During the first year of Penn State's new academic integrity policy, three students had their transcripts marked with an XF grade.

The Office of Judicial Affairs is now delivering such reprimands to mark especially serious or repeated acts of cheating, plagiarizing or other forms of academic dishonesty.

Since the policy was adopted in the spring of 2000, Judicial Affairs has registered 45 other breaches that did not end in a student receiving a cheating failure, or XF, grade.

"Academic integrity . . . is something that can be taught and ought to be learned," said John Cahir, vice provost and dean for undergraduate education.

Cahir reported the first year's results to the Penn State Board of Trustees at its meeting Thursday at the Nittany Lion Inn.

He emphasized the greater awareness of academic integrity by noting that almost every syllabus at the university now mentions the pertinent policy.

Richard Cyr, assistant department head in biology, who also spoke to the trustees last week, said he has seen improvements in his own classes, but he also notes a Penn State Pulse survey in which many students self-reported a willingness to cheat.

In March 1999, 17 percent of students surveyed said they themselves had cheated on tests at Penn State and 44 percent said they had done so on class assignments. "You don't know what you don't see," Cyr said.

A groundswell of concern among students and faculty in recent years led the University Faculty Senate to look into improving the climate of academic integrity. Instructors are supposed to focus on confronting and correcting unethical behavior in class work, Cahir said.

"The students themselves are key players, and while we place high expectations on them, it is most important that they place high expectations on themselves," he added.

Each academic college now has its own faculty committee to examine cases of cheating in which the student does not admit responsibility or questions the validity of the claim.

Judicial Affairs keeps track of all reported breaches, but most infractions do not rise to the level of disciplinary action, according to last year's numbers. "The buck stops with the faculty in all but the most extreme cases," Cahir said.

When faced with academic dishonesty in the past year, instructors docked points from students' exams, gave students lower course grades or just failed them outright.

The XF grade is considered a disciplinary sanction for severe or repeated offenses, whereas most lesser penalties are academic in nature. John Harwood, senior director of the Center for Education Technology Services, told the trustees that the Internet provides challenges for combating cyber-plagiarism.

But in the end, he said, "there's really nothing new under the sun."

Nonetheless, some faculty members are "aghast" when they hear about all the makeshift e-businesses that sell pre-written compositions and research papers online, Harwood said.

Harwood informs the Penn State community about ways to combat technology abuse inside and outside the classroom. But ultimately, he said, a technological solution can neither prevent all forms of dishonesty nor replace a learning environment where faculty and students value academic integrity.

Students can access online information about the policy adopted by the faculty senate at www.psu.edu/dept/oue/aappm/G-9.html.