Source B
Vangelli, Alyssa. “The Honor Code Vote: One Student
Senator’s View.
The following, an excerpt from a student’s account of the introduction of an honor code at her high school,
Lawrence Academy—a private boarding school in Massachusetts—was originally published in the school newsletter
in May 1999.
When the honor code proposal first came under consideration in the spring of 1998, many students, including
members of the Senate, were quick to criticize it. Students did not fully understand the role of an honor code; many
saw it as another rule to obey. The earlier drafts of the honor code included specific penalties for violations of the
honor code, which many students opposed. Students were expected to report or confront a fellow student if they
knew that he/she had cheated, lied, or stolen. Failure to confront or report a student would result in a period of
probation. Students opposed this obligation to take action against another student because they did not see it as their
responsibility. They feared that a mandate to confront peers would create friction and that a subsequent report could
not easily be kept confidential. . . .
After much discussion and debate in class and Senate meetings, the proposal was revised to eliminate any formal
disciplinary actions, although the expectation to take action if one witnessed or knew about any dishonest behavior
still existed. I saw the revision to eliminate all formal penalties in the honor code as a huge step in gaining student
approval, both inside and outside of the Senate.
Another part of the code which received student criticism was a requirement for students to write a pledge of honor
on every piece of work submitted, stating that it was the result of their own thinking and effort. Many students
thought that a pledge of honor for each piece of paper submitted was excessive, but a less frequent pledge of honor
could be a helpful reminder of their responsibilities. This section was revised to require a pledge of honor at the
beginning of each term, affirming that each student will behave honestly and responsibly at all times. In signing this
pledge of honor, students have reminders of these moral values and a responsibility to perform honestly in the school
environment. The revised pledge of honor also helped gain student approval for the honor code.
Another turning point occurred when students began to examine the role of an honor code as something other than a
new set of rules and regulations to obey. In order to understand the purpose of an honor code, the real question was
what type of environment we wanted to live in. As Senate members, we brought this question to class meetings for
discussion. Most responded that we needed an environment where students and faculty could live in complete trust
of one another. Although some did not see a need for an honor code, we, as Senate members, concluded that this
type of environment could only be achieved through first adopting an honor code. Implicit in an honor code is a
belief in the integrity of human beings; it also provides students a clear explanation of the importance of behaving
with the integrity and the expectation that our resulting actions will increase trust and respect in the LA [Lawrence
Academy] community.
As the time to vote for the honor code approached, I and many other student members of the Senate felt pulled in
two directions; we wanted to vote based on our consciences, but we wanted to represent the remaining skeptical and
uncertain views of our fellow students. At the time of voting, most of us took the first option and voted according to
our consciences, which we believed would eventually benefit every member of the school.
I voted in favor because I wanted to go to a school where I could feel comfortable taking an exam without worrying
about someone looking at my paper and where I could be trusted visiting a dorm as a day student. I imagined that
other students and future students of Lawrence would feel the same way.
Although the full acceptance of an honor code will take time, an important process has begun, one which I believe
will ensure moral action and thinking here at Lawrence Academy.
Currency
When was the information created?
How old is too old?
Does the currency of the information matter?
Relevance
Is the information related to the prompt?
Does the information support your stance?
Who is this written for?
Authority
Who or what created the information?
Who or what is publishing the information?
What credentials, education, affiliations, or experience does the information creator have to write on this topic?
What can we tell from the domain of the website where the information has been published?
Purpose
Why was this information created?
Was the information created to inform, teach, sell, entertain, or persuade you?
Is the purpose made clear?
The information in Source B was originally published in May 1999, making it over 20 years old. This could be considered too old for some purposes, especially if more recent information is available. The currency of the information does matter because new developments or changes may have occurred since it was published.
The information in Source B is related to the prompt as it provides a student's view on the introduction of an honor code at her high school.
Whether or not the information in Source B supports your stance depends on your stance on the issue of honor codes. Source B provides a positive view of the honor code and highlights the benefits it can bring to the school community, so if you support honor codes, this information may support your stance.
