Aaron Savoy-Pasha | Albanian Institute for International Studies (AIIS)

Albanian higher education faces documented integrity risks, particularly in grading, favoritism, and political influence. A 2024 peer-reviewed study highlights how these pressures shape assessment and weaken trust in degrees (Shahini, Zhllima, and Imami, 2024). Transparency International’s most recent Corruption Perceptions Index ranks Albania 80th out of 180 countries, with a score of 42 out of 100, underlining the urgent need for credible safeguards in public institutions, including universities (Transparency International, 2025). These findings show that policies on paper are not enough. Students, faculty, and administrators require clear rules, visible reporting channels, and a public record demonstrating that those systems function effectively (Shahini et al., 2024; Transparency International, 2025).

In the United States, universities have developed multiple ways to involve students directly in safeguarding integrity and to provide channels for reporting misconduct. These practices, while far from perfect, offer relevant lessons for Albanian public universities.

At many U.S. campuses, students participate in honor systems that emphasize personal responsibility and peer enforcement. Princeton’s Honor Committee, for example, is composed entirely of students who investigate and adjudicate exam-related violations under a published constitution. Students are also expected to report suspected misconduct, with confidential channels available to support them (Princeton University, 2024a; 2024b; 2024c). The University of Maryland reinforces this culture by asking students to hand write and sign a pledge on their exams and assignments, a practice intended to build a sense of community responsibility (University of Maryland, 2024a; 2024b). Washington and Lee University takes student ownership even further by assigning primary responsibility for integrity to an elected student Executive Committee that oversees a single sanction honor system (Washington and Lee University, 2025a; 2025b).

Research supports the effectiveness of these approaches. Donald McCabe, Linda Treviño, and Kenneth Butterfield found across decades of studies that campuses with consistently enforced honor codes report lower levels of academic dishonesty. Their work shows that clear rules, shared expectations, and peer enforcement foster an environment where integrity becomes part of the culture, not just a formal requirement (McCabe, Treviño, and Butterfield, 2001; 2002).

Universities have also learned that proportional sanctions encourage reporting. The University of Virginia recently moved from a system that imposed automatic expulsion to a multi sanction model that includes restorative education and tailored penalties. The Honor Committee reports that this change has increased willingness to report violations, while independent coverage noted that proportionality strengthens legitimacy and student participation (University of Virginia, 2022; 2023; 2024a; Inside Higher Ed, 2022).

Beyond academic misconduct, U.S. universities provide anonymous or confidential hotlines, often operated by third party providers, where students, staff, or even members of the public can report fraud, conflicts of interest, or other violations. Rice University operates an EthicsPoint portal that allows anonymous submission of concerns and routes them to the appropriate office. The University of Minnesota runs “UReport,” which functions similarly, while Brown University and Stanford University both maintain hotlines with explicit non retaliation protections to reassure whistleblowers (Rice University, n.d.; University of Minnesota, 2025a; 2025b; Brown University, 2025a; 2021; Stanford University, 2025a; 2022; 2025b).

These reporting mechanisms are reinforced by national compliance frameworks. Title IX obliges universities to publish procedures for addressing sex discrimination and harassment (U.S. Department of Education, 2024). The Clery Act requires them to issue annual security reports and timely warnings about campus safety (Clery Center, 2024; U.S. Department of Education, 2020). Federally funded research is regulated by misconduct procedures under 42 CFR Part 93, which detail the steps for investigating fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (Office of Research Integrity, 2005 and 2024; eCFR, 2025). Although these frameworks address different kinds of misconduct, they provide concrete models of transparency and accountability. In practice, enforcement can vary across institutions, but the rules themselves are publicly documented and enforceable.

Transparency is strengthened when outcomes are made public. At the University of Virginia, the Honor Committee publishes annual summaries of cases and reports received under its new sanctioning system. At the national level, the U.S. Department of Education has enforced the Clery Act with significant penalties, including a record fine of 14 million dollars levied against Liberty University in 2023 for reporting failures (University of Virginia, 2024a; Associated Press, 2023). These examples demonstrate that universities can be held accountable when they fail to meet established standards.

Rice University illustrates how these different practices work together on a single campus. Since 1912, its student run Honor System has relied on a pledge and an Honor Council that investigates and hears cases. Publicly available documents describe the purpose of the pledge, the Council’s role, and the process for handling violations (Rice University, 2025a; 2025b; 2025c; 2025d). For non academic issues, Rice maintains the EthicsPoint hotline, operated by a third party, which guarantees the option of anonymity. The Title IX office also points students toward this system for reporting misconduct. These channels lower the barrier to reporting while signaling that the university takes integrity seriously (Rice University, n.d.; 2024; 2025e). Outcome data beyond what federal law requires are not published, so I cannot confirm detailed statistics on the number of reports or sanctions. Still, the existence of clear, accessible mechanisms is verifiable.

For Albanian universities, the lessons are practical. Introducing student owned honor codes with proportional sanctions can build legitimacy and encourage reporting. Establishing anonymous reporting systems with anti retaliation guarantees can make it safer to speak up. Publishing annual summaries of cases and resolutions, even in simple formats, can increase trust. Aligning research integrity procedures with international standards ensures consistent treatment of academic misconduct. And embedding the six values identified by the International Center for Academic Integrity—honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage—into student orientation and faculty policies can help shift culture over time (ICAI, 2024). Implementing these reforms need not happen all at once. Piloting a hotline or honor system in a single faculty, publishing results after one year, and scaling up gradually can provide early signs of credibility. In contexts where silence has been the norm, even modest signals that reports lead to action can mark the beginning of cultural change (Shahini et al., 2024)

This interview was prepared under a sub-grant awarded by the Albanian Helsinki Committee (AHC), as part of the project “Civil society against corruption: from a Local challenge to a European response,” financially supported by the European Union. Responsibility for the content rests solely with Albanian Institute for International Studies (AIIS) and does not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union or the Albanian Helsinki Committee.

