Table of Contents

Abstract

Moral Panic: The Contemporary Context of Academic Integrity Fears of a Cheating Culture Time for a New Approach The Context for a New Approach Interpreting Misconduct Research A Note on Definitions Delineating Forms of Academic Misconduct Summary Revisiting the Past: The Historical Context of Academic Integrity The Antebellum Period: 1760–1860 The Research University: 1860–1945 Mass Education: 1945–1975 The Contemporary University: 1975 to the Present Lessons Learned Contemporary Organizational Strategies: Stopping Student Cheating A Comparison of the Strategies Rule Compliance Strategy Integrity Strategy Summary Dimensions of the Issue: Toward a Robust Explanation The Four Dimensions Internal Dimension: Student Character Organizational Dimension: Peer Norms and Classroom Dynamics Institutional Dimension: Academic Systems Societal Dimension: Broader Societal Forces The Four Dimensions and Contemporary Organizational Strategies Summary Twenty‐First Century Forces Shaping Academic Integrity Technology Institutional Constraints Academic Capitalism Diversity Summary Strains on the Teaching and Learning Environment On the Faculty‐Student Relationship On the Role of Faculty On the Learning Process On Evolving Ideas of Teaching and Learning On the Development of Students Summary A New Approach to Academic Integrity: The Teaching and Learning Strategy Defining the Teaching and Learning Strategy Assessment and the Teaching and Learning Strategy Accreditation and the Teaching and Learning Strategy Structures and Policies in the Teaching and Learning Strategy Summary Recommendations for Practice and Research Recommendations for Practice Recommendations for Research Summary References Name Index Subject Index About the Author

What Contributes to College Students’ Cheating? A Study of Individual Factors

“…Although the proposed model explains more than 16.4% of variance in academic misconduct, it stills leaves nearly 83.6% unaccounted for. This finding offers empirical support for the argument that academic misconduct should be explained by multiple-level factors (Bertram Gallant, 2008;McCabe et al, 2001). Although the reported adjusted R 2 is relatively small, it is nevertheless consistent with those reported in prior studies (Bloodgood et al, 2008;McCabe, Butterfield, & Treviño, 2006;McCabe & Treviño, 1993).…”

“…In this regard, the suggestions made by Lang (2013) that focus on the importance of faculty and how they conduct the classroom were reinforced by our study. Indeed, student cheating can be significantly reduced if faculty members are serious about student academic misconduct and communicate clearly with their students regarding academic honesty (Bertram Gallant, 2008).…”

“…As is usually the case with student surveys of academic misconduct, we suggest that readers interpret the results with caution, as the level of academic misconduct was derived from respondents' self-reports (Bertram Gallant, 2008;Davis et al, 2009). In addition, respondents may not accurately report the number of academic misconduct incidents (e.g., participants may have different interpretations of the rating scales for academic cheating), which may have influenced parameter estimation.…”

Integrity in and Beyond Contemporary Higher Education: What Does it Mean to University Students?

“…Such instances of academic misconduct undermine scholarship and compromise educators’ ability to accurately assess students. Moreover, breaches of academic integrity erode “truth, academic freedom, courage, quality, and the spirit of free intellectual inquiry” (Bertram Gallant, 2008, p. 2) that are cornerstones of learning communities.…”

A Study About the Academic Integrity of Second-Year Aviation Students in U.S. Higher Education

“…In addition, maintaining acceptable behavioral standards such as not cheating and not plagiarizing assignments is considered to be an integral component of academe. In a multi-institutional study, Gallant (2008) reported that colleges' and universities' first attempts to implement policies to convey student…”