Alexandra Harte, Editor-in-chief
@aharte_courant
On March 21, the Faculty Senate voted to approve an honor code which would require students to pledge that their work is aligned with NCHS’s standards of academic integrity. The code, which was developed by the faculty but has not yet become a poicy, is designed to “promote a positive learning environment” based on “trust and mutual respect for your own work and the work of others,” according to language in the document.
Science teacher Janel Willmott, chair of the academic integrity committee behind the honor code proposal, said, “We want it to become a part of our language and a part of our desire to be healthy, honorable and have integrity.”
The honor code would consist of a document that all parties, meaning the student and the teacher, would read and sign clearly stating that all assignments are the student’s own work, and acknowledge when the work of others is incorporated. Ms. Willmott said that the faculty first decided to pursue this because copying has become commonplace in a student’s academic career.
The process of forming the honor code began in 2016, when the committee surveyed both students and parents. They reviewed honor codes from Trumbull, Greenwich, Princeton (NJ) and Piedmont (CA) high schools, as well as UConn and Connecticut College. “It certainly helped us with wording, what needed to be covered, and just to see what else was out there,” Ms. Wilmott said.
Afterward, the committee placed the honor code on hold for a year. This past year, the committee proceeded to take the draft and hand it back out to faculty for further feedback. In March, the honor code was put to a vote and passed.
Ms. Willmott said cheating has increased due to pressure to meet high expectations to go to a top college. “We feel like they are overstressed and overscheduled, so some feel that it’s their only option,” she said. “We realize that there is a lot of pressure in this community to do really well.”
Junior Johnny Renda expressed less understanding toward the cheating problem. “People recognize cheating as condemnable. Unfortunately, I don’t think that people care enough to resolve or reconcile whatever issues they have with cheating,” he said.
Johnny also doesn’t believe that the honor code will reduce cheating nor create a cultural of academic honesty. “It won’t be effective because it has the same effect of telling someone not to do something they’ve been doing their whole life.”
Sophomore Megan Lydon feels that although the honor code is a great start, it won’t be enough unless it is enforced. “It will help them second guess what they’re doing but I don’t think it will really stop people unless there’s something to reinforce it,” she said. “I know there’s already a punishment for cheating right now but I feel there just needs to be a reinforcement to encourage more people not to cheat.”
Assistant Principal Ari Rothman said that the teacher decides the punishment and can do anything up to and including giving you a zero for said assignment. Administrators only find out about instances of cheating if teachers report them. “As a grade level administrator, I keep a running file from freshman year through all four years,” he said.
To clarify the definition of what constitutes cheating, the honor code lists twelve examples of academic integrity violations. “Somebody would say that [copying homework]is collaboration, but that’s not actually what the definition of collaboration is,” Ms. Wilmott said. “I think that that’s a really important piece to getting this under control is a common language of what does it mean to cheat? If I take something off of the internet and it’s only a sentence and I don’t say it came from a certain source, is that cheating? Yes, it is.”
According to Mr. Rothman, common language is one step toward stronger academic integrity. “If an honor code and the discussion of the development of an honor code raises consciousness about it, makes people think about it, respect it more – fine,” he said. “But I don’t know if the honor code exists effectively unless every single person enforces it; and that means everyone has to have the same value.”
Students generally feel that the honor code would not be a solution to the problem. Of 172 students who responded to a Courant survey about academic integrity, 77.4% feel that the implementation of an honor code would not significantly reduce cheating. One student wrote, “An honor code would not make a difference unless it is something that the school as a whole comes together to decide on and discussed on an annual basis. If there isn’t serious community engagement and approval in its creation, it will simply be treated the same as the honor codes and promises not to cheat some classes have; it will be ignored and forgotten entirely.”
AP World history teacher Zeeshaan Arastu said that the honor code is a good start. She believes grades aren’t necessarily reflective of student learning, and that the honor code’s main focus would be changing the student focus from perfection to process. “This might have some impact on the way students approach their assignments,” she said. “But if we don’t have student buy in, it’s just teachers telling students what they should think, and that tends not to be very effective.”
What does the honor code mean for the future of New Canaan high school? “I’ve been reading some articles on cheating and it says one of the major things is to focus on mastery, which is essentially giving kids multiple opportunities to show that they’ve mastered a concept or a skill as opposed to memorization,” Ms. Wilmott said. “But that’s such a change in high school thinking, that it would be a long time in coming.”
Ms. Arastu still believes there is room for research. “I think there is room for feedback from all of the different parties who are involved, like the parents, the administration and the students,” she said. “I’m just hoping that students take the initiative and get involved in that conversation.”
