Committee on Intellectual Integrity
Minutes of November 1, 2006

Present: Bozak, Chambers, Jalife, Kay, LeBlanc, Moore, Murphy, Santos, Shaffer

* Welcome to our newest member, Abigail Moore, a graduate student in English.

* Survey data is on campus, everyone should now have hardcopy of the open comments and electronic copies of the
surevy results in Exel and .doc formats. The national comparison data is from 2004-2005, the comparison data for
2005-2006 won't be available until the end of the year. I have asked for the raw objective data in order to break out
freshmen from seniors, adjuncts from full-time faculty, etc. There is a *lot* to digest here and we should spend our time
over the next bit going over the data and then discussing what we see in the data and what these results mean.

* In conjunction with this, the Student Opinion Survey results from Spring 2006 have arrived on campus. The '03 results
show us ranked #1 among comprehensive colleges in SUNY for students reporting having witnessed cheating. The bad
news is that we've maintained our #1 ranking. I will get the full data for our next meeting. I'm waiting for the SUNY-wide
results from the SUNY Academic Integrity Task Force committee that I was part of - we had campuses ask some
additional questions over academic integrity.

* Where to next? Well, we want campus discussions. Should we hold those with faculty first and then consult with
students? If students hear there is lots of cheating going on, will that provoke a "herd" mentality such that we end up
*increasing* cheating as everyone decides they need to cheat to survive? Probably not. We are a community and we
should, as a community, deal with this topic, so we won't restrict our discussions to any sector of the campus.

* Do we need a pledge? There is a code of conduct in the School of Business, as part of their AACSB requirements.
The evidence is that such a pledge will in fact change culture.

* Santos is on the Student Affairs core values committee and they are discussing just this idea. A common campus pledge
would be preferable - we are all part of one community, pledged to a common set of values. The key terms here are
civility, integrity, and social justice. "The Center for Academic Integrity (CAI) defines academic integrity as a
commitment, even in the face of adversity, to five fundamental values: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, and responsibility.
From these values flow principles of behavior that enable academic communities to translate ideals to action." (from the
Fundamental Values document at http://www.academicintegrity.org/, November 3, 2006).

* Why consult with everyone? Community means everyone and students need to know that faculty are talking about this
topic and faculty need to know that students are hearing it in all of their classes.

* We can use some of this data to support social norming posters. Santos can invite the local expert (Mr. Montero) to a
future meeting to see how we can use what we learn from this survey to begin a social norming project for next year.

* Who to present this to? We should do a report as spring begins to chairs, who can then bring the report to department
meetings for discussion and then to open forums. We can also bring it to Faculty and Student Assemblies. [Late note: the
Provost has asked for items for a January retreat for all chairs and I've suggested a report on the survey data - simplifying
getting this out to chairs.]

* We should consider a mailing to all faculty for each semester to encourage inclusion of text for the syllabus and of the
policies/procedures relating to integrity.

* The draft letter to a student indicating a problem with an assignment. We should post it, with appropriate introductory
prose, for faculty. Provost Council has given us the go-ahead to promote the site and whatever resources we put there.

* The URL will be changed to something more obvious - http://www.oswego.edu/provost/integrity - and then feel free to
pass the information along to your colleagues.

* Departments will have differences in interpretation of things like peer editing, so faculty must be clear in their syllabus
and in their assignments as to how they interpret appropriate collaboration.

* Our next meeting will be November 15, 2006 in room 711 Culkin Hall.

Respectfully submitted,

David Bozak

 Last Updated: 7/9/07