faculty integrity guide 2014

Published by the WPI Dean of Students Office, with support from the WPI Committee on Advising and Student Life, August 2014

Academic IntegrityFaculty Guide to

at Worcester Polytechnic Institute

2014–15

2014-154 fac guide integrityCover_x 7/25/14 9:56 AM

12

Faculty Guide to

Academic Integrityat Worcester Polytechnic Institute

A Message from the Dean of Students Office

The Dean of Students Office, with support from the FacultyCommittee on Advising and Student Life, has developed this guide tohelp faculty members create an atmosphere where academic integrityis recognized as a core value of the institution.

The guide is intended to assist the community in understanding thesubject of academic honesty and to orient faculty to WPI’s specificpolicies and procedures. It also provides suggestions of how tominimize the occurrence of academic dishonesty in the classroom.

Topics covered/included:

• WPI Aspirations for Academic Integrity

• What Constitutes Academic Dishonesty at WPI

• A Look at Academic Honesty at WPI

• Responsibilities of Faculty Members

• What If I Suspect Academic Dishonesty?

• Academic Dishonesty Flow Chart

• Facts and Myths about Academic Dishonesty at WPI

• Suggestions to Discourage Academic Dishonesty

The Dean of Students Office welcomes comments and suggestionsfrom faculty on ways to enhance this guide and/or make the inquiryprocess as easy as possible.

Suggestions to Discourage Academic Dishonesty

Consider implementing the following best practices to minimize orprevent cases of academic dishonesty:

• Put WPI’s Academic Honesty Policy in your course syllabus.

• Clearly explain your expectations during the first day of classes,including concrete examples that do and do not constitute cheatingin your course.

• Address academic integrity in class while distributing assignmentsand/or exams.

• Inquire about “best practices” policies from colleagues in yourdepartment or in your discipline at other institutions.

• Encourage students to come to you if they are confused aboutcitation and documentation practices.

• Talk about academic honesty with your students.

• Specify how you want sources documented on papers and researchassignments.

• Make up variations of the same exam.

• Avoid use of repeated exams, homework sets and research projects.

• Explain your expectations regarding collaboration on homework,computer programs and take-home exams.

• Report cases of academic dishonesty, utilizing WPI’s policy andprocedures.

• Collect all exams, or rewrite exams each term.

• MyWPI has a resource, Safe Assign, which is a plagiarism assignment submission tool. Safe Assign can be used to detect unoriginal content in student papers by comparing them to a variety of sources.

2014-154 fac guide integrity_x 7/25/14 9:38 AM Page 1

2 11

WPI Aspirations for Academic Integrity

Academic integrity is a fundamental principle of learning and anecessary foundation for all academic institutions, particularly thosededicated to independent project-based education, such as WPI.Violations of the principle deny the violators an opportunity toobtain confident command of the material they are credited withknowing, cheat their classmates out of deserved rewards andrecognition, debase the institution, and demean the degree that WPIawards. It is, therefore, a matter of great and mutual concern to allmembers of the WPI community that a concerted effort be made tomaintain high standards of integrity, both to protect the value of theeducational process in which we are engaged and to maintain thecredibility of the institution.

What Constitutes Academic Dishonesty at WPI

Individual integrity is vital to the academic environment becauseeducation involves the search for and acquisition of knowledge andunderstanding, which are, in themselves, intangible. Evaluation ofeach student’s level of knowledge and understanding is an essentialpart of the teaching process, and requires tangible measures such asreports, examinations and homework. Any act that interferes with theprocess of evaluation by misrepresentation of the relation between thework being evaluated (or the resulting evaluation) and the student’sactual state of knowledge is an act of academic dishonesty.

The following acts constitute academic dishonesty at WPI:

Fabrication (examples)

• Altering grades or other official records

• Changing exam solutions after the fact

• Inventing or changing laboratory data

• Falsifying research

• Inventing sources

• Sabotaging another student’s work or academic record

student’s permission to determine if the student has any record of prioroffenses involving academic honesty.

Myth:International students will be deported if they are found responsibleof academic dishonesty.

