• Home
• About Us
• Council Members
• Initiatives
• Student Resources
• Faculty Resources
• Application Process
• Contact Us

UHC Survey

Student Survey Results

In Spring of 1999, the University Honor Council announced the results of an on-line survey it had conducted over the past several months. The survey was completed by 1,689 undergraduates and asked respondents to answer questions regarding their experiences with academic dishonesty at Penn. Among the most interesting statistics to be tabulated follow:

• Of 1,689 respondents, only 918 (54%) considered copying homework to be cheating. Similarly, only 1,028 (61%) believed fabricating lab data to be a violation. And 1327 (78%) considered that the use of cell phones, pagers, etc. during exam constitutes cheating, with 1291 (76%) reporting that storing notes in a calculator for an exam is a violation.
• 1,041 (61%) indicated that they would not report a case of cheating to the Office of Student Conduct. The most common responses (in descending order) were: "Don't want to be a snitch"; "None of my business"; "Too much hassle"; and "Not enough evidence." 861 (51%) and 836 (49%) said they would not report cheating to a professor or teaching assistant, respectively.
• Only 100 (6%) reported that they were "very familiar" with the University's Code of Academic Integrity.
• 761 (45%) said they never even read the Code.
• 1278 (75%) of respondents said that the consequences of getting caught deter them from cheating; 861 (51%) said that respect for instructors deter them; and 1572 (93%) responded that personal values discourage them from cheating.

The survey results support last year's UHC survey, which showed that academic dishonesty continues to be a problem at Penn, as it is in schools across the country. Among the more compelling findings this year was the fact that many Penn students are not well informed about what constitutes cheating or what is expected of them if they have doubts or questions about the Code of Academic Integrity.

Faculty and TA Survey Results

The University Honor Council recently announced the results of both their Faculty and Teaching Assistant surveys that they had conducted over the past several months. The two surveys, similarly structured, asked respondents questions regarding their experiences with academic dishonesty at Penn. Among the most interesting statistics to be tabulated follow:

Faculty Survey

• Of the 107 faculty members to respond: 43% full were Full Professors; 31% were Assistant Professors; the remaining were Associate Professors, Visiting Professors and Instructors. 54% of the respondents were tenured, and the response rate was evenly distributed from across the four undergraduate schools.
• 30% of faculty is very likely to report violations to the Office of Student Conduct (OSC), while 28% are likely to take independent action.
• Of the 70% who are not very likely to report violations to the OSC, 38% of the respondents are deterred because there is not enough evidence; 27% because of the hassle.
• 70% of faculty is somewhat/moderately familiar with the Code of Academic Integrity; 9 % are unfamiliar; and 20% are very familiar with it.
• 37% of the respondents believe that the appropriate sanction for plagiarism is to fail the student in that class; 22% think that expulsion is the appropriate sanction.
• 40% think that the appropriate sanction for having a student take an exam for another student is to fail the student in the class; 55% think that violation warrants expulsion.
• 45% think that altering and resubmitting an exam/work for a grade change is punishable by failing the student in that class; 27% think this act warrants expulsion.
• 38% think that using unauthorized notes in an exam warrants failing the class; 35% thinks that the grade for that assignment should be lowered; and 14% think this violation warrants expulsion. The most popular departmental policies to deter cheating are to provide information on cheating/plagiarism and to change exams periodically.
• 16% require student to sign the Code of Academic Integrity consistently.

TA Survey

• Of the 68 T.A.s to respond, 58% studied in the USA as undergraduates, and 13% have seen cheating in their own graduate courses.
• 26% consistently have students sign the Code of Academic Integrity.
• 37% have never been exposed to the Code of Academic Integrity.
• 36% think that the appropriate sanction for plagiarism is to fail the student for the class; 33% think the student should redo the assignment; 27% think this violation warrants lowering the grade on the specific assignment.
• 38% think that the appropriate sanction for a student taking another student's exam is to fail the student for the class; 31% think the student should be suspended; and 21% think the student should be expelled.
• 39% think that the appropriate sanction for a student altering an exam/assignment and resubmitting it for a grade change warrants lowering the grade on the work; 34% think the student should fail the class; 19% think the student should be suspended.
• 40% think that the appropriate sanction for using unauthorized notes is to lower the grade on that specific work.

The most popular safeguards against cheating were: to provide information on cheating/plagiarism; to change exams periodically; to collect, mark and return exams; and to inform of methods being used to deter cheating.