Honor Code Pros And Cons

“Many high school, colleges, and universities have honor codes or honor systems: sets of rules or principles that are intended to cultivate integrity “. My school, Rockville HIgh School, should maintain honor code or honor system to prevent plagiarism. This allows a “ healthy academic environment”, where you can feel safe and relieved knowing that no one will copy your answers and use it to get credit. Many students in our school don’t even know honor codes exist and is placed in this school to avoid academic dishonesty. Even if this school strictly establish honor code, high school students still find a way to cheat.

Throughout his whole argument, he provides evidence and examples of why students cheat and explain that students feel more pressured to do well than learn. If the school was more about learning and less about how well a student performs on a standardized test at the end of the year, cheating would be less of a

An honor code can be so effective that “many schools with academic honor codes allow students to take their exams without proctors present, relying on peer monitoring to control cheating” (Source F). Despite this system, there is research that “indicates that the significantly lower levels cheating” (Source F) at schools with honor codes. This is possible because there is a peer culture that denounces cheating, making kids embarrassed to commit academic dishonesty. Such a peer culture was formed by educating the students about the value of academic dishonesty.

Should schools continue to use the traditional form of punishment of suspending students? Is suspension a benefit or a disadvantage to a students learning? Is suspension the right thing to do for all students? For many years suspension has been a common punishment for bad behavior in school, though many people are starting to wonder whether suspending a student really helps them learn and grow or does it harm their learning career. This is a big debate that has just recently come into light.

Structure like this in classrooms only validates that students are able to argue but, diminishes the opportunities of creating values to the scholarly work and voicing out from the side that share the same opinion as the author. This leads to academic rewards for these arguing students as suggested by Deborah Tannen, leaving the rest to believe that they are not good enough for the academia. Based on personal experience, I would like to add that such agonism demotivates students to explore knowledge outside of their field and creates an impression that they are never meant to explore topics that they are least expert at. This structure has to be reshaped to bring back the original goals of criticizing work so that there is a value for everyone in the

In a way this is some colleges cheating in ranking and on grades. Sometimes it’s not really about the grades, but the knowledge that students are able to bring with them and apply it to their future job. Colleges are supposed to prep students for the world ahead of them and help

Although some students may not pay attention, having SROs talk to students about the dangers of activities like such is a good thing because it could touch a student and possibly save their life one day. SROs also serve as a mentor or someone that students can talk to when it comes to certain situations. The article states that resource officers build relationships with students to make better choices and provide guidance as needed (Bonchak). If students have a positive relationship with someone that shares knowledge about the repercussions that come with illegal actions they might think twice before committing a crime. In the end resulting in one

Now, in college, cheating will place an academic warning on your official transcript, making it visible to other institutions. I am going to come clean, about cheating in the far past. I am taking, full responsibility that cheat is a unethical habit. Most students decide to cheat, because they want high grades, without much effort. I can’t remember the exact incident, that occured cheating, although I have.

A number of high schools, colleges, and universities have adopted an honor code to cultivate integrity amongst students at their institution. These principles vary from cheating to tardiness, to plagiarism and have garnered praise from multiple outlets for apparently being successful in preventing cheating and enforcing punishment for those who break the rules. However, others like myself, criticize the honor code due to skepticism in its abilities to prevent such rule breaking, its success in being enforced, and whether it would actually convince a student to not cheat. If Windham High School were to establish an honor code, it would be a failure given that it would not encourage students to abstain from breaking it. Academic institutions

Kory Williamson, who holds the Assistant Lennox Junior and Senior High Principle position with nine previous years of teaching high school history and a Master’s degree in education, emphasizes, “In that stereotype, people feel comfortable because it’s people who are alike them” (Williamson ). In making this comment, Williamson asserts, “You can’t escape the similarities” (Williamson). The essence of Williamson’s argument resides on the fact that students overwhelmingly choose stereotypes

On the other hand, students will want to cheat if everyone is doing it. Honor codes that are reinforced by peers will still cheat because the tolerance isn’t as high if the administrators of the schools reinforced them. Most honor codes have many different levels of consequences; it all depends how much it’s going to weigh on the cheaters if it’s possible for them to do so. Within many schools, there are “some sort academic dishonesty culture, thus causing more to encourage others to cheat”, (Source C). It’s so easy for them to cheat and get away with it because everyone is doing it that there’s really no need for a honor code to be put in place at

The student author of the editorial seems to respect the honor code Groveton expects from its students, yet the author assumes the code itself is solely responsible for the alleged reduction in cheating at the school. Citing a survey to further empahsize the aforementioned assumption, the author only invites more speculation on the topic rather than providing further evidence as intended. While cheating is a frowned upon topic in all universities, this editorial is rife with assumptions and fallacious deduction, rendering the argument weak and unconvincing. First, the reporting system for Groveton 's novel honor code and the "old-fashioned" system it replaced both relyed solely on a human witness for reporting. Teachers used to monitor students and the new protocol calls for students to monitor each other and report any instances of cheating.

Unfortunately, some teachers are more lenient than other when applying this rule. There is an inconsistency with the punishment of some cheating instances over others. For example, Laurel has strict rules on cheating on standardized tests. Because there is such a huge spotlight public schools to perform well on standardized testing, administrators take extra precaution to avoid any incidents that may blemish their appearance, such as a student caught cheating, thus invalidating the test scores of every other student in the area. While this is an effective protocol, it should also be applied in areas outside of testing, like homework for example.

Most teachers have great relationships with their students and want them to succeed. Some students struggle and end up cheating. Having an Honor Code would destroy these resected student-teacher relationships non existent due to the fact that students would have to tell on other students. The balance that had been established would be destroyed and could never be recovered. Having an Honor Code will fracture the trust that students have with teachers.

Some professors evidently feel the need to help these students, which they should but, not just pass the Sooleem students because they don’t speak English well. The pass-fail system will not allow for professors to be biases and will show if the student really put the effort in and earned the pass. The professors should also be there to clarify lectures and assignments. At Grassi Noll, the professor said they wouldn’t be able to help because of their scholarly pursuits, which is understandable, they have busy schedules and are bound by contracts that require scholarly pursuits but, they still have an obligation to help the students if they have questions about that professor’s class and provide assistants and resources to students. With that said, just because the students sit in silence and don’t understand English doesn’t mean they get to just give a passing grade that they did or didn’t earn.