Fact:Academic honesty violations are not reported to Immigration and CustomsEnforcement (ICE) for action against an international student. If a student isin the United States on a visa and is suspended or expelled, the univer sitymust report that the student is no longer registered as a full-time student.Unless that student becomes accepted and enrolled as a full-time student atanother institution, the ICE may begin the deportation process because thestudent is no longer “in status.”

Myth:A student’s judicial record is destroyed or sealed upon graduation orwithdrawal from the university.

Fact:It is the policy of WPI that judicial records shall be reportable by the Dean of Students Office for a period of two years from the date of graduation orwithdrawal from WPI, except when the sanction includes suspension orexpulsion. In those cases, disciplinary records are kept in perpetuity. Judicialrecords are kept separate from a student’s academic record.

Myth:Students found responsible of academic dishonesty are alwayssuspended from the university.

Fact: WPI does not subscribe to an automatic sanction for violation of itsAcademic Honesty Policy. Rather, each violation is reviewed individually and sanctioning takes into consideration the unique situation surrounding the incident. Having said that, reviewing past precedent, most faculty who adjudicate cases within the department impose either a “0” for theassignment or an “NR” for the course. In cases where the student has a priorrecord of academic dishonesty, the Campus Hearing Board many timesimposes a sanction of suspension or disciplinary probation.


10 3

Myth:As a faculty member, I have the freedom to lower a student’s grade orto give an “NR” on an assignment (or an “F” for a graduate student)if I believe the student has committed academic dishonesty.

Fact:Faculty may impose punitive action only if the student has admittedresponsibility and has agreed to the pro fessor’s sanction. The maximumpenalty that can be applied at the department level is dismissal from a courseor a project without credit. If a student has a previous record or if the studentclaims innocence, the case must be referred to the CHB. If the CHB findsthe student responsible, it can recommend a grade action to the professor, butthe professor makes the final decision about the student grade. The CHB hasa greater range of sanctions, up to and including expulsion from WPI.

Myth:If a student admits to academic dishonesty and accepts an agreedupon sanction, I have the option to retain all records for the casewithout reporting the case to anyone other than my department head.

Fact:All cases must be reported in writing, via the Department Agreement Form,to the Dean of Students Office citing the student’s name, student ID number,facts of the case, and sanction imposed. The student and faculty membermust sign the department agreement before it is sent. This is the only waythat the Dean of Students Office can accurately report to another facultymember if a student has a previous record and ensure that a student doesnot have multiple violations in different courses that go unreported.

Myth:I can assure a student that his/her academic dishonesty record willremain confidential and will not be shared with anyone.

Fact:Records will be available to prospective employers and other authorizedindividuals in accordance with applicable state and federal law andregulations. Judicial records may be shared both internally (e.g., IGSD, honorsocieties) and externally (e.g., transfer applications, prospective employers, law school) in accordance with federal regulations that require writtenpermission from the student involved. In keeping with the WPI AcademicHonesty Policy and the Constitution of the WPI Campus Judicial System, astudent’s judicial record may be shared internally as appropriate without the

Plagiarism (examples)

• Misrepresenting the work of another as one’s own

• Inaccurately or inadequately citing sources, including those fromthe Internet

Cheating (examples)

• Using purchased term papers

• Copying exams, homework or take-home exams

• Using unauthorized materials or sources of information (e.g., cheat sheet, preprogrammed calculator)

• Assisting another person in cases where prohibited

Facilitation (examples)

• Sharing test questions or answers from an exam with anotherstudent

• Letting another student copy a solution to a homework problem,exam or lab

• Taking an exam for another student

• Assisting in any act of academic dishonesty of another student


4 9

A Look at Academic Honesty at WPIWPI has collected data about attitudes and practices associated withacademic dishonesty at the undergraduate level at the university. Thefollowing is a sampling of data from the most recent survey ofstudents.

Report of Undergraduate Students

Students feel that faculty members are fair and unbiased in theirtreatment of individual students. Students have a strong sense thatWPI’s disciplinary procedures are fair.

Historical data indicates that...

• one third of the students reported that academic dishonesty is aproblem at WPI.

