Gary Pavela isn’t satisfied with the current Academic Integrity Policy. He says it lacks a very important asset: students.

The current policy does not include a student-run board to hear academic integrity cases, said Pavela, director of Syracuse University’s Academic Integrity Office. It has been his goal to change that since he was hired two years ago. On Friday, members of student-run honor councils at other schools came to SU to attend a luncheon and panel discussion to examine the role and responsibility college students have in protecting academic integrity.

Faculty began discussing proposed changes to the Academic Integrity Policy on Wednesday. The proposals would differentiate between academic dishonesty and negligence, place tighter sanctions on dishonesty, and revise academic dishonesty appeal procedures, according to an April 14 article published in The Daily Orange.

Research has shown institutions with effectively managed honor programs and significant student leadership have fewer cases of academic dishonesty, Pavela said. The luncheon, held in the Sheraton University Hotel and Conference Center, compared the honor systems of four different colleges: SU, Vanderbilt University, Princeton University and the University of Maryland.

Panelists were allotted 15 minutes each to explain how their own systems function, as well as give advice to faculty members on how they can best promote academic integrity and reduce dishonesty. About 35 people attended the luncheon.

‘Once faculty know that academic integrity is important to students, it will become even more important to faculty,’ Pavela said.

A summary of the discussion and ‘best practice’ suggestions presented by panel members will be published at the SU Academic Integrity Office website, according to the luncheon invitation. As of Sunday night, the website had not yet been updated.

The academic integrity forum held Wednesday discussed immediate issues with the policy that needed to be addressed, while Friday’s luncheon served as an example of where SU is headed in the next few years, Pavela said.

With the exception of the one SU student, all of the panelists were chairs for their university’s student-run honor committee or council, meaning that it is the students who investigate, hold hearings and vote on academic integrity cases.

Although each of the university systems run a little differently, the students had similar tips for the faculty at SU.

The visiting students stressed the importance of setting clear expectations. Having the Academic Integrity Policy written only in the syllabus isn’t enough, they said. Panelists suggested putting the policy on all exams, quizzes and homework assignments because it would serve as a constant reminder not to deviate from it.

Austin Elder, honor council chair at Vanderbilt, was the first to present.

‘Yes, it’s our responsibility as the student to do our own work, be honest and follow the guidelines. But professors should take responsibility, too, in making sure the students are equipped with the tools to do their own work. It’s a two-way street,’ Elder said.

Elder said even simple tricks, such as making different versions of exams, using plagiarism detection software and rewarding students for correct citations, significantly help to deter academic dishonesty.

Shaun Gates, honor council chair at the University of Maryland, said Maryland operates under a system that Pavela, Academic Integrity Office director at SU, co-authored in 1995, before he began working at SU.

The student system is so effective because ‘students understand students,’ he said. He explained because council members take classes with other students, they are under the perception that they are more likely to get caught if they cheat.

Pauline Nguyen, honor committee vice chair at Princeton, said she believes having an entirely student-run system forces students to take greater responsibility for their work. Nguyen said she finds the structure fitting because peers judge one another’s work throughout their academic careers, and students are most affected by peers’ actions.

While each of these panelists described the difficult situations they are often put in, they said their experiences have been formative and an area in which they are able to improve the university.

This is why Pavela is so adamant about moving in this direction.

‘The key is that students at SU are not being given the leadership opportunity to manage and influence their own culture on the issue of academic integrity,’ Pavela said. ‘It’s a shame.’

Eric Montgomery, a senior linguistics studies major at SU, was the final panelist to speak. He was the first student in SU history to chair a hearing panel on academic integrity because before last year, the policy prohibited a student from doing so.

Montgomery, a hearing committee member, said he sees a need for change in the Academic Integrity Policy.

‘I think the awareness of student involvement in academic integrity is crucial to bringing that culture that other schools have to (SU),’ Montgomery said.

Pavela said he believes this discussion was a step in the right direction to getting students more involved.

‘My hope is that a seed has been planted,’ he said. ‘And what that seed will grow into is some version of greater student authority over academic integrity issues at SU.’

egsawyer@syr.edu

Published on April 17, 2011 at 12:00 pm

Contact Liz: egsawyer@syr.edu | @3sawyer