By Benjamin Engle
During the weekend of October 16, members of Union College's Academic Affairs Committee (AAC) sub-council on Academic Integrity traveled to Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri to attend and present at the Conference for Academic Integrity.
Associate Dean of Students and Director of Minerva Programs Tom McEvoy, Ian Clemente '10, and Benjamin Engle '12 presented Union's draft of its new honor code and honor court.
Stemming from a cheating scandal in a Mechanical Engineering class in 2006, the Academic Affairs Committee established the sub-council on Academic Integrity with the goal of creating a modified academic honor code for Union.
At the conference, hosted by Clemson University's Rutland Institute for Ethics, Union representatives led a panel discussion entitled "Reintroducing an Honor Code at a Liberal Arts College." During the discussion, McEvoy, Clemente, and Engle discussed Union's history and the actions that the College has taken to bring a modified honor code back to Union's classrooms.
Union originally had an honor code and pledge in 1909, also resulting from a cheating scandal.
Unlike the code of 1909, the sub-council is currently building a modified honor code that does not have a single penalty for academic misconduct, does not mandate students to report observed observations, and gives professors the option whether or not to have un-proctored examinations.
McEvoy, Clemente, and Engle presented the sub-council's work to approximately 15 students and faculty from around the United States.
The group explained to the audience Union's history with honor codes and how it is imperative that there be mutual support between students and faculty in order for the College to go ahead with an honor pledge, code, and court.
Support for such a code has not been mutual since 1924 when faculty lost confidence in students' willingness to report cheating on unproctored exams to the honor court. Because of this disagreement, students and faculty voted to end Union's honor code in 1925.
Union's panel made it clear to those in attendance that having an honor code on campus will reduce cheating and will emphasize academic integrity throughout.
In creating the code, Union's sub-council is hoping to reverse the ethos of the campus community by defining the relationship between a student or a faculty member and the rest of the academic community as well as making academic misconduct an educational experience rather having rules for rules' sake.
The panel believes that the conference was an effective barometer of the sub-council's work thus far.
"The Conference was important to attend because it confirmed that the work we are doing is positive," Clemente said. "The weekend validated that we are on the right track as we build an honor code and court."
With the information from the Conference, the sub-council is expanding student input by adding new members to represent the various groups on campus, including Student Forum, the Greek system, the Minervas, and multiple academic departments.
Additionally student input is important as the committee moves further along in building the honor court since they will be determining the composition of the court, how hearings are held, as well as the appeals process, among other topics.
The sub-council is hoping to present its pledge and statement on academic integrity and honor court process to the Academic Affairs Council before the end of the fall term in November to be in place for the class of 2014.
Originally published in Union's Concordy on 10/22/09
Showing posts with label Honor Code. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Honor Code. Show all posts
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Union to create and institute new academic honor code
By Benjamin Engle
The Academic Affairs Committee has recently created a new sub-council on academic honor codes charged with the goal of creating a modified academic honor code for Union College that will include an honor pledge and an honor court. This will shift the roles of both students and administrators during the judicial process.
The committee hopes to adopt an honor code and honor court sometime next year in time for the Class of 2014.
The Academic Affairs Committee (AAC) sub-council on Academic Honor Code, headed by Philosophy Professor Baker and chair of the Rapaport Ethics Across the Curriculum Initiative, made up of students, faculty, and administrators, has been established based on the AAC Sub-council on Academic Integrity's recommendations.
The AAC established the Sub-council on Academic Integrity in Fall 2006 after a case of cheating on an engineering lab in a course taught by Professor Brad Bruno, Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering. The two students, who were caught inappropriately collaborating on a lab report, were required to research issues regarding academic integrity on college campuses. The students found that modified honor codes were increasingly being utilized successfully on other college campuses.
Union first instituted an honor code and pledge in 1909 through a student vote in reaction to a cheating scandal. The code at that time included an all-student Honor Court, which required students to report any case of misconduct. After working successfully for over a decade, in 1925 students and faculty voted to end its honor code. Previous unsuccessful attempts at returning an honor code to Union failed in 1965 and as recently as 1985.
As part of the committee's activities, the sub-council on Academic Integrity looked at 31 schools that Union compares itself to, 16 of which have honor codes. It formally interviewed the honor councils at Williams College and Skidmore College, as well as contacting other schools with honor codes.
In the spring of 2007, the sub-council on Academic Integrity emailed Union students and faculty a survey regarding cheating and the interest in creating an honor code at Union.
"This process consults students with surveys on how they want to be treated as well as faculty with proposals based on the data," Baker said.
The Academic sub-council presented the AAC with a report and recommendation in May 2008, suggesting that Union establish a modified academic honor code as well as the sub-council on Academic Honor Code.
The Honor Code sub-council is currently developing the new code and pledge as well as designing the process and procedures for an honor court. Currently, cases dealing with Academic Integrity go through an administrative judicial process.
"This is a unique opportunity for students at Union to offer input on how they want to be treated," Baker said. "Do they want to be judged by their peers or by faculty?"
