Randolph College - Honor System

HOME > Life at Randolph > Honor Code > Student Handbook > Honor System

Honor System

The Honor System
The Honor Pledge and the Judiciary Committee
The Judiciary Process
Responsibilities and Rights of Those Involved in the Judiciary Process
Plagiarism
Conclusion

The Honor System

Randolph College has maintained a strong and vibrant student-run Honor System for over one hundred years. Randolph College students are honor bound to behave with honesty and integrity at all times, as generations of students have done throughout the history of the College. The Honor System could be considered idealistic in its expectations and demands, yet it has proven practical throughout its existence. The opportunities it provides for personal growth and for developing a broad, internally consistent sense of personal integrity are perhaps the best preparation one receives in college for coping realistically and effectively with a world of rapidly changing ideals and values. The Honor System sets a standard of honesty that is rare and therefore both inspiring and challenging. The challenge that the Honor Pledge presents is well worth the conscientious effort required to maintain it. An atmosphere of freedom and trust is the result, as are unproctored tests, pledged work, and self-scheduled exams.

The Randolph College Honor System is effective because the College community has believed in it and worked to maintain it in an ever-changing social context. It has been and continues to be at the heart of the College. It is something in which alumnae, students, faculty, and administrators feel a great sense of pride and respect. Randolph College is a very special place ─ special because of the people who comprise the community and the spirit of trust and freedom that unites them.

Living Under The Honor System

A Randolph College student agrees to act with honesty and integrity in all matters, whether academic or personal, from the time she/he enters the College for orientation. The resulting atmosphere of mutual confidence among students, faculty, and administrators is evident in the feeling that a Randolph College student can be trusted to act with honesty and integrity; to take personal responsibility for her/his own actions as well as for the actions of another that violate the Honor Pledge or other community standards; to respect the rights of others; and to respect the property of others. In specific terms, a Randolph College student can be trusted

to take a quiz or an examination without a proctor;
to complete special "pledged" assignments without assistance;
to have the privilege of self-scheduled exams;
to have completed all assignments as reported;
to use the reserved materials in the Lipscomb Library in accordance with established regulations;
to respect the property of others at all times and under all circumstances, whether in student rooms or in community areas such as bathrooms, kitchens, lounges, and storage rooms.

Ownership of the Honor System
The Randolph College Honor System is owned by its students who are responsible for abiding by all the tenets of the system during their enrollment at the College. Maintaining and supporting the values of the Honor System are the individual and collective responsibility of all members of the Randolph College community. Upon matriculation into the College, a student accepts responsibility for conducting her/himself in accord with the tenets of the Honor System and for requiring other students to do the same.

The Judiciary Committee
The Judiciary Committee is composed of elected student representatives, a faculty member elected by the faculty, and the Dean of the College. The Committee is responsible for assuring that our core community values of honesty, integrity, civility, and respect for persons and property are upheld. The Judiciary Committee represents the ultimate disciplinary authority on campus and as such is responsible for investigating and adjudicating violations of the Honor Pledge. Students are bound to the guidelines of dual responsibility and confidentiality (both defined below) regarding matters presented for consideration by the Judiciary Committee. The pages that follow describe in detail the role of the individual student in supporting the Honor Pledge and the processes and procedures that are used by the Judiciary Committee to address potential violations.

The Honor System’s Jurisdiction On- and Off-Campus
Occasionally honor violations may occur between members of the Randolph College community at off-campus locations. Honor violations that stem from off-campus conduct may, as determined by the Chair of the Judiciary committee be adjudicated through our Honor System. It is unusual for the College to adjudicate a case in which either the accuser or the accused is not a member of the Randolph College community, although it is possible for such a hearing to be held. For instance, the Bad Check Policy requires that a student be referred to the Judiciary Committee the fourth time that she/he has been reported for writing a bad check or having a delinquent account on campus or in the Lynchburg community.

Learning about the Honor System: Honor Assemblies and Educational Programs
The Judiciary Committee sponsors educational programs during each academic year, including some that are mandatory for all students. All new students are required to attend an Orientation Honor Assembly during their orientation program. At the Orientation Honor Assembly, the Chair of the Judiciary Committee, the Student Government President, and a Randolph College faculty member speak to students about both the philosophical and the practical aspects of living under the Honor System. At the conclusion of the program, all new students are required to sign the Honor Pledge. The Judiciary Committee also sponsors various educational opportunities about the Honor System each academic year that might include residence hall programs, community-wide assemblies, or dissemination of information whether door-to-door, posters around campus, or in the dining hall. In addition, enrolled students are required to attend an Exam Honor Assembly before fall semester exam week. During the Exam Honor Assembly, all students re-affirm their commitment to the Honor System by signing pledge cards and listen to remarks by the Judiciary Chair, the Exam Scheduling Chair and a faculty member. During the Exam Honor Assembly, students ultimately agree to uphold their responsibility to the System as a means of maintaining their privileges of unproctored and self-scheduled examinations. Students enrolled spring semester but not fall semester must attend an Exam Honor Assembly before exam week during spring semester.

The Honor Pledge and the Judiciary Committee
The Judiciary Committee exists to assure that the Honor Pledge is explicitly followed by all Randolph College students. The Committee is empowered to address any potential violation of the Pledge. The Honor Pledge is signed annually by all Randolph College students and appears in all classrooms on campus.

