This is part three of a five part series on academic integrity committees.

High school students often hear from chagrined teachers, “When you go to college, _____________ won’t fly!”. What fits in that blank? All manner of executive functions (e.g., showing up on time, turning in work in a timely manner, attention to detail, self-sufficiency) fit the bill, as do other academic activities, such as “open note tests”, “extra credit”, and plagiarism.

The last one example is potentially the most serious and far-reaching in terms of consequences for your scholars. In this series of posts, I am going to explore the role and purpose of honor committees in higher education from the perspective of a former K12 teacher and university professor who has served on these committees. You can provide these articles to your scholars for important background information about potential consequences of academic misconduct in higher education.

Part 3 – What is academic misconduct?

In our previous posts we explored what Honor Committees are and how they conduct their meetings. The core purpose of an Honor Committee is to explore, adjudicate, and enforce the Honor Code. This means that they consider cases of academic misconduct, and whether student behavior has violated the stated Honor Code for the institution. 

Academic misconduct is behavior that defies academic integrity principles. Academic institutions worldwide abide by the six values of academic integrity espoused by the International Center for Academic Integrity. These values are honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage. Thus, academic misconduct includes any behaviors that are dishonest, untrustworthy, unfair, disrespectful, or irresponsible. You can read more about the ICAI and these values on their website, or in the Turnitin Blog.

So, what are some common examples of behaviors that constitute academic misconduct? Here is a starter list, which is by no means exhaustive:

• Plagiarism, or representing the work of another as your own through intentional or unintentional lack of attribution and documentation

• Cheating, whether by procedural (e.g., collusion) or content (e.g., copying) means

• Contract Cheating, wherein someone contracts another person to complete or submit work on behalf of them

• Text Manipulation, or changing the text, through use of software (e.g., text spinners) or symbol (e.g., white font, alternative alphabets)

What is important about this list is noting that intent does not necessarily need to exist to constitute academic misconduct. One can inadequately attribute sources and commit plagiarism, or have good intentions when working with a peer on an assignment, but commit an act of cheating. Many Honor Committees take intent into account when adjudicating cases. However, intent does not negate that academic misconduct has taken place.

Thank you for joining the discussion! In the next post I will answer the question, “What kinds of decisions do Honor Committees make?”  Share your honor code experiences, wonderments, and questions below!