Many schools that Union often compares itself to, including Williams and Skidmore, have honor codes that include honor pledges and courts. At Williams and Skidmore, the Honor Court is presided over entirely by students and has issues penalties that vary from case to case. Skidmore's Honor Court also deals with social misconduct, including alcohol and vandalism cases.
Based on the surveys completed by students and faculty, Union is not currently developing an Honor Court to deal with social misconduct because while the two parties agree on what academic misconduct is, they do not agree on what social misconduct is.
The AAC hopes that the modified honor code and court will create stronger trust relations between students and faculty. It will give both parties more options when dealing with academic misconduct. For example, students won't be forced to report incidents. Professors will have the option of using turnitin.com and the opportunity to proctor or not proctor exams.
"We have to teach students how to be morally responsible, but to do that, we must give them moral responsibility," Baker said. "Students will learn that they are responsible for themselves."
While Union has a low level of academic misconduct, Baker believes that the discussion of a modified honor code and court is important. "The introduction of a modified honor code should further decrease the number of cases. It will give accountability not to faculty, but to students."
Baker believes that based on the results of student surveys, current Union students believe a modified honor code is positive for the college, "It is clearly time for a change. It is an embarrassment, unlike the best schools in the country, that Union doesn't trust students to survey misconduct of fellow students."
The entire report and recommendations of the AAC Sub-council on Academic Integrity can viewed on-line by searching "AAC" on the Union website.
Originally published in Union's Concordy on 4/9/09
The Academic Affairs Committee has recently created a new sub-council on academic honor codes charged with the goal of creating a modified academic honor code for Union College that will include an honor pledge and an honor court. This will shift the roles of both students and administrators during the judicial process.
The committee hopes to adopt an honor code and honor court sometime next year in time for the Class of 2014.
The Academic Affairs Committee (AAC) sub-council on Academic Honor Code, headed by Philosophy Professor Baker and chair of the Rapaport Ethics Across the Curriculum Initiative, made up of students, faculty, and administrators, has been established based on the AAC Sub-council on Academic Integrity's recommendations.
The AAC established the Sub-council on Academic Integrity in Fall 2006 after a case of cheating on an engineering lab in a course taught by Professor Brad Bruno, Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering. The two students, who were caught inappropriately collaborating on a lab report, were required to research issues regarding academic integrity on college campuses. The students found that modified honor codes were increasingly being utilized successfully on other college campuses.
Union first instituted an honor code and pledge in 1909 through a student vote in reaction to a cheating scandal. The code at that time included an all-student Honor Court, which required students to report any case of misconduct. After working successfully for over a decade, in 1925 students and faculty voted to end its honor code. Previous unsuccessful attempts at returning an honor code to Union failed in 1965 and as recently as 1985.
As part of the committee's activities, the sub-council on Academic Integrity looked at 31 schools that Union compares itself to, 16 of which have honor codes. It formally interviewed the honor councils at Williams College and Skidmore College, as well as contacting other schools with honor codes.
In the spring of 2007, the sub-council on Academic Integrity emailed Union students and faculty a survey regarding cheating and the interest in creating an honor code at Union.
"This process consults students with surveys on how they want to be treated as well as faculty with proposals based on the data," Baker said.
The Academic sub-council presented the AAC with a report and recommendation in May 2008, suggesting that Union establish a modified academic honor code as well as the sub-council on Academic Honor Code.
The Honor Code sub-council is currently developing the new code and pledge as well as designing the process and procedures for an honor court. Currently, cases dealing with Academic Integrity go through an administrative judicial process.
"This is a unique opportunity for students at Union to offer input on how they want to be treated," Baker said. "Do they want to be judged by their peers or by faculty?"
Many schools that Union often compares itself to, including Williams and Skidmore, have honor codes that include honor pledges and courts. At Williams and Skidmore, the Honor Court is presided over entirely by students and has issues penalties that vary from case to case. Skidmore's Honor Court also deals with social misconduct, including alcohol and vandalism cases.
Based on the surveys completed by students and faculty, Union is not currently developing an Honor Court to deal with social misconduct because while the two parties agree on what academic misconduct is, they do not agree on what social misconduct is.
The AAC hopes that the modified honor code and court will create stronger trust relations between students and faculty. It will give both parties more options when dealing with academic misconduct. For example, students won't be forced to report incidents. Professors will have the option of using turnitin.com and the opportunity to proctor or not proctor exams.
"We have to teach students how to be morally responsible, but to do that, we must give them moral responsibility," Baker said. "Students will learn that they are responsible for themselves."
While Union has a low level of academic misconduct, Baker believes that the discussion of a modified honor code and court is important. "The introduction of a modified honor code should further decrease the number of cases. It will give accountability not to faculty, but to students."
Baker believes that based on the results of student surveys, current Union students believe a modified honor code is positive for the college, "It is clearly time for a change. It is an embarrassment, unlike the best schools in the country, that Union doesn't trust students to survey misconduct of fellow students."
The entire report and recommendations of the AAC Sub-council on Academic Integrity can viewed on-line by searching "AAC" on the Union website.
Originally published in Union's Concordy on 4/9/09
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
