Many student academic integrity infractions, such as forgery or exam cheating, are derogatorily referred to as “academic misconduct” (de Maio et al., 2022). This concept is refuted in this chapter by presenting a larger perspective. The formal concepts of academic misconduct are examined first, arguing that these notions must be applied to all academy participants, particularly the behavior of instructors and administrators who set an important example and moral tone. Even though integrity is critical to the academic mission, research suggests that certain educators and administrators engage in wrongdoing, especially in their variable of this study, and involves classification (Mike Perkins et al., 2020).
Following that, we look at policy changes resulting from calls to reinforce “China’s scientific integrity system” (HAL, 2009, I). Based on Eaton’s findings, we then offer examples of inappropriate behavior and other infractions committed by instructors and administrators, highlighting repeating tendencies. We emphasize the results of a search of the Rebuttal Watch database, which revealed 326 retractions involving professors employed by higher education institutions between 2010 and 2020 and reports of misbehavior in the national news. To conclude, we require a full examination of professional dishonesty by academic administrators and faculty at higher education institutions and an assessment of how well the changes have worked(Mahmoud et al., 2018).
Impact of Academic Misconduct
Academic dishonesty hurts students, instructors, schools, and the higher education system.
Students who use negation to rationalize cheating are more likely to cheat again and are more likely to develop an evil character. Studies have shown that dishonesty in the classroom predicts dishonesty and larceny in the workplace. The effects of academic dishonesty persist long after a student has graduated. A degree from an accredited college or university gives you an advantage when applying for jobs. A graduate’s education and skill set can be shown in their degree. Unfortunately, academic dishonesty means that not all students who achieved the same grades did as well in the course. Since businesses cannot tell which pupils will turn out to be “lemons,” they have to pay all of them the same amount of money regardless of their actual skill level. As a result, as more pupils cheat, passing without obtaining the essential skills or learning, the general standard of a school’s graduates declines, and companies are less inclined to hire a recruit from that institution. As a result, academic dishonesty hurts all students, including those who do not cheat. Academic dishonesty also influences teachers—cheating results in a lack of knowledge in an economy where the lecturer teaches a specific study area. Moreover, many professors experience emotional anguish following a cheating incident because they view it as a political statement or a betrayal of their confidence. Handling academic dishonesty is often one of the most demanding components of a career in education, as indicated by the fact that 77% of all academics stated that coping with a dishonest undergraduate is one of the most difficult aspects of the profession in a recent poll.
Academic misbehavior can harm a college’s credibility.
Academic misconduct can influence one of a college’s most important assets, its reputation. A college with a reputation for corruption scandals may lose favor with future donors, students, and, most importantly, employers. On the other hand, schools with low degrees of academic dishonesty can use their good name to attract candidates and jobs. Academic dishonesty endangers the academic community. Allowing students to achieve without needing to understand the material undermines education’s primary purpose of information transfer.
Furthermore, academic dishonesty produces a detrimental learning environment for both honest and unscrupulous students (Hughes, 2022). Because they understand the benefits of their behavior, honest students may grow discouraged when they watch cheats escape detection. When students cheat, it undermines the honesty of their work. The theft of an author’s ideas, which are their “property and personality,” stunts the advancement of human knowledge. False publications can be an issue for a long since they can persist in circulation and be cited even if they are never properly retracted. S. Walter Poulshock, a young scholar active in the mid-1950s, was exposed as a fraud in the American Historical Review’s 1966 warning about his work. Even so, many academic libraries kept copies of his book long after the publishers wanted to get rid of it, and it was still talked about in 2013.
Types of Academic Misconduct
Faculty and Administrator Misconduct
Still, there has not been a full inquiry into allegations of wrongdoing by university administrators and faculty. The preceding discussion of behavioral categories, structural influences, and potential solutions may serve as a valuable basis for this effort. Here we build on Eaton’s research by citing cases of alleged academic and corporate dishonesty reported in the Canadian news and now available through Rebuttal Watch. We have chosen to limit our attention to research misconduct, while we do briefly mention speech plagiarism, unethical admissions practices, and improper personal relationships. Is it because violations are less widespread in places of higher education or because they are better at covering them up (handling such issues in tight confidentiality as private personnel affairs)? Media reports of student cheating (Christensen Hughes & Eaton, 2022) and official and teacher misconduct appear to be more common in other countries. However, between 2007 and 2011, a concerted effort was launched to evaluate and tighten Canada’s research integrity standards in response to growing concerns about research misconduct by staff at Canadian higher education institutions. Following this, we will discuss some of the major discoveries and recommendations that resulted from this national response to various events.
“Taking another person’s ideas, skills, goods, or words while giving fair credit” is how the Aggie Honor System Office defines plagiarism. Plagiarism and cheating are the main types of academic misconduct. A term paper or writing project is plagiarized when an author fails to cite their cognitive form (Kolodziej, 2022). Plagiarism uses written or digital text in books, periodicals, magazines, newspapers, and websites. However, it applies to visual resources like photographs, graphs, statistics, sketches, and findings from presentations, dialogues, and television shows. It covers all created sources. Younger authors may reproduce due to a lack of understanding of citation and verification standards or misapplying norms from other disciplines or cultures. A rookie writer may need to learn the difference between direct quotes, paraphrases, and paraphrases. Plagiarism may result from poor note-taking. Authors are responsible for properly citing sources. Thus, if you quote someone else, you must credit them and include a link to the original work.
Even if we do not know how often academics and administrators in higher education commit research misconduct, the incidents above are troubling. Reports of researchers fabricating data and job financing, doctoring photographs, squandering research funds, neglecting to disclose conflicts of interest, hiring freelance copywriters, and plagiarizing graduate work and speeches harm public trust in science and the academy. Other concerns were briefly highlighted, such as graduate student supervision, recruiting procedures, international student recruitment ethics, and improper teacher-student interactions. These themes could damage institutional integrity, trust, and reputation.
Full investigations into academic and administrative wrongdoing are the best way to encourage honesty in higher education. As mentioned, Stone and Starkey’s (2011) categories might be used to survey questionable behaviors, propose possible solutions, and uncover systemic issues causing them. Such studies could inform policy and practice.
Zhang, C., Hu, M., Di Maio, F., Sprecher, B., Yang, X., & Tukker, A. (2022). An overview of the waste hierarchy framework for analyzing the circularity in European construction and demolition waste management. Science of the Total Environment, 803, 149892.
Perkins, M., Gezgin, U. B., & Roe, J. (2020). Reducing plagiarism through academic misconduct education. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 16(1), 1-15.
Mahmood, A. R., Korenkevych, D., Vasan, G., Ma, W., & Bergstra, J. (2018, October). We are benchmarking reinforcement learning algorithms on real-world robots. In Conference on robot learning (pp. 561-591). PMLR.
Kolodziej, L. (2022). Plagiarism and blat in the academic community: the case study from the Republic of Poland.
Eaton, S. E., & Christensen Hughes, J. (2022). Academic integrity in Canada: Historical perspectives and current trends. In Academic Integrity in Canada (pp. 3–24). Springer, Cham.
Hughes, R., Rose, A., Lozano, J. S., Garguilo, S., & Knight, D. (2022). A Model of Misconduct, Accusations, and Institution Response at US Colleges and Universities: Synthesis of the Literature and an Agenda for Future Research. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research: Volume 37, 457-517.
Liu, J. J., Dickson, R., Niaz, H., Van Hal, J. W., Dijkstra, J. W., & Fasahati, P. (2022). Production of fuels and chemicals from macroalgal biomass: Current status, potentials, challenges, and prospects. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 169, 112954.