As most of you know, I dedicated a lot of time and effort to the Honors Program during my first 5 years at Tech.  I have loved that program, regardless of the many flaws that I saw and my clashes with the leadership.  Right now, I am completely disgusted and disappointed.

At least since I came to Tech in 2001, the Honors Handbook has said that to graduate in cursu honorum (in the course of the Honors Program) you have to complete Honors 1010, 15 hours of Honors credit in classes spread across 3 disciplines, 2 Honors colloquia (interdisciplinary classes that are usually pretty cool,) full membership in the Honors Program, a 3.5 GPA and-here's the part I've always hated-2 essays, one on critical thinking and one on your developmental growth, a final resume, and an exit interview with one of the directors and an Honors professor.

It came to light a few years ago that while they've been required the essays, resume, and interview, they're not actually in the Honors Charter, which means that students don't actually have to do them.  The Honors Charter is approved by the Academic Council at Tech, and the program has to abide by it.  When we discovered that it was being violated and students were, let's face it, being LIED to about what they had to do to graduate in cursu, the Honors Council voted to change the Charter.  The change, of course, has to be approved by the Academic Council for it to actually change the requirements.  Just so you know, as of the current date, they haven't even sent it to the Academic Council.  They are still telling students that they're required to complete the essays, resume, and interviews, which again, is not true.  For the record, even if it had been passed, the ammendment notes that anyone who joined Honors before the change was enacted can choose the Charter under which they want to graduate.

One of my friends is graduating this year.  He's completed all the requirements set forth in the Honors Charter, and yet the Honors Program is trying to refuse him in cursu graduation.  First, they flat-out refused him.  This Wednesday, when he went to talk to them about it, the director told him that while the papers, etc aren't in the Charter as requirements, they're not optional.  Then, the director told him to talk to the secretary on Thursday.  Thursday, the secretary told him that he needed a signed letter from the director saying that he really was graduation in cursu, since he didn't do the interview and papers, nevermind that he doesn't actually have to.  While the director was in the office, the secretary refused to "disturb" her for this.  (Graduation is tomorrow, so this is rather important, you know?)  When my friend came back an hour later as directed, the secretary and director were both out to a "long lunch."  A quick e-mail sent to a variety of university officials fixed the problem somewhat, but the director protested that he had not completed the proper "processing."  ... What kind of processing do you have that requires 2 papers, a resume, and an interview to determine if a student has taken certain classes and has the appropriate GPA?  Anyone else think this sounds a bit shady?

I am overall extremely disappointed in the program and its leadership.  This problem certainly started with the old director who first imposed the requirements that were not listed in the Charter, but I thought that the new director had more integrity that this.  I'm not sure who exactly they think they are that they can blatantly ignore the Charter that gives them the right to even have their program on campus, but I am certain of one thing - they are going to lose this fight.  The Charter is explicit about the requirements, and my friend has fulfilled every last one of them.

For the record, neither Josh nor I intend to do the papers or interviews either.  They will certainly lose the fight then as well.