Faculty and Academic Integrity: The Influence of Current Honor Codes and Past Honor Code Experiences

This survey of faculty at honor code and non-honor code institutions investigated the influence of honor codes on faculty attitudes and behaviors. As hypothesized, we found that honor code faculty have more positive attitudes toward their schools' academic integrity policies and are more willing to allow the system to take care of monitoring and disciplinary activities. Faculty in noncode institutions have less positive attitudes and are more likely to take personal actions designed to both catch and deal with cheaters. We also investigated the potential influence of a student honor code experience on faculty attitudes. We found that, in noncode environments, faculty who had an honor code experience as a student were more likely to believe that students should be held responsible for peer monitoring and to say that they deal personally with cheating. Implications for higher education institutions are discussed.     

Revitalizing an Existing Honor Code Program

This article addresses academic integrity initiatives at a large research university. The article explains the rationale for the creation of the honor system office and its evolution to date. Data collected from academic violation cases during the program’s first two years are included. Pauline Melgoza is Assistant Professor and Physical Sciences Librarian at Texas A&M University. She received her B.S. and her M.S. from Texas A&M University and her MLIS from the University of North Texas. She was a member of the Academic Integrity Team and served two years on the Honor Council of the Aggie Honor System Office. Jane Smith is Assistant Professor and Education Reference Librarian at Texas A&M University. She received her B.S. from the University of Texas at Austin and her MLIS from Texas Woman’s University. Interests include information literacy, bibliographic instruction and faculty outreach.     

ACADEMIC DISHONESTY: A Zero Tolerance Professor and Student Registration Choices

College and university faculty and administrators are responsible for constructing academic honesty policies and communicating them to students. This is often attempted through institutional honesty policies and university-wide honor codes. While these approaches have been widely researched, less attention has been given to the role of individual faculty members. That role is examined in this study by addressing student reactions to professors based on their academic honesty policies. In addition to demographic information, data were gathered about student attitudes and beliefs concerning academic dishonesty and their decision to enroll in or avoid a course being taught by a professor with zero tolerance for academic dishonesty. The findings regarding different instructors’ approaches toward academic dishonesty indicate that an intolerant policy will keep dishonest students away, but at a price—it will also detract many honest students.     

美国大学荣誉制度探析

美国大学的荣誉制度是一项规约大学生学术研究行为的制度,强调以学生自我管理为中心,以信任学生的道德意识和责任感为前提。荣誉制度作为遏制大学生学术不诚信行为的有效措施可以为我国大学校园的诚信建设提供经验,本文从四个方面对荣誉制度进行介绍:荣誉誓词、荣誉委员会、对违规行为的处理程序以及对违规行为的惩罚措施,并进一步探讨了实施荣誉制度的成效。     

新加坡南洋理工大学学术诚信建设研究

学术诚信建设是高校净化学术氛围、培养卓越学术人才的重要举措。享有世界学术声誉的新加坡南洋理工大学非常重视学校的学术诚信建设,将其视为大学安身立命及社会交往的基石。其开展的学术诚信建设包括构建完善的制度和组织以引导与教育全校师生共同维护学术诚信,为师生开设学术诚信教育必修课程,并将学术诚信教育融于师生日常研究和学习中,在学术诚信建设方面积累了丰富经验。     

大学生学术诚信研究

自行编制“大学生学术诚信研究调查问卷”,并随机抽取某大学四年级150名学生进行调查,结果分析表明：排在学术欺骗行为前五位的是“作业直接从网上复制和粘贴”、“考试时夹带纸条”、“抄袭作业”、“同一份作业交给不同的老师”和“考试时传答案给同学”;男女大学生在“作业直接从网上复制和粘贴”、“提前获得考试题目”、“从网上直接下载论文交给老师”、“需独立完成作业时却与同学合作”、“同一份作业交给不同的老师”、“伪造学校档案（简历和证书等）”、“抄袭作业”等7个方面存在显著的性别差异。     

美国传统名校是怎样捍卫学术诚信的——普林斯顿大学本科生学术规范管理制度评述

普林斯顿大学本科生的学术规范管理非常富有特色,这体现在其强调学生自律的管理理念、严格而细化的管理规范、科学的管理程序与对学术失范行为实施公开惩处等方面.普林斯顿的学术规范管理使该校本科生从入校起就接受严格的学术规范教育,逐渐认同并自觉身体力行学术规范与要求,从而使优良的学术传统能在普林斯顿大学代代相传,成为后代学人学术不断产出的重要基础.     

弗吉尼亚大学荣誉制度的规范、组织及实施

弗吉尼亚大学荣誉制度是一种规范学生行为的规章制度,旨在规范学生的学术研究,引导学生做到学术诚信。基于对学生的信任,荣誉制度由学生充分自治。荣誉制度的组织机构:荣誉委员会、执行委员会、辅助官员、委员会职业道德准则和标准委员会。对违反荣誉制度的行为进行惩治,其处理程序:案件报告、案件调查、案件审判和上诉。     

在求真与求用之间——论院校研究人员的“院校忠诚“与“学术忠诚“

院校研究人员的院校忠诚或学术忠诚取向影响着院校研究的健康发展,因此,不论是其学术视域还是研究范式,院校研究人员作为一名学者而非行政人员的角色定位,要求其必须将社会责任和科学理性放在第一位,必须以对学术忠诚的态度开展院校研究。     

荣誉法则：研究生学术失信的善治路径

荣誉法则以信任研究生尊重研究生依靠研究生为基本前提、以治理研究生学术失信为主要内容、以维护学术伦理体系为根本目的,对学术共同体具有普遍的价值约束刚性和行为纠偏张力,具有治理研究生学术失信不可或缺的良法意涵。在价值导向维度上,荣誉法则的内在核心旨趣是致力于培育研究生的诚信美德,构筑大学学术共同体的信任感;在形式上,荣誉法则以明确的法条规则指引着研究生的行为,着力于构筑集教育、预防、监督、惩治于一体的学术诚信体系。实施荣誉法则治理研究生学术失信的善治路径在于：明确荣誉法则规定、夯实认知基础;激发学术道德情感、厚植荣誉情怀;锻铸学术道德意志,筑牢荣誉信念;完善学术治理程序,引领行为选择。     

大学生学术诚信教育的缺失与对策研究

当前我国大学生学术诚信教育存在制度规范不力、教师榜样示范不足、校园文化导向不明等局限。应从建立健全具有明确导向性和严格约束力的规章制度、加强以科学态度和诚信品质为中心的教师职业道德建设等方面综合治理,不断提高大学生学术诚信教育的成效。     

我国研究生学术诚信现状及对策研究

研究生学术诚信问题成为近几年研究生教育中的热点问题。“研究生教育的学风与学术诚信保障体系建设研究”课题组在全国范围内对我国研究生学术诚信现状展开实证调研,对其中的特点进行整体和差异性分析,并提出解决我国研究生学术诚信问题的对策建议。     

美国大学诚信教育制度体系述评

美国大学的诚信教育以"荣誉"(Honor)观念为核心思想,通过荣誉准则的树立培育学生的诚信观念,通过荣誉制度的实施保障学生对诚信行为的遵守,具有鲜明的指导思想和完善的制度体系。本文通过明晰美国大学"荣誉准则"的内涵与荣誉制度的操作程序,综合分析美国大学诚信教育体系的特征,并深入探讨美国大学诚信教育对中国大学诚信教育的借鉴意义。     

Individual and Contextual Influences on Academic Dishonesty: A Multicampus Investigation

Students at nine medium to large state universities were surveyed in this comprehensive investigation of the influences of individual and contextual factors on self-reported academic dishonesty. Results suggested that cheating was influenced by a number of characteristics of individuals including age, gender, and grade-point average, as well as a number of contextual factors including the level of cheating among peers, peer disapproval of cheating, fraternity/sorority membership, and the perceived severity of penalties for cheating. Peer disapproval was the strongest influential factor.     

