“I think more of our students would be willing to accept responsibility if they knew suspension was not in the decision-making process,” Hunter said.
Manning said faculty would only be able to use this process with first-time offenders, and both the professor and the student could still take it to the honor system if they wanted.
“Students always have an out — they can always take it to the Honor Court and face the possibility of suspension,” Manning said.
Diane Horton, chairwoman of the Committee on Student Conduct, said the policy aims to allow professors a bigger role in deciding the extent of punishment the student deserves.
“This was an attempt to meet in the middle,” Horton said to faculty members in attendance. “To formally bring you guys to the table.”
The policy will have to be approved by the student conduct committee, student government and the faculty before being implemented, Hunter said.
Another issue that was brought up for discussion is the requirement to prove guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt” in the Honor Court.
Hunter said this standard of proof is unique to the University within the UNC system — and a threshold faculty members often complain is too difficult to reach.
The faculty committee also discussed the results of the Turnitin.com pilot study tested last semester.
A survey found Turnitin to be “moderately effective.” The University has not yet decided whether it will implement the website campuswide.
Jan Boxill, chairwoman of the committee, said Turnitin would cost about $50,000 a year — equivalent to how much one Writing Center employee would be paid. She said Turnitin would be able to handle much more student work.
Still, the debate continues on the effectiveness of the site and whether it would be practical enough for the University to use across the board.
Contact the desk editor at email@example.com.