honor-code
2020-12-19T07:41:32.062Z
Twelve Barnard seniors were inducted as Junior Phi Beta Kappa, the college announced on Friday.
2020-11-16T14:59:28.409Z
Honors and awards are an important part of résumés and graduate school applications, showcasing the hard work you’ve put into your academic career. They are markers of your achievement, and some of these honor programs also develop skills that can be used for your internships and career. It’s important to be aware of the various awards that you are eligible for so that you can make the most out of your time at Columbia.
... 
2019-11-26T05:52:16.002Z
Before speaking to Luis Velasquez, I never knew it was possible to be in Peru, China, Harlem, and on Wall Street all at once.
Student-Worker Solidarity accuses Barnard of violating code of conduct, administration denies claims
2018-02-22T07:38:00.296Z
Student-Worker Solidarity has accused Barnard of breaking its own code of conduct following the group’s demonstration at President Sian Beilock’s inauguration ceremony in Riverside Church on Feb. 9.
... 
2017-02-06T10:00:02Z
Two years ago, when I was chair of Literature Humanities, I wrote an editorial on academic honesty for Spectator ("Cheating and Dante's hell" Mar. 31, 2011). I suggested that we have "an honest conversation about the grave dangers of dishonesty" and asked, "What will you students do?". My hope was that students would begin to take ownership of the problem and devise a solution. I suggested instituting an honor code.
Last spring, the Columbia College Student Council initiated a serious conversation about academic honesty. Its Academic Integrity Task Force has recently made thoughtful recommendations, including student-run sessions about integrity and an honor code. I write to endorse these. I also write to offer my help next year, when I will return as Lit Hum chair to do everything I can to support the implementation of these recommendations.
The task force's main goal seems exactly right: to create a culture of academic integrity on campus that requires student involvement.
Why is this so important? Right now, the burden of motivating honesty, educating students about what constitutes dishonesty, and maintaining academic trust falls on instructors. We waste precious classroom minutes educating students about plagiarism and valuable prep time devising assignments immune to plagiarism.
We fret about catching—and not catching—cheaters, while concerned students have no opportunity to do anything at all. In this bizarro world, the onus of maintaining the honesty of students falls entirely on instructors. The task force's recommendations are excellent and grounded in an obvious truth: real academic integrity must begin and end with students. Students must be the ones responsible for educating, promoting, and protecting themselves. Although instructors should offer support, only students themselves can create and maintain an environment of trust.
The proposed changes will not miraculously rid our world of cheaters. There will always be some students immune to the ideals of their community. But the recommended policies would make an immediate and significant difference. Studies are clear: When students sign an honor pledge and actively commit themselves to honesty, they are less likely to cheat. As soon as Columbia students take up the responsibility of creating and maintaining a community of honesty, they will have shifted the culture: A violation of trust is no longer merely between the cheater and instructor, but between the cheater and the entire student community.
The task force's recommendations should be adopted. They will have the immediate effect of shifting the primary maintenance of academic integrity from instructors to students. They will probably make a long-lasting difference by encouraging a culture of trust among students. This will benefit students and let instructors get back to practicing and encouraging the highest standards of academic work.
Christia Mercer is the Gustave M. Berne Professor of Philosophy. She will return as chair of Literature Humanities next year. She is presently on leave in Europe, where she is researching and writing a book.
To respond to this professor column, or to submit an op-ed, contact opinion@columbiaspectator.com
... Last spring, the Columbia College Student Council initiated a serious conversation about academic honesty. Its Academic Integrity Task Force has recently made thoughtful recommendations, including student-run sessions about integrity and an honor code. I write to endorse these. I also write to offer my help next year, when I will return as Lit Hum chair to do everything I can to support the implementation of these recommendations.
The task force's main goal seems exactly right: to create a culture of academic integrity on campus that requires student involvement.
Why is this so important? Right now, the burden of motivating honesty, educating students about what constitutes dishonesty, and maintaining academic trust falls on instructors. We waste precious classroom minutes educating students about plagiarism and valuable prep time devising assignments immune to plagiarism.
We fret about catching—and not catching—cheaters, while concerned students have no opportunity to do anything at all. In this bizarro world, the onus of maintaining the honesty of students falls entirely on instructors. The task force's recommendations are excellent and grounded in an obvious truth: real academic integrity must begin and end with students. Students must be the ones responsible for educating, promoting, and protecting themselves. Although instructors should offer support, only students themselves can create and maintain an environment of trust.
The proposed changes will not miraculously rid our world of cheaters. There will always be some students immune to the ideals of their community. But the recommended policies would make an immediate and significant difference. Studies are clear: When students sign an honor pledge and actively commit themselves to honesty, they are less likely to cheat. As soon as Columbia students take up the responsibility of creating and maintaining a community of honesty, they will have shifted the culture: A violation of trust is no longer merely between the cheater and instructor, but between the cheater and the entire student community.
The task force's recommendations should be adopted. They will have the immediate effect of shifting the primary maintenance of academic integrity from instructors to students. They will probably make a long-lasting difference by encouraging a culture of trust among students. This will benefit students and let instructors get back to practicing and encouraging the highest standards of academic work.
Christia Mercer is the Gustave M. Berne Professor of Philosophy. She will return as chair of Literature Humanities next year. She is presently on leave in Europe, where she is researching and writing a book.
To respond to this professor column, or to submit an op-ed, contact opinion@columbiaspectator.com
2016-09-21T06:00:04Z
This article is part of a special issue looking back at the 2012-13 academic year. Read the rest of the issue here.
... 
2015-02-10T11:59:09Z
Last week, ADI presented its first ever Code of Conduct for DevFest, our annual weeklong workshop series and hackathon. We wrote the code after numerous ADI members had negative experiences—ranging from misogynistic comments to subtle jabs at newcomers' abilities—while attending hackathons at other schools. Writing the code was an attempt not only to prevent similar occurrences at our event, but also to actively create an atmosphere of support and inclusion. While DevFest's code addressed the event's specific needs, the act of crafting and presenting a code of conduct is not specific to ADI—it is a generalizable process from which other groups could similarly benefit.
... 
2014-12-21T02:00:02Z
The Engineering Student Council unanimously passed its own three-page-long honor code for undergraduate and graduate students at the School of Engineering and Applied Science.
... 