Honor Pledge

I pledge absolute honesty in my academic work and in all personal relationships at Randolph College.

I will maintain the integrity of my word, and I will respect the rights of others.

Realizing that these standards are an integral part of life at RandolphCollege, I assume my obligation to uphold this honor pledge.

If at any time I fail to live up to my obligation of this pledge, I will report myself to the Chair of the Judiciary Committee.

I will also ask others to report themselves for any infraction of this pledge.

What Constitutes a Violation of the Honor Pledge?
Actions that violate the Honor Pledge include but are not limited to lying; cheating; stealing; plagiarism; submitting a particular paper, or similar papers, for credit in more than one course without obtaining prior specific permission from all professors involved; failure to uphold dual responsibility; misuse of library materials that constitutes obstruction to research, administration, or other College activities; interference with the Judiciary process; vandalism and other acts that are disrespectful of another’s property; and the fourth charge of writing a fraudulent (“bad”) check. The spirit of honor on the Randolph College campus lies in the broader challenge of the Honor Pledge: the commitment not only to be honest in all aspects of one’s life and to hold others to that standard as well, but also to maintain the integrity of one’s word and respect the rights of others.

The Meaning of Dual Responsibility
The responsibility of each student under the Honor Pledge is described by the term dual responsibility. A student's first responsibility is to uphold the Honor Pledge at all times, and if she/he should fail to do so, to report her/himself to the Chair of the Judiciary Committee within 24 hours of violating the Pledge. In addition, every student is responsible for addressing any student who appears to have committed an honor violation. Therefore, each Randolph College student has not one, but two obligations; 1) for conducting her/himself honorably, and 2) for addressing any student she/he suspects of having committed an honor violation and, after such, upon verification of an offense or continued suspicion of one, assuring that potential infractions of the Honor Pledge are brought to the attention of the Chair of the Judiciary Committee. The second of these is discussed in detail below.

Confidentiality
Confidentiality is required throughout the Judiciary process, beginning when a person suspects that a student has violated the Honor Pledge. At Randolph College we are committed to providing an environment in which personal and private information related to students is known only to those who truly need to know that information in order to address a concern or to assist the student in being a successful member of our community. In terms of the Honor System, personal and private information regarding specific students will only be made known to the persons who are directly involved in the investigation of an alleged violation: the accuser, the accused, witnesses, Judiciary Committee members, the Dean of Students, advisors at the hearing for the accused and accuser, and those who are needed to assure follow-through on any potential penalty. All persons who are privy to personal and private information as described above are honor-bound to maintain the absolute confidentiality of any information they may learn based on their involvement with the matter.

Persons To Whom One Can Speak about Honor Matters or Potential Honor Matters

Any person who suspects that an honor violation has occurred is responsible for confronting the suspected student in order to give her/him a chance to explain her/his actions. If a member of the Randolph College community who harbors suspicion wishes to consult with someone prior to or after confronting the student, she/he may speak with the Chair of the Judiciary Committee or the Dean of Students, both of whom are bound by dual responsibility, or she/he may seek counsel from the College Counselors who are not bound by dual responsibility.

How to Address and Report a Potential Violation of the Honor Pledge
Any member of the College community who believes a student may have violated the Honor Pledge is obligated to tell the student that the action in question appears to constitute an infraction of the Honor Pledge and to ask her/him to explain the action. The accuser must talk with the student she/he suspects about her/his suspicions right away, in person, and in private. If the explanation the suspected student offers removes the accuser's suspicion, both parties are responsible for dropping the matter entirely. The matter should not be mentioned again. If the explanation given by the suspected student does not remove the accuser’s suspicion, the accuser must require that the student report her/himself to the Chair of the Judiciary Committee within 24 hours. The accuser must then contact the Chair after the 24-hour period has passed to make sure that the accused student has indeed contacted the Chair. If she/he has not, the accuser is responsible for explaining the situation to the Chair so that the matter can be pursued by the Judiciary Committee. From that point, the matter is in the hands of the Judiciary Committee and the investigation of the matter handled solely by the Chair and the Committee Investigator. Any student who reports her/himself to the Judiciary Chair upon the request of another is not assumed to be admitting guilt. After a student has reported her/himself, the Judiciary Committee Investigator will conduct an investigation to determine if a hearing is warranted or if the matter will be dismissed before a hearing is held.

The Judiciary Process

Reporting Oneself to the Chair of the Judiciary Committee
If a student suspects that she/he has committed an honor violation, or if she/he is informed by another member of the community that she/he suspects the student has committed an honor violation, she/he has 24 hours to report her/himself to the Chair of the Judiciary Committee. Once the accused student has reported her/himself to the Chair of the Judiciary Committee, the accused student is required to meet in person with the Chair within two (2) class days, although in some cases the accused student and the Chair will conduct the initial meeting at the time the student reports her/himself. If a case is initiated during the final five (5) class days of the semester or during the examination period, the Judiciary Chair has the right to appoint an administrative hearing panel of at least 3 persons to adjudicate the matter and issue an appropriate penalty. The Administrative Hearing panel may be composed of students from the judiciary committee and administrators or may be solely administrators if necessary.