• Bibliography

• Shahini, A., Zhllima, E., and Imami, D. 2024. Politics of Corruption in Albanian Higher Education. Studies of Transition States and Societies.https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/bitstream/handle/document/94807/ssoar-stss-2024-shahini_et_al-Po litics_of_Corruption_in_Albanian.pdf
• Transparency International. 2025. Albania country page, Corruption Perceptions Index 2024. https://www.transparency.org/en/countries/albania and CPI 2024 overviewhttps://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2024
• International Center for Academic Integrity. 2024. Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity. https://academicintegrity.org/aws/ICAI/pt/sp/values
• Princeton University. 2024a. Honor Committee – overview. https://honor.princeton.edu/front
• Princeton University. 2024b. Undergraduate Honor System – reporting obligations. https://ua.princeton.edu/policies-resources/undergraduate-honor-system
• Princeton University. 2024c. Compliance Hotline for students – EthicsPoint. https://oac.princeton.edu/compliance/hotline/students
• University of Maryland. 2024a. Honor Pledge. https://studentconduct.umd.edu/you/students/honor-pledge
• University of Maryland. 2024b. Code of Academic Integrity. https://policies.umd.edu/academic-affairs/university-of-maryland-code-of-academic-integrity
• Washington and Lee University. 2025a. The Honor System – student responsibility and single sanction.https://my.wlu.edu/executive-committee/the-honor-systemand White Book: https://my.wlu.edu/executive-committee/the-honor-system/the-white-book
• University of Virginia. 2022. Honor Constitutional Referendum – multi-sanctionsystem. https://honor.virginia.edu/honor-constitutional-referendum University of Virginia. 2023. A New Era for Honor – overview of sanction reform. https://honor.virginia.edu/new-era
• University of Virginia. 2024a. Honor Committee FAQ and Sanctioning resources. https://honor.virginia.edu/resources/frequently-asked-questions and https://honor.virginia.edu/resources/sanctioning
• Inside Higher Ed. 2022. UVA students vote to end honor code expulsion policy.https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/03/16/uva-students-vote-end-honor-code-expulsion- policy
• Rice University. n.d. Reporting Concerns – EthicsPoint. https://rucompliance.rice.edu/reporting-concerns-ethicspoint
• Rice University. 2025a. Honor Code – Official Site. https://honor.rice.edu/
• Rice University. 2025b. Office of Academic Advising – Honor Code. https://oaa.rice.edu/policies-and-procedures/honor-code
• Rice University. 2025c. General Announcements – Honor System. https://ga.rice.edu/undergraduate-students/rights-responsibilities/honor-system/
• Rice University. 2025d. Honor Code FAQ. https://honor.rice.edu/frequently-asked-questions/ Rice University. 2024. General Announcements – Ethical Concerns Notice about EthicsPoint. https://ga.rice.edu/important-notices/ethical-concerns/
• Rice University. 2025e. Title IX FAQs – Anonymous Reporting via EthicsPoint. https://titleix.rice.edu/faqs
• University of Minnesota. 2025a. UReport – Reporting Suspected Misconduct. https://compliance.umn.edu/report https://policy.umn.edu/operations/misconductreporting
• University of Minnesota. 2025b. University Compliance Program Overview. https://compliance.umn.edu/
• University of Minnesota. 2025c. UReport FAQ and Procedure. https://policy.umn.edu/operations/misconductreporting-faq https://policy.umn.edu/operations/misconductreporting-proc01
• Brown University. 2025a. Anonymous Reporting Hotline Policy and FAQs. https://policy.brown.edu/policy/anon-reporting-hotline https://compliance.brown.edu/reporting-concerns/anonymous-reporting-hotline- faqs
• Brown University. 2021. Non-Retaliation Policy. https://policy.brown.edu/policy/non-retaliation
• Stanford University. 2025a. University Compliance Helpline and Report Portal. https://uco.stanford.edu/helpline https://uco.stanford.edu/report
• Stanford University. 2022. Administrative Guide – Non-Retaliation Policy.https://adminguide.stanford.edu/chapters/guiding-policies-and-principles/university-code-conduc t/non-retaliation-policy
• U.S. Department of Education. 2024. Title IX Final Rule Summary.https://www.ed.gov/media/document/title-ix-final-rule-summary-33970.pdf Clery Center. 2024. The Clery Act – Overview. https://www.clerycenter.org/the-clery-act
• U.S. Department of Education. 2020.
• Clery Act Appendix, Federal Student Aid Handbook. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/admins/lead/safety/cleryappendixfinal.pdf
• Office of Research Integrity, U.S. HHS. 2005 and 2024 updates. Policies and Regulations for Research Misconduct, 42 CFR Part 93.https://ori.hhs.gov/policies-regulations https://ori.hhs.gov/statutes- regulations https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-42/chapter-I/subchapter-H/part- 93 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/09/17/2024-20814/public-health-service-policie s-on-research-misconduct
• Associated Press. 2023. Liberty University Pays Record Clery Act Fine. https://apnews.com/article/ac7f365762fb8ac8a4abb86cf4613d33

The post Building integrity and accountability in Albanian public universities: practical lessons from the United States appeared first on Tirana Times.

Original post Here