Graduate Student Articles

Journal of College & Character VOLUME IX, NO. 5, July 2008

Moral and Ethical Issues Related to Academic Dishonesty on College Campuses

1 Heather E. Kaufman, University of Florida ______Abstract

In today’s goal driven society, cheating has become more prevalent among college students. These students first look for ways to cheat in secondary school and continue unethical practices in college. Some universities have implemented an honor code to hold students responsible for academic honesty. Researchers have investigated factors associated with college students and cheating that include personal and situational characteristics of this group of individuals, the influence of technological advances, and even influences from realms outside of academia. Many professionals in higher education argue that teaching students to behave in ethical ways and to develop core values that will influence lifelong decisions must become priorities. ______

heating on college campuses has been increasing in the last decade. It is a problem C because of its frequency and because students are sacrificing their education for what they think are indicators of success. “Success” is often measured by whether a student has a passing grade on a written assignment, exam, or quiz, or passes a course that leads to graduation rather than the ability to complete an assignment, exam, or a course with integrity. Throughout the literature, academic dishonesty has been defined in many different ways. An all inclusive definition would be the practice of students giving or receiving unauthorized assistance in academic assignments, or receiving credit for work which is not their own. More simply, academic dishonesty consists of acts of cheating and plagiarism. In general, cheating is described as any of a variety of unethical behaviors. Most students begin their cheating practices even before stepping foot on a college campus. McCurtry (2001) looked at a survey conducted in 1998 and found that 80 percent of the 3,123 students in Who’s Who Among American High School Students admitted to cheating on an exam. Half of these students did not believe that cheating was wrong, and 95 percent of these students who cheated had never been caught (Olt, 2002). Because of these cheating rates, one researcher believes that students are going to college with less knowledge and fewer skills (Gismondi, 2006). High school students either do not have the demands that students in previous years had, or students are cheating their

1 Heather Kaufman is an academic coordinator for student-athletes at Rice University. She received her masters degree in Sport Management at the University of Florida at Gainesville, where she conducted the research for this article. She received her bachelors degree in Exercise Science at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C., where she was a four-year letter winner for the Colonials gymnastics team. At GW, Heather also served on the Student-Athlete Advisory Council and the Academic Integrity Committee.

2 Journal of College and Character VOLUME IX, NO.5, July 2008

way through high school and not learning basic knowledge in preparation for college courses. Cheating in the classroom has been reported on large and small, public and private college campuses, and among schools with and without university honor codes. A study conducted in the early 90s by Davis, Grover, Becker, and McGregor indicated that between 40 and 60 percent of the students in the study reported that they had cheated on at least one exam during their college experience. In 1992, one researcher surveyed 15,000 students studying engineering, business, science, and humanities in 31 of the top universities and found that 87 percent of the business students had cheated in the classroom (Caruana, Ramaseshan, & Ewing, 2000). Why do students feel the need to cheat? Americans live on the theory that time is money, and money is power. In today’s goal driven society, students are looking to accomplish things faster and in any possible way to gain results. It is becoming more competitive to be admitted into top colleges. The pressure and stress necessary to compete and succeed in a college environment are what lead the majority of dishonest students to resort to cheating. Some students feel the need to cheat due to the pressure from parents or peers to be successful, while others feel the need because they have failed to study for an exam, because the class or professor is difficult, or because they fear they will fail the assignment, exam, or class. Further, similar to college admission, students feel the need to achieve because graduate programs and professional schools require good grades for admission. Researchers have investigated situational characteristics that have caused students to cheat. Situational factors include the size of the institution, size of the classroom, seat location in the class, difficulty of the assignment, exam or class, and the professor’s teaching method (Haines & Diekhoff, 1986). One problem commonly discussed in the literature is that students lack the fear of being caught and punished (Arnold, Martin, Jinks, & Bigby, 2007). Potential cheaters evaluate the risks and rewards of cheating in specific situations before deciding whether to participate in this unethical act. If the situation is ideal for cheating, according to the cheater, he or she would be more inclined to participate in this deviant behavior. Students evaluate the possible penalties they would face if they were caught cheating. Then, based on the chances of being punished and the level of penalty, students decide whether or not the benefits of cheating are more than the risk of being caught or accepting a punishment (Kibler, 1993). Personal influences have also been investigated. Personal factors include gender, places males are more likely to cheat, grade point average, work ethic, Type A personality behavior, major in school, membership in a fraternal organization, and self- esteem (McCabe, 1992). Students feel pressure to make good grades, be involved in many aspects of college life, fulfill leadership roles, and pursue jobs, internships, and other career related preparation. Barnett and Dalton examined the various reasons that caused students to cheat. They identified six factors that have a significant influence on their unethical behavior: (a) stress and the pressure to obtain good grades; (b) the environment; (c) intelligence levels; (d) personality; (e) lack of an understood definition of cheating; and (f) moral judgment and will (Barnett & Dalton, 1981). Understanding students’ reasoning behind cheating will help researchers try to develop solutions to the problem.