The Initial Meeting with the Chair of the Judiciary Committee
In her initial meeting with the accused student, the Chair of the Judiciary Committee will explain the student's rights and the judiciary process in detail, making certain that the student knows where the information is located in the Student Handbook. The Chair will inform the student of her/his right to have an advisor from the College community and will give her/him names of those faculty members who have served on campus judicial committees in the past, as those persons are particularly knowledgeable about the judiciary process and may be most helpful as advisors to accused students. When considering whom to ask to serve as her/his advisor, an accused student for who English is not the native language may wish to consider an advisor who is conversant in both English and the native language of the accused. Current members of the Judiciary Committee and the Judicial Appeals Board may not serve as advisors. If an accused student wishes to enlist the assistance of an advisor for her/his hearing, she/he is entitled to share information about the matter with that advisor. The advisor is bound to maintain confidentiality regarding any information that is shared.

The Investigation of a Potential Judiciary Case
The Chair of the Judiciary Committee will appoint a student representative from the Judiciary Committee to serve as the Investigator for the case.(1) The Investigator will talk to all persons having any knowledge of the situation and will gather necessary documentation in order to establish the facts of the case. Investigative efforts on the part of others are a violation of the Judiciary process and are not in keeping with the spirit of the Honor System. All persons interviewed or contacted as a part of the investigation are required to maintain absolute confidentiality about the investigation and may only speak with the Investigator or the Chair of the Judiciary Committee about the matter. After all the evidence is compiled, the Chair and the Investigator will determine whether there is sufficient evidence for the case to be heard by the Judiciary Committee.

(1) If a possible violation is reported during the final week of class, final examination week, senior week, or when the College is not in session, the Chair has the prerogative to serve as the Investigator for the matter.

If a Judiciary Hearing Is Not Warranted
If the Chair and the Investigator determine that there is insufficient evidence for the case to be heard by the Judiciary Committee, the matter is dropped entirely. The Investigator will inform all parties involved in the investigation that the matter will not be pursued further, and all persons are on their honor not to speak of the matter again.

If a Judiciary Hearing Is Warranted

If it is determined that the case will go to hearing, the Chair and the Investigator will prepare a written case statement which gives the charge(s) against the student and a summary of the events surrounding the alleged violation(s). The Chair is responsible for scheduling the hearing within 18 class days of the initial meeting between the Chair and the accused student.

At least 72 hours prior to the hearing, the Chair is required to send the accused student and the accuser written notification of the date, time, and place of the hearing, the charge(s), the nature of the evidence, and names of the witnesses who will participate in the hearing. The accused student must provide a list to the Chair of the names of witnesses and indicate any evidence that she/he wishes to have submitted as a part of the hearing at least 48 hours prior to the hearing. The Chair will notify the accused student's witnesses of the date, time, and place of the hearing. After the determination is made for a hearing, the accused student and the accuser may each choose to invite an advisor from the faculty or staff of the College to provide support and advice at the hearing. It is the requesting student’s responsibility to notify that advisor of the date, time, and place of the hearing and the charge(s), the nature of the evidence, and the witnesses.student’s responsibility to notify that advisor of the date, time, and place of the hearing and the charge(s), the nature of the evidence, and the witnesses.

If a Potential Social Violation Includes a Potential Honor Violation
Occasionally, a social violation may include allegations of lying or other potential honor violations. In such instances, the Social Violations Hearing Board Chair and the Judiciary Committee Chair will consult to determine if a combined Judiciary Committee/Social Violations Hearing Board hearing is warranted. If a combined hearing is determined to be necessary, the Judiciary Committee Chair will appoint a combined committee to hear the matter. Membership of the combined committee will include the Judiciary Committee Chair, the Social Violations Hearing Board Chair, four student members of the Judiciary Committee and four student members of the Social Violations Hearing Board, the Dean of the College or the faculty representative on the Judiciary Committee, and the staff advisor to the Social Violations Hearing Board. The investigation of the matter will be conducted by an Investigator from the Judiciary Committee appointed by the Judiciary Committee Chair. The combined committee will follow the procedures of the Judiciary Committee described in detail below. The Judiciary Committee Chair will preside over the hearing. All members of the combined committee except the Judiciary Committee Chair, the staff advisor from the Social Violations Hearing Board and the Investigator will vote on guilt or innocence and will determine any sanction(s). The Judiciary Committee Chair will vote only in the case of a tie. Appeals of the findings of the combined Judiciary Committee/Social Violations Hearing Board Committee will be heard by the Judiciary Appeals Committee.

The Composition of the Judiciary Committee
The Judiciary Committee is comprised of the following: the Chair of the Judiciary Committee (the Chair is a member of the Senior class elected to her/his position in the Student Government elections in the spring), three additional seniors, three juniors, three sophomores, and three first-years (all class representatives are elected during their respective class elections), the Dean of the College, and a member of the faculty elected bi-annually by the faculty.

Quorum for a Judiciary Hearing
During the fall and spring semesters, the presence of the following at a Judiciary Committee hearing is required for a quorum: the Chair, or the Student Government president presiding in her place; four voting student representatives; and either the Dean of the College or the faculty representative. If neither the Dean of the College nor the faculty representative can be present at a hearing, a quorum can be achieved by the presence of the faculty member who most recently served as the faculty representative on the Judicial Appeals Board.4 A quorum is required for a hearing. The accused student may waive the quorum requirement only in the event that voting membership of the Committee drops below quorum as a result of a member’s withdrawal during the hearing.

Quorum Requirements for Finals Week or for Hearings Held During College Breaks
For a regular Judiciary Committee hearing held during finals week, senior week, summer break, or winter break, the presence of the following is required for a quorum: the Chair, or the Student Government president presiding in her/his place; two voting student representatives; and either the Dean of the College or the faculty representative. If neither the Dean of the College nor the faculty representative can be present at a hearing, a quorum can be achieved by the presence of the faculty member who most recently served as the faculty representative on the Judicial Appeals Board. If the chair appoints an Administrative Hearing Panel to hear a matter during this time, quorum will consist of three persons.

Challenges or Voluntary Withdrawals of Judiciary Committee Members
The accused student has the right to challenge the participation of any member of the Judiciary Committee, but the challenge must be made in writing at least 72 hours prior to the hearing and must establish bias or show other cause. The Chair will decide the merit of a challenge. Should the Chair's participation be challenged, the Dean of Students will determine the merit of the challenge. If the Chair is unable to preside at the hearing due to a challenge or for any other reason, the Student Government president will preside. Any member of the Committee who feels that she/he cannot hear the case objectively is responsible for declining to participate in the hearing. In addition, if at any time during a hearing a Committee member feels that she/he is unable to act objectively in reaching a decision, the Committee member will withdraw from further participation in the hearing. Should this withdrawal result in loss of a quorum, the accused student may waive her/his right to the required quorum by recording her/his desire to do so on the audiotape.

The Judiciary Hearing
The hearing will be closed to non-participants. The accused student, the accuser, and the advisor(s) for either party will be present throughout the proceedings, with the following exceptions:

The Judiciary Committee may choose to call an executive session during the process of a hearing to discuss a procedural matter or to confer about information already presented. If an executive session is called, the room will be cleared of all persons except members of the Judiciary Committee.
Neither the accuser nor her/his advisor will be present when the Committee delivers its verdict or sanction(s) to the accused student. The Chair will inform the accuser of the hearing outcome within 24 hours of the conclusion of the hearing.

The Judiciary Hearing Process
The hearing will begin with introduction of the Committee members, the Investigator, the accused student, the accuser, and any advisors. The Hearing will proceed as follows:

The case statement will be distributed to everyone present.
The Chair will ask for any Committee member who cannot hear the case objectively to withdraw from participation in the hearing.
The accused student will tell the Committee whether she/he pleads guilty or not guilty to the alleged violation(s).
The Investigator will present the evidence.
The accused student will explain in her/his own words what happened.
The accused student, the accuser, and the Investigator will be questioned by Committee members and by one another.
The Chair will call the witnesses into the hearing, one at a time, to speak to the Committee in the presence of the accused student, the accuser, the advisors, and the Investigator. (2) A duly notified witness who does not appear at a hearing will be charged with failure to uphold dual responsibility. As soon as a witness has completed her/his testimony, she/he will be dismissed from the room and may not hear the testimony of others.
Each witness will describe her/his involvement in the situation and then may be questioned by Committee members, the Investigator, the accused student, and the accuser.
After all witnesses have been heard, the accused student may speak to the Committee again, and the Committee members may ask additional questions of the accused student, the accuser, and witnesses to the events in question. At this point in the hearing, the accused student will be allowed a total of one (1) character witness to provide oral testimony, and an additional one (1) written statement from a character witness. The accused student, the accuser, the Investigator, and Committee members may question the character witnesses who participate in the hearing.
Advisors to the accused and the accuser may consult with their advisees as desired during the hearing, but may not ask questions or make statements during the hearing unless specifically requested to do so by the Chair of the Judiciary Committee.
The accused student will have an opportunity to make a final statement to the Committee.
After her/his final statement, the accused student, the accuser, the advisors, the witnesses and the Investigator will leave the hearing while the Committee deliberates.

The Committee may recall the accused student, the accuser, or any witness. The accused student, the accuser, the advisors, and the Investigator will all be present if any person is recalled. After all testimony has been completed, the Judiciary Committee will meet in executive session to discuss the facts of the case and will review all testimony and evidence. The Committee will then vote to determine whether the student is guilty or not guilty. Each Committee member, except the Investigator on the case, has one vote, with Committee members voting in the following order: first year representatives, sophomore representatives, junior representatives, senior representatives, faculty representatives. The Chair votes only in the event of a tie. A finding of guilty requires a majority vote of all members present and voting. The standard applied in determining guilt is the preponderance of the evidence.

If the verdict is guilty, the Committee reviews Judiciary records of previous honor violations by the student. The Committee considers past violations and the entire proceedings of the current case in selecting an appropriate sanction. A simple majority of those members present and voting is required for a sanction to be imposed.

When the Committee has reached a decision, the accused student, her/his advisor and the Investigator will be recalled to the hearing. The Chair will read the Committee's decision and, in the case of a decision of guilt, the sanction(s) that will be imposed.
The Chair is responsible for delivering to the student within 24 hours of the conclusion of the hearing written notification of the Committee's decision, any sanction(s) imposed, and the appeals procedure.

(2) In the event that two accused students are involved in one case, the following procedure will be implemented: The Committee will follow normal judicial procedure for the first accused student until the point of deliberation, when the first accused student will exit the room. The Committee will begin again at the beginning of the judicial procedure to hear testimony from the second accused student and witnesses until the point of deliberation. At this time, both accused students will be brought together to serve as witnesses to each other’s cases. The Committee will then deliberate as usual and sanction each student separately.

