ANTI-CORRUPTION ACADEMY OF NIGERIA
INDEPENDENT CORRUPT PRACTICES & OTHER RELATED OFFENCES COMMISSION
Workshop on Academic Integrity in Tertiary
Institutions in Nigeria,
July 6-7, 2015
THOUGHTS ON MOVING FORWARD
PROFESSOR SOLA AKINRINADE, FNAL, FHSN
PROVOST, ANTI-CORRUPTION ACADEMY OF NIGERIA
Outline
1. Contextualising Moving Forward
2. What Next:
Defining Academic Integrity
3. Moving Forward:
i. Issues to Considers
ii. Questions to Ponder
iii. Proposals for Moving Forward
4. Concluding Remarks
Contextualising Moving Forward
 THE BACKGROUND TO THIS WORKSHOP IS THE UNIVERSITY
SYSTEMS STUDY AND REVIEW (USSR) OF 2012, WHOSE KEY
FINDINGS WERE PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC EARLY IN 2013 AND
SHARED WITH TERTIARY INSTITUTIONS CHIEF EXECUTIVES AND
REGULATORY AUTHORITIES DURING THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE
ON TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY AND ETHICAL VALUES IN
TERTIARY INSTITUTIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT HELD IN
MAY 2014.
 THE FINDINGS WERE ALSO SHARED WITH PARTICIPANTS DURING
THE OPENING SESSION OF THIS WORKSHOP.
Contextualising Moving Forward
 THE USSR REPORT WAS IN THREE VOLUMES:
 THE MAIN REPORT – THAT DISCUSSED THE KEY FINDINGS AS THEY
RELATE TO THE PILOT INSTITUTIONS STUDIED;
 THE PROCESS TEMPLATE – A DOCUMENTATION OF THE PROCESS OF
CONDUCTING THE CORRUPTION RISK ASSESSMENT OR SYSTEMS
STUDY WHEN EXTENDING THE STUDY TO OTHER INSTITUTIONS; AND
 THE PREVENTION TEMPLATE – IDENTIFIES AND DISCUSSES VARIOUS
STEPS TO BE TAKEN TO PREVENT CORRUPTION IN THE KEY AREAS
NOTED IN THE MAIN REPORT.
Contextualising Moving Forward
 A NUMBER OF FACILITATORS HAVE MADE COPIOUS REFERENCES TO
THE FINDINGS OF THE USSR IN IDENTIFYING AREAS OF
INFRACTIONS.
 HOWEVER, A DOCUMENT THAT IS PROBABLY MORE IMPORTANT IS
THE PREVENTION TEMPLATE
 THE PREVENTION TEMPLATE CONTAINS RECOMMENDATIONS ON
STEPS TO BE TAKEN BY KEY STAKEHOLDERS IN THE TERTIARY
EDUCATION SYSTEM.
Contextualising Moving Forward
 KEY STAKEHOLDERS IDENTIFIED INCLUDE:
 THE UNIVERSITIES: MANAGEMENT, STAFF, STUDENTS
 THE ICPC
 THE NUC, NBTE & NCCE
 THE JOINT ADMISSIONS AND MATRICULATION BOARD
 OTHER STAKEHOLDERS INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL BODIES (E.G.
MDCN, COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION, COREN, ARCON, ETC.;
PARENTS, FEDERAL & STATE MINISTRIES OF EDUCATION, ETC.
Contextualising Moving Forward
 ANOTHER NOTABLE FEATURE OF THE SYSTEMS REVIEW
PROCESS IS THE REQUIREMENT FOR TARGET AGENCIES TO
DEVELOP AN INTEGRITY PLAN`, THAT IS, HOW THE
INSTITUTION (IN THIS CASE THE INSTITUTIONS THAT WERE
STUDIED) WOULD ADDRESS THE VARIOUS AREAS OF
INFRACTIONS IDENTIFIED IN RELATION TO THEIR
INSTITUTION.
Contextualising Moving Forward
 THE MAY 2014 NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON TRANSPARENCY,
ACCOUNTABILITY AND ETHICAL VALUES IN TERTIARY
INSTITUTIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT WHICH HAD
THE CHIEF EXECUTIVES OF OUR TERTIARY INSTITUTIONS
PARTICIPATING ALONG WITH THEIR PRINCIPAL OFFICERS HAD
AGREED THAT THE FINDINGS OF THE USSR WERE APPLICABLE
ACROSS BOARD THE NIGERIAN TERTIARY INSTITUTION SYSTEM
WITH ALLOWANCE FOR A FEW INSTITUTIONAL PECULIARITIES.
