08/11/2025

Addressing Faculty Barriers to Navigating Academic Integrity Violations

by Cory Scurr and Carla Mangahis

(Image credit: Author using Microsoft Copilot with prompt: Create a cartoon image of a female professor buried under papers with an 'I surrender' flag popping out.)

Navigating academic misconduct is rarely straightforward. For many faculty, it’s one of the more challenging (and often thankless) parts of the role. Much of the existing research has treated faculty as a homogenous group, overlooking how experiences might differ depending on their teaching journey.

Drawing on survey responses from nearly 1,000 faculty at an Ontario polytechnic college, our research (see full reference below) sheds light on the diverse and complex realities faculty face when dealing with academic misconduct.

What we found:

1. Time/Workload is the Top Barrier (especially for non-full-time faculty)

This is nothing new! Overall, all faculty cited the time and workload it takes to investigate and file academic misconduct as the biggest barrier. This is especially evident among non-full-time (NFT) faculty, who aren’t compensated for the extra hours required to follow through on these cases.

2. Experience Shapes Perception

Faculty with over ten years of experience were more likely to feel that the institution does not take academic integrity seriously. Meanwhile, faculty with one or fewer years of teaching experience reported barriers related to their teaching practices being questioned by others, as well as fear of damaging relationships with their students.

These findings highlight that faculty are not a one-size-fits-all group. This is a great reminder to institutions that faculty concerns and needs will evolve over time, and our support should reflect that.

What can we do about it?

Based on our findings, we recommend the following strategies:

1. Create a safe space for dialogue regarding academic misconduct challenges, guided by a Teaching and Learning expert to steer the conversation in a positive and productive direction.
2. Strengthen the relationship between faculty and their administrators/management by proactively communicating the importance of academic integrity and providing reassurance, especially for NFT, that filing AIVs (Academic Integrity Violations) will not negatively impact future teaching opportunities.
3. Provide targeted messaging based on the number of years of teaching to create positive synergies within the collective by recognizing and acknowledging their specific challenges, and promote collaboration on innovative strategies to promote integrity in the classroom.
4. When possible, close the loop regarding outcomes related to serious academic misconduct cases to reinforce the institution's commitment to maintaining academic integrity.

Reference

Scurr, C., Managhis, C. and Mandal, J. (2025). Toward a Nuanced Understanding: Faculty Barriers to Navigating Academic Integrity Violations. Canadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity, 8(3), 13-23.  https://doi.org/10.55016/ojs/cpai.v8i3.79408

Dr. Cory Scurr is the Associate Director of Academic Integrity & Student Advising at Conestoga College and the Chair of the Academic Integrity Council of Ontario (AICO).

Carla Mangahis is the Academic Integrity Specialist at Conestoga College, where she supports faculty and students with a variety of academic integrity needs.

The authors' views are their own.

Thank you for being a member of ICAI. Not a member of ICAI yet? Check out the benefits of membership and consider joining us by visiting our membership page. Be part of something great!