Ethics the topic of town meeting

An open town meeting addressing the role of ethics at Homewood was held last night at 8 p.m. in Remson Hall. The discussion, hosted by Deans Dan Weiss and John Bader, attracted an attendance of about 40 undergraduate and graduate students, faculty and community members who spoke about the presence of ethics violations on campus and the conditions needed for improvement.

The meeting was the outcome of a recent proposal by Senior Class President Stephen Goutman, who has worked closely with the University's Ethics Board in the University's evaluation process. His proposal coincided with reactions to an anonymous editorial which appeared in a recent cheating Focus in the News-Letter, March 14.

"Ethics is a community discussion. I wanted to hear from all sides what people thought were the primary motivational factors for cheating, and then the factors that would be most influential in creating change," Goutman said. "If the University is to change, you need to involve as many people as possible."

The town meeting looked to investigate the current role of the University's ethics code and to identify venues for improving ethical standards on campus. It follows the creation of the Strategic Plan, a document written by Weiss to the curriculum committee following a 2 1/2-year investigation into how well the University was fulfilling its academic mission. Among other recommendations, the paper suggested that a large dichotomy exists between the aggressive, independent and research-oriented goals the University has for its students and its lack of a reinforced expectation of honor among students.

In attendance were several members of the University's Ethics Board as well as general members of the ethics review committee, which has been examining revision of the ethics code and possible implementation of an honor code. Both involved in academic ethics, Weiss and Bader said they were happy with the input they received on identifying problems and targeting solutions as they might exist at comparable universities.

Discussion at the meeting was eager and energetic. Primary concerns were the lack of awareness of the University's current ethics code, both by students and professors, and the highly-competitive academic atmosphere.

"The problem lies in not having knowledge of the existence of an honor code on campus," said Student Council President Anuj Mittal.

Students felt that Hopkins' legendary cut-throat environment often pressures students to cheat in order to succeed, especially in large, impersonal science classes.

Proposals stressed the need for increased awareness of University cheating policies and for changing the cycle of competition to one of community trust. They suggested targeting new freshmen at Orientation with a firm ethics policy in hopes of beginning a cycle of heightened ethics awareness.

"No one knows what cheating really is, what plagiarism is," said junior Ethics Board member Jess Myers. "Changing behavior is one of the hardest things you can do. It requires a community effort."

Students noted that an ethics policy can not be effective without both clear presentation and then consistent reinforcement and preventative measures. They showed frustration that the discussion of ethics violations, as well as ethics policies themselves, varied widely between professors. They noted that while some departments, such as Biology, take a firm stand on cheating, other professors seem indifferent and many fail to clearly define issues such as plagiarism. Many supported having more professors use ethics contracts as cover pages for every exam.

Speakers also noted the need for students to recognize the serious implications of ethics violations, such as cheating, stealing and lying.

Mary Savage, of the Pre-Professional Advising Office, said that few students realize that law and medical schools take the issue very seriously.

"Cheaters no longer feel morally responsible. We need to change the culture so that they do," Myers said.

Many supported reinforcing the required policy for professors to report any and every incident of ethics violation simply to keep a file record of student behavior. Should a second offense occur later in a student's undergraduate career, measures would be taken.

Students rejected the idea of a complete zero-tolerance policy.

"The thing I'd like most is to hear someone say they've learned something and be able to believe them," said Ethics Board Chairman senior Benjy Silverman.

The Ethics Board itself will not meet officially until next school year. Applications for Board positions are available in the Mattin Center and due Friday to priyasarin@jhu.edu. Bader encouraged anyone with further comments to contact him at jbader@jhu.edu or visit him in Academic Advising in Garland Hall. He said the review committee hopes to publish an ethics report next year.