Pre-Conference Workshops
Friday, October 16 (Day 1)
“Ethics Across the Curriculum and Academic Integrity: Building Foundations, Making Connections”
Daniel Wueste
Abstract: Part of the challenge that Academic Integrity advocates face is helping students understand not just that academic dishonesty is wrong, but why it is wrong. Ideally, that understanding is developed not only in courses or lessons devoted to ethics, but also, via “teachable moments” that occur in a variety of courses throughout the curriculum. In this session, participants will explore some of the ways that teachers in any discipline can make ethics a part of their coursework discussions and in so doing, contribute to a culture of academic integrity.
“Changing Their Minds and Recruiting Academic Integrity Champions: Using the Academic Integrity Violation as a Teachable Moment”
Tricia Bertram Gallant
Abstract: Is it possible to work with students who have been found responsible or been held responsible for academic misconduct in ways that actually promote a culture of integrity on college campuses? This session will explore some approaches that go beyond “right and wrong” and focus students’ attention on personal, professional, and academic development.
“The Academic Integrity Survey: Finding Out Where Your Institution Stands (and Figuring Out Where to Go from There)”
Don McCabe
Abstract: For two decades, colleges and universities have administered the Academic Integrity survey to assess not only the amount of self-reported cheating, but also the perceptions and attitudes of both faculty and students toward a range of academic integrity issues. In this session, the survey’s creator, Don McCabe, will discuss how to conduct the survey on your campus, and how to make the best use of the data you collect.
“Technology, Plagiarism, and You: Plagiarism Detection Software and Other Technological Challenges”
Gail Ring and Barbara Ramirez
Abstract: It is no secret that students have access to a nearly unlimited variety of resources that support cheating. Online paper mills, test-banks, and even custom paper-writing services are a quick mouse-click away. No wonder, then, that teachers are also turning, increasingly, to technological solutions that check for “authenticity.” But is this the most useful approach? In this session, participants will examine some of the most popular plagiarism detection software and discuss what they can and cannot do, in addition to their pedagogical implications.
“Citizenship and Academic Integrity: Locating Students in a Community of Lived Values”
Heidi Kolk
Abstract: When we present our students with an honor code or a set of academic integrity policies, we invite them to give their assent to principles valued by their community. But they often experience this assent as passive acknowledgement of institutional rules rather than an active practice of learning and interpretation. They may never consider how they shape their community by giving expression and dimension to its values. Worse, they may assume that the rules are the community’s values, and that their main responsibility is to appear to be in compliance. This session will address the idea of functional citizenship, asking how students can find a fuller relationship with – and ownership of – a community' ethics. We will begin by considering academic citizenship as it relates to participatory democracy, thinking broadly about educational practices and experiences, and then spend time exploring strategies for engaging students in a community of lived values.
Concurrent Sessions
Friday, October 16 (Day 1)
“Integrity and Accreditation: Be Prepared”
Mohamed Nagib Abou-Zeid
Abstract: This session is an interactive one highlighting the nature of integrity standards and their relation to other standards. The experience of meeting integrity standards in a number of universities and with three different accrediting bodies is presented and discussed. Recommendations are provided on preparing for meeting integrity standards both academic and institutional and how to raise awareness across campus. Case studies are presented on preparing the self study and conducting the accreditation visit. Best practices are demonstrated on how to incorporate the assessment of integrity into the overall outcome assessment which is a cornerstone in accreditation.
“Across the Disciplines: Academic Integrity Issues That Arise in Different Curricula”
Dirk Killen, Jeffrey Cannon, Peter MacKeith, J. Christopher Kroeger
Abstract: In this session, deans from four different academic disciplines at Washington University in St. Louis will guide a panel discussion about how a field's expectations affect academic integrity on the ground in educational institutions. Engineering, business, liberal arts, and design & visual arts will all be represented in this discussion. Participants are expected to gain a greater understanding of the scope and context of academic integrity issues in higher education, including case studies to bring to their campuses and strategies for handling particular classroom issues.
“Creating A Culture of Integrity through ‘The Development and Integrity Course’”
Camilla Roberts, David Allen
Abstract: A strong educational component is key to a strong Honor and Integrity System. For several years Kansas State University has offered a 1-hour Development and Integrity course as a sanction for academic dishonesty. The purpose of the class is to educate students who have violated the Honor Pledge regarding student development and ethical decision making. This presentation seeks to share the information from Kansas State University and lead an interactive discussion for the purpose of generating ideas to enhance, or create, new educational opportunities for students to enhance the academic integrity of a college or university.
