Rebuilding Trust in Education: Addressing Disengagement and Academic Dishonesty in Classrooms

Seth C. Bruggeman navigates a troubling decline in student trust and engagement, emphasizing the need for genuine dialogue and adaptive teaching in today's education.

Today’s educators are navigating uncharted waters, and Seth C. Bruggeman, a professor, is at the forefront of these challenges, particularly when it comes to trust in his classroom.

Confronting Academic Dishonesty

When he returned to class after Thanksgiving, the professor was confronted with yet another instance of academic dishonesty.

Frustration surged as he realized that his belief in his students’ integrity had taken a hit.

Once vibrant and eager, the 160 first-year students enrolled in his general education course had become increasingly disengaged.

Skipping classes became common, and those who did show up were often distracted, dabbling in activities far removed from their studies.

Meanwhile, complaints about grading surfaced, yet students showed little inclination to resolve their grievances through meaningful discussion.

Teaching assistants found themselves sorting through assignments that appeared to be churned out by artificial intelligence rather than crafted through genuine student effort.

In one striking example, a student manipulated an image to falsely show attendance at a local museum, missing the point of the assignment entirely.

The situation escalated to the point where a basic quiz became problematic—many students submitted identical answers, raising alarms about potential cheating, misuse of technology, and the efficacy of the professor’s teaching methods.

Building Trust Through Engagement

With his remarks about trust, the professor hoped to spark meaningful reflection among his students.

Their coursework had revolved around the intricate ties between culture and civic duty in Philadelphia, examining the ethical responsibilities of community leaders and the public’s faith in initiatives aimed at aiding neighborhoods.

Discussions of local history revealed pressing questions about who truly benefits from community endeavors, mirroring the concerns he faced in the classroom.

Expressing his dwindling confidence, the professor conveyed that his worries stretched beyond issues of cheating; they mirrored a broader societal trend where profit seemed to overshadow community welfare.

This raised a challenging question: Were his students treating their education as just another transaction, akin to purchasing a snack from a food truck?

In an attempt to address these challenges, the professor extended an intriguing proposition to his class: they could either complete the remaining assignments for full credit while engaging in constructive dialogue about enhancing their college experience or accept the same rewards without any participation.

This approach ignited spirited discussions as students assessed the sincerity of his offer.

After evaluating the responses, he found a glimmer of hope—nearly half of those initially offered the opportunity chose to engage in dialogue.

Yet, he soon discovered that this enthusiasm didn’t automatically translate to genuine commitment.

The professor organized an unconference aimed at gathering authentic feedback, inviting students to share their educational experiences through sticky notes that highlighted both the positive and the negative.

Following this activity, engaging discussions emerged, shedding light on their needs and concerns.

Understanding Student Perspectives

However, the insights he gathered tempered his initial optimism.

Attendance dwindled among those who expressed interest, and ultimately, only about 15 percent of students were willing to participate in a traditional lecture format without grades as an incentive—a disheartening sign that over 85 percent seemed satisfied to earn academic credit without active engagement.

The reasons behind this disengagement were varied, but patterns of perception about learning, individual identity, and the commodification of education began to surface.

This disconnect echoed a broader disenchantment with educational institutions and a troubling disassociation from the learning process itself.

Recognizing that the erosion of trust extended beyond himself, the professor came to see a deep-seated skepticism about the very structures of higher education.

This reality posed a significant challenge: how could he decipher what students truly needed from their educational journey?

Still, the feedback from those engaged in the discussion was heartening.

Contrary to initial expectations, the active participants were not solely high achievers; they represented a diverse array of student perspectives.

This realization emphasized the need to connect with and support all students, especially those who tend to fly under the radar.

Throughout these dialogues, engaged students voiced their desire for relevance and engagement in the material presented to them.

Many expressed frustration with instructors who resorted to outdated teaching methods, and a notable anxiety emerged around the prospect of speaking in front of strangers.

This highlighted a shared theme: trust is intertwined with communication and peer interactions.

Additionally, students recognized the professor’s efforts to manage classroom conduct, even if he considered this a shortfall in his teaching approach.

While he aimed to cultivate a supportive learning environment, students seemed to crave a more authoritative structure, raising questions about their attitudes toward accountability and shared responsibility.

Another prominent issue that surfaced during discussions was students’ literacy struggles.

While most could read, many lacked the critical analysis skills needed to navigate complex texts effectively.

Although he had tried to incorporate reading strategies into the curriculum, students reported feelings of inadequacy stemming from prior educational experiences that ill-prepared them for collegiate challenges.

Their enthusiasm for alternative formats—like audio and visual materials—underscored an urgent need for adaptive teaching strategies.

Engaging with students yielded fruitful exchanges, often embellished with humor as international students made candid observations about their American peers.

Despite the myriad challenges, the semester had fostered some enjoyable moments.

However, the ongoing quest to understand student needs and deliver the type of education they truly desire looms large.

The professor ultimately recognized that while negotiating points might reinforce transactional dynamics, finding common ground with students could be pivotal in rebuilding trust.

By aligning with shared goals, he believed they could open doors for improved engagement and foster an authentic learning environment.

Seth C. Bruggeman is a history professor and directs the Center for Public History at Temple University.

Source: Insidehighered