Valparaiso University Honor System
.
  

Report on Center for Academic Integrity International Conference 2006 (CAI website)

Krista Hennings, Executive Vice Chair

Thursday, October 19th: Pre-Conference Welcome Dinner

After twelve hours of traveling, I finally made it in to my room at the Boulder Outlook Hotel about 5:00 P.M. Mountain time. The first thing I noticed about the city of Boulder was, of course, the mountains. The city and UC Boulder campus is nestled right up against the edge of the Rockies, and some of the peaks seemed right across the freeway from my hotel’s front entrance.

The conference was held in the University Memorial Center. This is UC Boulder’s equivalent to the Union at Valpo, but at least four times the size. If you have seen plans for Valpo’s new Union, you can kind of imagine the scope of this enormous building.

This year’s theme was “Promoting Academic Integrity and Transforming Institutional Culture.” That first night featured a buffet dinner for all the nearly 400 conference guests, and the keynote speaker, Dr. Rick Rigsby. Dr. Rigsby’s speech addressed many topics, including effective leadership and the difference between intelligence and wisdom. One thing he said to the conference attendees that sticks with me is: “You are all intelligent people. But when you make decisions in your organizations, rely on wisdom, not only your intelligence.”

At dinner, I sat with students and faculty from the University of San Diego, LaGrange College, and Dartmouth. When speaking with these people, I found it interesting how different each of our systems were. For example, the students from LaGrange talked about how they have no standard penalties: the sanctions are different for each case, but they most frequently assign educational activities for first offenses. Compare this to Dartmouth, where the standard penalty for a first offense is a year’s suspension from the University.

Friday, October 20th: Conference Sessions

Faculty Questions: Research

Arthur Coren, Dean of the School of Business and Executive Director of International Education at Kwantlen University College

Carol Miles, Director of the Education Development Centre at Carleton University

Martha Roberts, Postdoctoral Fellow in University Teaching Development at the Education Development Centre at Carleton University

Two research projects conducted by faculty members at two different Universities examined what attitudes and personal experiences influence a faculty member’s likelihood of confronting or ignoring instances of cheating.

They found interesting things which indicate that the professor’s age or stage in their career is likely to influence the likelihood of reporting or confronting a student:

  • Professors early in their careers (the first 1-2 years) are most likely to confront students they suspect of cheating.
  • The likelihood of confronting diminishes somewhat as professors reach the later parts of their careers.
  • 85% of faculty members in the first two years of their careers believe that students do not have an accurate idea of what constitutes academic integrity when they first come to college, and that it is the professors’ duty to teach it to new college students.

They also found that a faculty member’s attitude of reporting cheating is highly influenced by the social norms of their university:

  • Faculty are more likely to report or confront cheaters if they feel they will have the support of their coworkers and superiors.
  • However, if a faculty member has had a negative experience with confronting a problem, they usually care less about their peers’ and superior’s attitudes, and are more likely to ignore problems in the future.

There are many reasons faculty may ignore cheating:

  • Some faculty members wrote that they are less likely to confront if they fear the student “will become emotional.”
  • The number-one reason listed as a reason to ignore a problem was “lack of evidence:” 95.2% of faculty questioned said that they had ignored suspicious circumstances because they felt there hadn’t been enough evidence to prove that a student cheated.

Mental Health and Academic Integrity on College Campuses

Christine Ghio, student, member of the Westhampton College Honor Council at the University of Richmond

Juliette Landphair, Dean of Westhampton College at at the University of Richmond

Lindsay Vang, student, Secretary of the Westhampton College Honor Council at the University of Richmond

This conversation session focused on how mental health issues can affect the atmosphere of academic integrity. Many students attribute their fall from academic integrity to high stress, and research has shown that mental health issues on college campuses have been rising for nearly a decade. The presenters argued that more can be done on college campuses to reduce mental health problems, and that there should be more outreach to help students with high levels of stress before they get to the point where they decide to cheat.

In small groups, we discussed the climate of mental health and academic integrity in our own universities, and possible measures of combating conflict between integrity and health. Some suggestions were encouraging students to talk to their professors if they are feeling overwhelmed and advocating university counseling centers. Others suggested an online stress-test for students to take and evaluate their own mental health.

More than Once: Examining the Attitudes and Ethical Perspectives of Repeat Cheaters

Jose Cantu, student and McNair Scholar at Eastern Washington University

Susan Stearns, Faculty Fellow for Academic Integrity at Eastern Washington University

This research session presented data collected from college students who admitted to cheating more than five times. Some interesting things that the researches found about what they call “active cheaters” were:

  • More likely to cheat in classes not affiliated with their major, or in classes they “don’t need.”
  • Many feel negatively about their cheating, i.e. are not “proud of themselves.”
  • However, most seem to justify their behavior as normal or necessary for success.
  • Most began regularly cheating in middle school or high school.
  • Only 4% of repeat cheaters questioned began in college.

The paper presented at this session is a very interesting read. I have a paper copy of it and permission to give a photocopy to council members who would like to read the whole thing. It is stuffed with more facts about repeat cheaters than I can fit in this report, and I recommend it to any council members. Email me at Krista.Hennings@valpo.edu if you would like a copy.

Inadvertent Academic Dishonesty Among Culturally Diverse Students

Maureen Barry, Lecturer in the Liberal Studies Department at the National Technical Institute for the Deaf at Rochester Institute of Technology

Sybil Ishman, Associate Professor, Liberal Studies Department at the National Technical Institute for the Deaf at Rochester Institute of Technology

This session focused on the differences in cultures which may lead students to often inadvertent acts of dishonesty. While this is a small portion of cases reported, there are many things one can apply to a larger scope or larger problem of educating campuses about academic integrity.

Some interesting things I gathered from this presentation were:

  • In some cultures, particularly East Asian populations, it is considered respectful to borrow work from others and turn it in.
  • Many international students have problems understanding that American colleges expect critical thinking, rather than regurgitating or re-presenting facts.
  • When people learn a second language, they are usually taught through imitating native speakers of that language. Often, this carries over into academic work: some students retain this “learning through imitation,” and consider it normal to turn in work that they imitated from someone else.
  • Students may feel uncomfortable with their own language skills, and so imitate the language of what they research.

Universities have a duty to make sure that all students, including international students, understand what constitutes academic integrity at their institution, and address the cultural differences which may result in plagiarism. Some ways to advocate academic honesty for all students are: