Hard to Catch: A Graduate Student's Perspective

The summer before I began my first semester as a graduate student I was introduced to the Academic Integrity lab. Academic Integrity has been a guideline within my academic career since high school and throughout my higher education. On the first day of each semester the instructors would stress our universities integrity policy and I always thought “Well, of course.” Maintaining integrity within academic endeavors was a given. Don’t cheat. It was that simple. As my education progressed I was always so concerned that I would accidentally break one of the policies, specifically with regard to plagiarism, by not citing correctly or having my words be too similar to another’s in a paper I did not even know existed. Remaining honest in these aspects is something I have gone lengths to maintain. Looking back, if I were to ask myself why I worked so hard at this, I am unsure if I would say that the reason was due to ethics, morals, or motivation to learn. It would probably be due to the fact that I was fearful of the repercussions.

While I researched academic dishonesty I learned two things very quickly. First, academic dishonesty is much more common than I had initially thought. Second, it largely goes unnoticed. It seems that unless the individual is fairly obvious in their cheating method it is very difficult to catch a cheater. Recently instructors have been able to curtail plagiarism with websites such as Turnitin, but that still leaves the other aspects within academic integrity unchecked. It seems as though much of the responsibility of catching an individual who is actively cheating has been left largely up to students and faculty members. This seems unfair to both parties as there is only one faculty member to a multitude of students, and the burden of students reporting their peers is unduly heavy. In a study done by Rennie and Crosbie (2002) it was found that only 13% of students are willing to report their peers due to fears of retaliation and the current general acceptance of cheating. This leads me to question alternative methods that could catch academically dishonest students and prevent the behavior in the future. One such method that consistently came up in literature was that of honor codes, which promote active student participation in maintaining academic integrity. This initially seemed like a very beneficial method, reminding students of their responsibility to their university, their instructors, and most importantly themselves. However, the research indicates very mixed results with some studies reporting a significant drop in cheating (McCabe, Trevino, & Butterfield, 2001), while others report no change at all (Vandehey, Diekhoff, & LaBeff, 2007). In light of these varied findings I believe that asking students to take pride in their education and intelligence in order to promote academic integrity is an incredibly positive step in the right direction.

McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Dishonesty in academic environments: The influence of peer reporting requirements. Journal of Higher Education, 72(1), 29-45.

Rennie, S. C., & Crosby, J. R. (2002). Students' perceptions of whistle blowing: Implications for selfregulation. A questionnaire and focus group survey. Medical Education, 36, 173-179.

Vandehey, M., Diekhoff, G., & LaBeff, E. (2007). College cheating: A twenty-year follow-up and the addition of an honor code. Journal of College Student Development, 48(4), 468-480.