Judiciary Committee Records

All materials pertaining to the following types of Judiciary cases are destroyed as soon as the decision not to have a hearing is made or as soon as there is a finding of not guilty:

an alleged violation that was reported or investigated but never the subject of a Judiciary Committee hearing;
a case in which the Judiciary Committee found the accused student not guilty;
a case in which the Judicial Appeals Board reverses the verdict of the Judiciary Committee and finds the accused student not guilty.

For any case in which the accused student is found guilty and the verdict is not later reversed on appeal, the following materials are maintained permanently in the Office of the Dean of the College: a copy of the Judiciary Committee Chair’s letter notifying the student of the verdict and the sanctions imposed; the case statement; the Investigator’s report; any physical evidence presented at the hearing; and the audio-tape of the hearing. These materials are not maintained in the student’s personal files but in a separate records system. Access to these materials is limited to the following persons: the student; the Chair of the Judiciary Committee; the Dean of the College; the Dean of Students; those authorized by the Dean of the College or the Dean of Students; and the President of the College. Access to this record by any other individual may only be granted by written permission of the student.

The suspension or expulsion of a student by the Judiciary Committee is recorded in the student’s permanent record but not on the transcript.

The hearing, with the exception of executive sessions and final deliberations, will be audio taped to make possible the accurate review of testimony during final deliberations and by the Judicial Appeals Board in case of an appeal. A student found guilty by the Committee has the right to have an unedited copy of the tape in order to plan an appeal. After the appeals process is completed, she/he must return the tape to the Chair. The tape of the hearing is the property of the Judiciary Committee and may not be reproduced or distributed in any way.

Responsibilities and Rights of Those Involved in the Judiciary Process

The Accused Student

Responsibilities

To report her/himself to the Chair of the Judiciary Committee within 24 hours of violating the Honor Pledge or of being asked to report to the Chair by another member of the community. To report oneself to the Judiciary Chair upon the request of another is not an admission of guilt; rather, it is an obligation of dual responsibility.
To meet in person with the Chair for the initial meeting within two (2) class days after the date on which she/he reported her/himself to the Chair.
To provide a truthful explanation upon being questioned, or to remain silent as is her/his right.
To be certain that she/he understands her/his rights and responsibilities as outlined in this Student Handbook and as explained by the Chair.
To check daily her/his campus post office box and voicemail for messages from the Chair or the Investigator and to respond in a timely manner.
To maintain confidentiality about the alleged violation, the investigation, and the hearing in order to maintain the integrity of the Judiciary process.

Rights

To be informed of her/his rights in the Judiciary process. Those rights are identified in this Student Handbook and will be explained to the accused student by the Chair of the Judiciary Committee.
To be subject to investigation for a possible violation occurring during the preceding 12 months only.
To have a fair hearing by the Judiciary Committee. Accused individuals will be judged solely on the evidence presented at the hearing.
To be presumed innocent unless guilt is established by the admission of the accused or until the Judiciary Committee delivers a verdict of guilty.
To have the existence and the details of an honor case and its proceedings kept confidential.
To have a prompt hearing. Except in extenuating circumstances (to be verified by the Dean of Students), hearings will be scheduled within 18 class days following the initial meeting of the Chair and the accused student. See footnote 5 for special circumstances during finals week or during College breaks.
To select and bring a member of the Randolph College community to the hearing as an advisor. Current members of the Judiciary Committee and the Judicial Appeals Board may not serve as advisors. The advisor to an accused student may not participate in the hearing except to consult privately with the accused student as desired. The advisor may be present to hear testimony at any time the accused is present in the Judiciary hearing.
To have an adequate amount of time in which to prepare for a hearing. Unless she/he waives this right, an accused student will have a minimum of 72 hours from the time the Chair informs her/him of the charges, the nature of the evidence, and witnesses against her/him.
To have access to written evidence at least 72 hours prior to the hearing.
To challenge, prior to the hearing and with cause, the participation of any member of the Judiciary Committee in the hearing of her/his case. Such a request for the removal of a Committee member must be made in writing, must establish bias or show other just cause, and must be submitted to the Chair at least 72 hours prior to the hearing.
Not to appear at her/his own hearing. The hearing will be held as scheduled and proceed as usual. (The Judiciary Committee strongly suggests that it is virtually always in an accused student's interest to appear at her/his hearing.)
To be present throughout the presentation of the case statement and all evidence and the testimony of all witnesses.
To speak in her/his own defense.
To have the Committee hear testimony from other persons of her/his choice with information relevant to the case.
To bring no more than one (1) character witness to provide an oral statement to the hearing, and no more than one (1) additional written character witness statement to be read by the committee.
To remain silent. This will not be construed by the Committee to be an implicit admission of guilt.
Not to be harassed by any member of the Committee during the investigation or the hearing in an attempt to coerce an admission of guilt or information about the conduct of others.
To confront adverse witnesses and hear and question and rebut the adverse testimony and any unfavorable inferences that may be drawn from such testimony during the hearing. The accused student should not discuss the case with any witnesses prior to the hearing except in the presence of the Chair of the Judiciary Committee.
To be notified in writing within 24 hours of the hearing’s conclusion as to the Committee's decision, any sanction(s) imposed, and the appeals process.
To appeal to the Judicial Appeals Board, under the following conditions (Refer to the Student Government Constitution, Article III, Section 16.):

Except by special permission of the Judicial Appeals Board, all appeals must be filed with the President of the College within six (6) class days (inclusive of the examination period) following the decision of the Judiciary Committee.
An appeal may be requested on the grounds of

new evidence, new witness, or new testimony that might cause an The Judicial Appeals Board to change the decision;
an error in procedure that affected the decision of the Judiciary Committee;
suspension or expulsion as a sanction from the Judiciary Committee.

