1. Academic Integrity Begins Here: Evaluating Your Institution’s Academic Misconduct Policy By Lana L. Becker and Dr. Jasmine Renner East Tennessee State University

2. PART I: An Introduction The role of ethics in higher education and the creation of an ethical culture The role of an Academic Misconduct Policy in creating an ethical culture The incidence of academic misconduct and the response of faculty

3. A Worthy Cause Ethical students Ethical employees Ethical workplaces

4. The Domino Effect Unethical students Unethical employees Unethical workplaces

5. How do institutions create an ethical culture? Communicate ethical expectations Institution’s response to its own ethical dilemmas Enforcement of policies Ethics training in the classroom

6. “Academic dishonesty is a threat to the intellectual fabric of an academic community” and is the “most serious violation of trust that occurs in a community of scholars and educators.” Fass (1986)

7. Academic Integrity of the institution is threatened Integrity of future workplace is threatened Dangers of Academic Misconduct

8. Challenges the authority of the faculty member Unfair grading scenarios for other students Classroom Dangers of Academic Misconduct

9. 1997 Study (Stearns) Self-reporting data indicates that 50-100% of students surveyed admitted to cheating at least once in college 1992 Study (McCabe) 67% cheated at least once 41% cheated on an exam 19% cheated on 4+ exams [survey of 6,087 students from 31 institutions]

10. Faculty often choose to circumvent the official Academic Misconduct Policy and handle the situation on a one-to-one basis with the student. (Stearnes, 1997) (McCabe, 1993)

11. Outside the Formal Policy 65% of faculty penalize students for cheating but : only 20% actually follow Formal Academic Misconduct Policy. (Jendrek, 1989)

12. Another study 800 professors were asked if they report cheating (formal process): 40% answered Never 54% answered Seldom 6% answered Often (Schneider, 1999)

13. Why do faculty avoid the formal policy/process? Don’t understand the formal process Process is too cumbersome Process is too time consuming Fears related to the formal process

14. Fears of Faculty Emotional confrontation Student retaliation Harassment or discrimination charges Lack of Administrative support

15. Danger in Circumventing Policy Faculty may not provide due process Faculty becomes “judge and jury” (Tauber,1984) Faculty member and the institution may be exposed to legal risk (Schneider, 1999) There is no record of the academic misconduct - Behavior is perpetuated

16. When academic misconduct occurs: Faculty often take it personally Experience anger or other emotions Faculty member must possess IMPARTIALITY (non-emotional response) in order for due process to be served in an informal resolution (Stevens, 1996)

17. “Capricious and arbitrary behavior” on the part of faculty is NOT supported in the courts. [Stearns, 1997]

18. IF the policy/process is clear, efficient, and effective: Faculty becomes comfortable with using the formal system Students, faculty, and the university are better served.

19. Part II: Objectives of an Academic Misconduct Policy

20. Identify where policy is needed Formulate policy Review and analyze existing policy The Tasks of Policy Analysis (Gill & Saunders, 1992)

21. Answering the Call “Any campus that has not reviewed its integrity policies for some time is derelict in its responsibilities to students.” McCabe (2006)

22. The Academic Misconduct Policy of an institution of higher education should serve STUDENTS FACULTY and the UNIVERSITY

23. OBJECTIVE #1 Preserve the academic integrity of the institution by discouraging academic dishonesty. (reduce the # of violations)

24. BEST PRACTICES Keep records of the incidence of academic misconduct and how they cheat (Hutton, 2006) Communicate this information to faculty Make the monitoring of academic misconduct part of your Assessment Program

25. OBJECTIVE #2 Provide a CLEAR and COMPREHENSIVE definition of academic misconduct (examples of misconduct should be provided)

26. Best Practices Communication of policy to students (Aaron,1992) Student Handbook FRESHMAN ORIENTATION Syllabus Student Newspaper Schedule of Classes Academic Misconduct Brochure

27. Best Practices Helping Students Understand the Policy Provide Definitions Ex: What is plagiarism? Provide examples/potential violations Choose assignments which are instructive in regard to understanding academic misconduct (Williams & Hosek, 2003)

28. OBJECTIVE #3 Due process for students should be served by the academic misconduct policy.

29. Adequate notice of the charge Disciplinary action must be supported by substantial evidence Opportunity for a hearing DUE PROCESS REQUIRES : (Rutherford & Olswang, 1981)

30. OBJECTIVE #4 Provide an efficient and timely resolution and create an optimum balance between swift justice and due process. (Sabloff, 1989)

31. Best Practices Avoid an excessively bureaucratic process Specify time limits for each step in the process Address the right to appeal and its related time limit [Student, Instructor, or both]

32. OBJECTIVE #5 Policy should be instructional and provide guidance for faculty. [state the role, responsibilities, and the rights of faculty members]

33. Faculty must understand Reporting expectations Due Process requirements Documentation requirements Faculty’s Role in the process

34. Best Practices –Faculty Development Provide a Flowchart of the academic misconduct process; ELIMINATE AMBIGUITY “First Step” Instruction: what they can and should do when they observe cheating (Stearns, 1997) Provide Due Process training

35. Best Practices –Faculty Development How to create an ethical culture in the classroom Create a testing environment that discourages cheating Use the course syllabus to communicate ethical expectations and explain academic misconduct Incorporate ethics perspective in the course content when applicable

36. OBJECTIVE #6 Should encourage a high level of faculty participation, indicating that the judgment of faculty is valued.

37. Faculty Participation in the Process Administration should clearly communicate their support of faculty Faculty level of participation must be clarified and communicated Faculty involvement in setting sanctions satisfies academic freedom rights Courts find faculty “uniquely qualified to evaluate” (Olswang, 1981)

38. OBJECTIVE #7 Clearly communicate to students their rights, choices, and the resolution proceedings in situations of suspected academic misconduct.

39. For the student’s understanding: Provide a flowchart of the process, specifically designed for Students Clarify the available options for a student who is accused of academic misconduct Emphasize that confidentiality of the student will be respected Clarify the range of sanctions and the effect on the student’s academic record

40. OBJECTIVE #8 Should specify a range of sanctions with increasing severity for repeat offenders.

41. Best Practices Consistently apply range of sanctions, increasing severity for repeat offenders (Sabloff and Yeager,1989) Allow for faculty input in deciding the appropriate sanction within specified range

42. OBJECTIVE #9 Should provide a confidential and centralized record-keeping system that is communicated to students and faculty.

43. Best Practices Clarify where academic misconduct files will be kept [Department, College, Office of Student Affairs, Office of Academic Affairs] Determine who will have access to these files Specify the length of time these records should be kept

44. Best Practices Determine what (if any) records are kept if case is dismissed Determine whether academic misconduct information is recorded on the student’s transcript Confidentiality of accused person respected throughout the process

45. Creating an Ethical Culture Communicate ethical expectations Institution’s response to its own ethical dilemmas Enforcement of policies Ethics training in the classroom

46. Limitations of a formal academic misconduct policy do NOT justify an institution’s lack of diligence in fulfilling its educational mission with integrity.