Cadet Honor Code
The bedrock of moral and character education at the United States Air Force Academy begins with a internalization of the cadet honor code. This code was created by cadets and is owned by cadets. They are responsible for maintaining the Code as well as for the process by which those who break it are assessed. The Code is based on a fundamental, positive principles of honesty, respect, fairness, and support.
Understanding the Code Honor Code: We will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does.
Honor Oath: We will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does. Furthermore, I resolve to do my duty and to live honorably, (so help me God).
Spirit of the Code: Do the right thing and live honorably.
The Class of 1959 gave us the Honor Code because lying, stealing, cheating and tolerating are dishonorable, and we can’t have the trust and respect required in our community — the military — if they are allowed to exist. So if you don’t lie, steal, cheat, or tolerate, are you honorable? Not Necessarily. Being an honorable person implies much more than someone who doesn’t lie, steal, cheat or tolerate. You could lock somebody in a closet and they’d never violate the Code. Are they honorable? What about the individual who plans to lie or cheat but is afraid to get caught, so they do neither? Is this an honorable person?
The U.S. Military Academy at West Point
West Point's Cadet Honor Code reads simply that
- "A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do."
Cadets accused of violating the Honor Code face a standardized investigative and hearing process (). First they are tried by a jury of their peers. If they are found guilty, the case will go up to the Commandant of the Academy who will give his recommendation, then to the Superintendent of the Academy, who has the discretion to either impose sanctions or recommend that the Secretary of the Army expel the cadet from the Academy.
Definitions of the tenets of the Honor Code
LYING: Cadets violate the Honor Code by lying if they deliberately deceive another by stating an untruth or by any direct form of communication to include the telling of a partial truth and the vague or ambiguous use of information or language with the intent to deceive or mislead.
CHEATING: A violation of cheating would occur if a Cadet fraudulently acted out of self-interest or assisted another to do so with the intent to gain or to give an unfair advantage. Cheating includes such acts as plagiarism (presenting someone else's ideas, words, data, or work as one's own without documentation), misrepresentation (failing to document the assistance of another in the preparation, revision, or proofreading of an assignment), and using unauthorized notes.
STEALING: The wrongful taking, obtaining, or withholding by any means from the possession of the owner or any other person any money, personal property, article, or service of value of any kind, with intent to permanently deprive or defraud another person of the use and benefit of the property, or to appropriate it to either their own use or the use of any person other than the owner.
TOLERATION: Cadets violate the Honor Code by tolerating if they fail to report an unresolved incident with honor implications to proper authority within a reasonable length of time. "Proper authority" includes the Commandant, the Assistant Commandant, the Director of Military Training, the Athletic Director, a tactical officer, teacher or coach. A "reasonable length of time" is the time it takes to confront the Cadet candidate suspected of the honor violation and decide whether the incident was a misunderstanding or a possible violation of the Honor Code. A reasonable length of time is usually considered not to exceed 24 hours.
To have violated the honor code, a Cadet must have lied, cheated, stolen, or attempted to do so, or tolerated such action on the part of another Cadet. The procedural element of the Honor System examines the two elements that must be present for a Cadet to have committed an honor violation: the act and the intent to commit that act. The latter does not mean intent to violate the Honor Code, but rather the intent to commit the act itself.
Three rules of thumb
- Does this action attempt to deceive anyone or allow anyone to be deceived?
- Does this action gain or allow the gain of privilege or advantage to which I or someone else would not otherwise be entitled?
- Would I be dissatisfied by the outcome if I were on the receiving end of this action?
History and relevance
The premise behind the Honor Code is as old as the Academy itself. When the Academy was founded in 1802, the officer corps operated on a simple code of honor—an officer's word was his bond. Sylvanus Thayer, Superintendent of the Academy from 1817 to 1833, explicitly banned cheating as part of his efforts to increase the Academy's scholarship standards. Allegations of theft were dealt with under normal Army regulations until the 1920s. The first major step toward formalizing the unwritten Honor Code came in 1922 when Superintendent Douglas MacArthur formed the first Cadet Honor Committee, which reviewed all allegations of honor infractions. In 1947, Superintendent Maxwell Taylor drafted the first official Honor Code publication, which is considered the first codification of the “Cadet Honor Code.” Although failure to report violations had long been reckoned as grounds for expulsion, the code wasn't formally amended to expressly forbid "toleration" until 1970."
