Creating a Campus Culture of Integrity: Comparing the Perspectives of Full- and Part-time Faculty
| Autor: | Caroline Apgar, Renée Gravois Lee, Suzanne S. Hudd, Eric F. Bronson |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2009 |
| Předmět: |
business.industry
Cheating media_common.quotation_subject 05 social sciences 050301 education Alienation Face (sociological concept) Public relations Education Academic integrity Wright Stern 0502 economics and business Pedagogy Institution Survey data collection 050207 economics Psychology business 0503 education media_common |
| Zdroj: | The Journal of Higher Education. 80:146-177 |
| ISSN: | 1538-4640 |
| DOI: | 10.1353/jhe.0.0039 |
| Popis: | Discussions of academic integrity are becoming increasingly important on college campuses across the country (Bush-weller, 1999; Center for Academic Integrity, 2005; Gomez, 2001; McCaffrey, 2001; Vincent, 1999). Recent survey data gathered from 50,000 undergraduates on over 60 college campuses indicate that nearly 70% of students participate in some form of cheating during the course of completing their education (Center for Academic Integrity, 2005). Findings such as these have led many faculty to adjust their classroom practices in order to reduce the occurrence of integrity violations. In addition, many universities have begun to establish more global, campus-wide honor policies that serve both to clarify academic policies and to demonstrate that integrity is a priority within the community (Hendershott, Drinan, & Cross, 2000; McCabe, Trevino, & Butterfield, 2001). In order to effectively create a culture of integrity on campus, "every layer of an institution, including students, faculty, administrators and governing boards" (Hendershott et al., 2000: 587) must be engaged. However, campus-wide discussions on academic integrity can be hampered by the fact that faculty and students tend to define cheating in unique ways (Kidwell, Wozniak, & Laurel, 2003; Nuss, 1984; Pincus & Schmelkin, 2003; Stern & Havlicek, 1986). Even when they concur on what cheating means, faculty and students often assign different levels of severity to specific violations (Pincus & Schmelkin, 2003). These disparities can lead to the creation of a "we versus they mentality" (Kidwell et al., 2003: 213) and so, serve as a major impediment to the creation of a commonly accepted set of standards of integrity that are consistently applied to all academic work within the campus community. Research has shown that demographic factors such as gender, major, Greek membership and peer relationships can affect the ways in which students define and experience integrity violations (Bernardi, Metzger, Bruno, & Hoogkamp, 2004; Carpenter, Harding, Finelli, Montgomery, & Passow, 2006; Chapman, Davis, Toy, & Wright, 2004; Dawkins, 2004; McCabe et al., 2001; Swaner, 2005;). However, less attention has been given to whether demographic factors produce attitudinal differences toward cheating within the faculty ranks. Research on faculty perceptions of integrity often does not reflect the depth, complexity and variety of attitudes with which faculty approach this issue, and so, campus-based integrity policies may fail to acknowledge these differences as well (Pincus & Schmelkin, 2003). In particular, the unique perspective of part-time faculty members in helping to create a culture of integrity warrants our concern. The status of part-time faculty is distinct in several ways (Liu & Zhang, 2007). Many, although not all part-time faculty, are employed on a contractual basis, and so they are not guaranteed a long-term relationship with the institution in which they teach. Part-time faculty also tend to work under less favorable conditions: they are assigned to "leftover" courses that full-time professors do not want to teach; their courses can frequently be cancelled due to low enrollment; and they are generally not encouraged to engage in university affairs outside the classroom (Liu & Zhang, 2007). Thus, it seems the working conditions of part-time faculty members are characterized by two constraints: time and place. Many part-time instructors face rigorous commutes, work on more than one campus and lack access to an office, or even a mailbox (McLaughlin, 2005). Such working conditions present challenges for part-time faculty seeking to align their practices with research findings related to academic integrity that encourage dialogue with students, checking sources for plagiarism, and using multiple exam formats to deter students from cheating (Kerkvliet & Sigmund, 1999). Because part-time instructors can often feel less integrated within the campus culture (McLauglin, 2005), they may also be hesitant to confront a student with an integrity violation that requires them both to understand and then enforce campus policies by engaging in judicial procedures that can be time-consuming and complex. … |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|