LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Clarifying Judicial Systems

To the Editor: An honor system consists of much more than student involvement in the adjudication process since very few cases actually proceed to the hearing phase. The primary mission of an honor system is to promote the importance of academic integrity. The Honor Council, a body of 13 undergraduates, was formed to educate the community about academic integrity, to advise the Provost on matters pertaining to the subject, as well as to supply students to hearing boards for academic integrity cases which proceed to hearings. We do not consider ourselves "meager," nor does Mr. Ornstein's provincial characterization of "students that would volunteer to take part in [the judicial system]" as "wanna-be lawyers and hot-shot debaters" even approach an accurate description of he composition of our diverse and dedicated membership. In reference to Mr. Ornstein's attack on honor systems at other institutions, we disagree that it is "blatantly obvious" that students are incapable of rendering fair decisions about violations of academic integrity. Do statistics indicating that students are more harsh judges than administrators necessarily imply that students are less fair? Does Mr. Ornstein truly believe that the University of Georgia students charged with drunk driving were unjustly reprimanded? As the Penn community debated drafts of proposals, one view consistently rose to the forefront: students want active involvement in their judicial system. So, we are baffled by Mr. Ornstein's comment, "The Penn student body would not support [a student judicial system]." Mr. Ornstein justifies his view by citing statistics for voter turnout in student government elections; yet, there is no evidence that a correlation exists between voter turnout and concern for academic integrity. In fact, students at the University of Virginia, who have been apathetic about student government in the past, came out in droves to support their existing honor system when a change was proposed. (This strong display of devotion to the principle of honor clearly indicates that the University of Virginia has hardly "gambled on student justice and lost.") We admire Mr. Ornstein's conclusion that "only a combination?which includes student involvement with guidance from faculty and administrators, will finally solve the problems of the kangaroo court on campus." Unfortunately, Mr. Ornstein appears to have read neither the current policy nor the proposed judicial charter, both of which provide for such a combination. MIRIAM LEVITIN Wharton '97 ASHLEY MAGIDS College '96 The Honor Council Kudos on Excellent Coverage To the Editor: I am really appreciating Julayne Austin's recent articles about happenings in the African American community on campus. The Daily Pennsylvanian looks better in color. Elizabeth Sayre Graduate School of Education Staff Intentions Misconstrued To the Editor: When Mike Madden interviewed me for his article on presidential salaries ("Penn president's salary highest in Ivy League " DP 9/27/95), I said, "I don't think anyone on the Penn faculty would have any serious disagreement with the salaries the University paid acting President Fagin or President Rodin." I added that where universities usually receive their criticism is not over presidential salaries, but rather over the cost of "extras" like lavish residents, club memberships, yachts, and the like. I specifically mentioned the well known and much publicized scandal at the University of Pittsburgh several years ago over such expenses. As far as our own Eisenlohr Hall is concerned, my comment to Mr. Madden was that from what I could see, it certainly needed renovation after decades of use as an office building. PAUL KORSHIN English Professor