“It’s a response to an emergency, or what the administration saw as an emergency,” said Mansfield, referring to the Government 1310 cheating scandal, Harvard’s largest in recent memory. “I think that’s generally understood and generally appreciated, but not enthused over. We had to do something and this is what we’ve done.”

While Harris has denied that the Academic Integrity Committee’s work was a response to any one case, the cheating scandal accelerated the group’s efforts.

Lyons, for her part, said that she thinks there is a “large contingent” of faculty members enthusiastic about the honor code, among them members of the Academic Integrity Committee who helped create it.

“I think once people come to understand it in a deeper sense, people will sort of adopt that enthusiasm,” Lyons said.

Still, Lewis said he thinks that some faculty members are not engaged because the proposal, as it stands, has limited effect on how professors teach their classes.

“I’m not terribly surprised it hasn’t caused a lot of conversation in the faculty. And it’s not because Harvard’s faculty doesn’t care about undergraduate affairs; they do when it really impacts the way students engage with education and research,” said Lewis, also a computer science professor. “It’s just not clear that this does that in the same way.”

—Staff writer Madeline R. Conway can be reached at mconway@thecrimson.com. Follow her on Twitter @MadelineRConway.

—Staff writer Steven S. Lee can be reached at steven.lee@thecrimson.com. Follow him on Twitter @StevenSJLee.