REBECCA: --WSU Global Campus.
And we started this series
of faculty-led workshops last
spring in collaboration
with the-- [INAUDIBLE]--
in collaboration with
the WSU Teaching Academy
and the Provost's office, and I
think it's been a great coming
together of entities that
support teaching on this
campus.
And today, we're here to
talk about academic integrity
issues, which I know is key
in a lot of people's minds.
And we have a great
panel, and it's
spearheaded by-- we're
starting with Adam Jussel,
and Adam's title is Director
of Student Standards.
ADAM JUSSEL: Student
conduct, yeah.
REBECCA: Student conduct.
ADAM JUSSEL: Formerly known as.
REBECCA: So Adam's
going to start us off
with a short presentation to
talk about academic integrity
issues at WSU and the process
and frame the conversation.
We then have Dr. Richard
Zack and Dr. Douglas Hindman
to talk about how
they-- the issues
they see in the classroom
and some of the strategies
that they've applied to
try and overcome concerns
about academic integrity.
We are fortunate
to have Dr. Jerman
Rose, interim vice-provost
for international programs,
and Dr. Mary Wack, vice-provost
for undergraduate education.
And although they don't actually
have a presentation piece
that I've asked them
to give, they're
here to provide their
expertise and answers
on a variety of things.
And really what we're looking
for today is conversation
about where you are as faculty,
where your concerns are,
what you're trying to
address, strategies
maybe that you've tried in your
classrooms that seem successful
or less successful.
And I will also say that I will
speak if there are questions,
concerns, issues that
relate to online students,
I am happy to address those,
talk about those as well.
So we're going to get started.
I'd like Mary Wack from
the office of provost
to say a couple of words
about the provost support
of our faculty-led workshops.
MARY WACK: Well, yeah, happy to.
I think on a
variety-- oh, whoops.
I'm happy to.
In so many different
ways, issues of teaching
are fundamental to every
aspect of every campus,
and academic integrity
is really undergirding
that in so many different ways.
And if I could just
take a couple of minutes
to describe my own kind
of personal revelation
a couple of years ago
that I think destroyed
my innocence or my naivete,
perhaps, about this issue
might be helpful as a
pre-framing of the framing
that Adam is going to do.
So I was at a conference
a couple of years ago
that had to do
with accreditation.
And I was attending a
session that actually
had to do with international
quality assurance in higher
education, and that was
fascinating to listen
to ministers of
education from Africa
and representatives
of the European Union.
But in the middle of
this, there was a session
on academic integrity.
It was sponsored by the
International Conference Center
on Academic Integrity.
And it was a bit
of a puzzle for me.
How are we in the middle of
accreditation and quality
assurance, and this sort of
undergraduate issue of honesty
and cheating and so on-- what
has that got to do with it?
And the way it was framed
really opened my eyes.
And the moderator said, academic
credit is really the currency
that we operate on.
And anything that
impairs or challenges
the integrity of academic
credit is a threat
to the value of the degree.
It is, in effect,
debasing our coinage,
lowering the value of
our academic currency.
And academic dishonesty
or violations
of academic integrity really
do challenge the nature
and the value of that credit.
And so it put it on a
much wider stage for me,
on a global stage for me.
And there were some other
very interesting and important
aspects to that conversation
that we had a couple of years
ago, and maybe I'll bring
them in at the closing.
 
REBECCA: I do just
want to explain
that we do have individuals
that we are streaming
this presentation to as
well, so although you
may be able to hear
everyone really
well without the
microphone, the people
we are streaming to
can only hear if we're
talking into the microphone.
So we will have someone running
around with a microphone
as we're going through the
question and answer period.
Thanks.
So we'll start with Adam.
ADAM JUSSEL: So as [INAUDIBLE]
said, I'm Adam Jussel.
I'm the director
of student conduct.
My primary responsibility is
to operate the WSU Standards
of Conduct for students in the
student conduct system, which
includes everything from, as
you could probably imagine,
alcohol and drug violations,
but also includes assaults,
sexual assaults, discrimination,
but also includes
academic integrity.
