped from the rolls of the University for matters involving violation of honor. In the fulfillment of this responsibility, the Student Body may create such student organizations and adopt such procedures as may be appropriate."

     2. The student body, through its duly elected Executive Committee, has been delegated direct responsibility from the Board of Trustees for the operation of its Honor System. While no such system can function with 100-percent effectiveness all of the time, it is generally agreed that the positive results far outweigh the negative. All Faculty members at Washington and Lee thus assume the obligation to support and uphold the Honor System in all of its various aspects. The president of the student body each year provides for new Faculty members an orientation session on the Honor System, and all Faculty members should study the White Book for an understanding of its philosophy and the procedures that the Executive Committee must follow.

     3. To assist the Faculty in carrying out its Honor System responsibilities, the Executive Committee of the student body has provided the following suggestions as recommended practices.

     a. The Faculty member should see that the application of the Honor System to the particular subject taught is made clear at the beginning of the course and from time to time as the work develops. Collaboration in preparation of assignments may, under some circumstances, be quite legitimate; but no uncertainty should be left in the minds of the students, particularly as to the preparation of any written work.

     b. The following pledge should be required on all written work: "I pledge that I have neither given nor received aid on this work," followed by the signature. No independent work should be accepted without a pledge. The full pledge is desirable, but some faculty members accept the word "Pledged," followed by the signature. Such practice of using only the word "Pledged" is inadvisable with freshmen, as the writing of the pledge probably makes a stronger impression on new students than simply using the one word. It should be clearly explained to the students that neither the intentional nor the accidental omission of the pledge can be offered as a palliating circumstance by the student.

     c. No better stimulus to the effective functioning of the Honor System can be supplied than the clear and unmistakable attitude of the Faculty member that he or she trusts the students and knows that they live under the Honor System. Such attitude, however, does not justify placing more strain than necessary on the operation of the Honor System. It must be recognized that the functioning of the Honor System is not automatic and that its strength is no more than the strength of the individual students operating under it. Certain suggestions may be helpful:

     (1) While Faculty members may absent themselves from the room during a quiz and students may likewise leave the room freely, Faculty rules require that the examination actually be taken in the classroom or adjacent rooms designated by the Faculty member.

     (2) Where the number of seats makes such action possible, students should be seated in alternating seats. It might be explained to the students that such action is no reflection on them. The arrangement simply recognizes that it is sometimes difficult to avoid seeing what a student in an adjoining seat is writing.

     (3) Final examinations. Students set their own final examination schedules within the period of time prescribed by the faculty. See Catalogue, Final Examinations, for details. Final examinations are taken in classrooms designated by the departments and are subject to the provisions of the Honor System.

     d. If a Faculty member believes a violation may have occurred, the Faculty member is obligated to either confront the student and ask for an explanation or report the matter directly to a member of the Executive Committee of the Student Body. If a Faculty member confronts the student and is not satisfied with the student’s explanation, the Faculty member should report the matter to a member of the EC.

     e. In all cases complete confidentiality is to be maintained to protect the accused and witnesses, including the Faculty member.

     4. Faculty members who are in any doubt as to the scope or operation of the Honor System should feel completely free to make inquiry. A Faculty member should consult the Head of the Department, or the appropriate Dean, concerning the application of the Honor System to particular work; the Dean of Students or the president of the student body may be consulted concerning the general operation and procedures of the Honor System.

Revised May 2003