STUDENT ACADEMIC POLICIES COMMITTEE

OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE

MEETING MINUTES

Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Kennedy Union Room 311

4:30 p.m.

Chair: Steven Hileman

Senators Present: Mark Brill, Carl Chen, Dale Courte, George DeMarco, Michael Doenges, Russell Hardie, Danielle Poe

The meeting commenced at 4:36pm.

An overview of the concept change was reviewed. It was explained that the change from an honor code document to an “honor pledge” was done for purposes of simplicity and regular exposure to students. Students will see, and be often reminded of the academic honesty policy by seeing the pledge on most exams and tests rather than only seeing it when they first enter the university.

Discussion on the exact language of the working draft began.

WORKING DRAFT

Understanding the policies and penalties associated with academic dishonesty stated in the University of Dayton Student Handbook, I <student name printed> pledge that I have made no attempt to obtain, or assist another student to obtain, a grade higher than honestly earned.

Some felt the line about Catholic Marianist values was unnecessary due to the risk that a small percentage of students might not understand or agree with those values. The argument was that a more secular statement might be more appropriate. A consensus agreed that the line containing Catholic Marianist values should retained with the understanding that students already are exposed to this in many other forms across campus and that the Marianist values did not impose religious beliefs on the person that signed the pledge. It was also noted that the concept of academic dishonesty cuts across all accepted value systems and therefore recognizing only one of those somewhat narrowed the scope of the pledge.

In continued discussion, a need for a short and concise statement was identified. Upon reviewing the previous three drafts of the Honor Pledge, the first draft was chosen as a better candidate to pass on to the ECAS. This draft was deemed as more precise, yet still maintaining the necessary definition of academic dishonesty and he reference to the student handbook.

DRAFT #1

In accordance with the policies and penalties associated with academic dishonesty stated in the University of Dayton Student Handbook, I <student name printed> pledge that I have not made any attempt to obtain, or assist another student to obtain, a grade higher than honestly earned.

A motion passed without opposition to move working draft #1 on to the ECAS for discussion at that level and introduction to the full Academic Senate.

Future business discussion included addressing the revision of the current Academic Dishonesty Policy located in the student handbook to further address newly arising issues. It was the feeling that the current policy was not up to date with new technology and fails to be uniformly enforced across all departments and schools.

It was also discussed that the appeals process (beyond the department chair) for the disciplinary portion of an academic dishonesty policy violation be handled by current university policy-violation hearings. This would allow for a more uniform and impartial appeal process for situation that may arise.

The meeting concluded at 5:45pm.