Personal honor

Princeton has a great honor code. I never hear about honor code violations, so it must be working. Have you ever heard this argument? Have you ever given it? Don't you think it's somehow illogical?

No worries. Before you send harassing emails, understand I don't mean to imply anything unfavorable about the academic integrity of Princeton students. I've never seen anyone at Princeton cheating, and I suspect it happens quite infrequently.

My problem with defending the Honor Code lies with its very nature. We're all fairly familiar with this document — Princeton does its best to make sure we've read it at least once. Under the honor system, the students assume full responsibility for honesty in written examinations. Of course, this is important. I don't think I have to go into the reasons that academic integrity is such an essential part of a university community.

Yet, classroom examinations are far from the only sort of honesty (consistency of character, if you will) that is desirable and needed to make Princeton a place where people feel comfortable and happy engaging in their studies. Integrity and honor are just as important in the realm of personal behavior, including what goes on behind closed dormitory doors.

Without entering into details, I'll say that I've heard of several cases of theft between roommates (no, not borrowing a favorite sweater). I've heard of physical fights between roommates. I've heard of people waking up to hear a roommate having sex in the lower bunk. I don't think I know people who are unusually unlucky, so I'm pretty sure everyone has heard similar (or probably worse) stories from people who didn't get everything they were hoping for in a freshman roommate.

Such behavior ought to come under the domain of the Honor Code. These abuses involve relationships between students and are as influential as the fairness of a classroom environment. Expectations of appropriate private behavior are just as intrinsic to the relationships among students and between students and professors as the agreement prohibiting cheating, and it's time the Princeton community recognize that fact explicitly.

"Princeton student" carries many connotations, some positive and some negative. We've all heard an earful of both kinds, and furthermore, tend to spend a good deal of time noting these different "myths," as we call them. We like to analyze how they spread and where they came from, but rarely does anyone advocate taking an active role to shape outside perceptions.

If Princeton wants public perception to be uniformly positive about our students, the most visible representatives of Princeton, both when attending and all over the world as gung ho alumni years after, we ought to make it clear exactly what we expect from students in personal behavior, and enforce these expectations at the level their underlying importance really demands.

I'm sure many people will argue that this is a bad idea. They'll say personal morality is none of Princeton's business — everyone has their own idea of proper conduct, right? Would you accept such an argument about plagiarism or cheating on a test? Why should our conduct be any different? I, for one, don't want to see a Princeton willing to graduate students without any concern for their moral character.

Some might say there are already mechanisms in place to enforce the community's generally agreed upon rules. However, I'd argue that these are either much too lax or they aren't working, more likely the latter.

Furthermore, because mutual respect outside the classroom is as essential to a university community as academic integrity, Princeton should be just as formally demanding in this arena.

By only insisting on integrity in the classroom, and then primarily under testing conditions, Princeton proves itself as little more than prep school for I-banking. I don't think that's all Princeton is, but such a policy does imply such a mindset. We're intent on making sure grading is accurate. Why? So businesses know exactly what product they're getting with any individual model. Business doesn't require moral character, so why should we?

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

How can it be that Princeton claims to look for evidence of moral character in its admissions process yet disdains any significant interest in student conduct as soon as we arrive on campus? There's nothing Big Brother-esque about demanding proper behavior when no one's looking, and I think we should do as explicitly as possible. Aileen Nielsen is a sophomore from Upper Black Eddy, Pa. She can be reached at anielsen@princeton.edu.