So what I've been asked to
talk a little bit about today
is the academic
integrity process
as it currently stands at WSU,
and also talk about a variety
of issues that my office sees.
We oftentimes become the
kind of eye in the sky.
We can track trends
and see what's
going on in the
various departments,
so hopefully, if you
have any questions
during the presentation, you can
go ahead and stop me and ask.
It's not very dynamic, so
feel free to yell at me if you
have any questions.
[sniff]
So I wanted to briefly talk
about the scope of the issue.
Between 2011 and
as of May, 2014,
we had about 450 cases of
academic integrity reported
to my office.
Those comprised of
168 cases of cheating.
Cheating broadly
described can be
anything from unauthorized
use of materials in an exam
or electronic devices
or something as simple
as looking over the shoulder
of the person next to you
during an exam.
And the majority of what we see,
as indicated by these numbers,
is we see a lot of
plagiarism cases.
So that could be improper
citations or not including
citations, and so that's
the broadest issue
that we see in our office.
And then we had two cases in
that time period of plagiarism
and cheating at the same time.
So very minimal, but
they sometimes overlap.
So the definition of
academic integrity at WSU
includes everything
that is on this list,
so most people think of academic
integrity as only plagiarism,
but it includes everything
listed up on the PowerPoint
now.
The majority of what we
see, again, is plagiarism,
but we do see a lot of
unauthorized assistance
and unauthorized
sources of materials.
As you'd probably imagine, that
is bringing stuff into the exam
that you aren't permitted to
do, going out and selling papers
to other classmates or to future
people in the classes online.
So selling papers online is
considered cheating at WSU.
Sometimes other
campuses don't have
that included in their
academic integrity,
but it is included here.
So the most common violations,
the first one-- or excuse me,
the third-- going
in reverse order
is unauthorized assistance.
Like I talked about, it's
use of unauthorized materials
when taking quizzes,
tests, or examinations,
or giving or receiving
unauthorized assistance.
One important thing
to note here is
that the standards of conduct,
including academic integrity,
includes actual
completion of cheating.
So the completion of the act
of cheating is a violation,
but also attempting
to or conspiring
to cheat is
considered a violation
of academic integrity.
So that's in the
context of we just
had a case where a student
was attempting to procure,
so they posted on Facebook,
looking for exams, old exams,
from my geology
class, Geology 101.
Willing to pay money for them.
And that actually was
reported by a grad student
at the University of Idaho
who saw it on Facebook
and reported it to my office.
That is considered a violation
of the academic integrity
policies, because it's
an attempt to cheat.
The second one is fabrication--
the intentional invention
or counterfeiting of
information in the course
of an academic activity.
The most common one here
is forging or falsifying
information in
internship programs.
So students have to complete
a certain number of hours
or complete certain
requirements for internship.
We've actually had students
that have falsified
that information, and
we go back and confirm
with their internship program
that they did not, in fact,
complete those hours.
So that's the
second most common.
And by far, the most
common is plagiarism.
One important thing to note
there is that WSU's policy--
and we get this from
students a lot--
doesn't make a distinction
between intentional and
unintentional plagiarism.
So plagiarism is plagiarism
is the way we described it
to students, even if you
didn't mean to do it.
It's still considered
a violation
of the academic
integrity policies.
 
So what happens if there's
an alleged violation?
Just talk a little
bit about the process.
The first step is
with the instructor.
The way our academic
integrity policy is written
is the instructor is the first
decision maker in our process.
When the instructor believes
that there is a violation,
they compile the
evidence or information
indicating that
there was and meets
with the student
about the issue.
Then the faculty
member determines
whether a violation occurred
from that conversation.
If the student disputes that
there was a violation, then
it's up to the instructor to
write a letter to the student
or on the email saying
that we met on x date.
I believe an academic
integrity violation occurred,
because x, y, and z, and then
refer the matter to my office.
There's a dual process
here, so the faculty member
has the right to
impose sanctions that
are included in the syllabus.
