Support independent, student-run journalism.

Your support helps give staff members from all backgrounds the opportunity to conduct meaningful reporting on important issues at Stanford. All contributions are tax-deductible.

Increase in CS 106A Honor Code cases prompts letter from Provost

A recent uptick in reports of academic dishonesty during Winter Quarter prompted an all-faculty email from Provost John Etchemendy Ph.D ’82. In the email, Etchemendy cited a large, introductory course, where as many as 20 percent of students are suspected of violating the Honor Code. According to sources familiar with the situation, the emailed referred to CS106A and B.

Letter to the Editor: Due process and the ARP

First, the ARP does allow students the opportunity to challenge reviewers. Students are provided with the names of their case reviewers in advance of their hearing. If a student objects to the presence of particular reviewers on his or her panel, and can demonstrate good cause for removing those reviewers, substitutions will be made. Second, due process requires that a student charged with a violation of the Fundamental Standard or any other Stanford policy receive notice of the nature of the charge against him or her, and the opportunity to respond to the charge.