University-Wide Impact Committee (UWIC)
Minutes
Thursday, February 19, 2004

Attending:  S. Bochain, C. Barrett, N. Chrissidis, K. Gatzke, N. Henderson, S. Jackson, N. Marano

Discussion Topic:  Academic Dishonesty and University Honor Code

Nikos provided us with sample honor codes from a variety of universities.  We reviewed these, noting that many were highly detailed.  We also noticed that most universities had a much more elaborate "procedural document" (outlining procedure if honor code is breached) than Southern.  In addition, sometimes the different schools within universities have their own honor codes, some variation (with added details) on the main university honor code.  Many of the universities we looked at involve students in the procedural process.  Sometimes, also, instructors required students to provide a short statement about the honor code at the top of their papers or tests, and were required to sign it.  All of this is very different from Southern's current documentation about Academic Honesty.  We do not have an honor code and there is only a very brief blurb referring to Academic Dishonesty in the Student Handbook.  Because we could find no procedural document, we questioned whether Southern even has an official procedure for dealing with academic dishonesty.

We realized, during discussion, that we appeared to be discussing three separate, though related, issues -

1. Developing an Honor Code
2. Procedures for violating an Honor Code (or committing academic dishonesty)
3. Punishments for violating an Honor Code (or committing academic dishonesty)

We questioned exactly which of these issues we were charged to explore.  It seemed to us that all three issues are so interrelated, it is difficult to discuss one without discussing the others. We also questioned whether or not this issue was a curricular one. 

 We wondered what other discussions were going on in the university about these issues, including the Dean's office, the Faculty Senate, and a committee we had heard about (not clear to which body this committee belongs). We agreed to invite Kelly Ritter from the English Department (a member of that committee and a compositionist who does research on plagiarism) to our next meeting because she had expressed an interest in talking with us. 

Other points of discussion and concern
1. The idea that an honor code assumes a certain view of morality.  Is it one we want to adopt?
2. Being very clear about what we want to achieve with this honor code.
3. Many members felt that whatever the procedure for violating the code or policy was, it needed to "have teeth."
4. If an honor code was developed, its publicity would be important.  How would all students receive it?
5. In what ways should students be involved in its development?  Should we ask the student government to explore this issue with students?
6. We should be clear about what we believe plagiarism is and what it isn't before developing an honor code.

Submitted by Nicole Henderson