Those are academic
sanctions, so that
could include failing
the assignment
or failing the
course, et cetera.
The educational prong or
the educational sanction
is facilitated by my office.
So for plagiarism cases,
we have a tutorial
that we ask students
to complete online
for their first violation to
teach them about plagiarism
and what it is.
For cheating cases, we have
a variety of other sanctions
that we try to assist students
with to understand integrity
and why cheating
is inappropriate.
So it's important to
report it to our office
not only for the
fact that we keep
all the records of students
and when they violated
the academic integrity policies,
but also because we provide
educational sanctions
above and beyond what
the instructor does.
So the student has the
option at that point in time
to accept the
instructor's decision
and complete the
sanctions, or has
21 days to appeal the decision
to the academic integrity
hearing board, which is
comprised of teaching faculty.
If the student
appeals, that board
makes an independent
decision based
on the information provided
by the student and the faculty
member.
So for faculty,
the first step is
to assemble the evidence of
the offending work, statement
by any witnesses if it was a
cheating case, original sources
of plagiarism.
Important thing to note is
that we don't have-- it's not
of prosecutorial system.
We don't have a burden of proof.
The standard of proof
is preponderance
of the evidence, which
means more likely than not.
A better way to think of
that is 50% and a feather,
so it's just a little over 50%.
So we don't have the beyond a
reasonable doubt standard that
is similar to criminal systems.
And the reason being is that
we're primarily educational.
So the goal isn't
to convict students.
But the goal is to educate.
So then the notification
to the student
providing a time and
date for a meeting,
and then communicate concerns
through email or phone.
So normally, what
I've seen from faculty
is they write an email
to the student saying,
hey, I have a concern I
want to talk to you about.
Please come to my office during
my office hours to discuss.
And if the student
doesn't show up,
they might elevate it to say, I
need to talk to you about this,
and if not, I will report it to
the Office of Student Conduct.
And in the meeting, the
important part for this
is to be able to show all
the information that you
have to the student.
So provide the student the
opportunity, a good opportunity
to respond.
And then notify the
student that you're
required to report it to OSSA.
That's the former
name of my office.
We're now the Office
of Student Conduct.
After you provide that
information to the student
and allow them to
respond, you notify them
that you'll be reporting
it to my office,
and then in an email summary,
you say to the student,
we had this meeting
on this date.
Like I said before,
you were in violation
of the academic
integrity policies.
This is the academic
sanction I've imposed.
You have 21 days to appeal to
the academic integrity hearing
board, and just
leave it at that.
Now if the student
appeals, my office
will notify the
instructor and ask
them to come in for a hearing.
So the instructor
has the opportunity
to discuss the case with the
academic integrity hearing
board.
And the student will
come in as well.
That's the final decision
of the university, whatever
the academic integrity
hearing board decides.
There's no further
appeal to the president
or any other body
within the institution.
The next option is
really for the student
to sue the university.
It doesn't happen very often
in academic integrity cases,
and that's primarily
because courts
defer to faculty members
in their decisions.
But it does happen
every once in awhile.
So that's kind of an
overview of the process.
Anybody have any
questions about that?
REBECCA: Adam, will you tell them about academic [INAUDIBLE].
ADAM JUSSEL: Right.
So it's made up of
teaching faculty
that are appointed
by the president
and nominated by
the Faculty Senate.
So we have nine
current board members,
and the chair of the current
board is Carmen Lugo-Lugo,
and she's in the critical
culture ethnic studies.
RICHARD ZACK: Thank you.
My name is Rich Zack.
I'm a professor in the
Department of Entomology,
and what I'll speak on today
are just some 100 level courses
that I teach.
So 101, 102 course,
and ideally, these
would be for incoming
freshman, but in my experience,
it's usually freshmen,
sophomores, juniors,
it's kind of spread out.
But when I look at integrity,
and I think one of the problems
with society, although
I won't go into this,
is that there is a total
lack of integrity in society.
So it's hard to
convince students
that they should be good people,
because they don't see it.
