April 29, 2014 Campus Involvement e Technician Page 6 Kettering University has introduced standards of behavior through the Code of Eth- ics, Code of Student Conduct, and a policy on Academic Integrity to ensure the sustainability of a culture that supports our Mission, Vision, Values, and Pillars of Success. The standards and policies implemented by Kettering are ethical because they promote and ensure that the behavior of the members of this commu- nity will enhance the well being of not only other members of the community but also other communities in which these members represent themselves. Kettering’s Code of Ethics states, “…fun- damental relationships upon which our universi- ty is built are those between individual students and individual professors…”. This concept di- rectly relates to the concept of reverence. There should be mutual respect between students, faculty, and administration when participating in courses and university affairs. Based on Kettering’s own definition of cheating, the use of cribs on academic exercises would be considered cheating unless specifi- cally authorized by the instructor of the course. However, due to the institutionalization of cribs a more in-depth analysis is required. In order to effectively analyze cribs at Kettering it is beneficial to separate cribs into two different categories: cribs used for homework assign- ments, lab reports, and final projects, and cribs used to study for tests. The purpose of homework, lab reports, and final projects is to help students to understand concepts taught in a course and to demonstrate succession in meeting the course objectives. When using cribs to complete these assign- ments students are not challenged in ways that foster a comprehensive understanding of course material. Additionally, using a crib in order to complete a final project does not show that a student has met the course objectives but that they were able to simply present another’s work as their own. In order to gain information about the gen- eral opinions of cribs at Kettering I administered two surveys; one to students, and one to faculty. The student survey has provided evidence with respect to student’s stated opinions about cribs and how they use them. Generally students stated that cribs are beneficial to their academic experience (87%) and help them to succeed in a university that requires them to learn a signifi- cant amount of material in a condensed amount of time. Almost all students said they use cribs for test preparation (98%) and almost half of them said they use cribs for homework assign- ments (48%) and lab reports (40%). The additional comments section of the student survey allowed me to analyze students’ opinions in further detail. Students generally defended the crib system, some even saying, “I would never not use a crib if given the choice” and “good grades get you a degree, not good ethics.” Throughout these comments students justify their use of cribs based on factors such as the eleven-week semester, their service to the community through Greek life, and an apathetic approach to changing test questions by faculty. The faculty survey has provided evi- dence of faculty’s stated opinions on cribs, and how often faculty change assignments, projects, and tests. 31% of faculty stated that all students had access to cribs for the courses they teach, and 31% stated no students have access. The views of ethical implications with the use of cribs was evenly distributed with yes (31%), no (29%). Faculty also generally stated that stu- dents mastery of course material through the use of cribs was dependent on how they are used (58%). The additional responses from the faculty survey represent diverse opinions on cribs and how they affect a student’s academic experi- ence. One faculty member said, “…[cribs] encourage students to focus on knowledge that is partial and spotty, and think of their educa- tion as a series of questions to be answered.” Another said, “Much [ado] about nothing.” These comments illustrate the drastic difference in opinions among faculty and what level of interest they have in the academic experience of their students. Constantly throughout the 327 addition- al comments of the student survey are referenc- es to cribs allowing students to more efficiently focus their studying on topics they will be tested over. This removes students from the real reason universities exist, to provide an environment to learn. According to our student handbook the Mission of our university states: We prepare students for lives of extraor- dinary leadership and service by linking trans- formative experiential learning opportunities to rigorous academic programs in engineering, science, mathematics, and business. Although this may not have been inten- tional, our mission statement does not directly mention academic learning. It focuses on the linkage between the work part of Kettering’s co-op program and the academic program. Ac- cording to another one of our professors “Cribs do nothing to challenge students to be creative or to take intellectual risks”. This deviation from the mission of our university is unethical by all parties involved because it allows members of the community to present the university as being something other than it actually is. According to Dr. Friedman, a professor at Santa Clara University, “Memorizing answers is analogous to the practice of going through a textbook using a highlighter to mark the five or ten percent that you believe you actually are supposed to learn—or at least will be tested on.”. This outlines how cribs can be used in a detrimental way and can negatively affect the pursuit of the community outlined in our Code of Ethics. If a crib is used as a source for prac- tice problems, or a way to determine how well a student understands course material, our Code of Ethics has not been violated. In this context the ethical use of cribs is entirely dependent on the student. There is fluctuation in the ways and fre- quencies in which professors approach chang- ing assignments and tests for particular courses. Some state that they attempt to change their assignments every term while others state they change them less frequently. This poses an ethi- cal dilemma for both students and faculty be- cause students are put in a position where they are tempted to cheat and faculty can receive false acknowledgment for the supposed success of the students in their course. This course of action by professors also gives students a way to justify unethical action by saying that if the professor can’t put in enough effort to change their test its their fault. According to Psychology of Academic Cheating “…individuals are likely to engage in some forms of dishonesty when unavoidable situational pressures clash with personal agen- das”. From this analysis we can see how the structure at Kettering may hinder the academic experience. The rigorousness of the eleven week semester puts students in a position where unethical action can seem to be the only way to survive. This environment and access to cribs can also allow students to prioritize the immedi- ate tangible, grades, over a more comprehensive understanding of course material. In order to successfully promote a com- munity driven to uphold the highest standards of ethical conduct, support will be needed from students, faculty, and administration. A rigorous commitment to the policies and standards of the university by faculty and administration will be needed to set an example for students that ethi- cal conduct is an expectation at our university. The implementation of an honor code by the students of Kettering University and its support from faculty and administration would further promote ethical conduct and academic integrity throughout our community. This will ensure that the behaviors of the members of this community will enhance the well-being of all those they come in contact with. Continued from Page 2 Letter from the Editor Welcome back B-Section! It is exciting to return to campus and see all of our friends, colleagues, and community. This past winter was one for the record books, and it defi- nitely makes us feel so much more anticipation for summer. As always, the Technician is open to feedback, suggestions, and writers. If you feel we aren’t being your voice, step up and put your words in print! It is crucial to have all of the campus involved in putting out our editions, and the greater diversity in content we have, the better we represent the whole of Kettering. As always, Jackson Coloske Editor in Chief