Has Anything Changed? Comparing Student Perceptions of Academic Integrity: 2006-2016

Academic integrity issues continue to challenge colleges and universities around the world. After a review of the relevant literature, the authors conclude that additional research is needed to understand and monitor academic integrity within institutions of higher education. This study explores student perceptions concerning academic integrity concepts and behaviors in two time frames ten years apart. In this comparative study, student attitudes toward academic situations, faculty behavior, and business decisions are assessed in 2006 and again in 2016. In general the two groups reported a similar overall pattern of responses. However, the students now perceive academic dishonesty as a non-acceptable norm. They also report that dishonesty causes long-term damage. The results contribute to understanding academic integrity in higher education over time. Implications for the academic environment are reviewed and the paper concludes with a discussion of the results and the implications for future research

A Comparison of Faculty Perceptions of Academic Integrity in Private and Public Universities

Public and private institutions of higher education are challenged by academic integrity. In this study, faculty from over 100 U.S. private and public universities shared their perceptions of academic integrity issues such as academic dishonesty detection, awareness of punishments, the faculty as role models, personal values and the ethical image of administrative units. Results indicate perceptions differed by type of institution but not gender or teaching experience. Administrative units were influenced in public universities (but not private) by teaching experience. The results contribute to an understanding of the academic integrity environment underlying the performance of business education. Implications for research and practice are discussed

Academic Integrity in Public and Private Universities: Exploring Faculty Perceptions, 2008-2014

Academic integrity issues among various constituencies challenge colleges and universities around the world. After a review of the relevant literature, the authors concluded that additional research was needed to understand and monitor academic integrity within institutions of higher education. This study explored faculty perceptions toward student academic integrity. The participants were faculty from public and private universities in selected business programs in the United States in 2008 and then again in 2014. Both similarities and differences in the two frames were examined. Essentially the study found a continuing faculty concern with student academic integrity. There appeared to be an increased awareness of the harm caused by academic dishonesty. Faculty in private schools expressed a higher level of concern than their peers in public institutions. The faculty in this study also noted an increase in the perceived level of punishment for dishonest student behaviors. In addition, faculty see themselves as positive role models for their students. The paper concludes with a discussion of the results and the implications for future research

Student Evaluations of Academic Integrity and Business Behaviors in Private and Public Universities

This article investigates the potential influence of college environment on student attitudinal and behavioral development. The influence of academic integrity issues is compared between students attending private and public universities. Student attitudes toward ethical business behaviors and academic issues such as the likelihood of academic dishonesty detection, the perceived effects of academic cheating, peer norms and past behavior are examined. The two groups report a very different pattern of responses. Students at private universities report lower cheating, plagiarizing, and committing other acts of dishonesty compared to students in public universities. Students in private universities are more aware of students being punished for academic dishonesty. A lower level of academic dishonesty detection and punishment is associated with the public universities. Students attending the private universities are more likely to consider academic dishonesty socially wrong and harmful. Results indicate business faculty in both settings are rated the highest on the ethical behavior scale compared to the general education faculty at both institutions. Students at the public universities are more likely to accept unfair competitive business behaviors. The study extends the influence of academic integrity to institutional characteristics and provides a measurement tool to understand how academic integrity issues impact business decisions. The results contribute to an understanding of the academic environment underlying the education and the potential behavior of future business practitioners. Insights and implications for the academic environment are reviewed

Business Faculty Perceptions: Exploring the Underlying Factors of Ethics as a Core Institutional Value

Institutions of higher education continue to be challenged by the complexity of academic integrity. In this study, faculty from over 50 different U.S. universities shared their perceptions toward academic integrity issues such as student, administration and faculty behavior. At universities where ethics is considered a core value, the faculty perceives the academic environment as one that values honesty, where dishonest behaviors receive adequate punishment, and where students are held responsible for their behaviors. The study contributes to the body of research as perceived by business faculty on the academic integrity environment underlying the education of future business practitioners. Implications for research and practice are discussed