Academic Dishonesty 3

Colleges and universities that implement an honor code attempt to reduce academic dishonesty on campus by holding the student responsible for his or her actions if he or she does not follow the honor code. The hope is that by having an honor code, students will either self-report a personal situation, or be more inclined to report a classmate for cheating or behaving in a dishonest way. Earlier research showed that students attending institutions with honor codes have lower self-reported cheating cases (Davis & Ludvigson, 1995) and rates (McCabe, Frevino, and Butterfield, 1999). However, more recently Arnold (et. al, 2007) report that “no significance was found in the difference in the level of academic dishonesty between institutions with or without honor code systems.” The University of Florida has a university-wide honor code that was voted on and passed by the student body in 1995. The code provides academic honesty guidelines and defines different types of cheating. Penalties for different types of cheating are described. The Honor Code states, “We, the members of the University of Florida community, pledge to hold ourselves and our peers to the highest standards of honesty and integrity.” It is either written on assignments and exams or assumed that all students follow the notion, “On my honor, I have neither given nor received unauthorized aid in doing this assignment” (University of Florida Student Handbook). At Columbia University, the Business School and School of Public Health have their own honor codes. The Business School prides itself in encouraging students to live by “principles of truth, integrity and respect” instead of simply following the rules. The thought behind this is to instill these honest and ethical values in each individual for life after graduation (“Business School Honor Code,” Columbia University). The School of Public Health promotes responsibility and integrity in its students. This code defines types of cheating and describes the procedures for dealing with alleged infractions (“Mailman School of Public Health,” Columbia University). Though cheating occurs in all settings, it is important for institutions to create policies and set a standard for academic honesty. A university wide honor code takes the pressure off of some professors. An honor code allows the university to take care of each case in the same way instead of professors having individual policies (Arnold, et al., 2007). However, very few professors discuss the honor code with their students. One study showed that “only 15 percent of the syllabi collected had academic policies in them” (Olt, 2002). In some cases, faculty members fail to proctor adequately in-class exams by having students sit too close together, by not giving different forms of an exam, or by having too many students to monitor at one time. Though the honor code is monitored by the university, professors must promote the policies, hold students accountable for honest actions, and report any violations. Larger institutions typically have a higher rate of reported cheating cases than smaller schools. Larger institutions with larger class sizes have an impersonal setting which makes the student feel like a number rather than a person (Arnold et al., 2007). In this case, students do not have a personal relationship with the professor and feel a sense of anonymity in the class. In order to reduce cheating, the policies and consequences written in the honor code must be in line with the campus culture related to academic integrity and size of the school (Arnold et al., 2007). Academic dishonesty policies can enhance the learning environment only if the honor code is written in a way in which

