September 17

Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes

FACULTY SENATE
MINUTES
February 19, 2003

Present: Phil Droke, President; Igor Glozman; Rebecca Sliger; Glen Avantaggio; Sharon Hashimoto; Rod Fowers; Jean Harris; Arline Garcia; Becky Riverman; Toni Castro; Gloria Rose Koepping; Eric Baer

Meeting of State Board in Olympia.

Phil Droke announced there will be a meeting of the State Board of Community Colleges in Olympia. Phil will find out more about the AAST degree. All are welcomed to attend this meeting.

Cheating and Academic Dishonesty.

Toni Castro attended this meeting at the invitation of the Faculty Senate so that we would have more information on policies and procedures addressing cheating.

She introduced Becky Riverman who is the new associate dean dealing with enrollment issues. She also introduced Ivan Gorne, Vice President for Students.

Toni discussed academic dishonesty cases she has dealt with and Eric Baer, faculty member who had originally brought up the issue of cheating with the faculty senate, was present and contributed to the discussion. He stated that currently, faculty tend not to deal with issues of academic dishonesty but instead go through a disciplinary process. Toni stated that faculty focus on educating students about the issue of academic dishonesty as stated the W.A.C. and follow procedures in place for dealing with academic dishonesty.

Students involved in cheating first are dealt with in an informal process if they are found to have cheated and then they are involved in a formal process, especially if they are involved in repeat acts of cheating. The more serious the charge, the more likely they are to go through a formal procedure where academic dishonesty is concerned. Eric saw the need for a clarification of the faculty’s role in cases of academic dishonesty. Glen Avantaggio emphasized that there is a web page on cheating and policies involved with case scenarios that guide faculty where academic dishonesty is concerned.

Faculty first informs students of expectations of accountability and responsibility concerning cheating as this is a due process issue. Eric Baer discussed the possibility of denoting on the student’s transcript that they were found to violate the rules concerning academic dishonesty. He also emphasized that there is no penalty for cheating.

Toni Castro suggested that a letter be sent to a student involved in academic dishonesty letting them know that they have violated the regulations of the Washington Administrative Code. She also mentioned that students sign a waiver when they go to a four year university allowing the university to inquire as to previous contact with a student judicial process She further emphasized that Highline consults with faculty before a sanction is levied where academic dishonesty is involved. The policies on dealing with cheating require a progressive sanction procedure.

John Pfeffer discussed the fact that there is no negative consequence for students found to have cheated and Eric Baer stated that a wrong deserves a penalty. Becky Riverman added that if there is a decision to put on the student transcript the fact of academic dishonesty we should run this decision by the assistant attorney general. It was also suggested that the faculty senate try to find methods for how to deal with the academic dishonesty issue in a preventive way. We need to balance the rights of students with the rights of the institution. Issuing a grade of 0.0X would result in a zero tolerance policy. Eric discussed his view, that of wanting an option for faculty to choose a grade/penalty based on formulated policies and procedures. Jean Harris mentioned that we should be cautious about instituting a punitive policy. Rebecca Sliger asked if she should report her cases of academic dishonesty to Toni Castro. This could help with repeat offenders.

Toni Castro reported that there were 15 reports of academic dishonesty since last fall quarter. Ten cases involved plagiarism and 5 cases involved cheating. Cases that went through formal proceedings with penalties resulted in students writing papers stating what they learned from the experience. Also, there are a range of sanctions. Faculty discussed the need for a cohesive policy on these issues. She also said that there would be a faculty forum on these issues during opening week of school.

Gloria Rose Koepping emphasized that she would like mandatory reporting of academic dishonesty so we would truly know the magnitude of the problem, especially concerning repeat offenders. In this manner we would also know who is manipulating the system. Toni suggested that we work as partners where academic dishonesty is concerned and help educate the rest of the faculty on these issues. Rebecca Sliger suggested that we have stated policies as to how repeat offenders would be treated with an emphasis on fairness and consistency. Toni Castro said that the most severe penalty for academic dishonesty is suspension.

Eric Baer mentioned the use of an honor code, having students sign a contract stating that they will not cheat. Rod Fowers said he has students in his classes sign a paper stating they will not cheat. Phil Droke added that is not worth proceeding with the idea of an 0.0X grade currently but the idea behind it is worth continued discussing.

In summary, we need consistency on the issue of procedures that would guide our reporting cases to Toni Castro. Also consistency on dealing with repeat offenders and the need for data on how many cases of academic dishonesty the college deals with so we know how wide ranging these problems are throughout the institution.

Respectfully submitted,

Judy Johnson-Wise