So how do you do that?
So that's kind of my
mission, which may or may not
be a good one.
So what I do is I try
to incorporate integrity
throughout the semester, and
so I'm teaching about insects,
but I try to do things that
bring up these concepts.
So my first class
period in all my classes
is an introductory class
where I tie insects in,
but I use a lot of Aesop's
fables types of things.
And I use Nez
Perce, so if you're
familiar with Chief
Joseph and all of that,
and I try to bring in people
that show great integrity.
And I tie this in
with the students.
Here's what we're
trying to do with this.
So I look at it more as an
educational type of item
in at least these classes.
So we'll do readings.
We'll talk about integrity.
We'll talk about items of
the day that are going on
and how these affect things.
And then we'll talk a little
bit about what is cheating?
What is academic integrity?
And I tie these into
science, because in science,
if you cheat, then you
disrupt the whole system.
And in science, cheating
can't be tolerated,
because science is built
on the work of others.
And so if there's something
along the way that isn't right,
then it just screws up
everything that goes on.
So we do a little bit
about scientific integrity
and why this is important.
We talk about
referencing material.
I don't think there's
any way you're
going to stop students from
going to Wikipedia or whatever,
and that's fine.
That's fine if they
do that, but what
I try to convince them to do is,
OK, you need to reference this.
Reference it.
Show that you've got
this from someplace
else, and again,
in science, that's
very important,
because you do yourself
more justice by referencing
than you do by not.
It's very important
that you give credit,
because the people that
review your science
are the ones that
you're giving credit to.
And so they're going
to take this seriously.
So we talk about a lot of this.
I don't know that that works.
I think it works
with good students,
but it doesn't work with all.
So the other thing that I do
is I try to put the fear of God
into them a little bit.
And if I have an incident
where students are cheating
on-- we have quizzes
or something,
and somebody doesn't show
up, and two quizzes come
in with the same handwriting
and the same answers,
then what I'll do the next
class is I'll just get up.
I'll bring the two quizzes, and
I'll just say, OK, last time.
I had this occur.
Obviously, one of
these students came.
One of these
students didn't come.
I don't care which one came
or which one didn't come.
If I see this again,
I will do everything
I can to get you booted
out of this university.
Now whether I would do that
or not, I have no idea.
But the point is try to
put that fear into them.
And I've done this
a couple times
where I've had a
graduate student come
in on like the first exam,
and that graduate student will
be looking over
someone's shoulders,
and another graduate
student that's
walking the aisles
comes up to me and says,
that student's cheating.
And we go up, and we
grab that student,
and we tell them
they're cheating,
and we throw them out of class.
And again, whether that--
it's to put the fear of God
into these students
that maybe they
shouldn't be doing
that type of stuff.
I don't know if
that's right or not.
But that's the type
of stuff that I do.
We try to tie in people that
maybe these students know
about.
So they may not
know about Aesop.
They may not know
about Nez Perce,
but here's a quote that I've
used over the last couple
years.
"We learned about honesty and
integrity, that truth matters,
that you don't take shortcuts or
play by your own set of rules,
and success doesn't count unless
you earn it fair and square,"
and that's a
Michelle Obama quote.
So we do we do these
types of things.
So again, it's trying to get
the students to understand
that integrity is a big picture.
It's not necessarily
that you've looked over
the shoulder to see if the
answer to A was B, C, or D,
or something.
That integrity is something
that's internal to the person.
And so when you leave
here that it becomes
very important that
one of the things
you leave with is a
certain integrity.
One of the things that I do
in every one of my courses
at the beginning is I
play, if you've ever
seen this, the Steve Jobs
convocation or whatever,
graduation talk at Stanford,
where he talks about not
going to college and
doing all of this stuff
and basically his
life philosophy.
And then I tie it in to
how many of the Stanford
students were kind
of looking around
dumbfounded and
looked like idiots.
And you know, even at
Stanford, these things.
So it's a personal type
of thing with them.
I get students that tell
me that that's really good,
and I get students that
tell me that it's not my job
to interfere with their lives.
