AI Policies from Selected Schools

Students proposing new AI policy to faculty.
Academic Integrity Policies
​
There are a variety of policy approaches taken to address academic integrity in high schools. The following table highlights some of the major themes that are addressed in a survey of public and private schools that have developed initiatives to advance academic integrity. Most of the schools include clear definitions of behaviors associated with academic integrity or cheating.
There are multiple decisions schools face as they choose to implement academic integrity initiatives. One important option is the decision to articulate and seek student support for an honor code. Honor codes can be stated passively; defined here to mean students only affirm their own personal commitment to academic integrity, or defined actively to mean students have a responsibility to confront others or inform authorities if they are aware of academic dishonesty. Honor codes are noted to be one strategy that combined with other factors support the development of a school culture that advances academic integrity(1,2,3). A second important choice in support of academic integrity is the creation of a honor board or committee to adjudicate reports of academic dishonesty. This choice also comes with the option of whether or not students are included on the honor board.
​
Academic integrity polices from the schools in the Table are summarized below where X denotes presence of policy and O denotes no policy located on the topic.
Policy Topic
Council Rock, PA
John Marshall, CA
Norcross High, GA
Montclair Kimberly Academy, NJ
Staples High, CT
Radnor High, PA
Woodside, CA
Woodson, VA
Definitions
X+
X
X
X
X+
X
X
X
Honor Code
O
PASSIVE
PASSIVE
ACTIVE
O
ACTIVE
O
PASSIVE
Honor Pledge
O
O
O
X
O
O
O
O
Honor Committee
X
O
INC. STUDENTS
INC. STUDENTS
X
INC. STUDENTS
O
O
Plagiarism
X
X
X
O
X
X
X
X
Turn-It-In
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
X
Teacher Resp.
X
O
X
O
O
X
O
X
Student Resp.
X
O
X
O
O
X
O
X
Admin Resp.
O
O
X
X
O
X
O
X
Parent Resp.
O
O
X
O
O
X
O
X
Consequences
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Procedures
O
X
X
X
X
O
X
X
1 Lucas, G. M., & Friedrich, J. (2005). Individual differences in workplace deviance and integrity as predictors of academic dishonesty. Ethics & Behavior, 15(1), 15-35.
2 McCabe, D., L. K. Trevino, et al. (2002). “Honor codes and other contextual influences on academic integrity: A replication and extension to modified honor code settings.” Research in Higher Education 43(3): 357-378.
3 Schab, Fred. 1991. Schooling without learning: Thirty years of cheating in high school. Adolescence 26, no. 104: 839-848.
Ethics in action creates character