4 Journal of College and Character VOLUME IX, NO.5, July 2008

professors and students at each school individually will act upon and report with integrity. Tracking academic dishonesty is becoming more difficult due to the technological advances today to which students have become accustomed. First of all, today’s technologically savvy students are being taught by instructors who are less aware of today’s newer technologies. Because distance learning courses have become more popular, instructors have to learn different teaching styles and be involved in courses in different ways than the norm. Students can complete a course without even stepping foot in a classroom or actually speaking to a professor. Students create their own learning environment instead of being monitored by an instructor in a classroom setting. Teachers cannot depend on a hard copy of an exam in which a student may have shown some work in choosing a multiple choice answer. On written assignments, with the click of a button, students can email notes to each other (Gismondi, 2006). Technology has resulted in many improvements in the classroom; however, it has created a medium for students to complete assignments in a dishonest and unethical manner. Researcher Melissa Olt discusses ways to minimize academic dishonesty in online learning. First, with the help of a technology specialist, a log-in system can be created. This is an attempt to allow only authorized students into the computerized system. During online lectures or slideshows, instructors should implement several short check points or assignments throughout the lecture so students have to keep up with readings and do the brief assignment at that moment instead of collaborating with other students on an assignment at the end of the entire lesson. Next, requiring all students to participate in discussion boards also ensures that all students participate. For researched based papers, there are websites like “turnitin.com” which scans written work to search for plagiarism. Finally, instructors should alter the course requirements and types of assignments so students are not able to borrow work from a student who took the same course taught by the same professor the previous semester (Olt, 2002). Another aspect of academic dishonesty comes from outside the realm of academia. The gaming industry has become more popular today through video games and websites among today’s students. The Entertainment Software Association found that 75 percent of American heads of households play video games, and on average this population has been playing video games for 12 years (Waltz, Griego, & Babbes, 2007). What does the gaming industry have to do with academic dishonesty? First, people have the same expectation of success and will do anything to win. Cheat codes or cheating strategies are published on websites like www.cheatcc.com to help gamers navigate through levels of their favorite games (Waltz et al., 2007). Gamers who use these sites are encouraged to post new cheating strategies they discover to help other gaming fanatics. Students look for the same types of websites when completing school assignments. In a highly competitive, win-at-all-cost society, some researchers have found that people believe “cheating is a type of game,” “winning is important,” “cheating [is] an addiction,” and “cheating [is the] easy way out” (Waltz et al., 2007). Therefore, school becomes a game, and cheating is viewed as a means to achieve success. The difference is a game can be turned off and tried again the following day, while school is a continuous learning process.

Academic Dishonesty 5

If the majority of students in college cheat or have cheated, how do non-cheating students perceive students who cheat? A couple of studies that have addressed students’ emotions related to cheating—specifically the feeling of guilt and the relationship between confession and forgiveness—suggest that students who confess receive more forgiveness from their peers. In general, most research has shown that “individuals who confess, apologize, and/or express remorse to a wrongdoing are perceived more positively than their non-confessing, non apologizing, and/or non-remorseful counterparts” (Kerby & Johnson, 2005). Students are likely to give more positive emotion and feel less anger toward students who confess through sympathy. Students typically show a negative emotion by feeling angry and annoyed with students who cheat and do not self-report or get caught. However, “the most common emotion reported by college students about cheating is indifference” (Caruana et al., 2000). Perhaps one explanation is that cheating is so common on college campuses so students look past the fact that it is wrong. The academic community has failed to recognize and enforce the moral values of personal and academic integrity. In order to develop an approach to address the problem of academic dishonesty, institutions need to express the importance of the matter. The John Templeton Foundation is a national foundation that recognizes universities for promoting “positive values such as honesty, self-discipline, and respect” (John Templeton Foundation, 1997). This foundation encourages universities to enforce honor code policies and implement character development programs. Implementing educational programs which focus on making ethical decisions would allow institutions to offer seminars or classes that would assist in enhancing academic skills and the educational experience. The University of West Florida created a course called “Life Choices: The Search for Meaning” for honors students to read inspirational books in which the theme is to value the meaning in life. Students discuss their personal roles in life and roles as a leader in a variety of situations. One student in the course said that he found the course “extremely enlightening” and wondered how people “live their lives so mechanically, without thought towards their actions or words.” Another student states, “I have been allowed to express myself on the behalf of my own opinions regardless of worrying if they were right or wrong.” This course allows students to build character without feeling the pressures of typical classes. The Life Choices course encourages students to measure success by engaging in the learning process and choosing to live life to the fullest instead of working toward receiving a grade. Students enter the class viewing life as “a chore to be accomplished.” By the end, students view life as “an adventure to be lived (Ford, Cavanaugh, & White, 2006).” Honesty in the realm of academia is much larger than moral and ethical issues on college campuses. Students who cheat are building a non-moral and unethical character and value system which is carried into all aspects of life. Students who cheat in school, in the gaming industry, or in aspects of life outside of the classroom are always looking for shortcuts. Students who are dishonest in their school work are likely to act in a dishonest way in the working world following graduation. All schools should promote and enforce an honor code to hold students accountable for honesty and integrity when pursuing an education. A college campus environment that promotes honor and integrity promotes

