UA discusses creating new honor code at U.

Last night's Undergraduate Assembly meeting was marked by heated debate over the possibility of adding an honor code to official University policy. An honor code would make students responsible for their own academic integrity -- meaning they would proctor their own tests and would also turn in other students for cheating. The students were split between those who said they see an honor code as a way for the University to "show its Ivy" and others who claimed it would "open the door for widespread cheating." "People who cheat have no place at this school," said College senior Jonathan Goldstein, a UA member. "Its time that we have a return to academia for its own sake." But many speakers at last night's meeting said an honor code would only end up hurting innocent students. College sophomore Michelle Falkoff said Wharton students in particular would take advantage of an honor code. "There are so many ways to manipulate the honor code," UA member Falkoff said. "People from Wharton have been gyping the country." And Wharton junior Ethan Youderian said he sees a problem in the "transition to an honor code and those who would take advantage of it." UA Chairperson Jeff Lichtman said he does not think the University is ready for the code. "I wish that students took it upon themselves to be on their honor," UA Chairperson Jeff Lichtman said. "But I'm not sure that the current environment at Penn would allow it to be effectively implemented." "You have this strong sense of competition in the sense that grades here are leading to a career," the College senior added. Although no vote was taken, UA members were asked to discuss the issue in order to provide a report to the University Council, which will address the issue at its Wednesday meeting. In the spring of 1990, a referendum on the UA ballot calling for an honor code was soundly defeated. In other UA business, the body reaffirmed the existence of the Social Planning and Events Committee. After a three-year trial run of the organization, the UA was asked to review the possibility of SPEC's future. The body unanimously approved SPEC, although future budget considerations and a possible restructuring might affect the way the body continues. The UA also unanimously approved a resolution "calling upon the administration to undertake a prompt and thorough investigation of McGinn Security Services." The legislation resolved that the University "develop strict guidelines that all future security services employed by the University will be expected to follow."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.