• more than half of the students saw another student cheat during an exam.

• a quarter of the students reported feeling indifferent when theywitnessed cheating and feel that reporting a friend who is cheating is as bad as, or worse than, cheating.

• almost half of the students reported that they had worked with oneor more students on a homework assignment when not allowed.

• two-thirds of all students believe that “collaboration on individualassignments” is not academic dishonesty.

Responsibilities of Faculty Members

Faculty members should outline their policies concerning evaluationprocedures and their expectations pertaining to academic integrity atthe beginning of each course. They must ensure that student perform-ance is judged solely on the basis of academic work in courses and projects. Because of the differences in disciplines and the type of workinvolved, faculty interpretation regarding what constitutes academichonesty may vary across campus. Since project-based education places astrong emphasis on group work, faculty members should be particularlyattentive to the distinction between group work and individual perform -ance expectations. Faculty members are responsible for knowing andunderstanding WPI’s policy and pro cedure for dealing with academicdishonesty. They are encouraged to implement measures designed tominimize or prevent academic dishonesty.

Facts and Myths about Academic Dishonesty at WPI

Myth:Students never get punished for academic dishonest by the admini -stra tion or the Campus Hearing Board, so why should I botherwasting my time by reporting academic dishonesty.

Fact: WPI takes the academic integrity of its students very seriously, and all cases ofacademic dishonesty are rigorously adjudicated. Over the past five years, aca-demic dishonesty cases have remained fairly consistent in number. Cheating isthe most commonly reported violation, followed by plagiarism and facilita-tion. During the 2013–14 academic year, there were 162 academic dishonestycases initially reported to the Dean of Students Office. Of these cases, 69 werefound responsible. The remaining cases were either dismissed by faculty (82cases), were found not responsible by the Campus Hearing Board (6), or arepending a hearing (5).

Myth:If students read the Academic Honesty Policy or if it were discussedduring Orientation, they should know that collaborating onhomework with another student is a violation of the honesty policy.

Fact:Each faculty member establishes his/her own rules and limits regardingcollaboration. A student may erroneously assume that what was allowed in one course applies to another course as well. Faculty should clearly spell out their expectations at the beginning of the course to eliminateincorrect assumptions. Particular emphasis should be placed on definingexpectations for group work.

Myth:Unless a faculty member catches a student in the act of cheating, there isno way to prove that the student cheated, so I should not pursue the case.

Fact:The standard used in campus judicial hearings is “preponderance ofevidence,” not “beyond a shadow of doubt.” Also, hearsay and circum stantialevidence are allowed to be considered by the hearing board. (An example ofcircumstantial evidence: a faculty member presents to the board that it wouldbe impossible for two students to do the same work on an assignmentwithout cheating.)

If you have

any ques

tions about WPI’s A

cadem

ic H

ones

ty Policy, ca

ll the Dea

n of Stud

ents O

ffice, x5201.


8 5

8. The CHB shall hear the allegations following standard proceduresfor disciplinary hearings established by WPI. The CHB may imposenormal disciplinary sanctions and may recommend loss of any creditor grade for the course or project. If a student is found notresponsible on a complaint of academic dishonesty, he/she may not be failed or penalized by the faculty member on the grounds ofdishonesty. The instructor shall assign a grade based on his or herassessment of the student’s mastery of the material being evaluated.

9. Judicial records are maintained by the Dean of Students Office,and are kept separate from a student’s academic records. It is thepolicy of WPI that judicial records shall be reportable by the Dean ofStudents Office for a period of two years from the date of graduation,transfer or withdrawal from WPI, except when the sanction includessuspension or expulsion. In cases involving suspension or expulsionfrom WPI, disciplinary records shall be kept in perpetuity. Recordsfor cases that are pending completion of the hearing and/or sanctionshall be kept in perpetuity. Records will be available to prospectiveemployers and other authorized individuals in accordance withapplicable state and federal law and regulations. Judicial records maybe shared both internally (e.g., IGSD, honor societies) and externally(e.g., transfer applications, prospective employers, law school) inaccordance with federal regulations that require written permissionfrom the student involved. In keeping with the WPI AcademicHonesty Policy and the Constitution of the WPI Campus JudicialSystem, a student’s judicial record may be shared internally asappropriate without the student’s permission to determine if thestudent has any record of prior offenses involving academic honesty.

