??ࡱ?>?? MO????L?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???.bjbjUqUq ?f77?*??????l???????D?????" .$? ^^tttttt???????$# C ???ttttt????tt????t"?t?t??t????????tR 0??w??????"???0? ?" ?????????KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY UNDERGRADUATE HONOR SYSTEMAnnual ReviewArticle VI of our By Laws requires the Honor System Director to provide an annual report to Student Senate, Faculty Senate and the Provost at the beginning of the subsequent fall semester. This report summarizes the activities of the Honor System for the academic year 2002-2003. During the 2002-2003 academic year there were 79 reports of alleged Honor Pledge violations involving 104 KSU undergraduate students. [A case-by-case summary of each case using non-identifying information is available at our web site ; click on AHonor Council@ and then on AAnnual Reports.@] As a comparison, last year there were 63 total cases reported.Of the 104 students alleged to have violated the Honor Pledge, 63 were male while 39 were female, a ratio supported by recent national research. (One student was not identified by gender.) Nearly half of the 104 students alleged to have violated the Honor Pledge plagiarized material usually acquired on the Internet. In some cases, students plagiarized the work of roommates or friends who were careless regarding the security of personal papers and computer files. One hapless freshman, asked to write a five-page paper, plagiarized all of a nine-page paper from a dated greek file, causing a GTA to become immediately suspicious, especially when a fellow GTA discovered the nearly identical paper (edited to the required 5 pages) in another class by another freshman. Both were caught and given XFs for the course.The 103 students had majors in the following colleges:Architecture, Planning & Design (1)Agriculture (13)Arts & Sciences (30)Business Administration (16)Education (5)Engineering (13)Human Ecology (8)Technology & Aviation (10)Open (7)Faculty and students who discovered and reported Honor Pledge violations did so in the following ratios:Professors (7)Associate Professors (19)Assistant Professors (18)Instructors (18)GTAs (16)Student (1) The one student who reported, observed an Honor Pledge violation in a large lecture class. Following an Honor Council investigation, the Case Investigators concluded there was insufficient information to proceed to a hearing, in part because the teaching Professor had inadvertently destroyed all test copies which were needed to support the allegations. Both the Director and Associate Director lauded the student=s courage in initiating the report and urged the student to consider applying to the Student Body President for appointment to the Honor Council. The student did so, was appointed, approved by Student Senate and is now an active member of the Honor Council.A second student also initiated reporting an Honor Pledge violation but did so anonymously to the Honor System Director by email, revealing sufficient specific information for the course=s Assistant Professor to discover which student had violated the Honor Pledge. The adjudication process resulted in the student receiving an XF in the course. Unfortunately the student violator deduced the source of the initial email tip and sent the reporting student an alarming, vicious and threatening email. Upon being informed of the assault, the Dean of that college immediately suspended the student violator who was also charged with assault in criminal court. A campus security officer was assigned to escort the reporting student to and from classes for a period of time until the student felt sufficiently safe and secure. Fortunately, when faced with this kind of scenario, KSU administrators were immediately responsive to a potentially dangerous situation, using existing policies to satisfactorily resolve a difficult situation.Of the 79 cases, 15 were reported in large (100 or more) size classes, 28 were reported in medium (25-99) size classes, and 34 were reported in small (1-24) size classes. The 104 students alleged to have violated the Honor Pledge were represented as follows:Frosh (30)Sophomores (21)Juniors (20)Seniors (32)Unknown (1)The unknown student was alleged to have arrived for an exam in the first section of a large class and filled out the scantron with a false ID number and name. When the Assistant Professor, after grading the exams, was left with an unaccounted exam, the suspicion was that a student who was enrolled in the second section of the class had benefitted from an early look at the exam. The Assistant Professor asked the Honor System Director and Associate Director to review the scantron and a sample of a suspected student=s handwriting but our conclusion was that there was insufficient information to begin the adjudication process. The Assistant Professor has since modified the course=s testing procedures to curtail the likelihood of a similar scenario occurring in the future. Freshmen may have a larger number of violations due to their unfamiliarity with the KSU Honor System and the notion of what constitutes academic dishonesty. The Dean of Student Life, at the suggestion of the President of Honesty and Integrity Peer Educators (HIPE) and with the concurrence of the Provost, has agreed to send all new KSU students a letter informing them of the KSU Honor System and its importance to the academic community. Perhaps that information will help reduce the number of Honor Pledge violations by freshmen. The high number of senior Honor Pledge violations may be attributed to the pressure of trying to complete a degree. One senior received a second Honor Pledge violation resulting in a second XF in the same class as the first Honor Pledge violation; apparently the student figured the only way to pass the course needed to complete the major was to cheat.Of the 79 Cases involving 104 students, two students were found by Honor Council Hearing Panels to be not responsible for Honor Pledge violations. Six cases which occurred late in spring 2003 semester, will be resolved at the beginning of fall 2003 semester. Of the 104 students alleged to have violated the Honor Pledge, 45 received an XF for the course. Other sanctions ranged from a zero on the assignment to suspension from the university. In most cases, Hearing Panels tended to require Honor Pledge violators to enroll in and pass the Academic Integrity course within a specific period of time whether