“Toward Reform in Higher Education Ethics”
William Hanson
Abstract: The researcher uses grounded theory methods, aided by graph theory-based analysis, to explore the ethics logic of faculty within a small university. Data were collected in two stages, emerging as 13 categories and 222 conceptual labels. Within a network framework, participant realities are represented through a faculty ethics logic model to operationalize institutional ethics logic. The model represents the primary forces that drive faculty teaching or resolution of ethics issues. Trustworthiness is provided through triangulation of methods for data collection and analysis.
“Honor System Development”
Bruce Johnston
Abstract: This program will offer a model for honor system development in a small college or college within a university.
“A Look at Technology-Based Approaches to Promote and Enforce Academic Integrity”
Christopher Diaz
Abstract: Faculty often look for technology-based approaches to assist with promoting and enforcing academic integrity at the classroom-level. While a number of such technology-based approaches do exist, these approaches often vary in applicability, effectiveness, availability, complexity, and cost. Consequently, one may be unaware of a technology approach that can satisfy a particular need, and may either choose a less-effective approach or use none at all. The goals of this session are to familiarize faculty with various technology-based approaches to promote and enforce academic integrity, and to help faculty identify and choose the best approach for a particular need.
“Surprising Plagiarism Amongst Graduate Students in Science, Math and Engineering Disciplines”
Joanna Gilmore, Briana Timmerman, Michelle Maher, Denise Strickland
Abstract: Plagiarism among graduate students receives sparse attention relative to that directed toward plagiarism committed by undergraduate students. Data from an ongoing study of graduate student development reveals an unanticipated and surprising rate of occurrence of plagiarism. Preliminary findings suggest an additional or novel cause of plagiarism at this level may exist in the form of a lack of graduate student enculturation to their discipline. This interactive program session investigates the nature and scope of plagiarism among graduate students and identifies best practices to address this issue.
“Reintroducing an Honor Code at a Liberal Arts College”
Robert Baker, Thomas McEvoy, Ian Clemente, Benjamin Engle
Abstract: Reversing a decision taken in 1925 to abolish its honor code, Union College-a private non-denominational liberal arts college founded in 1795, and one of the first northern colleges to adopt a Princeton-style honor code-is in the process of developing a modified honor code and honor court. This student-faculty panel will discuss why Union began to explore a modified honor code, the process used by the college's Academic Integrity Committee-including the use of survey and comparative data-and the process being used to create a "culture of integrity" that will include an academic honor code.
“When the Stakes are Higher: Issues at the Graduate-Professional Student Level”
Elaine Berland, Janet Bolin, Joseph Fox, J. Christopher Kroeger
Abstract: This round table session is an opportunity to discuss academic integrity issues at the graduate-professional student level. Open to those who work directly with graduate students and those interested in the impact of undergraduate academic integrity practices and problems on future graduate work. Discussion will be led by academic integrity officers from Washington University in St. Louis graduate and professional schools.
“Perspectives on TurnItIn—The Good, The Bad, and the (Sometimes) Ugly Truth About the Most Ubiquitous Plagiarism Detection Software”
Panel with Katie Povejsil, Breea Bacon, Pat Drinan, Gail Ring, Morris Mitler
Abstract: TurnItIn has become ubiquitous and is now included in the course management software of many schools and universities. Many educators, however, do not fully understand what the program is designed to do and the effects it can have on student writing. Members of this interactive panel discussion will start with brief opening statements about their perspectives on TurnItIn (and similar programs) and then make the case for their assertions in the ensuing discussion. Note: Representatives of the company itself will participate in the panel. Participants are encouraged to bring their TurnItIn related questions.
“Doctoring the Evidence”
Wade Robison
Abstract: In what will become a classic example of fraud in research, Dr. Scott S. Reuben recently conceded that he had not conducted any of the clinical trials he wrote about in 21 articles from 1996 on. These articles set the current standard for post-operative pain relief. The example will become a classic because the articles were so well written and their conclusions so well documented that Dr. Reuben owned the field, as it were, excluding other researchers from pursuing work in that area. So he harmed research as well as harming the patients who rightfully expected relief from the physicians who followed the current standard in good faith. It should come as no surprise that he recommended the drugs of the pharmaceutical company that underwrote his research.
