Academic Integrity Committee Minutes

November 21, 2003


Present:  Magnus Egerstedt (Faculty Member), Thomas Morley (Faculty member, Chair), Russ Callen (Faculty Member), Cheryl Contant (Faculty Member  and Honor Committee Chair), Adam Bernstein (Undergraduate Representative), John Dean (Honor Advisor Council - HAC - Chair), Michael Odom (Visitor – HAC) and Karen Boyd (Sen. Assoc. Dean of Students)


Absent:  Graduate Representative - not yet appointed


Meeting called to order at 2:05pm


I.The minutes for November 7, 2003 as contained in the email were approved.

John Dean moved and Adam Bernstein seconded. Unanimous approval


II.Academic Integrity Committee Website - Dr. Morley has established a website to facilitate discussion and dissemination of information. Issues to discuss include mitigating factors, aggravating factors, general principles, and summary of current practice.


http:/  user name: honor       password:code          


This site should provide a means to collaborate while developing the sanctions document.  In addition to the committee, Dean Andrea Goldblum and Erin Chernow (acting Dean 2002-2003) will be given access to the site.


III.Sanctioning Guidelines Discussion –                                                                               

The following axioms were discussed in great detail. There is general consensus that these have value; but no decisions have been made to date.


·Everyone deserves one mistake unless very egregious

·If a minimum penalty is established, then faculty will be discouraged from developing graded assignments that are not significant enough in their minds to warrant the minimum sanction

·Injury of getting caught should be greater than the possible benefit after having removed the advantage

·Sanctions should include a sanction that impacts the students standing (warning, probation, etc.), a sanction with educational impact and a punitive/reparative aspect.


Other ideas which were discussed include the need to develop minimum and maximum sanctions and what factors should be taken into consideration when developing sanctions (intentionality, acknowledgment of responsibility, student prior history).  The committee did determine that the minimum expectation of the faculty would be that they report a violation and that the assignment could not be counted as a whole toward a grade if the student is found to have cheated on the assignment.


IV.The proposed changes to the Student Code of Conduct, as it applies to addressing violations of the Honor Code, will wait until the Spring to go before the Rules and Regulations Committee.   If accepted, the Office of the Dean of Students is planning to forward the changes and this committee’s suggested sanctions guidelines to the Faculty Senate at the May meeting.



The meeting was adjourned at 2:50 pm.