Contextualising Moving Forward
 THAT CONFERENCE HAD RECOMMENDED AS ONE OF THE
WAYS FORWARD THE EXTENSION OF THE SYSTEMS STUDY
AND REVIEW TO OTHER TERTIARY INSTITUTIONS IN THE
NIGERIAN HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM, FIRST TO OTHER
UNIVERSITIES THAT WERE YET TO BE COVERED AND THEN
TO THE POLYTECHNICS AND COLLEGES OF EDUCATION.
Contextualising Moving Forward
A SECOND KEY DECISION OF THE CONFERENCE IS THE
CALL ON THE ICPC TO CONDUCT MANAGEMENT LEVEL
TRAINING FOR OUR TERTIARY INSTITUTIONS ON
AREAS OF INFRACTION IDENTIFIED IN THE USSR
REPORT. HENCE, THIS WORKSHOP.
THE NEXT QUESTION NOW IS:
WHAT NEXT?
WHAT NEXT?
THE KEYNOTE SPEAKER, PROFESSOR PETER OKEBUKOLA,
OFR, HAS PARTLY SET AN AGENDA FOR US:
1. AGREE ON A WORKING DEFINITION OF ACADEMIC
INTEGRITY AND DERIVE BY CONSENSUS AMONG
STAKEHOLDERS, A SET OF INDICATORS FROM WHICH ALL
HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS IN NIGERIA ARE
MEASURED.
WHAT NEXT?
 WE’VE HAD A NUMBER OF DEFINITIONS PROPOSED FOR
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY.
 THE KEYNOTE SPEAKER, PROFESSOR OKEBUKOLA DEFINES
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY AS “ADHERENCE TO A STATE OF HIGH
MORAL PRINCIPLES AND PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS AND
VALUES IN SCHOLARSHIP ESPECIALLY IN TEACHING, LEARNING
AND RESEARCH.” EMBODIED IN THIS DEFINITION IS HONESTY
AND RESPONSIBILITY IN SCHOLARSHIP.
WHAT NEXT?
PROFESSOR ADESEGUN FATUSI PROVIDES US WITH THE
DEFINITION BY ALISON KIRK
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY IS THE MORAL CODE OR ETHICAL
POLICY OF ACADEMIA THIS INCLUDES:
AVOIDANCE OF CHEATING OR PLAGIARISM
MAINTENANCE OF ACADEMIC STANDARDS
HONESTY AND RIGOR IN RESEARCH AND ACADEMIC
PUBLISHING
WHAT NEXT?
PROFESSOR FATUSI ALSO REMINDS US THAT ACADEMIC
INTEGRITY EQUALS COMMITMENT TO FIVE FUNDAMENTAL
VALUES:
HONESTY,
TRUST,
FAIRNESS,
RESPECT, AND
RESPONSIBILITY. …
- INT’L CENTER FOR ACADEMIC INTEGRITY
http://www.uwo.ca/tsc/resources/pdf/CAI-fundamental-values.pdf
MOVING FORWARD
WE WANT TO POSE A FEW QUESTIONS
THAT WOULD GUIDE OUR REFLECTION
ON MOVING FORWARD AS
INSTITUTIONS AND AS A SYSTEM.
MOVING FORWARD
1. WHAT IS OUR WORKING DEFINITION OF
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY AND WHAT ARE THE
IMPLICATIONS OF THIS DEFINITION FOR THE
IDENTIFICATION OF AREAS OF INFRACTION?
MOVING FORWARD
2. IS THERE A GENERAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE
RELEVANCE OF THE CHALLENGES IDENTIFIED
DURING THIS WORKSHOP AS APPLICABLE IN
OUR INDIVIDUAL INSTITUTIONS?
MOVING FORWARD
3. IF WE AGREE THAT THE PROBLEMS EXIST
AND CHANGE IS REQUIRED, HOW DO WE
BUILD STAKEHOLDER SUPPORT FOR CHANGE
IN OUR RESPECTIVE INSTITUTIONS?
NOTE: USUAL RESISTANCE TO CHANGE AND THE NEED
TO OVERCOME THE RESISTANCE.
MOVING FORWARD
IDENTIFICATION OF STAKEHOLDERS:
4. WHO ARE THE RELEVANT STAKEHOLDERS IN
THE CONTEXT OF ENTHRONING ACADEMIC
INTEGRITY IN OUR INSTITUTIONS?
MOVING FORWARD
ON SEQUENCE OF SECURING CHANGE:
5. WHAT IS THE ROLE OF AWARENESS,
CAPACITY BUILDING AND ENFORCEMENT IN
SECURING CHANGE AND MOVING
FORWARD?
MOVING FORWARD
6. HOW DO WE CARRY THE STUDENTS ALONG
PARTICULARLY IN RELATIONS TO INTEGRITY
ISSUES AFFECTING STUDENTS?