But I still do it,
because that's what I do.
So that's the way
I try to tackle it.
I have taken a couple students
beyond just a learning
experience, especially when
it just appears that they
want to push the system.
And we'll deal with
those in a manner
that kind of is equivalent to
what their grievances were.
So that's my philosophy.
Questions?
SPEAKER 1: [INAUDIBLE].
So is this a staged--
RICHARD ZACK: Yeah,
so this is staged.
Right. Right.
SPEAKER 1: So you humiliate
the guy in front of the class,
so everybody gets the point.
RICHARD ZACK: Right.
But it's my grad student
who's being humiliated.
Humiliation, it's a
tough type of thing,
because you don't want to
humiliate, and I try very hard
not to humiliate any students.
If there's something going
on, I pull the student aside.
But I just use that as nobody
knows who that student is.
They think it's just a student
of the 300 in the class,
and I think it works
pretty well sometimes. Yeah.
DOUGLAS HINDMAN: Hi,
I'm Doug Blanks Hindman,
and I teach in the Murrow
College of Communication.
About three years ago,
our dean subscribed
to turnitin.com for
the entire college,
became aware that we
were having issues
with our journalistic
style writing,
as well as classes that do
more academic traditional kinds
of writing.
And so I started using
it pretty seriously.
Found that it was a great
teaching tool for giving
feedback to students.
It has a quick mark section,
so you see the common errors.
You can stamp on
students' papers.
It saves you a lot of time.
They don't have to read
your bad handwriting.
It's all done online.
I used it for graduate students
and undergraduate students,
and I found that some
of my graduate students
are scrupulous at citing work.
I mean just
profoundly scrupulous.
It gave me a new respect
for those students.
And I found others who wrote
papers by cutting and pasting,
and then deciding
later whether or not
they wanted to rewrite sections.
And in some cases,
repeating sections
they cut and pasted in
two different places.
But the majority of students,
at least our grad students,
are very, very, very good
at using citations properly.
I think of Turn It In as
both an educational tool
and the integrity tool that
we were hearing about earlier.
In other words,
I see it as a way
to help students learn what's
proper citation, to help them
understand the value of
giving credit where it's due,
but also for those students
who are deliberately
trying to work the system, I
see it as a necessary means
to protect the integrity of
the class and the degree.
And unfortunately, I'd prefer to
be a teacher, not an enforcer.
That's my preference.
And so my goal is to make
all of these infractions
educational or learning
experiences for the student,
not only in the way that they
have to come to terms with what
they've done, but the fact
that they have the right
to challenge my decision.
So that's why I think it's
really important to report
to student conduct,
if nothing else,
just to show the
students that I too
am held to an external review.
My decisions are not
just summarily applied
that I have to go
through the same process.
And they have a chance
to make their pitch.
I find that I have the best
luck when I've trained students.
The Library of Corey Johnson
has this really great plagiarism
tutorial, because I think the
biggest problem students have
is how to properly paraphrase.
And this takes you
through about 11 questions
about paraphrasing.
And once students
go through that,
I feel like I can
really hold them
to a pretty high standard for
proper paraphrasing and APA
style.
Well, the thing
that Turn It In does
for you that makes
your job easier
as an instructor,
if you're reporting,
and I think you should, is it
helps you do that, accumulate
evidence part of your task.
It used to be that you'd
have to go out and find
the sources yourself, and
accumulate all the instances
in which violations occurred.
But Turn It In will
do that for you,
and so there's that part of it.
The rest of your time is just
documenting your communication
with the students, so it
saves you a lot of time.
So that's been the
valuable thing.
Turn It In doesn't
catch everything.
I mean, I think you're
still the better
judge of whether this passage
is consistent with the student's
voice, their ability to
write, and you kind of
know when something looks fishy.
Whether you can find it or
not is a different issue.
Turn It In won't
catch a lot of things,
so you're still in
a position of having
to go look things up sometimes
and see if you can find it.
