The Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Honor Code Committee (HCC) was created in late spring 2000 with the charge of determining the feasibility and advisability of introducing an academic honor code system at Millersville University (MU). An initial report of the findings was presented to faculty senate in spring 2002, and included a recommendation for the development of an MU honor code and its associated policy elements. The present document is a modification of that original report and addresses expressed senate concern on issues of overlap with the Student Code of Conduct, potential conflicts with APSCUF recommendations on faculty freedom in the classroom, and the severity of sanctions for violations of the honor system.

Since its initiation, the HCC has encouraged the campus to consider how the university community might best address academic integrity. Toward this end, the HCC has conducted a faculty forum on options toward academic integrity, surveyed both students and faculty, and organized a convocation centered around issues of academic integrity. Using the feedback from these initiatives, and the existent literature and resources on college academic integrity, the HCC finds:

1. The introduction of a new academic honor system to an already-existing institution of higher education is feasible, and would be feasible at Millersville University. Elements of honor systems have been successfully introduced to a number of schools in recent years, including University of Maryland at College Park, University of Tennessee, University of Georgia, University of Minnesota, and Kansas State University.1 Kansas State, like many other colleges, supports their newly instituted honor code system with a well-developed web site which allows students and faculty to quickly and easily access all information related to the program online. The success of this program may be partially assessed by viewing the extensive web site (http://www.ksu.edu/honor/).

   We believe an honor system would work for MU. However, institution of such a program should not be taken lightly and needs substantial support and commitment from the faculty, administration, and students. The HCC believes, given adequate campus commitment, resources, and training, the MU community could effectively develop and institute an honor system.

2. B. The implementation of an academic honor code system at MU is advisable. Specifically, the HCC recommends development of an honor code system which has the following key elements:
   1. required signing of the MU Honor Pledge upon admission to the university and/or at new student orientation,
   2. signing of an academic honesty statement on submitted course work at the option of the course instructor,
   3. a judiciary composed of both students and faculty for adjudication of alleged student dishonesty, and
   4. the creation of an Academic Honor Council, consisting of both students and faculty, which would among other things promote a culture of academic integrity on campus through education, motivational programs, and a system of sanctions for violations of academic honesty.
   HCC supports an academic honor system either with or without required student reporting of observed violations of the honor code. The committee believes that a system which is representative of the majority of opinions of faculty members on required student reporting will best serve the interests of the university. The committee therefore leaves it to the university community to determine whether student reporting should be optional or required.

   Full details of the proposed program are outlined in the attached Proposed Millersville University Academic Honor System Constitution and By-Laws. These recommended elements of the proposed academic honor system are subject to faculty discussion and approval. It is essential that MU develop the system which best reflects the ideals of the faculty and students. Revision of these recommendations may be in order to best meet the needs of the university community.

   The HCC believes that the benefits of an honor code system would be substantial and sustained for the following reasons:

   1. Significantly fewer cases of cheating are believed to occur on campuses with honor codes2,3, probably because of the culture of mutual trust and respect that develops between faculty and students4,5, and the clarification of expectations and definitions of cheating behaviors. It therefore becomes less easy for the student to rationalize cheating behaviors3.
   2. Greater consistency in addressing cases of academic dishonesty is likely to occur.
   3. Students commonly take considerable pride in their code schools, and find a sense of prestige in having attended such an institution.
   4. Having served on the student judiciary often advances career opportunities for students.
   5. Honor code schools are highly respected by the local community, academia, and potential employers. Such prestige may be attractive to high-achieving prospective students.
   6. Moral norms are more likely to operate within an honor code structure3. Furthermore, learned values may be carried away with students when they leave the university.
   7. The greater discussion and awareness of the value of academic integrity promoted by the honor system supports key elements of General Education Objective 16: Personal, Ethical, and Civic Values and Decision-making.
   8. The academic honor code system is consistent with that part of the university mission statement designed to "foster the examination, development and understanding of personal values and appreciation of values of others." The honor code system embodies MU community values and provides a means to foster them in our students.

   Key to the success of any campus integrity program is the promotion of a culture of academic integrity which clearly and frequently communicates the value of and requirements for achieving academic honesty. This culture is promoted by 1) establishing clear guidelines toward academic integrity with frequent encouragement to know the rules, 2) providing an atmosphere which inspires students to value and practice academic honesty, 3) initiating open university dialog on honesty issues, 4) encouraging high student involvement in the integrity program, and 5) carefully monitoring dishonesty and taking offenses very seriously.6 Recognizing this need, the HCC recommends establishment of an MU Honor Council. This committee would function to oversee the honor system, promote education on academic integrity, and develop and maintain the culture of academic integrity that is so integral to the success of integrity programs.

   This document has outlined the ingredients the HCC believes will lead to a successful academic integrity program at MU. These include the use of honor pledges, clear guidelines on how to achieve academic honesty, an active student role in the educational function of the Honor Council, and strong sanctions for violations of the honor code. Given the needed resources and campus commitment, the HCC is confident the proposed MU honor system can truly enhance the educational experience of our students.

   REFERENCES*

   1D. McCabe and G. Pavela. 2000. Some Good News about Academic Integrity. Change. September/October: 32-38.

   2Bowers, W.J. 1964. Student dishonesty and its control in college. New York Bureau of Applied Social Research, Columbia University.

   3McCabe, D.L., and Trevino, L.K. 1993. Academic dishonesty: Honor codes and other contextual influences. Journal of Higher Education. 64: 522-538.

   4McCabe, D.L. and Drinan, P.F. 1999. Toward a culture of academic integrity. The Chronicle of Higher Education. 46(8,Oct. 15):B7.

   5Lowry, J.D. 1996. Communities of trust: A recent graduate's experience with honor codes. Journal of College Science Teaching 26(1): 6.

   6McCabe, D.L., Trevino, L.K., and Butterfield K.D. 1999. Academic integrity in honor code and non-honor code environments. The Journal of Higher Education. 70(2): 211-234.

   *A list of other works consulted is available upon request.

   Past and Present Honor Code Committee Members

   Thomas ‘Chugger’ Baker, Student
   Eric Blazer, Business
   Jane Bray, School of Education
   Robert Buchanan, Mathematics
   Jill Craven, English
   Brandon Danz, Student
   Barry David, Industry & Technology
   Jessica George, Library
   Carol Heintzelman, Social Work
   Sandra Hoffman, Elem. & Early Childhood Education
   John McLarnon, History
   Jennifer Miller, Philosophy
   Andre Moine, Foreign Language
   James Mone, Biology
   Elba Rohena, Special Education
   Jane Rudden, Elem. & Early Childhood Education
   Carol Phillips, Academic Affairs
   Kathleen Schreiber, Geography, Chair
   

   * The MU Honor Code Committee would like to acknowledge and thank both Kansas State University and the New Jersey Institute of Technology for the permitted use of many ideas from their honor code constitutions in the development of this document.

   ---

   Return to Faculty Senate Home Page
   Return to MU Home Page