大学学术治理制度 建设有效性诊断与优化 ——聚焦“双一流”高校学术委员会章程的历时性修订

大学学术治理制度建设有效性内嵌着自主规范和工具理性的双重价值，彼此博弈的价值张力决定了大学学术治理成员结构、权责约束、运行机制以及异议监督的实践图景。通过文本分析发现，“双一流”建设高校学术委员会制度面临委员结构多形式化且运转效率低下，权责结构多数虚化且内容界定模糊，学术治理机制稳定性弱且实践性差，偏于事后监督控制且惩戒程序不清的多重困境，相应学术治理制度的形式、结构、运行与监督有效性不足。为此，应实现学术治理的“良法·善治·扩散”机制耦合，提升学术治理制度供给有效性，强化学术治理制度的实践效能，激活学术治理制度的学习机制。     

Contract cheating in UK higher education: A covert investigation of essay mills

Contract cheating is currently a concern for universities and the higher education (HE) sector. It has been brought into the spotlight in recent years through the growth of online essay mills, where students can easily commission and purchase written assessment responses. This study contributes to the wider literature on academic integrity in HE by examining the phenomenon of contract cheating from a supply‐side perspective, thereby considering the essay mill offering and student interaction with it. The authors covertly engage with five essay mills, before successfully completing an assignment purchase with two of these providers. The pre‐purchase stage of an assignment transaction is first examined, unpacking ten reassurance cues used by essay mill providers in the text of their websites. These reassurance cues help to ensure the attractiveness of the essay mill product to potential student consumers. The analysis then moves to explore the ethical discourses around academic integrity that essay mills provide, revealing inconsistencies in their stance towards the potential for academic misconduct from the use of essay mill services. Finally, the article explores the quality of the essay mill product, through grading and Turnitin^® reports for the two purchased essay mill assignments. Following recent calls for the outlawing of essay mills, this article provides a timely addition to current understanding of this phenomenon, and the associated challenges of contract cheating in HE.     

Reasons Not to Cheat,Academic-Integrity Responsibility,and Frequency of Cheating

The authors investigated the relations among reasons students gave for why they would not cheat in response to a cheating vignette, self-reported cheating, and the extent to which students take responsibility for promoting academic integrity. The authors surveyed 1,086 graduate and undergraduate students. Students who said they would not cheat because of punitive consequences were more likely to report that they cheated in classes and took less responsibility for promoting academic integrity. Students whose reasons related to the value of learning, personal character, and/or it being simply not right reported less cheating and took more responsibility for academic integrity. Academic-integrity responsibility correlated with less cheating. Results are discussed in terms of the effectiveness of punishment and the significance of internalizing integrity standards.     

论学术自我与学术他者的关系

学术自我与学术他者是构成学术研究共同体的不可或缺的、相互依存的组成要素。学术自我是学术研究起点、学术研究的情感基础、学术研究的本体关怀。学术他者是学术交流的起点,是对学术自我的补充丰富,是学术自我评价的参照。学术自我与学术他者互为参照、互相作用,过于强调其中一方都将影响学术健康发展。如何正确处理学术自我和学术他者的关系是一个不可忽视的学术认识问题。坚持独立见解的学术胆识,拥有宽容的学术态度,把握学术研究的差异是处理学术自我与学术他者的基本方略.     

南洋理工大学研究生学业与诚信管理体系

新加坡南洋理工大学将学业与研究诚信视为研究生的重要素质,并在长期摸索中形成系统的学业与研究诚信管理制度与机制。其主要做法有:建立科学的管理体系,为维护学业与研究诚信、治理学业与研究不端提供组织依托;制定严密的制度,设计科学的机制,为学业与研究诚信的日常管理和学业与研究不端的常态化治理提供制度和机制保障;设计与实施多样化、常态化的教育与培训活动,陶熔研究生的学业与研究诚信品质,塑造学业与研究诚信的氛围。