What If I Suspect Academic Dishonesty?

The WPI faculty and administration have developed a set ofprocedures designed to ensure uniform (and fair) treatment ofundergraduate or graduate students suspected of academic dishonesty.Faculty are encouraged to contact the Dean of Students Office(x5201) with any questions.

1. Faculty shall report to the department head any suspected act ofacademic dishonesty.

2. The department head shall review cases referred to him/her todetermine if there is reason for believing that academic dishonestymay be involved.

3. Faculty shall allow the student to continue in the course withoutprejudice, pending resolution of the case.

4. The department head or faculty member shall check with the Deanof Students Office to determine if the student has any record of prioroffenses involving academic dishonesty.

5. The faculty member shall consult with the student involved. If theact of academic dishonesty is admitted and is the first violation ofthat nature, the faculty member may resolve the complaint within thedepartment, provided the penalty is accepted in writing by thestudent. The maximum penalty that can be applied at the departmentlevel is dismissal from a course or a project without credit. In allcases, a signed, written report on the matter, including the actiontaken, shall be sent to the Dean of Students Office.

6. Faculty and/or students may request that a case be heard by theCampus Hearing Board (CHB) in lieu of a departmental agreement,even if the student accepts responsibility. The CHB may impose anysanction, up to and including expulsion, for an act of academicdishonesty.

7. For the second and subsequent violations, the case must besubmitted to the CHB for resolution.

Continued on page 8


CASE CLOSED

Student foundnot responsible

Student foundresponsible

Decision and sanction letter sent

Student does not appeal

CASE CLOSED

Student appeals

PRESIDENTIALBOARD OFAPPEALS

CHBdecision upheld

CASE CLOSED

Meet with student

Student admits and accepts sanctions

Faculty/Student sign

Copy of agreement sent to Dean of Students

PProfessor suspects student of academic dishonesty

P

P

Professor confers with Department Head

Checks with Dean of Students for previous recordPrevious

record NorecordCAMPUS

HEARINGBOARD Student does not admit

CASE CLOSED

optional

CASE CLOSED

Case remanded to CHB for re-hearingSanction modified

CHB decision modified CHB decision reversed

6 7

6 7


8 5

8. The CHB shall hear the allegations following standard proceduresfor disciplinary hearings established by WPI. The CHB may imposenormal disciplinary sanctions and may recommend loss of any creditor grade for the course or project. If a student is found notresponsible on a complaint of academic dishonesty, he/she may not be failed or penalized by the faculty member on the grounds ofdishonesty. The instructor shall assign a grade based on his or herassessment of the student’s mastery of the material being evaluated.

9. Judicial records are maintained by the Dean of Students Office,and are kept separate from a student’s academic records. It is thepolicy of WPI that judicial records shall be reportable by the Dean ofStudents Office for a period of two years from the date of graduation,transfer or withdrawal from WPI, except when the sanction includessuspension or expulsion. In cases involving suspension or expulsionfrom WPI, disciplinary records shall be kept in perpetuity. Recordsfor cases that are pending completion of the hearing and/or sanctionshall be kept in perpetuity. Records will be available to prospectiveemployers and other authorized individuals in accordance withapplicable state and federal law and regulations. Judicial records maybe shared both internally (e.g., IGSD, honor societies) and externally(e.g., transfer applications, prospective employers, law school) inaccordance with federal regulations that require written permissionfrom the student involved. In keeping with the WPI AcademicHonesty Policy and the Constitution of the WPI Campus JudicialSystem, a student’s judicial record may be shared internally asappropriate without the student’s permission to determine if thestudent has any record of prior offenses involving academic honesty.

What If I Suspect Academic Dishonesty?

The WPI faculty and administration have developed a set ofprocedures designed to ensure uniform (and fair) treatment ofundergraduate or graduate students suspected of academic dishonesty.Faculty are encouraged to contact the Dean of Students Office(x5201) with any questions.

