Academic Integrity Matters (AIM) at UCR: Incorporating Student Development Theory

Jennifer Miller

Student Development Educator

AVC/Dean of Students Office

2-5000, jennifer.miller@ucr.edu

Why does academic integrity matter at UC Riverside?

The Center for Academic Integrity reports that 70 percent of college students admit to cheating at least once. (http://www.umbc.edu/provost/integrity)

Academic dishonesty is an issue which has garnished national attention and it is considered a serious problem among college students (Maramark and Maline 1993:3; McCabe and Trevino 1997:379)

Nationally, college administrators and faculty are working to help students better understand what it means to be part of a scholarly community

Why does academic integrity matter at UC Riverside?

According to the University of California Standards of Conduct, all forms of academic misconduct are prohibited.  Academic misconduct is an umbrella term applying to the various forms which include, but are not limited to: 

Cheating Plagiarism Unauthorized Collaboration Facilitating Academic Misconduct Fabrication Retaliationhttp://conduct.ucr.edu/Policies/Academic+Integrity+Policy+and+Procedures

The Academic Senate has approved a policy and set of procedures regarding how the University will address issues of academic misconduct: http://senate.ucr.edu/senate_site/cms.php?node=academic_integrity

Academic Integrity Matters (AIM) at UC Riverside

Faculty: What ideas can you share from your classrooms for best helping students to understand concepts related to academic integrity?

Staff: What questions are you getting from students in regards to academic integrity?

Students: Where do you feel that UC Riverside students are having trouble with academic integrity?

How might theory help with academic integrity?

In the psychological research on student cheating, there is a consensus that individual characteristics determine whether students will engage in cheating behavior.

For example, some researchers found that cheaters have external attributional biases that enable them to justify their student cheating, and non-cheaters have an internal attributional bias (Davis et al., 1992; Forsyth, Pope, & McMillan, 1985; Payne & Nantz, 1994)—that is, "cheaters excuse their cheating" (Davis et al., 1992, p. 19).

Other researchers have found that students also have difficulty reporting on friends who cheat because they cannot reconcile friendship and loyalty with integrity (Drinan, 1999) and because they do not want to risk getting involved (Jendrek, 1992).

How might theory help with academic integrity?

If we apply developmental theories to the issue (Kibler, 1993), we also know that traditional-age undergraduates generally lack self-authorship—the ability to construct one's own ideas, make informed decisions with and without others, and take responsibility for actions (Baxter Magolda, 1999).

Students who are not self-authorized may acknowledge the existence of institutional policies to prevent and punish student cheating, but they cannot use this knowledge and are unable to decide what to believe about the actions of their peers or themselves.

How might theory help with academic integrity?

Most traditional-age university students are absolute or transitional knowers (Baxter Magolda, 1999).

When students see knowledge as absolute (right or wrong), they see external authorities as having a claim to the knowing of the answers.

When students are transitional knowers, they see some knowledge as certain and other knowledge as uncertain; they also tend to see the acquiring of knowledge as a result of talking with others.

Whether students are absolute or transitional knowers, they still perceive learning as the acquisition of knowledge held by experts and formal authorities. Students in both stages of knowing may not necessarily see development of their own knowledge as the critical goal.

How might theory help with academic integrity?

If students do not feel that they can generate their own knowledge, then they might believe that it would be redundant to cite knowledge sources or to promise to refrain from accepting assistance on papers and examinations.

When the environment is populated by individuals who are at the same developmental stage, it can "lead to the construction and reproduction of certain 'social realities' in a student culture that define[s] cheating as more acceptable or less-serious misconduct than it was considered previously" (Payne & Nantz, 1994, p. 91).

Psychologically based research has provided insight into motivations while providing linkage to culture-based theoretical and empirical studies.

How might theory help with academic integrity?

Psychologically based research is important, but a working knowledge of student development theory provides faculty and staff a foundation upon which to understand the overall maturation and development of the students with which they work.

This foundation will guide faculty and staff in how to best challenge and support individual students to promote psychosocial and cognitive development.

Neighbor interviews

How can we relate theory to our practice with UC Riverside students?

How can we relate the various development theories to concepts related to academic integrity and the sense of a scholarly community at UC Riverside?

Student Development Theory: AIM

Basic assumptions guiding the Student Development Theory movement:

The individual student must be considered as a whole. Each student is a unique person and must be treated

as such. The total environment of the student is educational and

must be used to help the student achieve full development.

The major responsibility for a student's personal and social development rests with the student and his/her personal resources

Introduction to Chickering’s Theory of College Student Development

His theory of psychosocial development was the first major theory to specifically examine the development of college students.

His work from 1959-65 led to his landmark 1969 theory which provided an overview of developmental issues faced by college students as well as environmental conditions that influences development.

Chickering’s seven vectors…

Developing Competence. Managing Emotions. Moving Through Autonomy Toward

Interdependence. Developing Mature Interpersonal

Relationships. Establishing Identity. Developing Purpose. Developing Integrity.

Seven vectors timeline

Developing competence Intellectual competence: acquisition of

knowledge and skills related to particular subject matter, development of intellectual, cultural, and aesthetic sophistication, and skills for critical thinking and reasoning ability.

Physical and manual skills: athletic and recreational activities, attention to wellness, and involvement in artistic and manual activities.

Interpersonal competence: skills in communication, leadership and working effectively with others.

Managing emotions

Students develop the ability to recognize and accept emotions, appropriately express and control them, and learn to act on feelings in a responsible manner.

Through his 1990’s work he included a more inclusive range of feelings (anxiety, depression, anger, shame and guilt) and more positive emotions (caring, optimism and inspiration).

Moving through autonomy toward interdependence

Increase in emotional independence: freedom from continual and pressing needs for reassurance, affection or approval from others.

Increase in instrumental independence: self-direction, problem-solving and mobility.

Students eventually recognize and accept the importance of interdependence (an awareness of their interconnectedness with others).

Establishing identity This vector was expanded to acknowledge differences

in identity development based on gender, ethnic background and sexual orientation.

Includes being comfortable with body and appearance. Being comfortable with gender and sexual orientation. A sense of one’s social and cultural heritage. A clear self-concept. Comfort with one’s roles and lifestyle. A secure sense of self through feedback from others,

self-acceptance/self-esteem, and personal stability/integration.

Developing mature interpersonal relationships

Experiences with relationships contribute significantly to the development of a sense of self: Development of intercultural and interpersonal

tolerance and appreciation of differences. Capacity for healthy and lasting intimate

relationships with partners and close friends. Reisser contributed that both tasks involve

the ability to accept individuals for who they are, to respect differences and to appreciate commonalities.

Developing purpose

Developing clear vocational goals. Meaningful commitment to specific personal

interests and activities. Establishing strong interpersonal commitments. Includes intentionally making and staying with

decisions even in the face of opposition. Lifestyle and family influences affect the decision-

making and goal-setting processes involved in developing purpose.

Developing integrity Integrity includes three sequential but overlapping

stages: Humanizing values: progress from rigid, moralistic

thinking to the development of a more humanized value system in which the interests of others are balanced with one’s own interests.

Personalizing values: value system is established in which core values are consciously affirmed and the beliefs of others are acknowledged and respected.

Developing congruence: values and actions then become congruent and authentic as self-interest is balanced by a sense of social responsibility.

Questions?

Jennifer Miller

Student Development Educator

AVC/Dean of Students Office

Commons 381

(951) 827-5000

jennifer.miller@ucr.edu

http://www.deanofstudents.ucr.edu/reach