Newspapers / Salem College Student Newspaper / March 10, 1961, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of Salem College Student Newspaper / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
Page Two THE SALEMITE March 10, 1961 Let’s Make Honor Tradition Work The Honor Tradition is something we hear a lot about at Salem. Every fall the officers stand up and publically assure us that here at Salem our Honor Tradition works. But privately they admit that socially our Honor Tradition does not work. But until last year, Nve assumed that the Honor Tradition did work academically. Then last year, for the first time in two years, Salem had a case of cheating, and an other case, and another case. These were the first cases that we had had since one case m 1957. Already this year we have two cases of cheating. In the years that Dr. Gramley has been at Salem, there had been only three cases of cheating before last year. In the last two years there have been five cases of cheat ing before the Judicial Board. Five cases of cheating and one case of lying seem to be grounds for re-evaluating the effectiveness of the Honor Tradition as it is now set up. Does the Honor System really work ? We fear that it does not. Salem’s Honor Tradition has become something that we talk about once a year and then ignore. The Honor Tradition now covers everything trom cheating to drinking in Winston-Salem to walking in the halls barefooted. Technically, if we violate any rule, no matter how Hivia or how important, we are breaking our Honor Tradition. This is dangerously overloading our Honor Tradition. Disrespect for some trivial rule now means disrespect for part ot our Honor Tradition. A new student will soon realize that our Honor Tradition does not work socially, and she will assume that it does not work at all. The Honor Tradition, as it is now set up, is ideal, but it is too idealized to work well with ordinary human beings. Therefore, we would like to propose that Salem study a plan for setting up a new Honor Tradition. We propose that a clear distinction be made between social regu a- tions and the honor offenses of lying, stealing, and cheating. This would mean that the Honor Tradition would cover only lying, steal ing, and cheating, but it would cover these of fenses in any area of life at Salem. All social regulations should be designated as such and should be handled separately from honor of fenses. We realize that this seems drastic at first. But we have taken our Honor Tradition tor granted for so long that something must be done. The distinction made between honor of fenses and social regulations would o^y recognize a situation which already exists. We are ffiven calldowiis for breaking house rules or social regulations. We turn ourselves m for academic violations. The two types of violations are handled differently now—why not make it official? And any effective Honor Tradition must be based on the honor of the individual student. Lying, stealing, and cheating are universally accepted as wrong — they involve ethical standards which would apply to any society in which we might find ourselves at any time. But does walking in the halls barefooted violate your honor? Of course not! Even drinking, which is a major social violation, may be breaking a rule but often it does not mean that a student’s sense of individual honor is violated. This is especially true if it is not considered dishonorable for her to drink at home or at another college on a week-end. This double standard of “it’s wrong here but all right anywhere else” is not really based on honor but on a rule. Placing the social regulations under the Honor Tradition at Salem has just become a convenient way to get rules which apply only to the Salem campus enforced. We are not advocating that the student body either change or abolish rules. But they should not be placed under the Honor Tradi tion. We propose that all social regulations be handled exactly as they are now, with tyro exceptions. We feel that a list of major social violations should be set up—perhaps to include drinking within the metropolitan area. unlocking doors after hours, falsifying sign- out information, and smoking in dormitory rooms. These violations would still be subject to penalties of suspension, probation, or ex pulsion. Then we also propose that a trial system be set up to cover both social regulations and honor violations. One astute observer re marked that here at Salem we deny that such a thing as lying exists. Students do not easily or lightly turn another student in for a vio lation. Yet even if several students report a violation, if the girl says that she is innocent, the Judicial Board must accept her word as final. And so some students feel that they can do anything and get away with it; all they have to do is lie to the Judicial Board, which will have to accept their word. This is an unrealistic approach for dealing with viola tions. Then, we also feel that a separate Hono. Court should be set up to try only honor vio lations. (Social violations would still b(. handled by Judicial Board.) This body, we feel, should be composed of people elected by the entire student body specifically for the Honor Court. We do not feel that member ship on such an Honor Court should be a bonus to being elected to another office. Honor Court members should be the personification of honor—they should be the best representa tives we could have. Therefore, we propose that membership on the Honor Court not carry points. Since the Court would meet only on call to try honor violations, we do not feel that it would involve enough work to justify carrying points. In this way. Honor Court members could also hold other major offices. As a basis for discussion, we should like to propose that the Honor Court consist of seven students. It would probably be advisable to have the President of the Student Govern ment and the Chairman of the Judicial Board as members. Then there would probably be two other seniors, two juniors, and one sopho more. We do not feel that the members of the freshman class would be known well enough for the student body to judge their qualifications. Also they would not be fami liar enough with Salem or the rules to be qualified for such an office. In order for this new Honor Tradition to work, we must be required to turn in other students for honor violations of lying, steal ing, and cheating. If we know of an honor violation and do not turn the student in, we should be considered as guilty as the student who did the deed. For major social violations we should stress the fact that you can and should turn students in, but this should not be a responsibility or a requirement. As a part of changing the Honor Tradition, we should also consider changing the way that our Honor Pledge is signed. Herding everyone across the stage is an efficient way to get a book signed—but it does not really mean anything. A student should not sign the Honor Pledge until she is ready to assume the responsibility both for turning herself in and for turning others in for honor violations. And we suggest that perhaps this pledge should be signed by every student each year to remind us of our responsibilities and pri vileges under the Honor Tradition. And we might consider pledging our individual work, not as a preventive measure but as a constant reminder of the importance of our Honor Tra dition. This should follow an intensive program of teaching students what kind of an Honor Tra dition we have and what is expected of them. This educational phase should stress the posi tive values of having an Honor Tradition in stead of the negative attitude that “here are the rules we have to follow.” We do not feel that these proposals would be a perfectly working cure-all for the in effective Honor Tradition which we now have. But it would go a long way toward improving conditions. Let’s hear some discussion and let’s set up a committee to study the situation. The spring of the year is when changes can most easily be made. t * M. L. N. ^ I, 'Well, it makes a difference to ine^ By Janet Yarborough “I don’t think Jack Kennedy is doing too much” and “He’s settled down after the campaign’ are a few of the remarks heard here and there. And from the headlines, it does appear that one of the quietest places on the world scene is Washing ton, D. C. Remembering the campaign last fall and the tremendous energy that Kennedy exhibited in it, one would think that JFK would, with “vigor”, meet Congress head on and fight for his legislative suggestions as a valiant liberal should. But President Kennedy is a politician, and from his apparent success, is a good politician. There are a few facts that he has to remember: that he was elected by a narrow margin; that there is the possibility of a Southern Democratic-Republi can coalition; and that Congress, because of its structure and organization, is a basically conservative institution. What then can Kennedy do in the legislative field? What he seems to be doing right now, as I understand, is acting moderately and waiting. He is waiting, first of all, until April when he reviews the condition of the national economy to see if any more measures should be taken to boost it. If more economic reform is needed, then Mr. Kennedy will be faced with a real test of his prestige in Congress. Secondly, President Kennedy is waiting for public opinion to solidify in his favor before attempting to get Congress to act on the controversial parts of his program—as minimum wage, aid-to-education, and the medical bill. In broadening his base of public support, Kennedy seems to have been successful. He is using every line of communication with which to contact the people. His televised news confer ences, which he uses to make dramatic announcements, his let ting the Council of Economic Advisors have open sessions, are ways and means of informing the public. Even the recent establishing of the Peace Corps, which has been applauded over the country, is another way of attracting the public eye. In the mean time, the President is “asking little of Congress and letting the pot simmer”. As seen in the article from The New Republic, “Hurrying Slowly Forward”, many of Ken nedy’s liberal supporters are concerned that he is backsliding too fast and compromising too early. However, he is slowly acquiring momentum in making small gains. He is attempting to let the public and their representatives know what his pro gram is. More than ever before, the President is putting more con fidence and responsibility on the electorate. Popular govern ment in the twentieth century can endure if the people accept this responsibility. Sources: New York Times, Section IV, March 5, 1961 The New Republic, March 6, 1961, pp. 3-4. PRESS PUBLISHBD KVBRY FRIBAY Or TMB COi.l.raB YEAR ■Y THE Student Body op Salem colleoe OFFICES—Bawment of Lehman Hall — Downtown Offito—4U Bank St« S.W. EDITOR Mary Lu Nuckols BUSINESS MANAGER Sara Uu RIchordtofl Printed by the Sun Printing Company Subscription Price—$3.50 a year News Editor Becky Boswell Associate Editor.. Susan Hughes Feature Editor Ellen Rankin Copy Editor Ginger Ward Headline Editors—Alta Lu Townes, Susan Ray Kuykendall and Madge Kempton. Managing Staff — Wanda Cervarich Rooney Nelson and Connie Rucker Proof Reader Liz Smith Feature Writers — Mary Jane Crowell, Dean Major, Janet Yarborough, Susan Hughes, Becky Shell, Betsy Hicks, Peggy Brown, Flicky Craig, Rooney Nelson, Nancy Peter, Nikki Althouse, Cynthia Randolph. Asst. Business Manager.. Sue Parham Cartoonists—Eloise Upchurch, Bug* Bta’'" don, Catherine Eller. Advertising Manager Becky ChopP*!! Circulation Manager Becky Bartok Lay-out editor Becky Boswell Faculty Advisor Ml»» Je»* Photography Editor lef»y Mcf»** Typists Becky Bartak, Elise Kate Co swell News Writers—Dot Grayson, Liz Smith, Kay Long, Ann Romig, Marguerite Harris, Bonnie Hauch, Winnie Davi son, Marsha Ray.
Salem College Student Newspaper
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
March 10, 1961, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75