“Caught in the Act Ethics: Strengthening Integrity”
Donald Noone
Abstract: Most methods of promoting ethics in academia use exhortation, analyses, facts, case studies, or ground ethical decision making models in objective evaluation, philosophical, legal or religious principles. These get augmented with credos, honor codes and policy awareness reminders in syllabi, school logos and handbooks. Nevertheless, cheating in academia grows. A new way to use feelings, family, imagination, visualization, and reflection to personalize the consequences of cheating will be experienced and discussed by all attendees. The method can be utilized personally or in the environments of attendees with the result of strengthening integrity among the users.
“Defining Plagiarism: Toward a More Accurate and Useful Understanding of Plagiarism”
Teddi Fishman
Abstract: Most of us agree that plagiarism is a serious problem, but few of us agree on what, exactly, plagiarism is. We speak of it in terms of theft, fraud, and copyright, but none of these definitions accurately or fully addresses the harm that plagiarism does. Please come to this session to discuss and comment on a proposed definition of plagiarism that breaks it down into its constituent elements. Comments, suggestions, and conversation from the session participants are invited and welcome.
“The Value of Rehabilitation”
Daniel O’Brien, Emily Lurie
Abstract: This program is about Georgetown University's Sanction Reduction Process, which affords students who have violated Georgetown's Honor System the opportunity to reflect on their violations and to reduce their sanctions. The goal of this presentation is not to look at the punitive aspect of Georgetown's Honor System. But rather, the goal is to look at just how important rehabilitation is to any honor system. To achieve this goal, we will look at who administers the Sanction Reduction Process, what the Sanction Reduction Process itself entails, and the advantages and disadvantages of the process.
Saturday, October 17 (Day 2)
“Making Meaning from Cheating”
Patricia Mahaffey
Abstract: What happens after an integrity violation? In what ways are students affected by the experience and what lessons do they take away? How can an institution sanction, support and educate in the wake of an integrity violation? This session will focus on the student perspective after an academic integrity violation has occurred by examining cases of individual students and reviewing how these students experienced the transgression. Information derived from this viewpoint can serve to align an institutions response to academic integrity violations with a student development perspective.
“(A)cross-cultural discipline: notes from a journey”
Jo Hinchliffe
Abstract: A grant was received to visit partner universities in South Korea, mainland China and Hong Kong with specific questions on how they deal with issues related to academic integrity and student conduct. The burning questions from my perspective for my institution to consider were:
-Is SFU effectively communicating our rules and regulations to international students?
-Are cultural differences getting in the way?
The questions asked were:
-Does your institution have:
_a code of conduct? (Academic, misconduct)
_a disciplinary committee? (Membership, appeals)
_Who gives penalties?
_What are the penalties, who tracks?
In this presentation there will be a discussion of the findings from this research trip and what implications there are for our international students, our communication strategies and our own work in the field of academic integrity.
“Virgin Eyes”
Wade Robison
Abstract: We are not well-positioned to make the right ethical decision when we ourselves have an ethical problem. As a party to the dispute, we cannot readily obtain the objectivity necessary to resolving the problem fairly. The usual move is to strive for the view of an impartial observer, someone who is not a party to the dispute, but can understand the issues involved and resolve them without any suggestion of bias. But this is not the first move we ought to make. We ought first to consider the problem from the point of view of the others who are involved in the problem. That will allow us to see our problem with virgin eyes. We can then move on to consider how to resolve the problem fairly.
“Toward Best Practices in Educational Leadership: A Synthesis of Models and a Call for Cases”
Jane Clark Lindle
Abstract: Recent work examining the ethics and practices of school leadership has resulted in several models for the profession. A synthesis of the models exposes their theoretical grounding, their similarities and differences. Most of these models have only moderate records of application to the field, and a call for cases testing these models is warranted.
“What Would Your University Do? – Try your hand at adjudication”
Donna Bell, Diane Schulman
Abstract: Having attended CAI conferences for several years, it has become apparent that institutions deal with academic misconduct in different ways, both procedurally and philosophically. Policies, penalties and consequences are generally "hot topics." Since misconduct cases at Ryerson University are likely as varied as those at other universities, we will be presenting actual cases for discussion and deliberation. Participants will work in groups to adjudicate the cases and share their decisions and reasons. Groups from the same or similar institutions are encouraged to work together using their own policies. Ryerson will then present the decision that was made by its Committee.
