Search

ARCHIVES
CONTACT US
WORLD NEWS

ASUA denies support for changes in academic integrity guideline

Although only 12 words in length, a proposed change to the Code of Academic Integrity led to an hour long debate last night before being voted down by the ASUA Senate.

After an informational presentation by Steve Smith, chairman of the University of Arizona Student Affairs Policy Committee, the Associated Students of the University of Arizona senators voted 6-4 not to support the change.

If approved at the Feb. 7 Faculty Senate meeting, the addition to the code will force students to disclose to their instructors when they are using material they have previously used for another class.

"The purpose is to try to ensure that a unit of credit is equal to the same amount of work for all students," Smith said. "It is to prevent students from using duplicate work for credit."

Smith, whose committee presides over academic integrity issues, said the presentation was an attempt to gauge student reaction to the proposal. While he expected the senate to deny support, Smith said he was surprised that some senators agreed with the changes.

"It is a courtesy that we brought this to them (ASUA)," he said. "I was expecting it to be shot down unanimously. I was quite surprised that four of them voted 'yes.'"

During the discussion, each senator voiced an opinion about the measure, most claiming that it conflicted with the basic principles of college education.

"For science majors, the point of education is to be intrigued by something and use it in your thesis," said Sen. Lauren Hickey, a molecular and cellular biology junior. "I don't think a student should have to ask permission to use that (information learned in other classes)."

"The purpose of college is to learn life lessons and not just go through the motions. If you are going into the real world, let us use real world applications," she added.

Sen. Ray Quintero, a marketing and finance junior, agreed.

"When you are getting an education, it is continuous. It is something not to be left in that classroom," he said.

Quintero added that the faculty is to blame for classwork duplication. He said, the generalization and similarities between class agendas entice students to use duplicated work in order to receive credit.

"That is a problem in itself," he said. "The root of the problem is in the curriculum."

Other senators concurred. Shane Brogan, a retailing and consumer studies senior, said the proposed change is indicative of the administration's misappropriation of blame.

"I think it poor planning on the university's part," he said. "They're trying to put the brunt of this on the students when it was their fault for the breakdown in the communication."

Smith, also an associate professor from the College of Renewable Natural Resources, said he understands the issues raised by the senate.

"I sympathize with everything you are saying," he said. "I was a student and it was a problem then. Now with twice as many students, it becomes an even larger problem."

Smith also recognized the immense conflict caused by duplicating material to gain credit in multiple classes.

"The duplication of curriculum is a massive problem," he said. "The work for credit issue is a large concern."

Smith also recognized that the issue stems more from curriculum congruencies rather than student attempts at academic efficiency. In addition, he said it is a problem that may not have an answer.

"We can't even do it in one department," he said. "I hate to say this, but it is really an impossibility without the students. The student is the only way that this is ever going to change."

This statement raised some concerns among some senators regarding the mission of the university.

"I think that's sad commentary," Brogan said. "Maybe we've grown too far too fast."

Sen. Tiffany Podbielski was equally concerned with duplication of class work.

"I don't want to be paying for units that I'm learning about in another class," she said. "I think it allows the student to become tangled in the evil web of mean faculty and teachers."

Hickey said the university needs to improve the exposure of the code, which may lead to increased understanding of the rules.

"The Code of Conduct is found in every schedule of classes, but it is tucked in the back," she said. "If you want a good place for it, put it where that big 'A' is on the front."

Smith said the Student Affairs Policy Committee understands the need for better exposure of their policies.

"One of our goals is to get the word out," he said. "It is important that the students know what is going on. These are the rules of behavior in a course. They're something all students should see and know."

While the ASUA senate decided not to support the change, Smith said the faculty senate will most likely pass the amendment.

"Chances are pretty good that it will pass once it gets to the Faculty Senate," he said "If it is approved, then it is going to happen. They're going to lean towards passing it. My guess is that the faculty is really behind it."

Despite the overall negative tone towards the change, four senators voted to support the amendment, including Michael Dobbs, a molecular and cellular biology junior.

"I think most teachers would allow the students to use work from the past," he said. "I do not think that they will see it as a hindrance for students."