Advertisement

Innovative Higher Education

, Volume 43, Issue 4, pp 289–302 | Cite as

Codes of Conduct for Undergraduate Teaching in Four Types of Colleges and Universities

  • Dawn E. Lyken-Segosebe
  • John M. Braxton
  • Mary K. Hutchens
  • Eugenia Harris
Article

Abstract

Codes of conduct for undergraduate teaching stipulate quality professional standards for teaching. Besides contributing to the safeguarding of student welfare, such codes are critical given the autonomy the professoriate has in the performance of its teaching role, the need for professional self-regulation, and research evidence linking positive teacher behaviors to student success. This study investigated the incidence of publicly-posted codes of conduct for undergraduate teaching in four types of institutions. It is the first stage of a research program that will assess the extent of faculty adherence to codes of conduct and arrangements for reporting and instituting sanctions for violations of such codes.

Keywords

Codes of conduct Faculty ethics Professional standards Norms of undergraduate teaching 

References

  1. Baldridge, J., Curtis, D., Ecker, G., & Riley, G. (1978). Policy making and effective leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  2. Ben-Yehuda, N. (1985). Deviance and moral boundaries. Chicago, Il: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Blackburn, R. T., & Lawrence, J. H. (1995). Faculty at work: Motivation, expectation, satisfaction. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Boice, B. (1996). Classroom incivilities. Research in Higher Education, 37, 453–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  6. Braxton, J. M., & Bayer, A. E. (1999). Faculty misconduct in collegiate teaching. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Braxton, J. M., & Bayer, A. E. (2004). Toward a code of conduct for undergraduate teaching. In J. M. Braxton & A. E. Bayer (Eds.), Addressing faculty and student classroom improprieties. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 99, 47–55. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  8. Braxton, J. M., & Bray, N. J. (2012). Introduction: The importance of codes of conduct for academia. In J. M. Braxton & N. J. Bray (Eds.), Codes of conduct in academia. New Directions for Higher Education, 160, 1–4. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  9. Braxton, J. M., Bray, N. J., & Berger, J. B. (2000). Faculty teaching skills and their influences on the college student departure process. Journal of College Student Development, 41, 215–227.Google Scholar
  10. Braxton, J. M., Bayer, A. E., & Noseworthy, J. A. (2002). Students as tenuous agents of social control of professorial misconduct. Peabody Journal of Education, 77, 101–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Braxton, J. M., Bayer, A. E., & Noseworthy, J. A. (2004). The influence of teaching norm violations on the welfare of students as clients of college teaching. In J. M. Braxton & A. E. Bayer (Eds.), Addressing faculty and student classroom improprieties. New Directions for Teaching and Learning (Vol. 99, pp. 41–46). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  12. Bray, G. B., Pascarella, E. T., & Pierson, C. T. (2004). Postsecondary education and some dimensions of literacy development: An exploration of longitudinal evidence. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 306–330.  https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.39.3.3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (2013). The Carnegie classification of institutions of higher education. Retrieved from: http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.org/
  14. Colgate University. (2012). Faculty handbook 2010–2011. Hamilton, NY: Colgate University.Google Scholar
  15. DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Edison, M., Doyle, S., & Pascarella, E. (1998, November). Dimensions of teaching effectiveness and their impact on student cognitive development. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Miami, FL.Google Scholar
  17. Ewell, P. T. (1994, January). The neglected art of collective responsibility: Restoring our links with society. Commissioned paper for the American Association of Higher Education Forum on Faculty Roles and Rewards Second Annual Conference. New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  18. Finkelstein, M. J. (1984). The American academic profession: A synthesis of social scientific inquiry since World War II. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Franke, A. (2002, March). Faculty misconduct, discipline, and dismissal. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association of College and University Attorneys, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  20. Goode, W. (1969). The theoretical limits of professionalization. In A. Etzioni (Ed.), The semi-professions and their organization (pp. 266–313). New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hanson, J., Paulsen, M., & Pascarella, E. (2016). Understanding graduate school aspirations: The effects of good teaching practices. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education Research, 71, 735-752.Google Scholar
  22. Loes, C. N., An, B. P., & Pascarella, E.T. (2015). Does effective classroom instruction enhance bachelor’s degree completion? Some initial evidence. Unpublished manuscript. The University of Iowa, Center for Research on Undergraduate Education.Google Scholar
  23. Lyken-Segosebe, D., Min, Y. M., & Braxton, J. M. (2012). The existence of codes of conduct for undergraduate teaching in teaching-oriented four-year colleges and universities. In J. M. Braxton & N. J. Bray (Eds.), Codes of conduct in academia. New Directions for Higher Education, 160, 61–72. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  24. Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science: theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago, Il: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  25. Pascarella, E., Edison, M., Nora, A., Hagedorn, L., & Braxton, J. (1996). Effects of teacher organization/preparation and teacher skill/clarity on general cognitive skills in college. Journal of College Student Development, 37, 7–19.Google Scholar
  26. Pascarella, E. T., Seifert, T. A., & Whitt, E. J. (2008). Effective instruction and college student persistence: Some new evidence. In J. M. Braxton (Ed.), The role of the classroom in college student persistence. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 115, 55–70.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.325 Google Scholar
  27. Pascarella, E. T., Salisbury, M. H., & Blaich, C. (2011). Exposure to effective instruction and college student persistence: A multi-institutional replication and extension. Journal of College Student Development, 52, 4–19.  https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2011.0005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Proper, E. (2012). Toward a code of conduct for graduate education. In J. M. Braxton & N. J. Bray (Eds.), Codes of conduct in academia. New Directions for Higher Education, 160, 49–59. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  29. Ruscio, K. (1987). Many sectors, many professions. In B. Clark (Ed.), The academic profession: National, disciplinary, and institutional settings (pp. 331–368). Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  30. Scott, W. R. (1966). Professionals in bureaucracies: Areas of conflict. In H. M. Vollmer & D. L. Mills (Eds.), Professionalization (pp. 265–275). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  31. Tittle, C. R. (1980). Sanctions and social deviance: The question of deterrence. New York, NY: Praeger.Google Scholar
  32. Volkwein, J. F., & Carbone, D. A. (1994). The impact of departmental research and teaching climates on undergraduate growth and satisfaction. The Journal of Higher Education, 65, 147–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Whitt, E., Pascarella, E., Elkins, B., Marth, B., & Pierson, C. (2003). Differences between women and men in objectively measured outcomes, and the factors that influence those outcomes in the first three years of college. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 587–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zuckerman, H. (1988). The sociology of science. In N. Smelser (Ed.), Handbook of Sociology (pp. 511–574). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dawn E. Lyken-Segosebe
    • 1
  • John M. Braxton
    • 2
  • Mary K. Hutchens
    • 2
  • Eugenia Harris
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Business, Management and EntrepreneurshipBotswana International University of Science and TechnologyPalapyeBotswana
  2. 2.Vanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA
  3. 3.Trevecca Nazarene UniversityNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations