In general - academic honor policies are BS. you have to sign them - there si no debate.

You don't have to go to the school. It's completely optional.

And I actually have some vague memory of someone somewhere who refused to sign saying they wouldn't turn someone in and he was allowed in if he took all his exams alone in a room or some such. Its all very vague.

This starts to sound a little bit like the unjust law question.

{{Gud}}

A friend who teaches at a local college said that she had students copying answers from their neighbors, even though to prevent that the students were given two different, color-coded versions of the test, so the students were copying answers for different questions. At that point, it becomes more a test of "just how stupid are you."

The honor code was part of everything we did at my university. They went over it in orientation and you signed a copy before every test. The philosophy was influenced by a beloved dean of students, who, when he was a math professor, used to give this speech before every test:

Today I am going to give you two examinations, one in trigonometry and one in honesty. I hope you will pass them both. But if you must fail one, let it be trigonometry. Many good men cannot pass an exam in trigonometry; there are no good men who cannot pass an examination in honesty.

The honor code at my college (Norwegian sister to juliana's college) was taken very seriously. Seriously enough that faculty were not allowed in the room while exams were given; they had to sit out in the hallway waiting for people to come out with questions. A member of the class would volunteer to deliver the exams to the faculty member when everyone was done.

So we were not treated like kindergartners. We were in charge. Any reports of cheating were investigated by a student committee and penalties were imposed by the committee. Faculty had no input. It was students who developed the policy and students could have changed it at any time. Prospective students were informed of the policy before they were admitted and were advised to go elsewhere if they did not agree with it.

I never saw anyone cheat, but I would have felt morally bound to report them if I did. Everyone I know felt the same way, which is probably why I never saw anyone cheat. But it was a student thing, not a faculty/administrative thing.

You don't have to go to the school. It's completely optional

nope you don't. but I don't know of any colleges or universities that don't have them.

So , it was my school that didn't take it seriously and there are other schools that do. that's cool. ( I thnk they thought they took it seriously. It was just delt with in such a prefunctory way)

I've never had to sign an honor code at any of the universities I attended, but there were things in the handbook about honesty and plagiarism.

The honor code is definitely serious at Tech. It kind of is Tech. Life as an undergrad there is distinguished by three things:

1) The core curriculum - 5 terms math, 5 terms phys, 2 terms chem, 1 term chem lab, 1 term bio, plus 12 terms humanities/social science, for everybody.

2) The house system (think Harry Potter without the hat, and seven houses instead of four.)

3) The honor code

It works well for us because we're so small - 900 undergrads is not many. In larger universities, it's simply not as workable. Sadly. Because I'm really hating taking in-class midterms and finals for the first time since high school.

I don't remember an overarching honor code that I had to swear to or sign off on at my university. But we often had to sign, "I didn't cheat, no siree!" thingies on individual tests. I didn't cheat, but often wondered if someone who did would think, "Golly. I cheated on this so I guess I can't sign the no cheating oath. Darn."