Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Published:
Innovative Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We refer readers interested in the derivation of these norms and their labeling as proscriptive patterns of behavior to Braxton & Bayer (1999), chapters 2–4.

  2. Prior to executing the Analysis of Variance, we tested the homogeneity of variance assumption using the Levene test of the homogeneity of variance. We detected heterogeneous variances as a result of this test. Accordingly, we conducted the 2X4 Analysis of Variance using a .025 level of statistical significance. We used this more conservative level of statistical significance to reduce the probability of committing a Type I error because of the violation of the homogeneity of variance assumption.

  3. Given that the probability of the F-Ratio for Institutional Type equals or falls below the .025 level of statistical significance, we used the Scheffe method of post hoc mean comparisons to identify those types of institutions that differ in a statistically reliable way on the number of tenets specified in their posted codes of conduct. To further reduce the probability of committing Type I errors, we used the .01 level of statistical significance to delineate statistically significant mean differences identified through the Scheffe method.

References

  • Baldridge, J., Curtis, D., Ecker, G., & Riley, G. (1978). Policy making and effective leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Yehuda, N. (1985). Deviance and moral boundaries. Chicago, Il: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, R. T., & Lawrence, J. H. (1995). Faculty at work: Motivation, expectation, satisfaction. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boice, B. (1996). Classroom incivilities. Research in Higher Education, 37, 453–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braxton, J. M., & Bayer, A. E. (1999). Faculty misconduct in collegiate teaching. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (2013). The Carnegie classification of institutions of higher education. Retrieved from: http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.org/

  • Colgate University. (2012). Faculty handbook 2010–2011. Hamilton, NY: Colgate University.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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 

  • 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.

  • 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 

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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 

  • Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science: theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago, Il: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Tittle, C. R. (1980). Sanctions and social deviance: The question of deterrence. New York, NY: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerman, H. (1988). The sociology of science. In N. Smelser (Ed.), Handbook of Sociology (pp. 511–574). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business, Management and Entrepreneurship, Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Private Bag 16, Palapye, Botswana

    Dawn E. Lyken-Segosebe

  2. Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, 37235, USA

    John M. Braxton & Mary K. Hutchens

  3. Trevecca Nazarene University, Nashville, TN, 37210, USA

    Eugenia Harris

Authors
  1. Dawn E. Lyken-Segosebe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John M. Braxton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mary K. Hutchens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Eugenia Harris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dawn E. Lyken-Segosebe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lyken-Segosebe, D.E., Braxton, J.M., Hutchens, M.K. et al. Codes of Conduct for Undergraduate Teaching in Four Types of Colleges and Universities. Innov High Educ 43, 289–302 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-018-9428-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-018-9428-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation