International J. Soc. Sci.

& Education
2016 Vol.6 Issue 1, ISSN: 2223-4934 E and 2227-393X Print

Academic Integrity Issues: Benefits, Challenges, Initiatives and

Practices
By

ArwaArna'out
Preparatory Year / Najran University, Najran, SAUDI ARABIA.

Abstract
This research has attempted to study faculty members' perception at Najran University about academic integrity
issues: benefits and challenges of promoting academic integrity, university initiatives and faculty members' practices
to promote academic integrity. Two questionnaires were distributed on a stratified sample among faculty members:
(26) respondents responded to the open ended questions and (200) respondents responded to the three-point Likert
Scale Questionnaire. Frequencies and percentages were utilized to answer the formulated research questions.
Findings revealed high percentages of agreement on the following benefits: the commitment to academic integrity
reduces violations, protects people's rights, and affects the institution's academic reputation. The majority of the
participants agreed that firm response to academic integrity violations, achieving the core values of academic
integrity and factors facilitate academic dishonesty are challenging the institution face in promoting academic
integrity. Findings also showed high percentages of agreement about keeping records as evidence related to the
issues of academic dishonesty, declaring an academic integrity and implementing academic integrity orientation
programs for freshmen. The most frequent practices faculty members use to promote academic integrity were setting
exam rules to avoid exam misconduct, encouraging an environment of mutual trust during lectures, and responding
to academic integrity violations immediately. Some recommendations were also suggested to promote academic
integrity in the university.

Keywords: Promoting academic integrity, benefit, challenge, initiative, practice

1. Introduction
Academic integrity is interpreted as the values, behavior and conduct of academics in all aspects of their
practice: teaching, research and service. The term ‘academic integrity’ is widely used as a proxy for the
conduct of students, notably in relation to plagiarism and cheating. (Macfarlane et al., 2014).

According to the Center of Academic Integrity, academic integrity is defined as a commitment to five
fundamental values: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility and courage. An academic community
flourishes when its members are committed to these values (ICAI, 2013). Academic integrity exists
when students and faculty seek knowledge honestly, fairly, with mutual respect and trust, and accept
responsibility for their actions and the consequences of those actions. Without academic integrity, there
can be no trust or reliance on the effectiveness, accuracy, or value of a university's teaching, learning,
research, or public service activities. It is therefore a key that we understand what academic integrity is,
why it is important, and how to help it flourish in college campuses (U.C.Davis, 2013).

Dyer (2010) indicates that academic integrity is viewed as a cornerstone for the majority of academic
institutions as it is a fundamental value upon which the school, college or university institution depends
upon its students, faculty and administrators to support, maintain and uphold. To promote and sustain an
institutional climate of academic integrity, Gilber et al (2007), suggest that it requires active participation
by all members of a college community and is largely dependent on ongoing system-wide
communications that are wedded more to principles of alliance than compliance. Such climate is an
extension of institutional integrity and understanding that honesty must be woven throughout the fabric of
a college. They also state that strategies for developing academic integrity vary from college to college,
but the similarities fall into several categories:

8
 ArwaArna'out

a) Educate and involve students in discussions about promoting and sustaining an institutional
climate of academic integrity;
b) Develop and publish clear definitions and examples of academic dishonesty
c) Formulate clear and consistent methods of communication about unacceptable behaviors and
their consequences; and
d) Establish clear processes for documenting infractions and providing due processes and clearly
defined consequences for unacceptable behaviors.

Promoting and maintaining academic integrity in an age of collaboration, sharing and social networking
has been challenging for educators, librarians, and administrators. These challenges come from several
sources: the increase and availability of new types of technology, the difference in the characteristics and
viewpoints of the millennial generation and the changing society and environment in which they live to
name just a few. Each of these different challenges offers educators new opportunities to change their
pedagogical approach (Besnoy, 2005).

A number of colleges have found effective ways to reduce cheating and plagiarism. The key to their
success seems to be encouraging student involvement in developing community standards on academic
dishonesty and ensuring their subsequent acceptance by the larger student community. Many of these
colleges employ academic honor codes to accomplish these objectives. (McCabe & Pavela, 2005).

Najran University, which is located on the eastern outskirts of the city of Najran in the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia, was established on 2006 and comprises fourteen colleges. In accordance with the belief, values,
and teachings of Islam, it is committed to core values, guidelines, which control the conduct and the
overall performance of all its employees, academic and administrative units in all activities and decisions.
Therefore, the university realized and affirmed academic integrity as part of its core values: leadership,
responsibility, honesty, transparency, accountability, fairness, respect, team work, creativity and quality.
(University Mission, 2014).

Najran University as other universities in KSA, is committed to an academic integrity environment. It

views academic integrity as an ethical principle of the institution which should be compelled with laws
and regulations.

Therefore, it sets academic integrity rules and regulations and makes students comply with them. Faculty
members, on the other hand, orient the students' compliance with these rules and regulations, and follow
practices to promote them. All these rules and regulations are announced under the name "Undergraduate
List of Study and Tests". These regulations are derived from higher education council system and
universities which were passed by the Council of Ministers dated 1993. (Rules and Regulations, 2014).

Both "Undergraduate Regulations of Study and Tests" and the "Disciplinary Regulations List" are
published on the university website. All undergraduate students in Najran University are subjected to
comply with these regulations which aim to:
1. Ensure the quality of educational process and supportive activities
2. Adjust students behavior to be active members in the society
3. Evaluate violators' behavior by implementing sanctions commensurate with their violations and
to address their behavior educationally and academically. (Rules and Regulations, 2014)

According to the "Disciplinary Regulations List", the following behaviors cause severe penalty:
1. Every deed affects the morals and Islamic values, or breaches the good conduct and manners
inside and outside the university.
2. Cheating at the exam, reports or projects or even commencing cheating.
3. Disordering the examination system or the calmness of the exam.
4. Misuse of university facilities and contents.

9
 Academic Integrity Issues: Benefits, Challenges, Initiatives and Practices

5. Appearing at the exam in place of another student.

6. All forms of forgery or cheating. (Disciplinary Regulations List, 2013)

Consequences for acts of academic dishonesty are included in this list in (Article three). Penalties for
violations include an oral alert, a written warning, a denial from university benefits, and denial of
registration from a course or more for one semester or more, a suspension from university for a semester
or two, and a denial from entering the test of a course or more. (Disciplinary Regulations List, 2013)
Because Academic integrity is a collective responsibility which should be shared by everyone in the
campus and all members shall ensure holding to academic integrity standards and that violations leads to
sanctions, academic integrity environment needs faculty awareness of its benefits, challenges, initiatives
and practices to promote it.

2. Literature Review
Increased interest has been focused on Academic integrity in many educational institutions and many
empirical studies shed light on it from different aspects.

Academic Integrity in Online Environment (Distance Education):

Gibbons et al., (2002) focused in their paper: "That's My Story and I'm Sticking to It: Promoting
Academic Integrity in the Online Environment", on factors that influence academic dishonesty in online
environment and ways to design online courses to discourage academic dishonesty.

Kleinman (2005) provided filed-tested recommendations for designing and maintaining online learning
environments that encourage active learning, interaction and academic integrity. On the other hand,
Kitahara & Westfall (2007) discussed promoting academic integrity in online distance learning courses.
They mentioned that universities face challenges to ensure academic integrity in online distance learning,
so they reviewed the literature highlighting the extent of the problem of academic dishonesty in distance
learning courses and discussed issues relevant to this. They argued that while the challenge to protect
Academic Integrity is common to course offerings in both the online and traditional (in-class)
environments, courses presented in a purely distance learning environment present special concerns for
implementation of protective measures.

Other researchers as Spaulding (2009) examined student perceptions of academic integrity related to both
online and face-to-face course formats. A survey was administered which measured the frequency
students participated in academic misconduct and the instances in which students believed other students
participated in academic misconduct. Findings gave evidence that there may be unnecessary alarm
concerning the prevalence of academic dishonesty in online courses as opposed to face-to-face courses.
The faculty concerns about academic dishonesty should not necessarily be more strongly focused on the
online environment. Jones (2011) focused on internet plagiarism as one of the most common forms and
studied academic dishonesty with students enrolled in an online business communication course. This
study recommended ten institutional strategies to reinforce academic integrity and assist students with
avoiding cheating especially internet plagiarism and high-tech cheating. While academic dishonesty is a
priority for all educational environments, it is particularly of concern in courses offered at a distant where
students work independently and with less direct monitoring of their actions by an instructor. McGee
(2013), in her article, "Supporting Academic Honesty in Online Courses", examined reasons that cause
students to cheat and plagiary in online courses and she recommended strategies to minimize violations.

Academic integrity as an institutional issue:

Institutions can take actions to enhance academic integrity as Whitley & Keith-Spiegel (2001) noted in
their article. They considered that the institution has a major role in fostering academic integrity by the
content of an effective academic honesty policy, campus-wide programs designed to foster integrity, and

10
 ArwaArna'out

the development of a campus-wide ethos that encourages integrity. Gallant & Drinan (2006) argued in
their research "Institutionalizing Academic Integrity: Administrator Perceptions and Institutional
Actions" that there has been less research on the roles of faculty and administrators in managing
academic integrity issues institutionally. They developed a survey from institutional theory and academic
integrity research, and they collected academic affairs administrators' perceptions of academic integrity
institutionalization. They suggested focus on cultivating faculty as key change agents and reduced
attention to students and increased attention to reducing obstacles to successful institutionalization of
academic integrity while engaging faculty more thoroughly in the process. Moreover, Gallent & Drinan
(2008), proposed a model of academic integrity institutionalization using institutional theory, delineates
four stages and a pendulum metaphor. A case study was provided to illustrate how the model can be used
by postsecondary institutions as a stimulus for specifying points of change resistance and developing a
common understanding of institutionalization challenges.

Promoting, enhancing, and maintaining a culture of academic integrity:

McCabe & Drinan (1999) focused on the culture of academic integrity. They discussed some fundamental
issues that institutions must address like inadequate administrative support for academic policies and
procedures, inequitable systems to adjudicate suspected violations of policy and lack of awareness of new
educational trends affecting academic integrity on campuses. In another research by McCabe, et al.
(2001), they examined cheating in academic institutions. This research suggested that although both
individual and contextual factors influence cheating, contextual factors, such as students’ perceptions of
peers’ behavior, are the most powerful influence. In addition, an institution’s academic integrity programs
and policies, such as honor codes, can have a significant influence on students’ behavior.

McCabe, et al. (2002) conducted a study discussing that traditional academic honor codes are generally
associated with lower levels of student academic dishonesty. They investigated the influence of modified
honor codes, an alternative to traditional honor codes, that is gaining popularity on larger campuses.
Results suggested that modified honor codes are associated with lower levels of student dishonesty. They
also conducted a survey of faculty in (2003) which investigated the influence of honor codes on faculty
attitudes and behaviors. They found that honor code faculty have more positive attitudes toward their
schools’ academic integrity policies and are more willing to allow the system to take care of monitoring
and disciplinary activities. Faculty in noncode institutions have less positive attitudes and are more likely
to take personal actions designed to both catch and deal with cheaters. They also found that, in noncode
environments, faculty who had an honor code experience as a student were more likely to believe that
students should be held responsible for peer monitoring and to say that they deal personally with
cheating. Implications for higher education institutions are discussed.

Hendershott & Drinan (2000) concluded, in a study in titled "Toward Enhancing a Culture of Academic
Integrity", the importance of the need of awareness to address campus culture issues before creating
honor code and the need to involve every layer of an institution as steps toward enhancing a culture of
academic integrity. On the other hand, Boehm, et al. (2009) identified four initiatives to be significant in
reducing scholastic dishonesty: Faculty training, effective classroom management strategies, clear
definitions and examples of cheating, and placing an "XF" (failed class due to academic dishonesty) on
official transcripts of students found cheating. On the other hand, Hulsart & McCarthy (2011) addressed
questions on academic dishonesty to provide a model for creating a culture of trust by utilizing the basic
tenets of leadership to promote academic integrity with students. They concluded that faculty must create
an ethical classroom climate, by model integrity as well as communicate what constitutes cheating and
the consequences of academic dishonesty, and by deter opportunities for student cheating through
redesign of the learning environment to include instruction and assessment pedagogy.

Academic integrity Misconduct and Challenges:

A study performed by Kisamore, et al. (2007) examined how integrity culture interacts with prudence and
adjustment to explain variance in estimated frequency of cheating, suspicions of cheating, considering

11
 Academic Integrity Issues: Benefits, Challenges, Initiatives and Practices

cheating and reporting cheating. Age, integrity culture, and personality variables were significantly
related to different criteria. Overall, personality variables explained the most unique variance in academic
misconduct, and adjustment interacted with integrity culture, such that integrity culture had more
influence on intentions to cheat for less well-adjusted individuals.

Gynnild & Gotschalk (2008) focused on promoting academic integrity at a Midwestern University. They
examined the nature and prevalence of integrity violations and present approaches that might reduce or
eliminate opportunities to cheat. They suggested that more emphasis needs to be put on structural
approaches to reduce or eliminate opportunities to cheat, and the educational aspect of dishonest actions
should be further strengthened.

Dyer (2010) explored challenges facing faculty and academic institutions in maintaining academic
integrity which come from different areas such as the increased availability of technology and
connectivity, the characteristics and viewpoints of students, and the environment where the students
live—namely a society where cheating seems commonplace. She suggested that maintaining academic
integrity can be accomplished by promoting academic integrity, educating students and including new
technologies and new styles of teaching.
Bernardi et al., (2012) discussed challenges to academic integrity: Identifying the factors associated with
the cheating chain. Findings indicated that students having cheated in a minor and/or major examination
associated with the sum of having observed other students cheating, knowing a student who routinely
cheated and social desirability response bias. Their model for students’ intentions to cheat in the future
included their having cheated in minor and major examinations. Many other researchers examined
academic dishonesty and students misconduct like cheating and plagiarism such as Davis et al., (1992),
Jurdi et al. (2011), McCabe & Trevino (1993), Colnerud & Rosander (2009), Hochstein et al. (2008),
Anderson & Wheeler (2010), Scanlonm & Neumann ( 2002), and Schrimsher et al. (2011).

Research Objectives
The study intended to identify faculty members' perception about:
1- The benefits of promoting academic integrity in their institution.
2- Identifying academic integrity challenges in their institution.
3- Suggested initiatives to be sponsored by their institution.
4- The practices used to promote academic integrity.

Research Questions
In order to understand faculty members' perceptions about promoting academic integrity in Najran
University, this research aimed to answer the following research questions:
1. What are faculty members' perceptions about the benefits of promoting academic integrity to
their institution?
2. What are faculty members' perceptions about identifying academic integrity challenges in Najran
University?
3. What are faculty members' suggestions about university initiatives to promote academic
integrity?
4. What are faculty members’ practices to promote academic integrity?

Significance of the Study

Faculty members play an important role in the process of creating and maintaining academic integrity by
influencing expectations and behaviors of students within their classes. They act as a medium between
the university and students for promoting academic integrity. (Hulsart & McCarthy, 2011)
The importance of this study stemmed from the fact that it is attempted to identify faculty members'
perception about the four issues of promoting academic integrity in their institution: the benefits, the
challenges, the initiatives and the practices because activating the engagement of the students in
understanding and complying with academic integrity rules and regulations is sponsored by faculty

12
 ArwaArna'out

members. They are responsible for administering disciplinary regulations and confronting academic
dishonesty by supporting those with practices. This will not happen if they are not aware of the
significance of the mentioned four issues related to promoting academic integrity.

Limitations of the Study

This study was limited to faculty members at Najran University during the first semester of the academic
year 2014-2015, and the findings were limited to the sample size and way of choosing it. A random
stratified sample was intentionally chosen for better representation. The study was also limited to faculty
members' perception about the four issues of academic integrity and other stakeholders were not sought
by the study.

3. Research Methodology
The descriptive analytical method was used to answer the questions of the study by distributing two
questionnaires (Open Ended Questions and Three-Point Liker Scale Questionnaire) on a stratified sample
from faculty members in Najran University. They aimed to elicit and explore faculty members' perception
about academic integrity in Najran University regarding: the benefits, the challenges, university
initiatives, and faculty members' practices of academic integrity. The responses were then analyzed
quantitatively using descriptive statistics, displaying the frequency distribution using percentages.

Population and Sample

The study population consisted of faculty members at Najran University during the first semester of the
academic year 2014-2015. For best representation of the population according to academic qualification,
gender and college type, a random stratified sample was chosen from two scientific colleges (College of
Medicine, and College of Computer and Information Systems) and two humanities colleges (College of
Science and Arts and College of Education). Table 1 shows the distribution of the population.

Table 1. Population Distribution according to Qualification, Gender and College

Master
PhD

BSc
Academic Qualification

Total
Female

Female

Female
Male

Male

Male

Gender

College of Medicine 42 18 25 10 32 6 133

College of Computer & Information Systems 16 6 35 19 17 19 112

Total 58 24 60 29 49 25 245

College of Science and Arts 62 22 45 23 18 72 242

College of Education 56 38 12 38 7 30 181

Total 118 60 57 61 25 102 423

Table 2 shows the distribution of the sample study according to the academic qualification, gender and
faculty type (Scientific or Humanities).

13
 Academic Integrity Issues: Benefits, Challenges, Initiatives and Practices

Table 2. Sample Distribution according to Academic Qualification, Gender and College

Master
PhD

BCs
Academic Qualification

Total
Female

Female

Female
Male

Male

Male
Gender

College of Medicine 12 8 10 5 14 5 54

College of Computer and Information Systems 6 4 12 8 8 8 46

Total 19 9 19 10 16 9 100

College of Science and Arts Sample size 22 10 20 14 12 42 021

College of Education Sample size 19 15 8 15 5 18 01

Total 63 21 21 22 00 66 200

Instrument
Two questionnaires were designed and used to collect data. They were an open-ended questions and a
three-point Liker scale questionnaire. The aim of the first questionnaire (Open-ended Questions) was to
elicit the main ideas regarding the four issues (the benefits, the challenges, the initiatives and the practices
of academic integrity). Open-ended questions were sent to a random sample of 40 faculty members from
College of Computer and Information Systems and College of Education in Najran University via email
during one month period. Faculty members were asked to express their opinion about questions listed in
table 3 below. Answers received from (26) participants of the open ended questions out of (40) were
collected and analyzed. The most frequent answers were arranged in four domains in a Three-Point
Likert-Scale Questionnaire.

Table 3. The Questions of the Open-Ended Questionnaire

1. What are the benefits of promoting academic integrity in Najran University?

2. What are the challenges of academic integrity in Najran University?

3. What initiatives do you suggest your institution to activate to promote academic integrity?
4. What practices do you use to promote academic integrity?

The second questionnaire (Three-Point Liker Scale Questionnaire) was directed to a sample of faculty
members in Najran University (table 2). The questionnaire consisted of (40) items distributed into those
four domains (Academic integrity benefits, challenges, initiatives and practices). It was standardized on
the response of (6) arbitrators who expressed their opinion about the validity of the questionnaire items.
Out of (45) items, five items were omitted and seven were rephrased. Moreover, reliability was calculated
and revealed a reliability Alpha Coefficient (r=0,804). Table 4 shows the distribution of the four
domains.

14
 ArwaArna'out

Table 4. Distribution of Faculty Members' Perceptions about Academic Integrity Issues

Item Academic Integrity Issues
Number
1-10 Benefits of Promoting Academic integrity in the institution
11-20 Identifying Academic integrity challenges
21-30 University initiatives to promote academic integrity
31-40 Faculty members’ practices to promote academic integrity

4. Findings
The findings revealed in the analysis of the data gathered through the instruments described in the
instrument section are presented based on the research questions using tables and interpretations.

Findings Regarding the First Research Question:

The first research question of the study was: "What are faculty members' perceptions about the benefits of
promoting academic integrity in their institution?" The participants' feedback on this question was
examined using frequencies and percentages and the findings are presented in table 5.

Table 5. Frequencies and percentages of sample responses regarding the benefits of promoting
academic integrity
Response Categories
Benefits of Promoting Academic Integrity to the
Institution Agree Neutral Disagree Rank
F % F % F %
1 Academic integrity affects learning environment quality 258 86 - - 42 14 6

2 Academic integrity is a fundamental requirement for 279 93 - - 21 7 2

producing good scholars
3 Commitment to academic integrity reduces violations 288 96 3 1 9 3 1

4 Academic integrity facilitates formation of self-reliance 243 81 - - 57 19 7

habits
5 Academic integrity protects people's rights 279 93 - - 21 7 2

6 Academic integrity affects the institution's academic 280 93 6 2 14 5 2

reputation
7 Academic integrity affects the credibility of the 273 91 - - 27 9 3
university degree
8 Equity is affected by academic dishonesty 261 87 - - 39 13 5

9 Academic integrity affects students professional 237 79 1 1 63 21 8

development
1 Academic dishonesty affects students' morale when no 265 88 6 2 29 10 4
0 action is taken

As seen in table 5, findings showed that the majority of the sample (above 79%) agreed on the ten
benefits of promoting academic integrity to their institution. (96%) agreed that the most important benefit

15
 Academic Integrity Issues: Benefits, Challenges, Initiatives and Practices

of promoting academic integrity to their institution is that commitment to it reduces violations. (93%)
also stated that academic integrity is a fundamental requirement for producing good scholars and that it
protects people's rights and affects the institution's academic reputation. (91%) agreed that academic
integrity affects the credibility of the university degree. On the other hand, (21%) disagreed that the most
important benefits of promoting academic integrity is that it affects students' professional development.
Moreover, (19%) of the sample didn't agree that academic integrity facilitates formation of self-reliance
habits. And (14%) disagreed that academic integrity affects learning environment quality.

Findings Regarding the Second Research Question

The second research question of the study was: "What are faculty members' perceptions about identifying
academic integrity challenges in their institution?" The participants' feedback on this question was
examined using frequencies and percentages and the findings are presented in table 6.

Table 6. Frequencies and percentages of sample responses regarding identifying academic

integrity challenges
Response Categories
Identifying Academic Integrity Challenges Agree Neutral Disagree Rank
F % F % F %
1 The excessive use of internet 261 87 - - 39 13 5
2 Campus awareness about academic integrity 252 84 - - 48 16 6
3 The motivation of applying academic integrity 264 88 - - 36 12 4
4 Achieving the core values of academic integrity 280 93 3 0 17 7 2
5 Training faculty about practices to promote academic 249 83 - - 51 17 7
integrity
6 Availability of tools to deal with academic dishonesty 207 69 - - 93 31 8
7 Factors facilitate academic dishonesty 267 89 - - 33 11 3
8 Commitment to sustain academic integrity 261 87 - - 39 13 5
9 Integrating academic integrity into the courses 180 60 9 3 111 37 9
10 Firm response to academic integrity violations 285 95 5 2 10 3 1

Findings in table 6 showed that the majority of the sample (above 60% of them) agreed on the suggested
ten challenges in the table above. (95%) agreed that the most important academic integrity challenge in
Najran University is firm response to academic integrity violations. (93%) of the sample agreed that
achieving the core values of academic integrity is another challenge and (89%) agreed that reasons of
academic dishonesty are important challenge. On the other hand, (37%) of the sample disagreed that
integrating academic integrity into the courses is a challenge in their university. Moreover, (31%)
disagreed that the availability of tools to deal with academic dishonesty is a challenge of academic
integrity.

Findings Regarding the Third Research Question

The third research question of the study was: "What are faculty members' perceptions about suggested
university initiatives to promote academic integrity in Najran University?" The participants' feedback on
this question was examined using frequencies and percentages and the findings are presented in table 7.

16
 ArwaArna'out

Table 7. Frequencies and percentages of sample responses regarding suggested initiatives

to promote academic integrity
Response Categories

University's Initiatives to Promote Academic Integrity Agree Neutral Disagree Rank

F % F % F %

1 Declare an academic integrity policy 282 94 3 1 15 5 2

2 Have a clear pedagogical vision about the importance of 273 91 - - 27 9 3

academic integrity

3 Keep records as evidence related to the issues of 285 95 - - 15 5 1

academic dishonesty

4 Set clear sanctions to curb academic dishonesty 273 91 - - 27 9 3

5 Nominate Academic Integrity Board / Committee 199 66 3 1 98 33 8

6 Develop academic integrity training programs on campus 258 86 - - 42 14 4

7 Develop "Online tutorials" about academic integrity 237 79 - - 63 21 5

8 Implement annual events that promote academic integrity 207 69 - - 93 31 7

9 Implement academic integrity orientation programs for 273 91 - - 27 9 3

freshmen

10 Activate Students' Council to inspire academic integrity 222 74 - - 78 26 6

As seen in table 7, the majority of the sample (69% and above) agreed on the ten items suggested as
university initiatives to promote academic integrity. (95%) agreed that keeping records as evidence
related to the issues of academic dishonesty is an initiative for promoting academic integrity in Najran
University. Moreover, declaring an academic integrity policy (94%), having a clear pedagogical vision
about the importance of academic integrity (91%), setting clear sanctions to curb academic dishonesty
(91%), and implementing academic integrity orientation programs for freshmen (91%) are initiative -
suggested by the majority – to promote academic integrity. (33%) of the sample disagreed that
nominating academic integrity board or committee is an important initiative for promoting academic
integrity, (31%) disagreed that implementing annual events that promote academic integrity and (26%)
also disagreed that activating Students' Council to inspire academic integrity are initiatives for promoting
academic integrity in Najran University.

Findings Regarding the Fourth Research Question:

The third research question of the study was: "What practices faculty members' use to promote academic
integrity?" The participants' feedback on this question was examined using frequencies and percentages
and the findings are presented in table 8.

17
 Academic Integrity Issues: Benefits, Challenges, Initiatives and Practices

Table 8. Frequencies and percentages of sample responses regarding practices used to promote
academic integrity

Response Categories
Faculty Members' Practices Used to Promote Academic Agree Neutral Disagree Rank
Integrity
F % F % F %
1 Discussing the code of ethics at the beginning of the course 264 88 - - 36 12 6
2 Including material in courses to promote academic integrity 162 54 - - 138 46 8
3 Reviewing academic integrity core values during course 267 89 - - 33 11 5
orientations
4 Clarifying research ethics before giving assignments 264 88 - - 36 12 6
5 Clarifying disciplinary actions for violations of academic 273 91 - - 27 9 4
integrity
6 Responding to academic integrity violations immediately 276 92 - - 24 8 3
when they occur
7 Requiring specific citation style (APA, MLA, … ) to 249 83 - - 51 17 7
prevent academic dishonesty
8 Starting open discussions about academic integrity issues 150 45 9 3 141 52 9
9 Setting exam rules to avoid exam misconduct 285 95 3 1 12 4 1
10 Encouraging an environment of trust during lectures 279 93 - - 21 7 2

According to table 8, the majority (95%) of the sample agreed that setting exam rules to avoid exam
misconduct is an effective practice they use to promote academic, (93%) agreed that encouraging an
environment of trust during lectures is another practice. Moreover, (92%) of the sample agreed that
responding to academic integrity violations immediately when they occur are used practices. (52%) of the
sample disagreed that starting open discussions about academic integrity issues is an effective practice to
promote academic integrity. Also, (46%) disagreed with including material in courses to promote
academic integrity, and (17%) disagreed with requiring specific citation style to prevent academic
dishonesty.

5. Discussion
This study aimed to examine faculty members' perception about academic integrity issues in Najran
University: benefits, challenges, initiatives and practices. In general, high percentages and frequencies
were registered in most of the issues. As a result of the analysis, it was determined regarding the benefits
of promoting academic integrity issue that the majority of the participants agreed that commitment to
academic integrity reduces violations, affects the institution's academic reputation, protects people's
right, and is a fundamental requirement for producing good scholars. They also believe that academic
integrity affects the credibility of the university degree. This result was in line with Gallant & Drinan
(2008), who stated that academic misconduct can challenge the value of the university degree and cast
public doubt on the validity of teaching and assessment methods. On the other hand, the results showed
that the majority of the participants agreed that academic integrity affects students' morale when no action
is taken, and affects equity. Less percentage was recorded about other benefits: academic integrity affects
students professional development, facilitates formation of self-reliance habits and affects learning
environment quality.

Findings also showed, in regarding to the participants perception about academic integrity challenges
issue, that the challenges which gained most of the participants agreement is the challenges of firm
response to academic integrity violations, achieving the core values of academic integrity and the
18
 ArwaArna'out

existence of factors which facilitate academic dishonesty. Results also showed that faculty members also
perceive university motivation of applying academic integrity, commitment to sustain it, the excessive
use of internet, and campus awareness of promoting academic integrity and training faculty about
practices of promoting academic integrity as challenges of academic integrity to their institution too. This
leads to what Whitley & Keith-Spiegel (2001) stated about college and university faculty members, that
they rarely receive training on how to prevent, control, and confront academic dishonesty. Within this
context, Whitley & Keith-Spiegel (2001) also encouraged training for all newly hired graduates teaching
assistants and faculty members, and refresher training courses should be offered periodically for all
instructors. Moreover, results showed that faculty members' perceive the availability of tools to deal with
academic dishonesty and integrating academic integrity into the courses are less important challenges as
they got fewer frequencies.

