Student ratification will still be required for amendments to the Honor Code with the release of the results from the June referendum, the Honor Council announced Sunday.
The first proposed revision—to reduce the size of hearing panels from twelve to six Honor Council members—passed overwhelmingly, with 77% of the vote. The second proposed revision, however, which would have granted the Honor Council the ability to amend its constitution without student approval, failed by less than one percent of votes cast. More 2,100 students voted in the referendum, about 35% of the undergraduate population.
"We had a remarkable voter turn out for an Honor Council Referendum," Council President Abby Stufflebam said. Stufflebam said the timing of the referendum, which unconventionally took place after semester's end, was designed to avoid the hectic weeks before and during final exams.
In other ways, though, the referendum was more conventional.
"This referendum...stemmed from national trends…Honor Councils across the country are mostly composed of six people or less," Stufflebam said, regarding the amendment to reduce the hearing size. The second proposal—to remove student ratification—was designed to expedite the process for similar procedural adjustments and revisions.
Nevertheless, the proposed amendment caused some apprehension among students—enough for it to fail narrowly.
"I didn't like the idea of a closed voting process," junior Lauren Bruns said, "though I can definitely understand that there are some uninformed, apathetic students, and that would be difficult to work with."
“The idea that the Honor Council would have had the ability to change its own constitution is disturbing,” said sophomore Michael Semeraro. “Eliminating the student body oversight seems contrary to cultivating trust and academic responsibility with the students.”
Peer institutions such as the University of Virginia and William & Mary—whose honor codes are listed on the Honor Council’s Website as recommended links—require student ratification for amendments. Others, like the University of Richmond, require student government ratification. Of the seven schools listed on the Website, only Washington & Lee explicitly requires no outside ratification—though amendments require two separate votes to pass.
Addressing these concerns, Stufflebam said the Honor Council Executive Board felt "this change would have only been acceptable if we had increased our communication with the student body.” She cited progress during the spring with three Hustler articles.
The Honor Council may still remain removed from the campus dialogue, perhaps due to the nature of the organization itself. "The Honor Council is an elusive and even daunting presence on campus that people know of but don't really want to take the time to understand because of its negative connotation," Honor Council member junior Janelle Stokes said.
"Honor Council being a more visible presence on campus has been in the works for a while," Stokes explained.
She named outreach to professors as an ongoing project to this end. Further referendums, according to Stufflebam, will likely include measures to simplify the Honor Code for students to reduce violations. Stufflebam also isolated increasing the visibility of the organization as a top priority for the upcoming year.
VSG President Joseph Williams noted the Honor Council's outreach to VSG, citing an existing relationship between the two groups as a foundation. He added that both VSG and the student body seem eager to strengthen the Honor Council’s presence on campus.
"The students voted that they want to have a say in Honor Council constitutional changes, regardless of how large or small," said Williams. "This was a validation of the student body."
Katherine Miller is a junior in the College of Arts & Science. She can be reached at katherine.m.miller@vanderbilt.edu. She blogs daily at Right-Wing Vitriol.