The information in Source B was written by Alyssa Vangelli, a student at Lawrence Academy, a private boarding school in Massachusetts. It was originally published in the school newsletter. The writer's credentials and credentials of the school newsletter are not mentioned in the excerpt.
From the domain of the website where the information was published (the school newsletter), we can infer that it is a credible source within the context of the school community.
The purpose of the information in Source B is to inform readers about the introduction and implementation of an honor code at Lawrence Academy. It also aims to persuade readers that the honor code is beneficial and will ensure moral action and thinking at the school. The purpose is made clear in the excerpt.
Currency:
The information was created in May 1999, which makes it over 20 years old. Generally, information that is over 5-10 years old may be considered too old.
The currency of the information does matter because it reflects how up-to-date the information is and whether it is still relevant in the current context.
Relevance:
The information is related to the honor code proposal and the student's perspective on it. It provides insight into the initial criticisms, revisions, and eventual acceptance of the honor code at Lawrence Academy.
Whether the information supports your stance depends on your stance on honor codes and how you interpret the student's views.
Audience:
The information was originally published in the school newsletter, so it was written for members of the Lawrence Academy community, including students, faculty, and parents.
Authority:
The information was created by Alyssa Vangelli, a student member of the Senate at Lawrence Academy. The publication of the information in the school newsletter suggests that it was approved by the school administration.
The credentials, education, affiliations, or experience of Alyssa Vangelli are not explicitly mentioned in the excerpt.
The information was published in the school newsletter, which is likely affiliated with Lawrence Academy and may have been reviewed by faculty or staff members before publication.
The domain of the website where the information has been published is not provided in the excerpt.
Purpose:
The information was created to share one student's perspective on the introduction of an honor code at Lawrence Academy. It provides insight into the initial criticisms, revisions, and eventual acceptance of the honor code from a student's point of view.
The purpose of the information seems to be primarily to inform and possibly persuade readers to see the value of implementing an honor code at the school.
To assess the currency of the information, we need to determine when it was created. In this case, the source states that the excerpt was originally published in May 1999. So, the information is over 20 years old. Whether this is too old depends on the context and the specific topic being discussed. If the information is about historical events or general concepts that haven't changed significantly, it might still be relevant. However, if it pertains to recent developments or specific data, it may not be considered current.
The currency of the information does matter because certain topics or fields can change rapidly, and new research or developments may have occurred since the information was published. It is important to consider more recent sources and to check if there have been any updates or changes in the topic since the publication of the information.
To assess the relevance of the information, we need to consider whether it is related to the prompt or the specific question being asked. In this case, the prompt is not provided, so we cannot determine the direct relevance of the information. However, based on the content of the excerpt, it appears to be discussing the introduction and approval of an honor code at Lawrence Academy, a private boarding school in Massachusetts. If the prompt or question is related to honor codes or the implementation of rules in educational institutions, this information may be relevant.
To determine if the information supports your stance, you would need to compare the content of the information to your own position or argument. Since the prompt or your stance is not provided, it is not possible to determine if the information aligns with your views.
The source, Vangelli, Alyssa, is identified as a student senator at Lawrence Academy, a private boarding school in Massachusetts. The information is published in the school newsletter. The author's credentials are not explicitly stated, but she is a member of the student senate and actively involved in discussions and decision-making regarding the honor code. Therefore, she likely has first-hand knowledge and experience related to the topic.
The purpose of the information, as stated in the excerpt, seems to be to share the author's personal view and account of the introduction and acceptance of the honor code at Lawrence Academy. It provides insights into the process, challenges, and reasons behind the decision. The purpose of the information appears to be to inform and persuade the reader about the benefits and importance of having an honor code at the school.
The prompt or question is not provided, so it is not possible to determine if the purpose aligns with the specific information you are seeking. It is essential to consider the purpose of the information and how it aligns with your own needs and goals when evaluating its relevance and credibility.