Findings showed that the suggested initiatives that shall be conducted by the university as perceived by
faculty members: keeping records as evidence related to the issues of academic dishonesty, declaring an
academic integrity policy, having a clear pedagogical vision about the importance of academic integrity,
setting clear sanctions to curb academic dishonesty, and implementing academic integrity orientation
programs for freshmen. The result of the agreement of most of the faculty members about a suggested
university initiative which was "the declaration of an academic integrity policy" complied with Whitley &
Keith-Spiegel (2001) notification about academic integrity policy: "Every college and university must
develop an academic integrity policy that fits its mission as well as its student body and faculty".

Other initiatives suggested by the respondents were: developing academic integrity training programs on
campus as suggested by Boehm, et al. (2009), developing "online tutorials" about academic integrity and
activating students' council to inspire academic integrity. Fewer frequencies by faculty members were
noticed about nominating academic integrity board or committee and implementing annual events to
promote academic integrity, as they gained less agreement among them.

Findings showed that the most frequent practices used by faculty members to promote academic integrity
were : setting exam rules to avoid exam misconduct, encouraging an environment of trust during lectures,
and responding to academic integrity violations immediately when they occur. They also recommended
reviewing academic core values during course orientations, clarifying research ethics before giving
assignments, discussing the code of ethics at the beginning of the course, and requiring specific citation
style to prevent academic dishonesty. More than half of the participants disagreed that starting open
discussions about academic integrity issues is not an effective practice to promote academic integrity.
This result was also questioned by (Whitley & Keith-Spiegel, 2001).

6. Conclusions and Recommendations

Based on the results of the present study, it can be concluded that faculty members perceive promoting
academic integrity as an important issue in their institution. The majority of them agreed that there are
many benefits of promoting academic integrity to their institution and there are also challenges that stand
against achieving that. Moreover, they agreed upon suggested initiatives that contribute to promote
academic integrity and practices to achieve that too.
The following recommendations are suggested to promote academic integrity in Najran University,
1. Start the process of developing an academic integrity policy.
2. Spread academic integrity awareness in the campus through a set of tools and resources:
– Training programs
– Online tutorials
– Orientation programs for freshmen
3. Establish an academic integrity office to deal with violations and to educate and train
students, faculty and staff.
4. Activate and involve Students' Council role in promoting and sustaining academic integrity.

19
 Academic Integrity Issues: Benefits, Challenges, Initiatives and Practices

References
Anderson, D. & Wheeler, D. (2010). Dealing with Plagiarism in a Complex Information Society, Education,
Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues, 3, (3), 166-177.
Bernardi, R. A., Banzhoff, C. A., Martino, A. M. & Savasta, K. J. (2012). Challenges to Academic Integrity:
Identifying the Factors Associated With the Cheating Chain. Accounting Education: an international
journal, 26 (3), 247–263.
Besnoy, A. (2005). Academic Integrity in a Cut and Paste World: Lost Cause or Pedagogical Possibility?
International Conference on Technology, Knowledge & Society. Available from
http://t05.cgpublisher.com/proposals/198/index_html [Accessed Sep 25, 2015]
Boehm, P. J., Justice, M. & Weeks, S. (2009). Promoting Academic Integrity in Higher Education. The
Community College Enterprise, 45-61.
Colnerud, G. & Rosander, M. (2009). Academic Dishonesty, Ethical Norms and Learning, Assessment and
Evaluation in Higher Education, 34, (5), 505-517.
Davis, S. F., Grover, C. A., Becker, A. H. & McGregor, L. N. (1992). Academic Dishonesty: Prevalence,
Determinants, Techniques, and Punishments. Teaching of Psychology, 19, (1).
Disciplinary Regulations List (2013). Najran University Deanship of Admission and Registration, Online
Academic Portal. Available from http://edugate.nu.edu.sa/nu/ui/home.faces [Accessed Sep 30, 2015]
Dyer, Kirsti A. (2010). Challenges of Maintaining Academic Integrity in an Age of Collaboration, Sharing and
Social Networking, TCC 2010 Proceedings, 168-195.
Gilber, G., et al. (2007) Promoting and sustaining an institutional climate of academic integrity. Education
policies committee, the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, 1-41.
Gallant, T., B. & Drinan, P. (2006). Institutionalizing academic integrity: Administrator perceptions and
institutional actions. NASPA Journal, 43(4), 61-81.
Gallant, T., B. & Drinan, P. (2008). Toward a model of academic integrity institutionalization: Informing
practice in Postsecondary education. Canadian Journal of Higher education, 38(2). 25-43.
Gibbons, A., Mize, C. D. & Rogers, K. L. (2002). That's My Story and I'm Sticking to It: Promoting Academic
Integrity in the Online Environment. ED-MEDIA 2002 World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia & Telecommunications. Denver, Colorado.
Hendershott, A. & Drinan, P. (2000). Toward Enhancing a Culture of Academic Integrity. NASPA Journal, 37
(4), 587-597.
Hochstein, D. D., Brewer, J., Steinke, M. D., & Taylor, J. D. (2008). Examining the Issue of Academic
Plagiarism: What Do Students at Wright State University Lake Campus Know about Plagiarism? AURCO
Journal, 14; 59-81.
Hulsart, R., & McCarthy, V. (2011). Utilizing a culture of trust to promote academic integrity, The Journal of
Continuing Higher Education, 59; 92-96.
ICAI, (2013). The Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity, Second Edition, Clemson University. Available
from http://www.academicintegrity.org/icai/assets/Revised_FV_2014.pdf. [Accessed Sep 30, 2015].
Jones, Dorothy L. R. (2011). Academic Dishonesty: Are More Students Cheating? Business Communication
Quarterly, 74 (2), 141-150.
Jurdi, R. , Hage, H. Sam, & Chow, Henry P. H. (2011). Academic Dishonesty in the Canadian Classroom:
Behaviours of a Sample of University Students. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 41, (3), 1-35.
Kisamore, J., L., Stone, T., H. & Jauahar, I., M. (2007). Academic Integrity: The Relationship between
Individual and Situational Factors on Misconduct Contemplations, Journal of Business Ethics, 73: 381-
394.
Kleinman, S., (2005). Strategies for encouraging active learning, interaction, and academic integrity in online
courses, Communication Teacher, 19 (1), 13-18.