And the other thing
that Turn It In does
is if you allow things to see
the originality report, which
I do, because again, I think
it's an educational process.
They can do multiple
submissions before the due date.
They get to see the
originality report.
They can fix things that
are having a problem.
But what I do is
for the final draft,
I say, your first
submission is final,
so you better know by now what's
proper citation and what's not.
What we don't want
is students just
to learn how to game the system,
how to game turnitin.com.
So I guess if I would
be more inclined to say
first submission is final, if we
had gone through the training,
or with grad students, I would
be more likely to just say
first submission is final.
So that's been my experience.
The new Blackboard system has
a Turn It In direct function.
It's had some issues.
I'm an early adopter
and paying the price,
I know that students
are climbing
they don't get to see
originality reports,
even though they submit early.
And there's been a
few other issues.
I don't see what my
students are seeing,
so I can't guide them through
the process of finding
my comments, but I know
that some have found it
and can do that.
So that's the new system.
The Blackboard has its
own Safe Assign system,
which I think works better.
They're still working
out the Turn It In kinks,
but I'm not sure I would
recommend Turn It In Direct
through Blackboard.
I think I'd probably
stick with the Safe Assign
until those are worked out.
Rebecca's going to take this
mic away from me, I think.
[Laughing]
REBECCA: I just want to
say that we are actively
working with Turn It In
and with Blackboard to get
that integration to
be working smoothly,
so it's not a long--
I hope this isn't
a long-term recommendation
that we wouldn't use
Turn It In Direct,
but that is ultimately
where we're trying to go, and I
know our tech team is actively
working with both
partners, and that
is Mary, what I was going
to talk to you about.
Yeah, so I think-- I don't know.
At this point, either Jerman
or Mary, do you have any?
MARY WACK: Yeah, I really
appreciate the comments
of my colleagues here and
getting an insight into what's
happening down at the
classroom level, especially
the proactive educational part.
I think that that
is just terrific.
I was kind of
taken aback when we
were having some conversations
about a year, year and a half
ago on this topic in
the provost's office.
And I was looking
into the issue of what
level of kind of
immediate accountability
do we hold students to,
because after all, they've
all taken English 101, and
they got the academic integrity
story in English 101.
And so therefore, from
that point forward,
really they're fully responsible
for correct and very high
standard citation.
And I had institutional
research run the numbers,
and of any graduating
cohort, about 40%
have taken English 101 at WSU.
So that really raised
the question for me
of how more systematically
are students educated
about academic integrity
when the majority of them
don't go through the
one place where we know
for sure that it's happening.
So I'm really gratified that
people in a very distributed
way are doing that
in their classrooms.
And this was sort of a more
compelling issue to me.
Again, coming out of
that same conference,
I mentioned earlier,
the International Center
for Academic
Integrity folks gave
a kind of a little
history of 20 years
of their academic integrity
work in this country.
And they broke it
into three phases.
And they called phase one,
which was in the beginning,
the speeding ticket phase.
It's all about catching
the students who
have incurred a violation
and subjecting them
to some kind of discipline
or process or something.
It was really kind of the
moral fault of the student.
And then they had a really
interesting little session
on how many of us
actually speed.
How much of a deterrent
is a speeding ticket?
Really as rampant as
violations of integrity are,
they are not considered by
many students that serious,
just as we would go 62, 64,
67 on the way to Spokane,
and not feel that we as
individuals were necessarily
morally at fault
for just pushing it
a little on the road.
And so that kind of
ushered in a second phase
of thinking about
academic integrity, where
kind of the punish
and deter approach
was not working so well.
And that was more on the faculty
development side of things, so
kind of proactive
assignment design.
So if faculty could craft
the assignments well enough,
make the tests cheat proof,
have a fresh test every time,
so it was never recycled.
Then all of this
would stop, because we
would have the perfect
instructional system.
But experience shows
there is not enough time,
there's not enough
support, there's
just not enough
collective resource
to have that whole burden
rest on individual faculty
assignment design.