“Plagiarism Detection Software in Practice: Surprises, Challenges, and Opportunities”
Bradley Zakarin
Abstract: More schools are using software like Turnitin and SafeAssign to detect possible plagiarism. This presentation highlights unexpected complications and welcome opportunities created by SafeAssign at Northwestern University. Ultimately, the advantages for focusing students' attention on the writing process may outweigh the disadvantages of analyzing SafeAssign reports with great care. The presentation also considers the implications of simultaneous increases in student reliance on internet sources and faculty tendency to employ plagiarism detection software.
“Damage to the culture: What’s behind faculty reluctance to respond?”
Christine Austin
Abstract: Faculty members do not always report or address all incidents of academic dishonesty occurring in their classrooms. The reasons for this unwillingness are often given as insufficient proof, no support from administration, or a lack of time and interest to pursue adjudication of the violation. This presentation will examine research that suggests that a faculty member's emotional response to the incident might possibly contribute to this reluctance to act. Suggestions will be generated to support faculty in addressing violations of academic integrity and to create the all-important culture of integrity that can in itself impede further violations.
“Cheating or Sharing? Academic Ethics Across Cultures”
Anne Hayner, Opal Leeman Bartzis
Abstract: Students traveling across cultures often encounter definitions of 'cheating' and 'plagiarism' that differ from those of their home cultures, and such confusion can lead them - often unwittingly - to serious academic violations with dire consquences. How do standards and expectations of academic integrity in the US compare with those of other cultures? How can we orient students, faculty, and administrators to prevent crises? This interactive session will begin with analysis of actual case studies faced by faculty, advisors and study abroad administrators, then introduce tools and resources that educators can use in training students, faculty, and administrators.
“A Cognitive Disruption in my Better Judgment: Reading Student Discourse about Academic Dishonesty”
Clare Dunsford
Abstract: How do students write about their own academic misconduct, and what does their discourse tell us about their experience in the classroom and their attitudes toward academic integrity? This paper analyzes the discourse of a sample of university students' written responses to charges of academic dishonesty, and describes patterns of rhetoric that shed light on students' motivation, reasoning, and justification for cheating.
“Cheating in School: What we know and what we can do”
Tricia Bertram Gallant, Pat Drinan, Tracey Bretag
Abstract: "Cheating in School: What we know and what we can do" (Wiley-Blackwell, 2009) is the latest book on addressing and preventing the student cheating problem in all levels of education. Written for parents, students, K-12 teachers and staff, as well as higher education faculty and practitioners, the book can serve not only as a resource for those who wish to do something about student cheating, but also as a stimulus for school-family dialogues about the problem. In this session, co-authors Tricia Bertram Gallant and Patrick Drinan will offer key insights from the book, with moderation by Tracey Bretag.
“Worse than plagiarism? The case against the dismissive research literature review”
Richard Phelps
Abstract: With a dismissive literature review, one claims to be the first to conduct research on a topic. This discussion will make a case for addressing a serious public policy problem, discover if others are interested in the topic, and/or to make plans for addressing the issue.
Dismissive reviews may do more damage than plagiarism as they are bad behavior and they destroy information. Readers are discouraged from looking for information and so it may be removed from public consideration.
Dismissing research seems to pose little professional risk, but can save time and earn one credit for conducting "original" research.
“I Have to Think So Much in This Class! Fusing Ethics and Critical Thinking”
Kristyl Kepley, Amanda Bond
Abstract: Our students often don't realize that being part of a culture of education means becoming a life-long learner, a critical thinker, and a good citizen. So, we developed a program which fuses critical thinking with ethics.
Our aim was to get students to (1)Realize that much of their thinking was unreflective; (2) Learn to practice assessing their own thinking by analyzing the ethical assumptions they held; (3) Make choices based upon critical analysis of ethical issues.
This workshop will replicate our five-day module. All the materials needed to institute this program in a high school or college will be provided.
“Expanding Outwards – Using the CAI Forum to Generate Discussion and Debate”
Mark Reardon
Abstract: The session entitled "Expanding Outwards - Using the CAI Forum to Generate Discussion and Debate" is a workshop oriented session that seeks to illustrate the benefits of having an online, active, user-generated forum for the purposes of academic debate and discussion regarding academic integrity. Topics to be covered will include user participation within the forum, the goals of the forum as they relate to CAI's objectives, and the forum as a resource for teachers and students. This session will also ask for user feedback on how to improve the forum and publicize it such that it becomes a central hub for academic discussion and contributions.
“To publish or not to publish? That is the question!”
