All templates
Education & Academic

Academic Integrity Climate Survey for Students

Measures student awareness of academic integrity policies, perceived peer norms around misconduct, and views on institutional interventions. Designed for education administrators and researchers seeking actionable data to strengthen integrity culture.

Sample questions

A preview of what’s in the template. Every question is editable before you launch.

29 questions · ~12 min
Q01
Message

Welcome to the Academic Integrity Climate Survey. This survey asks about your experiences with and perceptions of academic integrity at your institution. Your responses will help improve policies, communication, and support. • There are no right or wrong answers — we are interested in your honest opinions. • Participation is voluntary and you may stop at any time. • All responses are anonymous and will be reported only in aggregate. • Estimated time: 13 minutes. Please answer based on your experiences in the current academic year.

Q02
Multiple Choice

Which learning setting best describes most of your courses this term?

  • Primarily in-person
  • Hybrid (mix of online and in-person)
  • Fully online
  • Self-paced / asynchronous
  • Lab, studio, or clinical-heavy courses
  • Other
Q03
Multiple Choice

Are you aware of an academic integrity policy at your institution or program?

  • Yes, and I have read it fully
  • Yes, but I have only skimmed it or heard about it
  • Not sure if a policy exists
  • I believe there is no formal policy
Q04
Opinion Scale

Thinking about the academic integrity policy that applies to you, to what extent do you agree it clearly defines what counts as misconduct?

Scale: 17
Min:Strongly disagreeMax:Strongly agree
Q05
Dropdown

In your estimate, what percentage of students in your academic context engaged in any form of academic misconduct in the last 12 months?

  • 0–5%
  • 6–10%
  • 11–25%
  • 26–50%
  • 51–75%
  • 76–100%
  • I have no idea
Q06
Ranking

In your opinion, rank the following strategies from most to least effective at reducing academic misconduct.

  1. Clear expectations and examples
  2. Probability of being caught
  3. Severity of penalties
  4. Assessment redesign (authentic or open-book)
  5. Academic support (tutoring, office hours)
  6. Peer norms and honor pledges
Drag to rank
Q07
Long Text

Based on your responses in this survey, if you could change one thing to improve academic integrity in your context, what would it be?

Q08
Multiple Choice

What is your current program level?

  • High school / secondary
  • Vocational / bootcamp
  • Associate degree
  • Bachelor's
  • Master's
  • Doctoral
  • Professional (e.g., JD, MD)
  • Other
Q09
Message

Thank you for completing this survey. Your responses are anonymous and will be used to improve academic integrity policies and support at your institution.

Q10
Multiple Choice

Where did you learn about academic integrity expectations for your courses? (Select all that apply.)

  • Course syllabus
  • Learning management system (course site)
  • Instructor announcements
  • Orientation
  • Student handbook or website
  • Honor code or pledge
  • Email notifications
  • Peers or word of mouth
  • Other
Q11
Opinion Scale

To what extent do you agree the policy provides fair and proportional consequences?

Scale: 17
Min:Strongly disagreeMax:Strongly agree
Q12
Multiple Choice

Which of the following behaviors have you observed or heard about among peers in the past term? (Select all that apply.)

  • Copying during in-person exams
  • Using unauthorized notes or aids
  • Collaborating on individual assignments
  • Using AI tools when not allowed
  • Submitting someone else's work
  • Falsifying or fabricating data
  • Looking up answers during online quizzes or exams
  • Plagiarism (e.g., patchwriting, uncredited paraphrasing)
  • None of the above
Q13
Ranking

Rank the following areas from where the most institutional effort is needed to where the least is needed to reduce misconduct.

  1. Policy clarity and communication
  2. Assessment design (authentic or open-book)
  3. Detection and proctoring
  4. Student academic support (tutoring, office hours)
  5. Faculty development and guidance
  6. Peer norms and honor pledges
Drag to rank
Q14
AI Interview

We'd like to explore your experiences with academic integrity in a bit more depth. An AI moderator will ask a couple of follow-up questions based on your earlier responses.

Q15
Multiple Choice

What is your current enrollment status?

  • Full-time
  • Part-time
  • Prefer not to say
Q16
Multiple Choice

In the last 12 months, did you receive formal training on academic integrity at your institution (e.g., a module, workshop, or online tutorial)?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Not sure
Q17
Opinion Scale

To what extent do you agree the policy is communicated in ways that are easy to find and understand?

Scale: 17
Min:Strongly disagreeMax:Strongly agree
Q18
Opinion Scale

In your view, how acceptable do most of your peers consider collaborating on assignments that are meant to be completed individually?

Scale: 17
Min:Completely unacceptableMax:Completely acceptable
Q19
Opinion Scale

Overall, how fair do you consider the academic integrity processes (reporting, investigation, and outcomes) at your institution?

Scale: 17
Min:Very unfairMax:Very fair
Q20
Dropdown

What is your age group?

  • Under 18
  • 18–20
  • 21–24
  • 25–34
  • 35–44
  • 45 or older
  • Prefer not to say
Q21
Dropdown

When was that training delivered?

  • At orientation
  • In a required course or module
  • In a workshop or webinar
  • In an online tutorial or self-paced module
  • Other
Q22
Opinion Scale

To what extent do you agree the policy adequately addresses the use of AI tools?

Scale: 17
Min:Strongly disagreeMax:Strongly agree
Q23
Opinion Scale

In your view, how acceptable do most of your peers consider using AI tools on assignments when not explicitly permitted?

