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."

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."

It's a bit like the "Are you a terrorist?" question on citizenship tests.

I went to a school with a serious honor code and one of the benefits was that most exams were self-scheduled and self-administered. (The exceptions were stuff like art history slide exams where it would be a big pain to show 50 people the same 15 slides wherever they wanted to see them.) There was definitely a great academic culture that you were there to learn for yourself - a lot of people cared fiercely about grades, but only as a validation of your brutal hard work, not in a competitive sense.

We also had a social honor code that was very interesting - you were obligated to confront someone who was doing something that offended/deeply bothered you, and attempt to work to a mutual resolution. As you can imagine this was rather more controversial; I have some memory of a big brouhaha over dorm door whiteboard messages protesting Martin Luther King day. It was actually kind of like a bad Buffista social kerfuffle, now that I think of it.

Now I want to create a questionnaire that has these questions:

• Do you lie on questionnaires?
• When asked about your truthfulness on questionnaires, do you answer honestly?

In Chicago there's a traffic sign that says, "Obay all traffic signs." I want there to be a sign that says, "Obay all signs that require you to obay all signs."

The enormous state university where I teach now has no honor code, although it does have a policy against cheating. This puts faculty and students in an adversarial position, each one trying to outsmart the other. Instead of sitting in the hallway reading a newspaper, I spend exams walking around looking for cheaters. I would much prefer a working honor code (if only for newspaper time), but it's probably only possible in a small school with a real sense of shared mission.

It was actually kind of like a bad Buffista social kerfuffle, now that I think of it.

I can see why. First you attempt to resolve in-thread, then you take it to Bureaucracy. But I'll bet your college honor code didn't have guacamole in it.

it's probably only possible in a small school with a real sense of shared mission.

I know UVA makes a Very Big (and Pooh-Cased) Deal out of theirs in the same way a lot of smaller schools do -- part of the school's identity and tradition and the Jefferson thing yadda yadda -- but not having gone there, I can't say much about how it actually plays.

The enormous state university where I teach now has no honor code, although it does have a policy against cheating. This puts faculty and students in an adversarial position, each one trying to outsmart the other.

In my tenure at this university we've had a plaigarism case where the professor believed that that student borrowed heavily from one paper to write another paper, while the student countered by saying they had followed the protocols of citation. Basically, the question was whether the student's paper was wholly original or not. Eventually the decision handed down was very down the middle and wishy-washy and left it to the professor to decide what to do.

I didn't see how the student could continue in that class after that, what with the professor continually in this "gotcha" mode.