Student’s Attitudes toward Academic Dishonesty: An Exploration

Academic dishonesty in college/university classrooms is widely recognized as a serious problem (Offstein and Chory 2017). Studies indicate that academic dishonesty is pervasive. Klein, Levenburg, McKendall, and Mothersell (2007), report 40-80 percent of college students are involved in academic dishonesty, whereas McCabe, Butterfield, and Treviňo (2012), report 65-87 percent involvement. Studies also report that cheating activity is increasing (Forsha 2017; Pérez-Peňa 2012), facilitated by increasing levels of tolerance (where instances of academic dishonesty are overlooked by classroom instructors (Coren 2011)), and advances in technology (Best and Shirley 2018). Consequently, academic dishonesty has become an increasingly important area of concern and, likewise, an important area of study (Robinson and Glanzer 2017). Academic dishonesty is not a victimless activity. With the growth of cheating activity, the integrity of higher education is increasingly being questioned (Drye, Lomo-David, and Snyder 2018). Pervasive academic dishonesty prevents academic institutions from being able to certify that graduates have gained a specific level of knowledge and ability from their education (Yu, Glanzer, Johnson, Sriram, and Moore 2018). Academic dishonesty has also been connected with a number of other undesirable activities (Biswas 2014), including unethical work behaviors (Harding, Carpenter, Finelli, and Passow 2004). Several studies suggest that academic dishonesty primes students for continuing dishonesty in their subsequent employment (e.g., Harding, Carpenter, Finelli, and Passow 2004; Hsiao and Yang 2011; Nonis and Swift 2001; Yang, Huang, and Chen 2013). Consequently, recent highly publicized business scandals have focused renewed attention on cheating activities in the classroom (Rakovski and Levy 2007). Past ethics research has explored many important issues involving academic dishonesty, including the effectiveness of various tactics to reduce the incidence of academic dishonesty. Examples of these tactics include the implementation/enforcement of honor codes (McCabe, Treviño, and Butterfield 2001; Tatum and Schwartz 2017), required ethics courses (Medeiros et al. 2017), ethics instruction integrated into discipline-specific coursework (Desplaces, Melchar, Beauvais, and Bosco 2007), campus climate (Molar 2015), and the activities of faculty to fight dishonesty (Coalter, Lim, and Wanorie 2007). The attitudes of students toward academic dishonesty have also received a significant amount of research attention (e.g., Johns and Strand 2007). An area that has not received the same level of research attention involves the effects that students’ perceptions of the ethicality of their academic environment have on their attitudes toward academic dishonesty. Specifically, do students’ perceptions of the ethicality of their college/university, their faculty, and their student body affect their attitudes toward academic dishonesty? This is an important area of study since if students’ attitudes toward academic dishonesty are affected by their perceptions of the ethicality of their institution and their colleagues, it may be possible to affect students’ participation in academic dishonesty by affecting their perceptions of their school environment. To explore this issue, first, student academic dishonesty in higher education is examined. Second, hypotheses are developed and tested. Finally, conclusions are drawn

The Inmates Are Running the Asylum: The Role of a Consumer Mentality in Higher Education and Exploring How it Can be Overcome

Serving and satisfying customers is often viewed as the primary function of businesses. Consequently, a customer orientation, or a focus on determining customers’ wants and needs and designing and offering products to satisfy them, is a key concept within marketing. Is the importance of a customer orientation also true in higher education? Several believe that it is. The answer to the question of who is the customer in higher education, however, is less clear. Historically, society was viewed to be the primary customer of higher education – the purpose of higher education was viewed to produce educated individuals who possess the knowledge and skills to serve society by serving as leaders in society and its primary institutions, including government and business. Arguably, this view of the purpose of higher educations has changed. Today, students are most often viewed as the customers of higher education. Indeed, when viewing the activities of colleges and universities, the extent to which a consumer mentality has been accepted and employed quickly becomes obvious. The promise of consumer (student) satisfaction is viewed to be key to attracting students and is an essential component of most university marketing programs. Not all agree with this assessment of the role of a consumer mentality in higher education, however. Several believe that a consumer mentality is antithetical to higher education, which logically raises an important question: Why would a customer mentality be appropriate for most organizations, but not higher education? The focus of this special session is to explore this issue

The Perks and Problems of Being Department Chair

Many faculty members find the opportunity to serve as chair of their department at a point of their career. How does the chair position differ from a faculty position? Of what should a faculty member be aware before agreeing to serve as chair? Is it possible to prosper in the chair’s position? This special session will involve a candid discussion if the chair’s position – its perks and its problems. Four marketing faculty, both present chairs and former chairs, will present a clear picture of the chair’s position, and will address such issues as chair selection and appointment, dealing with faculty, dealing with administration, etc

A Study of the Academic Integrity Perceptions of Business Students in China and Their Business Decisions

Students in three universities in China shared their evaluations of ethical business behaviors. These evaluations were examined in relation to the influence of academic integrity measures such as acts of academic dishonesty detection, peer norms, faculty behavior and ethical training. Results indicate that for these students, perceived role of faculty and peer norms influence their evaluations of business behaviors. Participating in dishonest academic behaviors did not have a statistical influence. Implications of academic experiences are reviewed

Perceptions of Social Media and Online Shopping: A Comparison of Chinese and USA College Students

Retailers have much to gain by utilizing and harnessing the power of social networking to enhance their overall marketing strategy. Consumers now have the means to communicate their opinions about products and companies to other consumers “like themselves” at a critical point in the sales cycle – the beginning. Social networking provides retailers the opportunity to learn about their consumers’ needs and respond proactive. It also offers creative and effective ways to obtain insights not previously available. Additionally, social networking has started influencing culture. Cross- cultural differences may exist and have an impact on the way people use social networking. It is imperative for retailers to incorporate social networking in their marketing strategy. This conceptual paper uses the Technology Acceptance Model (Davis, 1989) to examine the cultural influence on social networking and its influence in online shopping