20
 ArwaArna'out

Kitahara, R., T. & Westfall, F. (2007). Promoting Academic Integrity in Online Distance Learning Courses,
MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 3, (3). Available from
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol3no3/kitahara.htm [Accessed Aug, 8, 2015 ]
McGee, Patricia (2013). Supporting Academic Honesty in Online Courses. Journal of Educators Online, 10
(1), 1-31.
McCabe, D. L. & Trevino, L. K. (1993). Academic Dishonesty, Honor Codes and Other Contextual
Influences. Journal of Higher Education, 64(5),
McCabe, D. L., & Drinan, P. (1999). Toward a culture of academic integrity. Chronicle of Higher Education,
46(8).
McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K. & Butterfield, K. (2001). Cheating in Academic Institutions: A Decade of
Research, Ethics and Behavior, 11(3), 219–232
McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K. & Butterfield, K. (2002). Honor Codes and Other contextual Influences on
Academic Integrity: A Replication and Extension to Modified Honor Code Setting, Research in Higher
Education, 43, (3)

McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K. & Butterfield, K. (2003). Faculty and Academic Integrity: The Influence of
Current Honor Codes and Past Honor Code Experiences, Research in Higher Education, 44, (3).

McCabe, D. L., & Pavela, G. (2005). New honor codes for a new generation. Inside Higher Education (pp. 1–
4).

Macfarlane, B., Zhang, J. and Pun, A. (2014). Academic integrity: A Review of the Literature. Studies of
Higher Education. 39, (2), 339-358.
Rules and Regulations, (2014). Najran University Portal. Available from
http://portal.nu.edu.sa/en/web/guest/professional-policies [Accessed Sep 30th, 2015] &
http://edugate.nu.edu.sa/nu/files/admissionpoliciesforunistudy.pdf [Accessed Apr 21st, 2015]
Spaulding, M. (2009). Perceptions of Academic Honesty in Online vs. Face-to-Face Classrooms. Journal of
Interactive Online Learning, 8(3), 183-198.
Scanlonm P., M. & Neumann, D., R. ( 2002). Internet Plagiarism among College Students. Journal of College
Student Development, 43, (3), 374-385.
Schrimsher, R., H., Northrup, L., A., & Alverson, S., P. (2011). A Survey of Stamford University students
regarding plagiarism and academic misconduct, International Journal of Educational Integrity, 7, (1), 3-
17.
U.C. Davis. (2013). What is Academic Integrity? Office of Student Judicial Affairs. The Regents of the
University of California. Available from http://sja.ucdavis.edu/academic-integrity.html [Accessed Feb 8,
2015]
University Mission (2014). Najran University Portal. Available from
http://portal.nu.edu.sa/en/web/guest/university-mission [accessed Sep 30th, 2015]
Gynnild, V., & Gotschalk, P. (2008). Promoting academic integrity at a Midwestern University: Critical
Review and Current Challenges. International Journal for Educational Integrity. 4 (2), 41-59.
Whitley, B. E. & Keith-Spiegel, P. (2001). Academic Integrity as an Institutional Issue. Ethics and Behavior,
11(3), 325-342.

21