Danielle Istl
Abstract: Has your institution ever contemplated publishing its disciplinary decisions? This session will canvass the pros and cons of doing so, taking into consideration issues such as deterrence, accountability, transparency, consistency, precedent-building, and privacy. This session will also provide the steps the University of Windsor's Academic Integrity Office took to obtain the necessary approval and buy-in to publish disciplinary decisions online. Windsor also publishes "Students' True Stories," which are anonymous accounts by students about the misconduct they engaged in, what they learned, and what advice they have to offer other students. The rehabilitative and deterrent value of this initiative will likewise be explored at this session.
“Finding Our Way”
Joy Goldsmith, John VanVliet, Jessica Keaton, Lindsey Neisler
Abstract: This panel will autoethnographically present the qualitative experience of a small private institution transitioning from a two to four year college and the growing pains of the Honor Code and its Council. As additional classes, majors, and faculty are added to the institution, so evolves the nature of the Council and its goals. We chronicle two years of growth from the perspective of students and faculty.
“Gender and Age Variations in Perceptions of Situational Appropriateness of Academic Integrity Among Students in Kwara State, Nigeria”
Olabisi Olasehinde-Williams, Olabisi Olawuyi, Lasiele Yahaya
Abstract: This study investigated the extent to which younger and older students differ in their endorsement of academic integrity across the variables of gender and marital status. One thousand students from ten secondary and tertiary institutions in Kwara State, Nigeria responded to three hypothetical scenarios created to measure their academic integrity status. Findings of the study showed that more female, than male, students endorsed academic integrity; marital status had no significant influence on students' endorsement; while students aged 17-21 years, tended to endorse actions that were not consistent with the value of integrity. These findings underscore the need to mainstream value orientation into the curricular at every level of education in Nigeria.
“The Evolution of Academic Integrity: Parallel Progress in Two Hemispheres”
Panel with Daniel Wueste, Tracey Bretag, Teddi Fishman
Abstract: In this interactive panel discussion, panelists will trace the "evolution" of academic integrity practices in CAI (The Center for Academic Integrity) and APCEI (The Asia Pacific Conference for Educational Integrity), highlighting the most significant and most promising approaches and trends. Attention will be paid to "the three Ps" (prevention, policing and promotion) as well as successful AI efforts that focus on teaching and learning. Panelists will work with each other and the session's attendees to identify the "core" of academic integrity in the present moment. Comments, questions, and participation is welcome and requested.
“Institutional Change and the Honor & Integrity System: A Shared Vision for Dialogue”
David Allen, Camilla Roberts
Abstract: Organizing, implementing and institutionalizing an Honor System require long term-sustained dialogue involving all stakeholders. As a dynamic campus community experiences growth, new ideas are proposed and implemented. In order for an Honor System to thrive in such a dynamic environment all stakeholders must be involved in the ongoing dialogue related to goals, purpose, and implementation of the system. This session will address strategies for initiating dialogue and resolving conflict within the politics of a university. A short presentation will be followed by roundtable discussions related to institutional implementation and strategies. Bring your questions and institutional issues for a lively discussion involving problem solving in a university setting.
“Grappling with Academic Integrity: Hands-On Classroom Activities”
Renee Gravois Lee
Abstract: In this interactive workshop, we will share a variety of hands-on classroom activities that can be used to engage students in discussions about academic integrity. Grappling with academic integrity issues increases student involvement, offers them practice thinking through complex decisions about ethical issues, and builds more buy-in for the academic integrity program. Time will also be set aside for audience members to share and develop their own hands-on activities.
“Keystroke Dynamics and Academic Integrity: Authenticating Students by Analyzing Typing Patterns”
Shaun Sims
Abstract: Relying solely on an assigned unique student login name and password to validate the identity of a student is soon to be rendered insufficient. While the traditional username and password method may be useful for initially accessing course material, there exists no intrinsic identity assurance mechanism built into this method that would prevent a student from either giving out his username and password to a third party or allowing a third party to complete the work once the registered student logs in. Keystroke dynamics provides an authentication method that is dynamic, continuous, and inseparable from the student over the lifetime of their distance education enrollment. Additionally, the method: respects the privacy of students, does not distract from the overall learning experience, is exclusively a software solution that never requires expensive and non portable hardware, integrates seamlessly into institutions' learning management systems, and has accuracy rates competitive with or exceeding biometric solutions such as voice recognition, fingerprint, or handwriting analysis.
“Hey, did you know we have an Honor Code?”