MOVING FORWARD
CLEANING UP THE MESS:
7. WHAT ARE THE CHALLENGES TO
SANCTIONING AND ENFORCEMENT IN
RELATION TO EXISTING INFRACTIONS?
MOVING FORWARD
8. HOW DO WE PROPOSE TO REPLICATE THIS
PROGRAMME AT INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL AND
BUILD INTERNAL CAPACITY FOR UNDERSTANDING
AND TACKLING THE ISSUES AT OUR VARIOUS
INSTITUTIONS?
MOVING FORWARD
BUILDING SYSTEMIC INTEGRITY
9. IS THERE A PLACE FOR INSTITUTING AN
INTEGRITY INDEX SYSTEM-WIDE? AND,
10.HOW DO WE GO ABOUT DEVELOPING THE
INTEGRITY INDEX?
MOVING FORWARD
BUILDING SYSTEMIC INTEGRITY
11.WHAT ROLE SHOULD BE PLAYED BY THE FOLLOWING IN
BUILDING SYSTEMIC INTEGRITY?
i. THE ICPC
ii. REGULATORY AUTHORITIES: NUC, NBTE, NCCE, JAMB
iii. OUR INSTITUTIONS: GOVERNING COUNCILS, MANAGEMENT,
SENATE, ACADEMIC STAFF, NON-TEACHING STAFF, STUDENTS
iv. OTHER STAKEHOLDERS: PARENTS, PROFESSIONAL REGULATORY
BODIES
MOVING FORWARD
 ON MOVING FORWARD, FACILITATORS HAVE
IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF PROPOSALS WHICH, IF
IMPLEMENTED WILL SET OUR INSTITUTIONS ON THE
PATH TO INTEGRITY IN ACADEMIC PROCESSES.
IMPORTANT ONES WHICH WE SHOULD TAKE WITH
US INCLUDE:
MOVING FORWARD
1. INDIVIDUAL INSTITUTIONS TO ASSESS AND DOCUMENT THE
INTEGRITY CHALLENGE IN THE CONTEXT OF INSTITUTIONAL
PECULIARITIES AND NOTED CHALLENGES. THE ICPC/NUC
STUDY HAS GIVEN US A TEMPLATE. WHILE THE ICPC/NUC
TEAM MAY NOT BE ABLE TO VISIT EVERY HIGHER INSTITUTION
IN THE NIGERIAN TERTIARY INSTITUTION NETWORK, EACH
INSTITUTION CAN – AND SHOULD – ENGAGE IN SELFASSESSMENT, AKIN TO THE SELF-ASSESSMENT THAT PRECEDE
ACCREDITATION.
MOVING FORWARD
THE SELF ASSESSMENT SHOULD BE AS HONEST AS
POSSIBLE IN ORDER TO PERMIT THE DEVELOPMENT OF
APPROPRIATE RESPONSES AT INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL.
MOVING FORWARD
2. UPON COMPLETION OF INDIVIDUAL SELFASSESSMENT, BUILD & IMPLEMENT EVIDENCEBASED & ROBUST INTERVENTIONS.
3. CULTIVATE THE CULTURE OF INTEGRITY
ON MOVING FORWARD
 IN ADDITION, THE KEYNOTE SPEAKER SET US A TEN-POINT
AGENDA FOR CONSIDERATION:
1. DEVELOP A UNIVERSITY POLICY/CODE ON ACADEMIC
INTEGRITY.
2. WIDE DISSEMINATION OF THE POLICY.
3. CONDUCT UNIVERSITY-WIDE WORKSHOPS ON THE
POLICY.
ON MOVING FORWARD
4. SECURE SIGNATURES OF STAFF AND STUDENTS AS
ENDORSEMENT AND AGREEMENT WITH THE PROVISIONS
OF THE POLICY.
5. SET UP A UNIT ON ACADEMIC INTEGRITY.
6. REWARD AND CELEBRATE EXEMPLARY STAFF AND
STUDENTS.
7. PROCURE, PERIODICALLY UPDATE AND WIDELY USE
PLAGIARISM SOFTWARE.
ON MOVING FORWARD
8. CONFIRMATION OF NON-PLAGIARISM
9. INCLUDE CONCEPTS ON ACADEMIC INTEGRITY IN THE
GENERAL STUDIES PROGRAMME.
10.SANCTION ERRING STUDENTS AND STAFF.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
1. THE RESPONSIBIITY FOR EFFECTING CHANGE IS
PRIMARILY THAT OF OUR INDIVIDUAL INSTITTIONS AND
ULTIMATELY THE SYSTEM AT LARGE.
2. WE CAN MAKE A LOT OF PROGRESS IF WE ALL MAKE UP
OUR MINDS TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN OUR VARIOUS
CORNERS.