The Accuser

Responsibilities

To confront the person she/he suspects has committed an honor violation, in person, in private, and as soon as possible. If and only if the accuser has made determined but unsuccessful efforts to talk to the student in person may the accuser present her/his suspicions to the student in writing or by telephone.
To drop the matter entirely if the student's explanation removes the accuser's suspicion.
If the student's explanation does not remove the accuser's suspicion, to request that the student contact the Chair of the Judiciary Committee about the suspected violation within 24 hours.
To check with the Chair following the 24-hour period to confirm that the person has contacted the Chair as requested.
To maintain confidentiality.
To cooperate fully with the Chair and the Investigator appointed by the Chair.
To participate in the hearing and explain to the Judiciary Committee why she/he suspects the accused student of violating the Honor Pledge. The participation of the accuser in the hearing is required. If the accuser cannot attend the hearing because she/he is not residing within a reasonable drive of Lynchburg at the time of the hearing, the accuser may participate in the hearing by way of a telephone conference call.

Rights

To know the outcome of the Judiciary Committee hearing. Before being told the outcome, the accuser must sign an official acknowledgment that the information is confidential and that a breach of confidentiality is an honor violation.
To be accompanied during the hearing by an advisor of her/his choice from the Randolph College community. Current members of the Judiciary Committee and the Judicial Appeals Board may not serve as advisors. The advisor to the accuser may not participate in the hearing except to consult privately with the accuser as desired. The advisor may be present to hear testimony at any time the accuser is present in the Judiciary Hearing.
To be free from harassment or intimidation by any participant in the hearing process or as a result of testifying in the matter.

The Investigator

Responsibilities

To meet privately and document her/his meetings with the accused student. She/he will gather information from the accused student regarding potential witnesses and extenuating circumstances.
To meet privately with the accuser and with any witnesses to the matter in question.
To develop a comprehensive report of her/his findings in the matter that she/he will subsequently share with the Chair of the Judiciary Committee. Her/his report should provide facts and statements of steps taken in the investigation. The report must include all pertinent evidence and facts that are to be presented during a potential hearing.
To meet privately with the Chair of the Judiciary Committee to share her/his investigator’s report and determine whether, based on the facts available, a hearing in the matter is warranted. If the Chair and the Investigator determine that a hearing is warranted, the Chair will begin the process of scheduling the hearing.
To share her/his report with the Judiciary Committee, the accuser, and the accused student at the Judiciary hearing of the matter. The Investigator’s testimony at the hearing will include only points of clarification regarding the investigation, and must not indicate any bias for or against any person.

Rights

To be free from harassment or intimidation by any participant in the hearing process or as a result of her/his report or testimony in the matter.

Witnesses

Responsibilities

To appear at any Judiciary Hearing at which their testimony is requested.
To provide true and complete information about what they know about the matter in question.
To maintain absolute confidentiality regarding anything they learn before, during, or after the hearing.
To cooperate fully with the Chair and the Investigator.

Rights

To ask appropriate and pertinent questions of any member of the Judiciary Committee, the accuser, or the accused.
To be free from harassment or intimidation by any participant in the hearing process or as a result of testifying in the matter.

The Chair of the Judiciary Committee

Responsibilities

To maintain confidentiality about matters brought to her attention.
To confirm that the alleged offense has taken place within the previous 12 months.
To instruct the accuser(s) to discuss the matter with the suspected student. The Chair and the accuser should not discuss the matter in detail until after the accuser has discussed her/his concerns with the accused student.
To inform the accuser of her/his rights and discuss her/his obligations of dual responsibility and confidentiality.
To contact the accused student after the accuser's 24-hour notice has expired if the accused has not yet reported her/himself to the Chair.
To conduct initial interviews with the accused student and the accuser and to appoint a student representative on the Judiciary Committee as Investigator. During the initial meeting with the accused student, the Chair will instruct the accused student of her Judiciary rights through discussion of the relevant sections of this Student Handbook. Among the rights to be discussed are 1) the right to be accompanied during the hearing by an advisor of her/his choice from the Randolph College community, (3) and 2) the right to present no more than one character witness to provide an oral statement, and one written character witness statement at the hearing. This meeting can be conducted via phone or letter if the accused student chooses not to meet in person with the Chair.
To inquire about any favorable witnesses and/or evidence the accused student might be able to provide.
To present a list of Judiciary Committee members to the accused student so that she/he may exercise her/his right to challenge Committee members.
To appoint a student representative on the Judiciary Committee to investigate the case. Investigation consists of questioning the people involved and gathering all available information and evidence.
To determine, at the conclusion of the investigation, in conjunction with the Investigator, whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant a Judiciary hearing.
To inform the accused student of the following in writing at least 72 hours prior to the hearing, unless the accused waives that right: the charge(s) against her/him; the date, time, and place of the hearing; the witnesses; and the nature of the evidence against her/him.
To provide the accused student access to all physical evidence at least 72 hours prior to the hearing.
To summon witnesses to appear at the hearing of the Judiciary Committee and to advise them of Judiciary procedure.
To instruct character references about their roles and responsibilities in the hearing process and to notify those individuals of the date, time, and place of the hearing.
To write an objective case statement summarizing the charge(s) against the accused student.
To conduct the hearing according to procedures outlined above.
After a decision of guilt and prior to deliberation on sanctions, to inform the Committee of any previous honor violation(s) and the Committee’s action in each instance.
When the Committee has concluded its deliberations, to recall the accused student to the hearing and to inform her/him of the Committee's decision and any sanction(s) imposed. In the case of suspension or expulsion from the College, the Chair will advise the student that the Dean of Students will be notified of the decision immediately, and that the student should seek the advice of the Dean of Students in preparing a potential appeal.
Within 24 hours of the conclusion of the hearing to provide the accused student with written notification of the Committee's decision, any sanction(s) imposed, and the appeals process.
To have the accuser sign a Statement of Confidentiality prior to notifying her/him of the results of the hearing.
To inform the accuser of the outcome of the hearing within 24 hours after the conclusion of the hearing.
To provide all required information and to serve as a witness in the case of an appeal.
To give written notice to the Dean of Students and the Associate Academic Dean in the event that a student is suspended or expelled. In the case of suspension, the notice shall specify the duration of the suspension and all conditions with which the student must comply before being reinstated. (If the sanction is reversed to a sanction other than suspension or expulsion on appeal, no notification shall be made.)

(3) Persons who have served on campus judicial committees in the past may be willing to serve as advisors. The Chair will inform the accused of the names of these individuals.

Rights

To proceed with the Judiciary process without the participation of an accused student who fails to respond to inquiries of the Chair and/or the Investigator.
To summon the accused student, the accuser(s), and all necessary witnesses from within the College community and to request witnesses from outside the College community as appropriate.
The right, though not the obligation, to postpone until the following semester the hearing of cases that arise during the final examination period or in the final five (5) class days of a semester, except in the case of a graduating Senior or a student who is known not to be returning to campus the following semester.
To be free from harassment or intimidation by any participant in the investigation or hearing process or as a result of participation in the resolution of the matter.

The Judiciary Committee

Responsibilities

To provide a fair hearing for each accused student.
To make a fair and rational decision of guilt or innocence based on the evidence provided by the Investigator, the testimony of witnesses, and the statements of the accuser and accused.
To maintain confidentiality about charges, evidence, hearings, and outcomes.
To sponsor programs and publications to educate the College community about all aspects of the Honor System and its role in the life of the College.
To clarify and amend policies and procedures so that the Judiciary process reflects and upholds the philosophy of the Honor Pledge. The Student Legislature, the Faculty, and the Board of Trustees must approve substantive changes in policy or procedure.
To report to the College community in two ways: a semester report to the faculty by the Committee's faculty representative that summarizes the number of cases and the charge, decision and, in the case of a guilty verdict, the sanction(s) of each case; a report made to the Sundial at the end of each semester summarizing the number of cases and the charge, decision and, in the case of a guilty verdict, the sanction(s) of each case.

Rights

To hold a scheduled hearing in the absence of an accused student who has been properly notified.
To impose appropriate penalties on a student. Potential penalties include but are not limited to a warning; counseling with a member of the College community; requirement of an assignment appropriate to the nature of the violation; removal of the privilege of self-scheduled examinations; suspension for a stated period of time; suspension (temporary removal of student status); and expulsion (permanent removal of student status).
To be free from harassment or intimidation by any participant in the investigation or hearing process or as a result of participation in the resolution of the matter.

Plagiarism

The following statement describes what constitutes plagiarism and how to avoid it. The statement represents the position of the College and the Judiciary Committee. All students will be held accountable for the information contained herein, and any violation of the principles set forth will be handled by the Judiciary Committee as a violation of the Honor Pledge and may result in suspension or expulsion.

Definition of Plagiarism
Plagiarism is using the words or ideas of another person without properly acknowledging their source. When a student presents work for academic credit, her/his instructor assumes that the work is original except where the student shows through correct documentation that she/he is citing the work of another. Inadequate or improper documentation is grounds for a student’s being charged with plagiarism. Whether she/he is found to have been ignorant of the conventions for documentation, careless in applying her/his knowledge of those conventions, or dishonest in presenting someone else's work as though it were the product of her/his own understanding, the result is the same: she/he has committed plagiarism. The Honor System requires that the student who has committed plagiarism go through the judiciary process.

"Common Knowledge"
The student may have learned in secondary school that if she/he finds the same material in three sources, the material may be presumed to be "common knowledge" and need not be documented. That is not always the case. What is common knowledge among experts in a field is not necessarily common knowledge among members of a more general audience. A useful rule of thumb is that one might consider to be common knowledge any information available in an ordinary desk dictionary. If the student is in doubt, she/he should always cite her/his source.

Proper Documentation to Avoid Plagiarism
Avoiding plagiarism is easy. The student need only follow the rules for proper documentation of material that is not original. Printed material, as well as material communicated electronically, orally, or in unpublished form, must be documented.

There are four methods of using such material: direct quotation, paraphrase, summary, and a combination of paraphrase or summary with direct quotation. With all four, the writer must cite her/his source by using the documentation style appropriate to her/his discipline—in most cases either MLA or APA style. Both styles are described in detail in the current edition of the Hodges Harbrace Handbook. (Note that in the examples below, MLA style is used.)