6 Journal of College and Character VOLUME IX, NO.5, July 2008

these characteristics upon students inside and outside of the classroom. The Life Choices course at West Florida is one step in the right direction in creating a long-term solution to encourage students to behave in an ethical way

Academic Dishonesty 7

References

Arnold, R., Martin, B. N., Jinks, & M., Bigby, L. (2007). Is there a relationship between honor codes and academic dishonesty? Journal of College & Character, 8(2), 1- 18. Barnett & Dalton (1981). Why college students cheat. Journal of College Student Personnel, 22(6), 545-551. Business School Honor Code. (n.d.). Columbia University. Retrieved November 23, 2007, from www.gsb.columbia.edu/honor/fag.html Caruana, A., Ramaseshan, B., & Ewing, M. (2000). The effect of anomie on academic dishonesty among university students. The International Journal of Educational Management, 14(1), 23-30. Davis, S.F., & Ludvigson, H.W. (1995). Additional data on academic dishonesty and a proposal for remediation, Teaching of Psychology, 22, 119-121. Davis, S., Grover, C., Becker, A., & McGregor, L. (1992). “Academic dishonesty: Prevalence, determinants, techniques, and punishments.” Teaching of Psychology, 19(1), 16-20. Ford, D. Cavanaugh, J., & White, H. (2006). Life choices: The search for meaning. Journal of College and Character, 7(1), 1-7. Gismondi, A. (2006). The downside of the internet: Cheating and technology in higher education. Journal of College & Character, 7(5), 1-4. Haines, V.J., & Diekhoff, G.M. (1986). College cheating immaturity, lack of commitment, and the neutralizing attitude. Research in Higher Education, 25, 342-354. John Templeton Foundation (1997). Retrieved November 22, 2007, from Templeton.org Kerby, J.A., and Johnson, P. (2005). Students’ reactions to cheating: An examination of the effects of confession on forgiveness and emotions. Journal of College & Character. Retrieved November 24, 2007, from http://www.collegevalues.org/articles.cfm?a=1&id=1367 Kibler, W.L. (1993) When students resort to cheating. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 39. B1-B2. Mailman School of Public Health. (n.d.) Columbia University. Retrieved November 23, 2007, from www.mailman-handbook.com/node/15 McCabe, D.L. (1992). The influence of situational ethics on cheating among college students. Sociological Inquiry, 62, 365-374. McCabe, D.L., Trevino, L.K., & Butterfield, K.D. (1999). Academic Integrity in honor code and honor code environments: A Qualitative Investigation. Journal of Higher Education, 70. McCurtry K. (2001). E-Cheating: Combating a 21st Century Challenge. THE Journal: Technological Horizons in Education. Retrieved November 23, 2007, from http://thejournal.com/magazine/vault/A3724.cfm Olt, M.R. (2002). Ethics and distance education: Strategies for minimizing academic dishonesty in online assessment. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 1(3).

8 Journal of College and Character VOLUME IX, NO.5, July 2008

University of Florida Student Handbook (1995). University of Florida School Honor Code. Retrieved November 23, 2007, from: www.itl.chem.ufl.edu/honor.html. Waltz, J.T., Griego, O.V., & Babbes, G.S. (2007). Does gaming lead to cheating? A model of gaming to cheating. Journal of College & Character, 1(2), 1-4.