Akshay Thusu, Kelly Gambill, Charlin Jones
Abstract: An Honor Code is only a piece of paper until its provisions are followed throughout the university/college community. During this session we shall discuss the various techniques for educating your community about an honor code. This session will enable you to define your target audiences and create an educational plan for them. An educational plan will be formulated together that we all can take back to our respective campuses and implement them with amendments to mirror our respective communities.
Sunday, October 18 (Day 3)
“Building an integrity culture through academic integrity, business ethics, and corporate social responsibility”
Tony Feghali, Hanin Abdallah
Abstract: Five years after launching the Initiative for Academic Integrity and Business Ethics -- Bicharaf ("With honor" in Arabic), this session will show how Bicharaf involved the corporate sector in academic integrity and business ethics through a corporate social responsibility framework. The session will show detailed offerings for high school and university students on academic integrity as well as for corporations on business ethics.
“A Space Odyssey: The Implications of Moving the Writing Center into the Virtual World”
Barbara Ramirez
Abstract: For decades, traditional writing centers have offered tutoring services in face-to-face environments, but with the growing popularity of distance education, many students now need online access to tutoring. To meet this need, some writing centers are exploring the idea of "virtual" tutoring. As we explore options using virtual environments such as Second Life for this purpose, we are confronted with a range of questions about changes in the dynamics of the tutoring process, many of which concern academic integrity. This paper will explore some of these issues, including strategies for maintaining the boundary between legitimate, effective tutoring and proofreading, rewriting, and prohibited collaboration; methods for training tutors to be effective in virtual environments; and safeguards for ensuring student academic integrity and ownership.
“Conceptualizing appropriate textural re-use in academic publishing”
Tracey Bretag
Abstract: The "great and mounting pressure to publish and produce results for the institution" (Bertram Gallant 2008) has the potential to undermine the integrity of research publications. Using insights from ongoing research, this interactive workshop aims to determine the circumstances in which academics might ethically submit a paper to a journal for review, when a substantial part of that paper has already been published. Participants in the workshop will be asked to work in small groups to consider a number of different instances of textual re-use, and assess whether a case can be made for its submission/publication.
“Globalization, English as a Lingua Franca and Academic Integrity in the Arabian Gulf: Are We Speaking the Same Language?”
Paul MacLeod
Abstract: Academic integrity is about "honesty, trust, fairness, respect and responsibility" (FVP, 1999). Nevertheless, these values can be interpreted in different ways in different cultural milieus. What happens when students and educators do not share-- or do not completely share-- the same conception of how these values should be acted upon? The presenter will discuss the challenges of implementing North American concepts of academic integrity in the Arabian Gulf and illustrate a variety of approaches to creating a unified vision of academic integrity in cross- cultural or multi-cultural contexts.
“Changing a Campus Culture to Promote Honor”
Mary Wise, Jodean Schmiederer
Abstract: In 2005, Elon began a culture change related to the centrality of honor in all student behaviors. It combined two rule-based honor codes (social and academic) and shifted focus to positively embrace 4 core values. Visibility of the honor code was increased on campus and a new ceremony, "The Call to Honor," was introduced. This session shares Elon's decision points, accomplishments and frustrations with trying to change a culture and encourages participants to share ideas for making honor a more integral part of the campus culture.
“The Challenges of Transplanting an Honor System in New and Fertile Ground”
Sonia Jacobson, Daniel Stoll
Abstract: When implementing an already established honor system (or honor code) for students in a location outside the United States, it is necessary to consider what policies and procedures must remain consistent and the same as the home institution, but also to be sensitive (and not surprised) when adjustments should be made. Having completed most of the task, Georgetown will share the process and the "best practices" of such a change for its new School of Foreign Service in Qatar. The presentation will focus on how and why it was necessary, what Georgetown has learned, and what still may lie ahead.
“Creating and Maintaining a Culture of Honor and Integrity: Lessons Learned over 230 Years”
Brian Focarino, Dave Gilbert, Andy Rudd
Abstract: With an Honor Code penned by Thomas Jefferson himself, William and Mary has been a model of "changing with the times." To create a true culture of integrity on campus, those tasked with promoting integrity on campuses must change the dialogue and reach beyond the classroom to make students accountable for integrity within their personal lives. This program will discuss who today's Millennial students are, what expectations they bring to campus, and recommended best practices for communicating a vision of shared values. Students from the William and Mary Honor Council, along with the Associate Dean of Students, will share approaches to create a culture of honor on campus, both within the academic and social settings.