Reports of academic dishonesty increased by 44 percent during the 2015-16 academic year, and 83 percent of students referred were found guilty, according to an Office of Student Conduct report sent to faculty members.
The office received 700 new referrals last year compared to 486 in the 2014-15 academic year. This heightened number does not necessarily indicate more acts of academic dishonesty, said James Bond, the assistant director of the Office of Student Conduct. He added reports may have become more commonplace due to increased awareness.
“When we make folks aware of it, things tend to be reported more,” Bond said. “We were just making folks more aware of it over the past couple of years, and so as we’ve gotten out there more, faculty members have connected with us to bring it to our attention.”
Of the 700 cases, 37 percent of students involved were seniors, while only 5 percent were freshmen, suggesting academic dishonesty is taking place in higher-level classes, Bond said.
Students most commonly referred for academic dishonesty majored in computer science and mechanical engineering, in addition to those enrolled in letters and sciences.
After being referred to the Office of Student Conduct, students typically take one of three courses of action: They may choose an informal resolution in which they would accept responsibility for the charge, attend a disciplinary conference where they can challenge the referral or attend an honor review where they can challenge charges before an honor board.
Of the 64 Honor Council reviews conducted last year, 12 originated in computer science classes, seven in engineering classes and six in chemistry classes.
“In terms of actual numbers, we are by far the largest major on campus, so we’d expect more students, more possibilities for academic dishonesty issues,” said Alan Sussman, a professor and associate chairman of the computer science department.
Computer science professors and instructors have also started using technology to detect similarities in student projects and programs, enabling the department to identify more instances of academic dishonesty, Sussman said.
“If you look at the syllabus for all of our classes, especially the introductory classes that have a large enrollment, the instructors are very explicit about what is considered academic dishonesty and what is OK and that we do use automated tools and that we are pretty diligent and we take it seriously,” he said.
The chemistry department is also “very serious about monitoring” academic dishonesty, said Janice Reutt-Robey, a professor and chairwoman of the chemistry and biochemistry department.
“It’s a very low playing field, so obviously we don’t want anyone to have an unfair advantage in the class,” she said.
The majority of academic dishonesty cases involved cheating or plagiarism, according to the report. Fifty percent of all referrals were for cheating and 32 percent were for plagiarism.
While the Office of Student Conduct compiles data on academic integrity each year, this was the first year “in a while” the report was shared with faculty, Bond said.
“This year because our numbers grew significantly in terms of the number of referrals that we got, we wanted to make sure that everyone was aware of that,” he said. “I thought it was concerning in that sense.”
This semester also marks the 15th anniversary of the creation of the honor pledge, which is a statement many professors require students to write on exams or assignments to ensure awareness of academic responsibilities.
“We as an office wanted to remind students that this is part of our tradition and this honor pledge was started by students back in 2001,” Bond said. “I wanted to remind students and kind of celebrate the idea that students value the idea of academic integrity.”
