Model Code of Academic Integrity
Director of Academic Integrity Office
Stages of Institutional Development
Four stages of institutional development are hypothesized so as to comprehend and distinguish the relative positions of colleges and universities regarding the organization of academic integrity on their campuses:
Stage One: "Primitive"
This stage describes a school with no policy or procedures (or minimalist ones) and where there is great variation in faculty and administrative handling of cheating.
Stage Two: "Radar Screen"
This stage describes a school where cheating issues have risen to public debate because of the perceived weakness of academic integrity policies and fundamental concerns with the consistency and fairness of existing practices. Stage two is characterized by early efforts, usually led by administration, to put a policy and procedures into effect, often for fear of litigation.
Stage Three: "Mature"
This stage characterizes a school where academic integrity policies and procedures are known and widely, but not universally, supported. Continuing efforts occur to socialize new faculty and students to the academic integrity policy, and it is used frequently by faculty, in particular.
Stage Four: "Honor Code"
This stage describes an institution where students take a major responsibility in implementing the integrity policy, and there is wide recognition that the code distinguishes the school while leading to lower cheating and plagiarism rates than most non-code schools.
Stage four is not necessarily the best. Most institutions can get to stage three, and a few can create and sustain stage four. Stage four is heuristic so that institutions may learn what kinds of campus cultures can sustain integrity. Stage three schools, in particular, should strive to emulate the advantages of student empowerment seen in stage four schools. Prudence dictates that "the best is the enemy of the good" so great care in attempting to move to stage four is required. Stage three is a realistic and desirable stage for most institutions.
Institutions should engage in planning that identifies their current stage of development and the obstacles and opportunities in moving to the next stage.
What Are High School Students Like?
There are several resources to help faculty, staff, and administrators at the K-12 level develop or refine their academic integrity programs and policies. Excerpts from a few of these resources can be found on this page, with information on how to access the resources in full.
K-12 Honor Code Development Stages
former Chair of the Theology Department at Saint Andrew's School
Ph.D., honor council advisor at the Westminster Schools
High School Honor Codes
The School for Ethical Education, led by David Wangaard, Ed.D., hosts a large number of honor code resources for secondary, junior high, and middle schools. Those academic integrity policies can be found on their Integrity Works! site. Click here to view them, or view some samples below!
East Chapel Hill High School (NC)
Illinois Math and Science Academy
New Mexico Military Institute
Wyoming Seminary College Preparatory School (PA)
Honor System for High Schools: A Developmental Flowchart
The School for Ethical Education, led by David Wangaard, Ed.D., designed a three-year strategy for the development and implementation of academic integrity committees and programs. To view the table, click here. Although it was developed with high schools in mind, many of the strategies can be universally applied.
SEE has also created a flowchart to advise in the creation of honor systems for high schools. Each topic contains a wealth of information on the fundamentals of individual development phases.