Home > Student Life > Dean > Student Handbook > The Honor Code

The Honor Code

Article II: Academic Rights and Responsibilities of Students

2.1 Academic Honor System

2.1.1 Introduction

2.1.1.1 The Honor System exists at Luther College because we as students believe that one of the basic goals of an institution engaged in higher education and dedicated to the Christian faith is to develop academic integrity and responsibility within its student body. The Honor System does not assure honest behavior; rather, it transfers the responsibility for enforcing honorable conduct from the instructor to the student.

2.1.1.2 The Honor System is a formal code established by us as students who, like any group of professionals, recognize the integrity of our own calling and should assume the responsibility for its maintenance ourselves. This we believe to be vital to any academic community.

2.1.1.3 We also recognize that the honor of the individual person should be the concern of any Christian community, and that the Honor System is an attempt to put into practice those values or principles of conduct which are consistent with such a community.

2.1.2 Honor System Constitution

2.1.2.1 Preamble

2.1.2.1.1 We, the members of the student body of Luther College, believing that one of the basic functions of an institution engaged in higher education and dedicated to the Christian faith is the development of academic integrity and responsibility, do hereby resolve to uphold individually and collectively the honor of the college by doing all that is within our power to prevent any form of dishonesty in our academic work and our college life.

2.1.2.2 Article 1: Scope

2.1.2.2.1 The Honor System shall apply to all aspects of a student’s academic life. This means that all tests, quizzes, examinations, and assigned written or oral work of any kind is expected to be the work of the student alone (unless otherwise assigned or approved) and that failure to observe this requirement shall be considered a violation of the Honor System. The Honor System prohibits the giving or receiving of information to or from students who write the test at another time.

2.1.2.3 Article 2: Organization

2.1.2.3.1 Membership. The Honor Council shall be made up of three members from the Senior Class, two members from the Junior Class, one member from the Sophomore Class, and one nonvoting faculty member acting in capacity of adviser.

2.1.2.3.2 Election. The First-year Class, the Sophomore Class, and the Junior Class shall each elect one member to the Council at their respective class elections held during the second semester, to take office the following fall.

Members once elected shall continue in office until their graduation, or until they leave college or are otherwise removed.

The advisory member of the Council shall be selected by the faculty. All vacancies in the Honor Council shall be filled by special election in the same manner as above.

2.1.2.3.3 Recall. Any member of the Honor Council who is found incompetent or otherwise objectionable may be removed from the membership of the Honor Council by a majority vote of the Council. Action may be instituted against such a member by a majority vote of the Honor Council or by petition signed by twenty members of the Student Body. All voting shall be by ballot.

2.1.2.3.4 Election of Officers. The Honor Council shall, in the spring of the year, select a chairperson and a secretary from the membership of the Council to serve the following year.

2.1.2.3.5 Powers and Duties. It shall be the duty of the Honor Council to hear all complaints of the violation of this constitution and to conduct investigations thereof as hereinafter provided. It shall have power to summon the accused, also witnesses, before it; it shall hear the evidence, try to determine the fact, and shall adjudge the accused guilty or not guilty. It shall keep complete written record of all its meetings and proceedings. This record shall be available to the Campus Appeal Board upon request.

The Honor Council shall make provision for bringing the Honor System satisfactorily and effectively before the Student Body.

2.1.2.3.6 Administrative Support. The Dean of the College is responsible for supervising the academic program of the College. The Dean of the College will, therefore, provide the primary administrative support for both the Honor System and the Honor Council. Such support from the Dean (or the Dean’s designee) will include—but is not limited to—presence along with the Honor Council at hearings of the Campus Appeal Board (see 2.1.2.5 below for appeal procedure).

2.1.2.4 Article 3: Investigation and Violations

2.1.2.4.1 Upon being informed by a student that he or she wishes to make a complaint, the Council shall be convened by the chairperson, and the said student and other complaining witnesses shall be notified.

2.1.2.4.2 At the said meeting the complaining witnesses shall privately make their statements to the Honor Council, and shall be questioned by the Council.

2.1.2.4.3 The defendant shall be called privately, informed of the charges made, and shall be requested to make a statement if he or she so desires. Witnesses suggested by the accused and any other witnesses shall then be called. All witnesses shall be questioned by the Council.

2.1.2.4.4 All “hearsay” and “opinion” evidence shall be excluded from the final decision arrived at by the Council. Testimony from student witnesses will only be considered as evidence if the witnesses agree to allow the accused student to question them during a meeting of the Honor Council. If student witnesses do not agree to that condition, their testimony may be used by the Honor Council as a basis for initiating an investigation, but may not be used as evidence of guilt.

2.1.2.4.5 The record of evidence shall be kept by the secretary. The secretary’s permanent record shall be filed in the Student Life Office except when in use by the Council on a case.

2.1.2.5 Article 4: Appeal Procedure

2.1.2.5.1 If a student found guilty of violating the Honor System feels that he or she has been unfairly dealt with, he or she may appeal to the Campus Appeal Board (see also Section 7.3.4). If the Campus Appeal Board decides to accept the appeal, they shall meet with that student and the Honor Council and the Dean of the College (or the Dean’s designee) to determine:

A. whether the Honor Council procedures were careful, fair, and consistent with stated policy

B. whether the penalty is consistent with past experience and appropriate to the seriousness of the violation

2.1.2.5.2 After hearing an appeal the Campus Appeal Board may decide as follows:

A. Accept the report and decision of the Honor Council

B. Direct the Honor Council to rehear the case in keeping with suggestions that the Appeal Board may make

C. Reverse the Honor Council’s decision and dismiss the case

D. Accept the decision of the Honor Council, but reduce the sanction imposed. The Appeal Board may not increase the sanction

2.1.2.5.3 If the student found guilty of violating the Honor System finds new evidence bearing on his or her case, the Honor Council is obliged to hold a new hearing and may be directed to do so by the Campus Appeal Board.

2.1.2.6 Article 5: Amendments and Revisions

2.1.2.6.1 All revisions and amendments to this constitution shall be presented in writing to the Luther College Student Senate and its president. Proposed amendments shall be posted and published in Chips for two weeks prior to the first reading before the student members of the Community Assembly in session. Two-thirds of the votes cast at two consecutive meetings of this group shall be required to amend or revise this constitution.

2.1.2.7 Article 6: Provisions for Referendum

2.1.2.7.1 Every second year the student body shall have an opportunity to reaffirm or reject the Honor System, as it operates according to the above Articles of Constitution, in a referendum held during regular student government elections.

2.1.2.7.2 A simple majority of the votes cast will decide the referendum. A majority vote reaffirming the Honor System will continue the system in operation until the next scheduled referendum.

2.1.2.7.3 Should the Honor System be rejected by the majority of students voting, a second referendum shall be held during student government elections one year later. If the majority of students voting again reject the Honor System, the system shall be abolished, and responsibility for maintaining academic integrity shall immediately revert to the faculty. If, on the other hand, the majority of students voting reaffirm the Honor System at the second referendum, the system shall continue in force until the next regular referendum two years there after.

2.1.2.7.4 The referendum shall take the following form: The Constitution under which the Honor System functions at Luther College specifies that the system shall be referred to the student body every second year for reaffirmation or rejection. A vote to reject the Honor System must be confirmed in a second referendum one year later before becoming effective.

In accordance with the Constitution, therefore, the following alternatives are hereby offered. Check the one which most nearly expresses your opinion. Leave the other one blank.

__The student body of Luther College shall continue to assume responsibility for maintaining academic integrity through the Honor System.

__The responsibility for maintaining academic integrity shall be returned to the faculty of Luther College.

2.1.2.7.5 If a second referendum becomes necessary, it shall take the following form:

One year ago the student body of Luther College voted to reject the Honor System. The Constitution under which the Honor System functions at Luther College specifies that a vote to reject the Honor System must be confirmed in a second referendum one year later before becoming effective.

In accordance with the Constitution, therefore, the following alternatives are hereby offered. Check the one which most nearly expresses your opinion. Leave the other one blank.

__The student body of Luther College shall continue to assume responsibility for maintaining academic integrity through the Honor System.

__The responsibility for maintaining academic integrity shall be returned to the faculty of Luther College.

2.1.3 Honor System Procedure

2.1.3.1 The Honor Council, composed of elected representatives from each academic class, has therefore established the following procedures, in accordance with the provisions of the Honor System Constitution.

2.1.3.2 The Statement Which Students Will Sign

2.1.3.2.1 Each Luther College student is required to sign the following statement at the time of his or her first registration. It is assumed that this statement will apply to all of the student’s academic work while enrolled at Luther College and that no further statement need be signed on individual examinations and papers. The full responsibility for maintaining academic integrity rests solely with each individual student.

2.1.3.2.2 The Statement: I am aware that an Honor System is in effect at Luther College, and I understand its implications for me as a student. I understand that as a student I am expected to uphold the highest standards of academic integrity, neither giving nor receiving any unapproved assistance, and that I am expected to demand the same standards of academic integrity in my fellow students.

Signed            _________________________________________

2.1.3.3 Plagiarism

2.1.3.3.1 To forestall unintentional violations of academic integrity so far as possible, the concept of plagiarism needs some discussion and definition here.

2.1.3.3.2 Plagiarism of any sort involves presenting someone else’s intellectual output as one’s own. One kind consists in unauthorized collaboration on an assignment. Discussing and studying together are legitimate and desirable. But joint efforts should not extend to planning and writing something together that is supposed to show one’s individual grasp of the matter at hand (unless the assignment specifically requires such collaboration).

2.1.3.3.3 Another kind of plagiarism consists in using someone else’s work (in whole or in part) in a test, a paper, a lab report, or some other context where one is expected to be doing independent work. The most obvious form is to quote someone else’s exact words (or use data, or a diagram, or a musical score, etc.) without showing that the material is borrowed. But it is also plagiarism to rewrite (paraphrase) someone else’s ideas, or follow someone else’s plan of development, or present someone else’s argument, without acknowledging the source; changing the wording does not cancel the debt. Of course, matters of common knowledge need not be credited to a source. To be safe, however, one should not assume anything is common knowledge unless one has seen it mentioned in print more than once without a reference to some other source of information.

2.1.3.3.4 The usual form for showing such debts is a footnote, giving at least the name of the author, the title of the work, and the exact page. (Customs governing what should be included in the note vary somewhat from one subject field to another; the departments of instruction can provide information about their particular requirements.) Direct quotations must always be indicated: short quotations should be enclosed in quotation marks, and longer ones should be set off from the writer’s own text by indentation. (Generally, quotation marks are required if one quotes three or more words from a sentence; however, if it is significant, even a single quoted word should be set off in quotation marks.)

2.1.3.4 Student Procedures

2.1.3.4.1 Any student who suspects or is aware of dishonest work is personally responsible to contact the Honor Council. This may be done by sending a signed note in a sealed envelope to the Council via the intra-campus mail, or by contacting an individual member of the Honor Council.

2.1.3.5 Faculty Procedures

2.1.3.5.1 Every examination is given under the Honor System. This includes all short quizzes and lab tests. If it is necessary for the professor to remain in the room during the test, he or she should explain that he or she is acting as an administrator and not as a proctor.

2.1.3.5.2 The following reminder to students should be printed at the top of the first sheet of examinations:

You are reminded that at your enrollment at Luther College you acknowledge an understanding of the Honor System under which this test is being administered. If you are aware of dishonest work, you are expected to contact the Honor Council through the Student Post Office (SPO). Send to the “Honor Council.”

2.1.3.5.3 The instructor should inform the student of what assistance (if any) is permitted on daily assignments, out-of-class papers, etc. Thus the instructor may require that no references other than a specified list be consulted, that no references be consulted, or that the student do an assignment without seeking the help or advice of other students.

2.1.3.6 Test and Paper Procedure

2.1.3.6.1 In order to create an atmosphere for the best possible work and to avoid all possible suspicion, the following procedure is requested:

A. The professor may ask the students to sit apart from one another during an exam. Books and other aids shall be left in an inaccessible spot except during an open-book test. They should be put aside before the test is passed out.

B. Instruction about the reference materials one may use in preparing a paper shall be carefully observed.

C. It is suggested that students avoid the following:

 1. leaving the room and returning to a test

 2. talking during a test.

2.1.3.7 Honor Council Procedure

2.1.3.7.1 Any correspondence with the Honor Council is to remain confidential. Students who present their suspicions are not judges. The decision of guilt or innocence is the duty of the Honor Council.

2.1.3.7.2 Students accused of violating the Honor System are considered innocent until proven guilty. A confession by the accused is not necessary to convict a person if conclusive evidence has been presented to the Council.

2.1.3.7.3 Nothing said during the meetings of the Honor Council shall be repeated outside the meeting. The alleged violator of the Honor System is never informed of the name of the person who reported the alleged violation, unless that person agrees to allow the alleged violator to question her or him during a meeting of the Honor Council (see 2.1.2.4.4).

2.1.3.7.4 Each case is individual. The consequences of violation might include one or more of the following:

A. Warning by the Honor Council

B. Recommendation that the student be allowed to do the work over

C. Recommendation of no credit for the work in question

D. Recommendation to lower the grade in the course

E. Recommendation of probation, suspension, or dismissal from school.

2.1.3.7.5 The Honor Council will inform the Dean of the College and the Dean for Student Life of an honor system violation.  The Dean for Student Life will be responsible to inform the parents at his or her discretion.

2.1.3.7.6 Any student accused of violating the Honor System has the right to appeal the decision of the Honor Council to the Campus Appeal Board.

2.1.3.8 Honor Council Due Process

2.1.3.8.1 The student shall be contacted by a member of the Honor Council and given notification of the following matters:

A. That there is an allegation that he or she may have violated the Honor Code in connection with a specific instance in a particular course (e.g. the midterm exam in Psychology 47).

B. That he or she is asked to appear before the Honor Council at a specific time and place.

C. That he or she has the right to have people testify on his or her behalf before the Honor Council.

D. That written notification confirming the above points as well as information about the operation of the Honor Council will be issued at least 24 hours prior to the hearing, except when the accused waives this provision.

2.1.3.8.2 The student may appear in person and present a defense to the judicial body. The student may also elect not to appear before the judicial body. In this case, the hearing shall be held in his or her absence. The failure of a student to appear shall not be taken as indicative of guilt and must be noted without prejudice.

2.1.3.8.3 The student may be accompanied by a counsel of his or her choice.

2.1.3.8.4 The student or counsel may ask questions of the judicial body. If the testimony from one or more students is used as evidence of guilt, the accused student or his or her counsel will have the right to question the accusing student(s) during a meeting of the Honor Council.

2.1.3.8.5 The student may refuse to answer questions without implication of guilt.

2.1.3.8.6 The student is entitled to an expeditious hearing of the case.

2.1.3.8.7 The student may request and receive an explanation of the reasons for any decision rendered against him or her.

2.1.3.8.8 The student shall be notified of his or her right to appeal the decision of the Honor Council to the Campus Appeal Board. Should the student appeal, any judgment assessed by the Honor Council shall be held in suspense until acted upon by a higher body.

2.2 Academic Evaluation Grievance Procedure

2.2.1 Students have a right to expect that their professors are competent to render fair evaluations of student academic work, and that such evaluations will be free of prejudice and caprice. When students have cause to believe that these rights have been violated they may avail themselves of the following procedures:

A. Lack of Information

Instructors are expected to make their grading practices, attendance policy, and assignments clear to students. Where these matters are not sufficiently understood, students have a responsibility to request clarification. If a student feels that his or her grade in a course is inconsistent with explicit standards then he or she should first make an effort to resolve the matter by registering a complaint with the instructor. In the event that this fails to produce a resolution the student may submit a formal petition to the department in question. This petition should express the grievance and give just cause for the department to intervene. Should the department support the actions of the instructor then the matter is closed with no further institutional recourse to the student. A department may wish to refer the issue to the Dean of the College for final resolution.

B. Competence

Students should be advised that to challenge the professional integrity of an instructor is a grave matter. Should a student feel that his or her academic evaluation has been unfairly rendered as a result of professional incompetence then he or she may formally request a departmental review of the evaluation. If the department endorses the original evaluation then the matter is closed with no further institutional recourse. Alternatively, a department may wish to refer the issue to the Dean of the College for further action.

C. Prejudice

Instructors are expected to render academic evaluations that are free of any considerations extraneous to those of an academic nature. Should a student feel that an evaluation is prejudicial he or she may formally request a departmental review of the evaluation. If the department endorses the original evaluation then the matter is closed with no further institutional recourse. Alternatively, a department may wish to refer the issue to the Dean of the College for further action.

2.2.2 When a student feels that his/her academic evaluation has not been fairly rendered, he/she has 30 days after the release of the final grades by the Registrar’s Office to file an appeal.