1. Faculty shall report to the department head any suspected act ofacademic dishonesty.

2. The department head shall review cases referred to him/her todetermine if there is reason for believing that academic dishonestymay be involved.

3. Faculty shall allow the student to continue in the course withoutprejudice, pending resolution of the case.

4. The department head or faculty member shall check with the Deanof Students Office to determine if the student has any record of prioroffenses involving academic dishonesty.

5. The faculty member shall consult with the student involved. If theact of academic dishonesty is admitted and is the first violation ofthat nature, the faculty member may resolve the complaint within thedepartment, provided the penalty is accepted in writing by thestudent. The maximum penalty that can be applied at the departmentlevel is dismissal from a course or a project without credit. In allcases, a signed, written report on the matter, including the actiontaken, shall be sent to the Dean of Students Office.

6. Faculty and/or students may request that a case be heard by theCampus Hearing Board (CHB) in lieu of a departmental agreement,even if the student accepts responsibility. The CHB may impose anysanction, up to and including expulsion, for an act of academicdishonesty.

7. For the second and subsequent violations, the case must besubmitted to the CHB for resolution.

Continued on page 8


4 9

A Look at Academic Honesty at WPIWPI has collected data about attitudes and practices associated withacademic dishonesty at the undergraduate level at the university. Thefollowing is a sampling of data from the most recent survey ofstudents.

Report of Undergraduate Students

Students feel that faculty members are fair and unbiased in theirtreatment of individual students. Students have a strong sense thatWPI’s disciplinary procedures are fair.

Historical data indicates that...

• one third of the students reported that academic dishonesty is aproblem at WPI.

• more than half of the students saw another student cheat during an exam.

• a quarter of the students reported feeling indifferent when theywitnessed cheating and feel that reporting a friend who is cheating is as bad as, or worse than, cheating.

• almost half of the students reported that they had worked with oneor more students on a homework assignment when not allowed.

• two-thirds of all students believe that “collaboration on individualassignments” is not academic dishonesty.

Responsibilities of Faculty Members

Faculty members should outline their policies concerning evaluationprocedures and their expectations pertaining to academic integrity atthe beginning of each course. They must ensure that student perform-ance is judged solely on the basis of academic work in courses and projects. Because of the differences in disciplines and the type of workinvolved, faculty interpretation regarding what constitutes academichonesty may vary across campus. Since project-based education places astrong emphasis on group work, faculty members should be particularlyattentive to the distinction between group work and individual perform -ance expectations. Faculty members are responsible for knowing andunderstanding WPI’s policy and pro cedure for dealing with academicdishonesty. They are encouraged to implement measures designed tominimize or prevent academic dishonesty.

Facts and Myths about Academic Dishonesty at WPI

Myth:Students never get punished for academic dishonest by the admini -stra tion or the Campus Hearing Board, so why should I botherwasting my time by reporting academic dishonesty.

Fact: WPI takes the academic integrity of its students very seriously, and all cases ofacademic dishonesty are rigorously adjudicated. Over the past five years, aca-demic dishonesty cases have remained fairly consistent in number. Cheating isthe most commonly reported violation, followed by plagiarism and facilita-tion. During the 2013–14 academic year, there were 162 academic dishonestycases initially reported to the Dean of Students Office. Of these cases, 69 werefound responsible. The remaining cases were either dismissed by faculty (82cases), were found not responsible by the Campus Hearing Board (6), or arepending a hearing (5).

Myth:If students read the Academic Honesty Policy or if it were discussedduring Orientation, they should know that collaborating onhomework with another student is a violation of the honesty policy.

Fact:Each faculty member establishes his/her own rules and limits regardingcollaboration. A student may erroneously assume that what was allowed in one course applies to another course as well. Faculty should clearly spell out their expectations at the beginning of the course to eliminateincorrect assumptions. Particular emphasis should be placed on definingexpectations for group work.

Myth:Unless a faculty member catches a student in the act of cheating, there isno way to prove that the student cheated, so I should not pursue the case.