In August 1951, Time reported that 90 of the Academy's 2,500 cadets were facing dismissal for mass violations of the honor code related to "cribbing", receiving the answers to exams ahead of time, allegedly through upperclass tutors who were assisting other cadets, mostly dedicated football players, to study for those exams."
The Army arranged for an investigation headed by famed jurist 79-year-old Judge Learned Hand. The investigating board recommended dismissal of all 90 suspected violators of the Honor Code, and while the Army and Congress debated the issue and its causes, the cadets were left with a cloud hanging over their heads and their futures.
There have been other instances of mass cheating scandals at the Academy, including two very famous ones. In August 1976, where it was found that possibly over half of the junior class at the Academy had violated the honor code by cheating on a case assignment. In 1951, 37 members of the football team were dismissed after they were found to have cheated. The team was so decimated that it fell to 2-7, the only losing record suffered by legendary coach Red Blaik.
U.S. Air Force Academy
The Cadet Honor Code at the Air Force Academy, like that at West Point, is the cornerstone of a cadet's professional training and development — the minimum standard of ethical conduct that cadets expect of themselves and their fellow cadets. Air Force's honor code was developed and adopted by the Class of 1959, the first class to graduate from the Academy, and has been handed down to every subsequent class. The code adopted was based largely on West Point's Honor Code, but was modified slightly to its current wording:
- I will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor will I tolerate those among us who do.
In 1984, the Cadet Wing voted to add an "Honor Oath," which was to be taken by all cadets. The oath is administered to fourth class cadets (freshmen) when they are formally accepted into the Wing at the conclusion of Basic Cadet Training. The oath consists of a statement of the code, followed by a resolution to live honorably:
- We will not lie, steal or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does.
- Furthermore, I resolve to do my duty and to live honorably (so help me God).
Cadets are considered the "guardians and stewards" of the Code. Cadet honor representatives throughout the Wing oversee the honor system by conducting education classes and investigating possible honor incidents. Cadets throughout the Wing are expected to sit on Honor Boards as juries that determine whether their fellow cadets violated the code. Cadets also recommend sanctions for violations. Although the presumed sanction for a violation is disenrollment, mitigating factors may result in the violator being placed in a probationary status for some period of time. This "honor probation" is usually only reserved for cadets in their first two years at the Academy.
In popular culture
The 2005 ESPN made-for-TV movie Code Breakers was about the 1951 scandal in which 83 West Point cadets were implicated in violations of the Cadet Honor Code in order to help the West Point football team. The film was nominated for two awards.
The song 'Intolerance' by the rock band Tool makes specific mention of the honor code.
- "Brigade Honor Captain Named For 2009 ", Release № 14-08 United States Military Academy, 14 March 2008, Retrieved 3 April 2010
- "TIME Magazine: The Nation: Trouble at West Point", 13 August 1951, Retrieved 26 Feb 2011
- "Duty, Honor, Country, and Too Many Lawyers", John Harry "Jorgie" Jorgenson, Originally printed in "The Lawyer's Washington" column in the American Bar Association Journal for April 1977 (63 ABAJ 564-S67). Copyright 1977 by the American Bar Association, Retrieved 26 Feb 2011
- "The Honor Code ", USAFA Fact Sheet, April 2009, Retrieved 3 April 2010
- "Honor Code Reference Handbook- Volume II – The Honor System ", (646 KB) USAFA, August 2008, Retrieved 3 April 2010
- "", Final clause in cadet Honor Oath made optional, October 2013, Retrieved 4 April 2014
- "Code Breakers at IMDb". IMDb.
- "Awards for Code Breakers at IMDb". IMDb.
- Cadet Honor Committee
- Cadet Bugle Notes
- The Simon Center for the Professional Military Ethic at West Point
- USAF Academy Honor Code Handbook, 2003