Scale: 17
Min:Completely unacceptableMax:Completely acceptable
Q24
Multiple Choice

What is your gender identity?

  • Woman
  • Man
  • Non-binary
  • Prefer to self-describe
  • Prefer not to say
Q25
Opinion Scale

How clear are the rules about using AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT) in your courses?

Scale: 17
Min:Not at all clearMax:Extremely clear
Q26
Opinion Scale

In your view, how acceptable do most of your peers consider copying or using unauthorized aids during exams?

Scale: 17
Min:Completely unacceptableMax:Completely acceptable
Q27
Dropdown

In which region do you primarily study?

  • North America
  • Europe
  • East Asia
  • South Asia
  • Southeast Asia
  • Middle East / North Africa
  • Sub-Saharan Africa
  • Latin America / Caribbean
  • Oceania
  • Other
Q28
Multiple Choice

Which elements of an academic integrity policy would be most helpful to you? (Select all that apply.)

  • Clear definitions of misconduct (e.g., cheating, plagiarism)
  • Concrete examples or case studies
  • Guidance on acceptable collaboration
  • Proportional penalties by severity
  • Educational or restorative options (e.g., redo with support)
  • Citation and plagiarism guidance
  • Rules about AI tools by assignment type
  • Exam rules (open/closed book, proctoring, allowed aids)
  • How reporting and investigation work
  • Appeals and student rights
Q29
Opinion Scale

In your view, how acceptable do most of your peers consider submitting work with uncredited or poorly paraphrased sources?

Scale: 17
Min:Completely unacceptableMax:Completely acceptable

What’s included

  • AI follow-ups

    Adaptive probes on open-ended answers that pull out detail a static form would miss.

  • Attention checks

    Built-in safeguards against rushed answers and low-quality respondents.

  • AI-drafted copy

    Wording, ordering, and branching written by the AI — tuned to your research goal.

  • Auto report

    Themes, quotes, and a plain-English summary write themselves once responses come in.

How it compares

We reviewed the closest templates from other survey tools. Here’s what they do well — and where this template goes further.

Why this template

  • Includes a dedicated peer-norm battery (opinion-scale items on how acceptable peers consider collaboration, AI tool use, unauthorized aid, and contract cheating) rather than a single generic question
  • Uses ranking questions to force-prioritize which interventions and institutional focus areas matter most, giving administrators actionable ordinal data instead of flat ratings
  • Layers in an AI follow-up interview after the structured questions to probe the open-text reflection on what students would change, surfacing detail static forms can't capture
  • Separates policy awareness/training exposure (including how and when it was delivered) from fairness and clarity perceptions, so admins can see whether gaps are informational or structural

Jotform

Academic Integrity Form Template

A ready-to-deploy form focused on academic integrity, built on Jotform's drag-and-drop form builder. It's oriented toward straightforward data collection (e.g., acknowledgments, reporting, or basic questionnaires) rather than a multi-dimensional climate assessment with awareness, peer-norm, and fairness constructs. Good for quick deployment but lighter on structured analytical depth.

What it does well

  • Easy to customize and deploy quickly via Jotform's drag-and-drop builder
  • Benefits from Jotform's broad integrations (payments, file uploads, e-signatures) if the use case needs them
  • Free tier available for basic use

Where it falls short

  • Static question set with no adaptive AI follow-up probing based on a student's prior answers
  • No automated per-response quality scoring or AI-generated analytical report
  • No built-in ranking or peer-norm scaling constructs for benchmarking institutional climate

Ready to launch?

Open this template in the editor. Every part is yours to change before the first respondent sees it.

Related templates

More studies from the same category.

See all
Education & Academic

Academic Advising Session Satisfaction Survey

Measures student satisfaction, perceived quality, and outcomes after academic advising sessions. Designed for institutional advising offices seeking actionable feedback to improve service delivery.

View template
Education & Academic

Remote & Hybrid Work Experience Survey: Productivity, Well-being & Engagement

Measures employee perceptions of productivity, well-being, collaboration, and engagement across remote, hybrid, and in-office arrangements. Use this instrument to identify burnout risk factors and inform flexible-work policy decisions.

View template
Education & Academic

Parent-Teacher Conference Feedback From Parents

Captures how prepared, heard, and informed parents felt during a recent parent-teacher conference, what topics were actually covered, and whether a clear next-steps plan resulted — with an AI follow-up that reconstructs the specific concerns raised and whether they were resolved. Built for schools and PTAs auditing conference quality.

View template
Education & Academic

Student Program Recommendation & Advocacy Survey

Measures how likely students are to recommend a course, program, or instructor to a peer, what drives that willingness, and where the experience falls short. An AI follow-up interview digs into the specific reasons behind each student's score, surfacing concrete moments and details that a rating alone can't capture. Built for academic departments, bootcamps, and course teams tracking word-of-mouth and retention risk.

View template
Education & Academic

Diversity Training Program Effectiveness Survey

Measures whether diversity training changes real workplace behavior, not just satisfaction — covering relevance, confidence applying concepts, and inclusion climate. An AI follow-up interview digs into a specific moment participants applied (or struggled to apply) what they learned, for L&D and DEI teams evaluating training impact.

View template
Education & Academic

Teacher Self-Evaluation and Reflective Practice Survey

A structured self-reflection for teachers covering instructional practices, classroom management, student engagement, and professional growth priorities, plus an AI follow-up interview that digs into a specific teaching moment behind the numbers instead of stopping at a rating.

View template