“The code is a handbook of policies for our relationship with our students,” said James Morales, vice president of Student Services. “(Before), there wasn’t a section that provides the kind of clarity that this section does. The honor statement (of academic integrity) was just kind of assumed.”
This lack of clarity was brought to the attention of the Associated Students of Utah State Univeristy Senate in October 2007 by HASS Sen. Nick West, a 2008 USU graduate in political science.
Jeri Brunson, then-graduate student senator, said West was “pretty fired up about it. He was a real champion for student rights and very passionate about changing the code.”
“Pieces of the code had been changed,” Brunson, a 2003 graduate in physics, said, “but no one had ever gotten far enough along to fix the big picture.”
She said after West brought the issue to the Student Senate, she researched it along with then-Science Sen. Brittany Woytko. After reviewing policies from institutions similar to USU and successful policies at prominent schools, Brunson said, “We realized we couldn’t go it alone. We needed a joint effort. Thankfully, we found allies.”
The allies came in the form of a subcommittee formed within the Academic Standards Committee, proposed by Committee Head Scot Allgood.
“Part of the problem was students couldn’t find a compromise to some sticky issues,” Allgood said.
Representatives from the Records and Registrar’s Office, administration, faculty and students were tapped to form the new code.
“The code was an absolute mess,” Allgood said. “Polices were scattered in three sections and were applied differently to different colleges and within departments.”
To make sure enforcement of the code was uniform, Brunson and Allgood met with the university’s attorney to rewrite the entire code. Old portions were removed and sections were moved around. Allgood said Article VI is completely new and it bears “no resemblance” to the old code.
It was approved by the Student Senate and the Academic Standards Committee, after which it was sent to the Educational Policy Committee. Once approved there, the Faculty Senate, Provost’s and President’s offices were involved, and it passed the Faculty Senate on Jan. 5. The Board of Regents approved the code March 6, and then it took effect following the first week of the semester.
According to the new policy, violations to the code are reported by the appropriate faculty member using an electronic form, which records the allegation and suggested punishment and is then simultaneously forwarded to the student involved, the department head, the dean of the corresponding college and Student Services.
Allgood said the new code specifies that a student has seven days to respond, not including holidays and semester breaks, and outlines a “clear step-by-step appeals process.”
The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution was one of the fundamental motivators for the change, Brunson said. It allows for due process as required by law.
“We wanted to make sure every student was treated fairly, to make it easier for faculty and more understandable for students,” she said.
Along with providing due process, Allgood said the policy has the advantage of giving everybody accountability for their actions. One of the unique parts of the new system is tracking repeat offenders. Where academic honesty violations were previously handled within the department, this tracks across time as well as across the college. Allgood said it tries to address situations like a plagiarized thesis or paper that is discovered weeks or years later. The language of the new code states that an offense can be reported and then followed through “when it’s discovered.” There is now the option to expel a repeat offender.
However, Morales said the new code is not due to an “increase in problems. It’s just the reality of it being a different world out there, than even five, 10 years ago. This section helps to clarify expectations, given the changes over the years.”
Morales said Student Services regularly reviews student policies to make sure they are current.
“Things change,” Morales said, “and you’re going to see this all the time, we listen to our students and ask for the issues, look for improvements. What students should feel good about is that Utah State has fleshed this area out. It protects your papers, your software, your rights.”
Brunson said that although changing university-wide policy is challenging, the new code is something that will work for students and faculty.
“One thing I took away from this is a real love of the Constitution and what it means. Everyone should get the chance to see its concepts in action and impact in real life,” she said.
Allgood, however, cautioned, “Don’t cheat so you have to find out how it works.”
–chelsey.gensel@aggiemail.usu.edu