they received an XF or not. One student who was charged with an Honor Pledge violation refused to respond to the Director=s requests to comply with the adjudication process. When so informed of the student=s refusal, an Honor Council Hearing Panel recommended the student be suspended from the university by the Provost, who complied with the request. That student my apply for re-enrollment in January 2004.The number of students taking the Academic Integrity course continues to escalate each year. During the academic year 2002-2003 approximately 100 students took the course. Many of their course evaluations commented that it was academically rigorous, personally challenging and, for some, life-altering. Helene Marcoux, Associate Director of the Honor System and the instructor for the Academic Integrity course, is this year taking steps to insure the continuity of the course by taping some of the sessions and training others to also teach the course. The course continues to be unique in public higher education institutions of our size which have an Honor System. Helene, two HIPErs and one student Honor Council member will also be doing presentations at this year=s Center for Academic Integrity Conference in San Diego in October. Helene continues to serve on the CAI Board of Directors and was instrumental, along with Loni Marietta, President of HIPE, in persuading the CAI Board to hold their annual conference at Kansas State University the weekend of October 9-11, 2004. We were clever enough to avoid a football weekend. The Honor Council, Student Senate and Faculty Senate all approved proposed changes to the Constitution which will increase the number of Honor Council members from 34 to 44. The number of faculty and student Honor Council members for the College of Technology and Aviation will increase from two students and two faculty to four students and four faculty, which should make it less likely for potential conflicts of interest on the Salina campus during the adjudication process. We will continue to transport Honor Council members from the Manhattan campus to Salina for hearings. Also, the Dean of Student life will appoint three staff members to the Honor Council and the Associate Provost for Diversity will appoint three at-large students to the Honor Council, in an attempt to increase the diversity of Honor Council membership. The Honor System Constitution and ByLaws have been reprinted over the summer to reflect those changes and various ByLaws changes that have occurred during our first four years.With the addition of a half-time staff position in our office, the Associate Director and the HIPErs have been able to greatly increase our visibility and ability to make presentations to faculty and student groups about the Honor System, explaining its purpose and the adjudication procedures. We already have scheduled dozens of presentations for the first few weeks of school, have contacted all the deans and department heads offering them presentations for their faculty, and anticipate we will again reach some thousands of those in the academic community.Although the Graduate School has not yet become part of the Honor System, this past academic year has seen some movement in that direction. Both the Graduate School Dean and the Provost are in support of the Graduate School becoming part of the Honor System.In 1999, just before our inaugural year, the Provost said that he hoped the Honor System would become part of the Kansas State University culture within five years. The 2003-2004 academic year will be our fifth year of operation and we believe we are in sight of that goal. The Honor System is built on four principles:1. The Honor System retains the philosophical and financial support of the Provost;2. The Honor System operates autonomously;3. The Honor System is governed by equal numbers of student and faculty Honor Council members;4. The Honor System employs a student development perspective.The Honor System web site continues to develop as an extensive and useful guide to many topics related to issues of academic dishonesty and has received over 24,000 visitors since October 1999. We believe it is the most comprehensive and useful academic honesty web site of any academic institution in the country.Questions or comments can be directed to , or visit us in our office, Fairchild Hall 215.Respectfully Submitted,Phil AndersonHonor System DirectorSeptember 2003PAGE 4[klyz????~>?????IJ??w!x!?.?.?.?.?.?.?.???????????????? mHnHu jUOJQJ5?\?3ABCfg??  J K o ? ? ? ? ? ? ?   q r ? ? ? ? ????????????????????????????d?$d?a$?.?.??? ? ? ? ? ???????????????ijkl!!?"?"?"????????????????????????????d?$d?a$?"?&?&))**`+a+?+?+?+?+E,F,?,?,?-?-=.>.?.W.X.Y.g.}.??????????????????????????$d?a$??d?^????d?`??d?}.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?????????$????$& #$a$d?d? +0P??/ ??=!??"??#??$?%????. 00P??/ ??=!??"??#??$?%????. 00P??/ ??=!??"??#??$?%????. 00P??/ ??=!??"??#??$?%???? i8@??8 NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH <A@???< Default Paragraph Font????*f????-f????]f?????f?????ijkl????"?"%%&&`'a'?'?'?'?'E(F(?(?(?)?)=*>*?*W*X*Y*g*}*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?@???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0???@0?? ?@0???@0???@0?? ?.-? ?"}.?..012?./ !T????*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*?*??Helene MarcouxLW:\hc\12-01-2006\Archived\Annual Reports\2002-2003\Annual Report 2003-03.doc?@??*?*?QZ?*?*?*P@??Unknown????????????G??z ??Times New Roman5??Symbol3&? ?z ??ArialS?WP TypographicSymbols"1???hb+?Fc+?F'#J!???????0+2????2KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY UNDERGRADUATE HONOR SYSTEMHelene MarcouxHelene Marcoux???????Oh??+'??0??????  8D ` lx?????3KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY UNDERGRADUATE HONOR SYSTEMANSHelene MarcouxIeleeleNormalMHelene MarcouxI1leMicrosoft Word 9.0S@F?#@? P??@ ?s??'#????՜.??+,??0 hp|??? ????? ??KSUJ+ 3KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY UNDERGRADUATE HONOR SYSTEM Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123????56789:;????=>?@ABC????EFGHIJK????????N????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Root Entry???????? ?FP1?w??P?1Table????????????4WordDocument?????????fSummaryInformation(????<DocumentSummaryInformation8????????????DCompObj????jObjectPool????????????P1?w??P1?w???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???? ?FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8?9?q