And so then the current
phase, the third phase,
is really looking at it
from a more community
or system perspective,
which is really
we can only lessen these
instances of academic integrity
violation.
If we think in terms of an
entire culture of integrity
or a community of
integrity and what
are we doing on the student
side, on the faculty side,
on the administrative
side to help
build a context in
which students operate
that is not pushing them in
the direction of thinking
violations are necessary to
get ahead in their career,
but rather that they develop
the inner sort of resources
of integrity that
Rich Zack outlined,
which this organization
summarizes,
and Rich did too-- trust,
respect, fairness, honesty,
responsibility.
And they've added a new
one, which is courage.
So how do we cultivate all of
that in a proactive kind of way
so that the incentives for
violations of integrity
aren't as strong?
And so I'm kind of
eager to hear if anybody
can share what that group
that's looking at all of this
is thinking about.
And also, just to
end my remarks here
with noting that we are
institutional members
of the International Center
for Academic Integrity
through my office, and so I
just Xeroxed this brochure,
which is a couple of years old.
But feel free to pick one up,
and you can sign up as a member
through WSU's membership
and get access
to the listserv, the
resources, videos.
You can show these
little YouTube videos
in class and stuff.
And then just as an
interesting thought experiment,
or if you have a reflective
moment on this topic,
they have an academic
integrity rating system.
So if you wanted to think about
academic integrity in more
system terms, kind of
a series of questions,
and I've made a few copies if
you're interested over there
on that desk there as you
leave, to think about where
are all the places
within the system
as the student encounters it,
faculty, all the stakeholders,
where we do build in
practices that can contribute
to academic integrity?
So I really
recommend that as you
think about this in a more
system-based perspective.
ADAM JUSSEL: Our
office oftentimes
will have additional information
about a student's situation,
where they might not
just be violating
the academic integrity
policies, but they've also
got other situations that are
going through our process.
And the importance of that
is the care for students.
We see oftentimes in reflective
pieces about plagiarism,
academic integrity, or
cheating for that matter
is that well, there was a
bunch of other stuff going on
in my life.
And we can often see that
through drug violations,
marijuana violations,
maybe suicidal ideations.
So it's important to
report, because then
if we get that
information, we're
looking at the whole student--
what's going on in their life,
how their academics are
doing, and so we can engage.
We have a student care team on
campus here, and oftentimes,
that'll be a
trigger point for us
to engage that student care
team to provide additional care
for the student.
So I think it's important
to report not only for kind
of enforcement and record
keeping, but also just knowing
that we're looking
at that as well.
And the second comment
is, as Mary hinted,
is that we do have an academic
integrity task force now
that has been charged
by the Faculty Senate
to look at all aspects
of academic integrity
at WSU, including but
not limited to cheating,
definitions, policy and
process, technology, training,
sanctions, and so forth.
So that group is kind
of in its infant stages
and working through
that, but our hope
is to provide those
recommendations
to Faculty Senate
by the end of summer
with some real
actionable plans on how
to move forward and
maybe change our process
and our system for
academic integrity issues.
REBECCA: So we are
pretty much out of time.
I hope to continue this
conversation in the fall.
I also am on the academic
integrity task force,
and it would be
great if, perhaps, we
could have a panel
follow up to talk
about what kinds
of recommendations
that group is making,
and to continue,
it would've been great to
hear where all your concerns
and why you're here
at this session.
But hopefully you've
heard some ideas.
You know about some
resources, have some people
to contact if you
have further questions
or want to provide
us any information.
I do always want
to take a minute
to thank my staff for
helping to put these on,
and I want to
mention that we have
two more faculty-led workshops
coming up this spring.
One is March 24th, first
generation students,
and again, we'll have, I think,
a small panel with students,
faculty to talk about
addressing those student
kinds of issues
in your classroom.
And the last one will
be we're collaborating
with the Office of Assessment
and using your course
evaluation data effectively.
And that's April
21st, I believe,
so you can sign up
for those now on
the elearning.wsu.edu website.
And I would like to give a round
of applause to our panelists.
[APPLAUSE]