Fact:The standard used in campus judicial hearings is “preponderance ofevidence,” not “beyond a shadow of doubt.” Also, hearsay and circum stantialevidence are allowed to be considered by the hearing board. (An example ofcircumstantial evidence: a faculty member presents to the board that it wouldbe impossible for two students to do the same work on an assignmentwithout cheating.)

If you have

any ques

tions about WPI’s A

cadem

ic H

ones

ty Policy, ca

ll the Dea

n of Stud

ents O

ffice, x5201.


10 3

Myth:As a faculty member, I have the freedom to lower a student’s grade orto give an “NR” on an assignment (or an “F” for a graduate student)if I believe the student has committed academic dishonesty.

Fact:Faculty may impose punitive action only if the student has admittedresponsibility and has agreed to the pro fessor’s sanction. The maximumpenalty that can be applied at the department level is dismissal from a courseor a project without credit. If a student has a previous record or if the studentclaims innocence, the case must be referred to the CHB. If the CHB findsthe student responsible, it can recommend a grade action to the professor, butthe professor makes the final decision about the student grade. The CHB hasa greater range of sanctions, up to and including expulsion from WPI.

Myth:If a student admits to academic dishonesty and accepts an agreedupon sanction, I have the option to retain all records for the casewithout reporting the case to anyone other than my department head.

Fact:All cases must be reported in writing, via the Department Agreement Form,to the Dean of Students Office citing the student’s name, student ID number,facts of the case, and sanction imposed. The student and faculty membermust sign the department agreement before it is sent. This is the only waythat the Dean of Students Office can accurately report to another facultymember if a student has a previous record and ensure that a student doesnot have multiple violations in different courses that go unreported.

Myth:I can assure a student that his/her academic dishonesty record willremain confidential and will not be shared with anyone.

Fact:Records will be available to prospective employers and other authorizedindividuals in accordance with applicable state and federal law andregulations. Judicial records may be shared both internally (e.g., IGSD, honorsocieties) and externally (e.g., transfer applications, prospective employers, law school) in accordance with federal regulations that require writtenpermission from the student involved. In keeping with the WPI AcademicHonesty Policy and the Constitution of the WPI Campus Judicial System, astudent’s judicial record may be shared internally as appropriate without the

Plagiarism (examples)

• Misrepresenting the work of another as one’s own

• Inaccurately or inadequately citing sources, including those fromthe Internet

Cheating (examples)

• Using purchased term papers

• Copying exams, homework or take-home exams

• Using unauthorized materials or sources of information (e.g., cheat sheet, preprogrammed calculator)

• Assisting another person in cases where prohibited

Facilitation (examples)

• Sharing test questions or answers from an exam with anotherstudent

• Letting another student copy a solution to a homework problem,exam or lab

• Taking an exam for another student

• Assisting in any act of academic dishonesty of another student


2 11

WPI Aspirations for Academic Integrity

Academic integrity is a fundamental principle of learning and anecessary foundation for all academic institutions, particularly thosededicated to independent project-based education, such as WPI.Violations of the principle deny the violators an opportunity toobtain confident command of the material they are credited withknowing, cheat their classmates out of deserved rewards andrecognition, debase the institution, and demean the degree that WPIawards. It is, therefore, a matter of great and mutual concern to allmembers of the WPI community that a concerted effort be made tomaintain high standards of integrity, both to protect the value of theeducational process in which we are engaged and to maintain thecredibility of the institution.

What Constitutes Academic Dishonesty at WPI

Individual integrity is vital to the academic environment becauseeducation involves the search for and acquisition of knowledge andunderstanding, which are, in themselves, intangible. Evaluation ofeach student’s level of knowledge and understanding is an essentialpart of the teaching process, and requires tangible measures such asreports, examinations and homework. Any act that interferes with theprocess of evaluation by misrepresentation of the relation between thework being evaluated (or the resulting evaluation) and the student’sactual state of knowledge is an act of academic dishonesty.

The following acts constitute academic dishonesty at WPI:

Fabrication (examples)

• Altering grades or other official records

• Changing exam solutions after the fact

• Inventing or changing laboratory data

• Falsifying research

• Inventing sources

• Sabotaging another student’s work or academic record

student’s permission to determine if the student has any record of prioroffenses involving academic honesty.

Myth:International students will be deported if they are found responsibleof academic dishonesty.

Fact:Academic honesty violations are not reported to Immigration and CustomsEnforcement (ICE) for action against an international student. If a student isin the United States on a visa and is suspended or expelled, the univer sitymust report that the student is no longer registered as a full-time student.Unless that student becomes accepted and enrolled as a full-time student atanother institution, the ICE may begin the deportation process because thestudent is no longer “in status.”

Myth:A student’s judicial record is destroyed or sealed upon graduation orwithdrawal from the university.

Fact:It is the policy of WPI that judicial records shall be reportable by the Dean of Students Office for a period of two years from the date of graduation orwithdrawal from WPI, except when the sanction includes suspension orexpulsion. In those cases, disciplinary records are kept in perpetuity. Judicialrecords are kept separate from a student’s academic record.

Myth:Students found responsible of academic dishonesty are alwayssuspended from the university.

Fact: WPI does not subscribe to an automatic sanction for violation of itsAcademic Honesty Policy. Rather, each violation is reviewed individually and sanctioning takes into consideration the unique situation surrounding the incident. Having said that, reviewing past precedent, most faculty who adjudicate cases within the department impose either a “0” for theassignment or an “NR” for the course. In cases where the student has a priorrecord of academic dishonesty, the Campus Hearing Board many timesimposes a sanction of suspension or disciplinary probation.


12

Faculty Guide to

Academic Integrityat Worcester Polytechnic Institute

A Message from the Dean of Students Office

The Dean of Students Office, with support from the FacultyCommittee on Advising and Student Life, has developed this guide tohelp faculty members create an atmosphere where academic integrityis recognized as a core value of the institution.

The guide is intended to assist the community in understanding thesubject of academic honesty and to orient faculty to WPI’s specificpolicies and procedures. It also provides suggestions of how tominimize the occurrence of academic dishonesty in the classroom.

Topics covered/included:

• WPI Aspirations for Academic Integrity

• What Constitutes Academic Dishonesty at WPI

• A Look at Academic Honesty at WPI

• Responsibilities of Faculty Members

• What If I Suspect Academic Dishonesty?

• Academic Dishonesty Flow Chart

• Facts and Myths about Academic Dishonesty at WPI

• Suggestions to Discourage Academic Dishonesty

The Dean of Students Office welcomes comments and suggestionsfrom faculty on ways to enhance this guide and/or make the inquiryprocess as easy as possible.

Suggestions to Discourage Academic Dishonesty

Consider implementing the following best practices to minimize orprevent cases of academic dishonesty:

• Put WPI’s Academic Honesty Policy in your course syllabus.

• Clearly explain your expectations during the first day of classes,including concrete examples that do and do not constitute cheatingin your course.

• Address academic integrity in class while distributing assignmentsand/or exams.

• Inquire about “best practices” policies from colleagues in yourdepartment or in your discipline at other institutions.

• Encourage students to come to you if they are confused aboutcitation and documentation practices.

• Talk about academic honesty with your students.

• Specify how you want sources documented on papers and researchassignments.

• Make up variations of the same exam.

• Avoid use of repeated exams, homework sets and research projects.

• Explain your expectations regarding collaboration on homework,computer programs and take-home exams.

• Report cases of academic dishonesty, utilizing WPI’s policy andprocedures.

• Collect all exams, or rewrite exams each term.

• MyWPI has a resource, Safe Assign, which is a plagiarism assignment submission tool. Safe Assign can be used to detect unoriginal content in student papers by comparing them to a variety of sources.


Academic IntegrityStudent Guide to

at Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Published by the WPI Dean of Students Office, with support from the WPI Committee on Advising and Student Life, August 2014

2014–15

2014-154 stu guide integrityCover_x 7/25/14 9:57 AM Page 1

faculty integrity guide 2014

Documents

academic institutions

academic integrityis

academic dishonestyconsider

wpis academic honesty

wpi suggestions

wpi dean of students

wpi aspirations

wpi committee