Direct Quotation
The first method of using material that is not original is direct quotation. With this method, the student uses quotation marks (or, in the case of a longer passage, indentation and double spacing without quotation marks) to set off the exact words of her/his source. Omissions within the quotation are indicated by the use of spaced periods; brief additions or interpolations are placed in square brackets. (Consult Hodges Harbrace Handbook for proper use of these marks.) With these exceptions, a direct quotation must be copied accurately down to its punctuation and italics and must be followed by a parenthetical reference to the precise page or pages where it originally appeared.

For example, a direct quotation from Simone de Beauvoir's The Second Sex would appear in a paper in this form:

Formal attire has a double function: it is intended to indicate the social standing of the woman (her standard of living, her wealth, the social circles to which she belongs), but at the same time it puts feminine narcissism in concrete form; it is a uniform and an adornment; by means of it the woman who is deprived of doing anything feels that she expresses what she is. (de Beauvoir 498)

Note that since this quotation is longer than four typed lines, it is indented and double-spaced, and the citation, by convention, follows the final punctuation. A quotation of four lines or less is enclosed in quotation marks rather than being indented, and the final punctuation follows the citation.

Paraphrase
A second method of using material that is not original is the paraphrase. With this method, the student digests the idea, opinion, or interpretation of her/his source and presents it completely rewritten in her/his own words. If she/he can talk freely about the material she/he has borrowed, she/he is probably safe in assuming that she/he can write a legitimate paraphrase. Merely changing a few words here and there in a passage that retains the essential language or even the sentence structure of the source does not constitute legitimate paraphrase. If any echo of the original source can be heard in the student's paraphrase, it is not a successful paraphrase.

Sometimes a student may have difficulty deciding whether certain language must be quoted, or whether it might legitimately be used as paraphrase without quotation marks--in other words, whether it is "common language." In "The Difference between Plagiarism and Research," Paul Roberts comments on this problem:

If P.V. Pettiquale writes, "Swallows build nests in trees," you, in paraphrasing P.V. Pettiquale, might also write, "Swallows build nests in trees." But if P.V. Pettiquale writes, "The swallow sings his heart-warming little song as he darts among the treetops," and you, without quotation marks, write, "The swallow sings a heart-warming little song" or "The swallow darts among the treetops," then you are plagiarizing. These phrases, wretched though they are, are the property of P.V. Pettiquale and may not be lifted from him without acknowledgment. (473-74)

In this context, there are no substitutes for the words "swallows," "nests," and "trees." This is "common language" necessary to any discussion of the subject at hand and thus may be presented without quotation marks.

The passage from de Beauvoir's The Second Sex quoted above might be paraphrased as follows:

In her discussion of the social meaning attached to women's

clothing, de Beauvoir explains that it serves two purposes:

first, clothing tells an observer what a woman's social rank

is, and second, being preoccupied with dress is one of the

few forms of self-expression available to women (498).

As this passage illustrates, the paraphrase, like the direct quotation, requires (a) a reference to the page or pages which have been paraphrased and (b) the author's last name, either in parentheses preceding the page number or in the text itself . Final punctuation follows the citation.

Summary
A third method of using material that is not original is the summary. While a paraphrase is close to the same length as the original, a summary is considerably shorter than the original. Like a paraphrase, a summary must use the student's own words and sentence structure and must be followed by a parenthetical citation. A summary of the above passage from de Beauvoir might read as follows:
A woman's clothing reveals her social status and gives her a way to express herself (de Beauvoir 498).

Combination of Paraphrase or Summary with Direct Quotation
A fourth method of using material that is not original is the combination of paraphrase or summary with direct quotation. For example, a student might include in a paper a passage like this:

In her discussion of the social meanings attached to women's clothing, de Beauvoir explains that it serves two purposes: first, clothing tells an observer what a woman's social rank is, and second, dress "puts feminine narcissism in concrete form; [. . .] by means of it the woman who is deprived of doing anything feels that she expresses what she is " (498).

The combination of quotation with paraphrase or summary, like the direct quotation, paraphrase, or summary used alone, requires a parenthetical citation . Since the quoted passage is shorter than four lines, it need not be indented; final punctuation follows the citation.

Conclusion
Since citation forms and certain other rules for documentation vary among disciplines, the student should consult her/his instructor about the method preferred for a particular assignment. The forms in the Hodges Harbrace Handbook will be acceptable in many classes.

Whatever form of citation the student uses, she/he must proceed with the understanding that plagiarism, as it is defined here, violates the Honor Pledge . Plagiarism is also a serious offense outside the red brick wall. Writers like Doris Kearns Goodwin have suffered irreparable damage to their reputations as a result of plagiarism charges (History). Language and ideas are, after all, fundamental to an intellectual community's functioning; honesty requires the most scrupulous attention to their proper use.

Works Cited

de Beauvoir, Simone. The Second Sex . Trans. H.M. Parshley. New York: Knopf, 1965.

History News Network Staff "How the Goodwin Story Developed." 24 June 2002. 26 June 2002 http://historynewsnetwork.org/articles/article.html?id=590 .

Roberts, Paul. "The Difference between Plagiarism and Research." Understanding English . New York: Harper, 1958. 468-82.

Honor System

Index

History & Traditions

Community Conduct Standards and Policies

Honor System

General Information

Hours

Information Technology Resource Policy