Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Academic Integrity University of Arkansas “This is college, everyone cheats. Everyone cheats in life in general,” Ravvin told.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Academic Integrity University of Arkansas “This is college, everyone cheats. Everyone cheats in life in general,” Ravvin told."— Presentation transcript:

1 Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Academic Integrity University of Arkansas “This is college, everyone cheats. Everyone cheats in life in general,” Ravvin told ABC News. “I just think you’d be hard pressed to find anyone in this testing lab who hasn’t cheated on an exam. They’re making a witch hunt out of absolutely nothing, as if they want to teach us some sort of moral lesson.” gma-ucf-cheating-scandal-national-news-quinn/

2 Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Ad Hoc Committee Members Pat Koski and Paul Cronan, Co-Chairs Steve Boss Paul C. Calleja Alan E. Ellstrand Chaim Goodman-strauss Ethel Goodstein Paul Michael Hewitt Monica Holland Linda Jones Beth Juhl Terry Martin Charles Rosenkrans Patsy Watkins

3 Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Some Relevant Points  Current procedures - Judicial process is not clear and is complicated  It takes time for faculty  Faculty decisions are not supported  A student can use multiple paths (Judicial Board and/or Grade Grievance)  Lack of trust  Differences for undergraduate students vs graduate students 3

4 Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Points of View Expressed Awareness and good information about process and results reported back to all stakeholders Clear process is needed - simple way of viewing this process; simple step-by-step Context of the situation must be considered (we need to be careful not to oversimplify). Clear definitions are important. 4

5 Academic Integrity Fall 2010 The intention of the infraction should (not) be considered (lack of clear understanding vs. willful act) Administration of the policy is important Clarity, consistency, structure, and a clear risk- reward-punishment are essential Faculty reporting of an infraction should be simple and not time consuming Minimize time burden for the faculty member; college “academic integrity monitor” in each college to handle the details 5

6 Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Faculty – “buy in” - type of sanction for a given offense Simplify sanctions – very clear and consistent Clear burden of proof and what constitutes proof No tolerance once academic dishonesty has been proven – if there is no trust, our academic system falls apart and what it means to be an academic community is in question It should never be “too much work” 6

7 Academic Integrity Fall 2010 There should be consequences for actions Foundational/systemic issues need to be addressed – from H.S to university; educating students and faculty; instilling values about academic honesty in students; ownership; responsibility Structural - cases involving academic dishonesty are different from student conduct cases; results of both types of cases reported to the Faculty Senate 7

8 Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Revised Streamlined Process Instructor meets with student involved in the infraction If it is deemed by the instructor that an infraction has occurred, it is reported to the College Academic Integrity Monitor College Academic Integrity Monitor reviews the case with instructor & student If student admits, file centrally and file to the Judicial Board for sanctions approval 8

9 Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Revised Streamlined Process If the student contests responsibility, Academic Integrity Monitor forwards file to a standing University Judiciary Committee (faculty in majority from each college plus students) Appeals are to the Provost/Chancellor– procedural errors, expulsion, new evidence, (very limited) 9

10 Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Ideas We Are Discussing Clear Definitions of Violations w/ Sanctions Level One – copying, collaborating, … Level Two – stealing exam, “ringers,” plagiarizing, multiple Level One’s Level Three – altering grades, sabotaging, multiple Level Two’s 10

11 Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Ideas We Are Discussing Sanctions for Violations– Level One – grade of zero for 1 st offense to “F” in the course for 2 nd offense + required classes Level Two – grade of “F” in the course, Academic Probation, & required classes to Expulsion for 2 nd offense Level Three – immediate and permanent Expulsion 11

12 Academic Integrity Fall 2010

13 Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Your Input is Important !!! Let’s have a conversation about this… Because we do care…. 13


Download ppt "Academic Integrity Fall 2010 Academic Integrity University of Arkansas “This is college, everyone cheats. Everyone cheats in life in general,” Ravvin told."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google