Apply Now
My BPC
Apply Now

Academic Integrity Policy

As a Christian community of faith and scholarship, Brewton-Parker Christian University is committed to the principles of truth and honesty in the academic endeavor (2 Timothy 3:16). Faculty and students in this community are called to present academic work as an honest reflection of their own abilities; we must not misrepresent others’ work as our own (Mark 10:17–22).

Academic dishonesty is treated with serious consequences for two fundamental reasons: it is stealing—taking something that is not ours—and it is lying—pretending to be something it is not. Such actions harm both the individual and the community. Cheating has no place at a campus where all labors are informed by faith, because God desires us to be truthful with one another concerning our academic abilities. Only with a truthful presentation of our knowledge can there be an honest evaluation of our abilities. Our policy maintains zero tolerance for intentional dishonesty while providing educational correction for honest mistakes and progressive discipline for repeat or severe offenses.

What is Academic Dishonesty?

Academic dishonesty is any unauthorized action or attempted action that results, or could result, in academic gain. Unintentional violations are still violations and will be treated as such. Brewton-Parker Christian University categorizes academic dishonesty as follows.

Students are encouraged to seek clarification from instructors if unsure whether a specific action is permitted.

Using someone else’s ideas or words without proper acknowledgment, creating the false impression that you created them.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

  • Copying another person’s words, theories, data, etc., without quotation and/or proper acknowledgment.
  • Inserting a few original words while still essentially copying another’s work.
  • Paraphrasing another’s work without crediting the source.
  • Fabricating, inventing, or counterfeiting sources.
  • Submitting someone else’s work as your own, regardless of how it was obtained.
  • Omitting quotation marks on otherwise acknowledged material.
  • Using citations in the paper but not in the reference list, or vice versa.

Submitting work that contains no meaningful personal analysis, synthesis, evaluation, or unique perspective—even if all sources are properly cited. Academic work must reflect both research and the student’s own intellectual contribution.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

  • Assignments consisting entirely of quoted or paraphrased material with no original commentary.
  • Work that follows the structure or argument of source material so closely that it lacks independent interpretation.
  • Papers that simply summarize sources without presenting a distinct argument or creative solution.

Submitting for credit an assignment previously submitted for credit without permission.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

  • Using the same paper, project, or assignment for more than one class.
  • Submitting work from a previous semester when retaking a class.
  • Copying data or results from a previous study without repeating the work.

Giving or receiving unauthorized assistance in connection with academic work. Unless otherwise stated, students should assume assistance is unauthorized.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

  • Obtaining or sharing information during an exam, quiz, lab, or other assignment.
  • Allowing another student to copy your work.
  • Sharing exam or quiz questions.
  • Possessing or accessing unauthorized electronic devices during an exam or assignment.
  • Giving or receiving answers to an assignment scheduled for another time.
  • Completing work for another student or allowing someone else to complete your work.
  • Submitting group work prepared by fewer than all members of the group.
  • Using non-scholarly sources when instructed to use only scholarly sources.

Providing false information or altering academic records.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

  • Giving false reasons for missing assignments or class.
  • Falsifying lab results or data.
  • Altering work after submission.
  • Altering grades or attendance records.
  • Signing someone else in as present when absent.
  • Taking a test for another student.
  • Submitting work under a false name.
  • Omitting or falsifying information during an appeal.

(Note: lying about and/or omitting information pertinent to an appeal will result in the charge of an additional violation of the academic integrity policy.)

Knowingly encouraging, inducing, facilitating, or assisting another to commit an academic integrity violation.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

  • Failing to report knowledge of another student’s violation.
  • Soliciting or encouraging a violation.
  • Planning a violation with others, regardless of whether it occurs.

Using AI in a manner inconsistent with the Policy Regarding AI Usage at BPCU is an academic integrity violation.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

  • Using AI tools to generate substantive academic content without authorization.
  • Submitting AI-generated work as your own.
  • Failing to acknowledge approved AI use as directed by the instructor.

Policy Regarding Artificial Intelligence Usage at BPCU

Introduction

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a rapidly developing technology with seemingly limitless potential. Multiple AI tools are presently available, with many more developments occurring daily. However, like most tools, this advancement can be used constructively or destructively in relation to our pursuit of knowledge and advanced education.

According to Proverbs 11:3, “The integrity of the upright guides them, but the unfaithful are destroyed by their duplicity.” Therefore, to ensure that AI is used ethically and responsibly, Brewton-Parker Christian University has adopted the following guidelines governing the use of AI in academic settings.

 AI in Instruction

Brewton-Parker Christian University recognizes the potential benefits of AI as a teaching and learning tool. Faculty are encouraged to incorporate AI purposefully into classroom instruction, discussions, and assignments where appropriate, to help students understand both the capabilities and limitations of such tools. In these cases, instructors will clearly communicate expectations for AI use, including how students should document or acknowledge any AI-assisted work.

 Policy
  • AI Prohibition Without Approval
    The use of AI is prohibited on assignments, exams, quizzes, lab work, and similar academic activities unless the instructor has explicitly approved AI for that specific assignment. This includes using AI to generate text, translate languages, write code, answer questions, or perform other functions in place of a student’s original work.
  • AI as a Non-Credible Source
    Since credible research relies on verifiable citations, and we are presently unable to adequately fact-check the sources of AI-generated content, AI will not be accepted as a credible source in academic work. However, instructors may permit the use of AI tools as sources within specific assignments. In such cases, the AI tool must be properly acknowledged in accordance with the instructor’s guidelines.
  • Required Technology Use
    All instructors affiliated with Brewton-Parker Christian University are required to utilize the university’s designated Learning Management System (LMS) and approved AI detection tool(s) for assignment submission and evaluation. Instructors may also require a hard copy submission, but the student must still submit the work through the LMS.
  • Assignment Submission and AI Screening
    Students must submit relevant assignments through the LMS. Upon submission, the work will be checked for AI-generated content using the university’s approved detection tool(s).
  • AI Detection Thresholds and Review Process
    If a student’s work returns an AI detection score meeting or exceeding the threshold outlined in the Artificial Intelligence Sanction Table, the instructor may initiate an academic integrity review. This determination will be based on results from the university’s approved AI detection tool(s).
    AI detection scores are a tool, not definitive proof of misconduct. Instructors must review flagged content, compare it to the student’s prior work, and speak with the student before filing a violation if the flagged content is below 50%. Students are responsible for proving originality by providing drafts, notes, outlines, or revision history upon request.
  • Consequences for Violations
    Students who violate this policy will be subject to disciplinary action as prescribed in the Academic Integrity Policy and the sanction table.
Additional Notes of Emphasis:
  • Policy Revisions
    Since AI is a continually evolving tool, this policy is subject to review and revision at any time. It should not be considered final, as future developments in AI—especially those intended to circumvent academic integrity—are unknown at the time of publication. Brewton-Parker Christian University reserves the right to modify the policy without prior notice based on new evidence.
  • Scope of the Policy
    This policy is intended to address AI primarily designed for generating substantive academic content (such as ChatGPT). It does not currently apply to AI-assisted language correction tools (such as Grammarly and Microsoft Editor) or citation generation tools (such as MyBib and Landmark Citation Machine). However, students should exercise caution when using these tools, as they can produce inaccurate information and may evolve to include generative capabilities in the future.

Citation Mistakes (Correctable – Not Misconduct): Errors in citation format where sources are acknowledged but improperly formatted.

Sanctions:

100 level - up to 10 percent deduction

200 level - up to 20 percent deduction

300 level - required on substantial written assessments; up to 30 percent deduction

400 level - required on substantial written assessments; up to 40 percent deduction

500+ level - required on substantial written assessments; up to 50 percent deduction

*Instructors may require resubmission of work or professional tutoring

Academic Misconduct (Always Sanctionable): Passing off another’s work as one’s own, using Artificial Intelligence without approval, cheating on exams or assignments, falsifying records or data, or knowingly helping others commit violations.

Sanction levels/points are cumulative over the length of the student’s tenure at Brewton-Parker Christian University.

The following violation levels are assigned to specific types of violations of the Brewton-Parker Christian University Academic Integrity Policy. If a violation occurs that is not specifically provided for below, then any sanction(s) will be based on the most similar type of violation that exists in this rubric. All violations may be considered a single violation regardless of the timeframe in which they occur. If a student commits more than one type of violation in a single act, his/her sanction will be based on the highest violation level applicable.

For offenses not specifically mentioned in this rubric, faculty members may confer with the Provost and propose a description of the offense and the level of sanctions. The Provost will review the proposed offense and sanction for consistency with existing offenses and sanctions. If a faculty member and the Provost disagree over a particular offense or sanction, the Provost will make the determination with advice and counsel from the Appeals Committee. In the event of a conflict between a course syllabus and the Academic Integrity Policy, the policy and rubric shall take precedence.

In addition, upon proof by clear and convincing evidence of complicity and pursuant to notice and fair opportunity for a hearing before the Appeals Committee, offenders not enrolled at the time of the offense, either at the university or in the class where the offense was committed, may be subject to revocation of academic credit, grades, and degrees or other credentials already conferred.

LEVEL

EXAMPLES OF OFFENSE

SANCTION(s)

BLUE

· Plagiarism such as no citations in work done for a course in which the plagiarized material constitutes less than 10% of the assignment.

· Unauthorized collaboration on or providing answers for homework assignments constituting less than 10% of the assignments.

· Use of any other materials or resources that are not authorized by the instructor in completing any assignment, not including exams and quizzes, which has a value of less than 10% of the overall course grade.

· Required Integrity training

· Up to 20% reduction

· Possible resubmission

· Possible tutoring referral

* After 2 blue-level offenses, subsequent blue-level offenses will be treated as yellow-level offenses.

YELLOW

· Copying from or viewing another student’s work during a quiz or exam.

· Using unauthorized materials during a quiz, exam, or assignment worth 10% or more of the course grade, or a second offense.

· Collaborating during a quiz or exam without permission.

· Unauthorized collaboration on laboratory or in-class work.

· Plagiarism constituting 10% or more of the assignment or a second offense.

· Self-plagiarism without instructor permission.

· Falsification of attendance or participation.

· Lying or falsification as described in the policy.

· Required Integrity training

· Zero on assignment

· Possible resubmission

· Possible tutoring or success coach referral

* After 5 combined blue- and yellow-level offenses, or after 3 yellow-level offenses, subsequent offenses will be treated as orange-level offenses.

ORANGE

· Buying, selling, or obtaining information about an examination or assignment not yet administered.

· Substituting for another person or permitting substitution.

· Submitting altered or falsified data for internships.

· Any level 2 violation on a major exam or capstone project.

· Required Integrity training

· XF course grade

· Possible suspension or probation

* After 3 orange-level offenses, subsequent offenses will be treated as red-level offenses.

RED

· Multiple orange-level offenses

· Altering grades or official records.

· Forging signatures on academic documents.

· Sabotaging another student’s work.

· Repeated orange-level offenses result in suspension

· Grade tampering results in expulsion

· Forging signatures results in expulsion

· Sabotaging work results in expulsion

False Positive Safeguards for AI Detection Turnitin
AI scores along with other AI detectors are a tool, not necessarily definitive proof of misconduct. Instructors must review flagged content and compare it to the student’s prior work and should speak with the student before filing a violation if the flagged content is less than 50%. Ultimately, students are responsible for proving originality by providing drafts, notes, outlines, or revision history.

LEVEL

DETECTED SCORE AND WEIGHT

SANCTION(s)

BLUE

20–30% on any assignment

OR

31–50% on assignments less than 10% course weight

· Possible rewrite

· Required Integrity training

· Up to 20% grade deduction

* After 2 blue-level offenses, subsequent blue-level offenses will be treated as yellow-level offenses.

YELLOW

31–50% on an assignment ≥10% weight

OR

51%+ on any assignment

· Zero on assignment

· Required Integrity training

ORANGE

On the 5th combined blue- and yellow-level offenses

OR

On the 3rd yellow-level offenses

· Course grade of XF

· Required Integrity training

RED

On the 2nd orange-level offense

· Course grade of XF

· Immediate Academic Suspension

Academic Integrity Policy – Clarifications

The following clarifications and addenda are to be read in conjunction with the 2025–2026 Academic Integrity Policy. These additions are intended to close gaps in interpretation, ensure consistency across courses, and preserve the integrity of Brewton-Parker Christian University’s academic mission.

  1. English and Writing-Focused Courses

    In English and other writing-focused courses, students must submit original drafts that reflect their own unaided writing, with only minimal reliance on built-in spell check tools (such as Microsoft Word or Google Docs automatic spelling underlines). Advanced language correction tools (Grammarly, Microsoft Editor, QuillBot, AI writing assistants, etc.) should be applied only after the unaided draft is complete.

    The inclusion of both versions as part of the final submission ensures that faculty can evaluate the student’s authentic writing ability as well as their revision process. Faculty may specify whether drafts are to be submitted in an appendix or as separate documents.

  2. Citation Escalation Across Courses

    Repeat citation mistakes across multiple courses may escalate to academic misconduct if students fail to correct their behavior after receiving feedback. Faculty should document prior warnings or corrections when recommending escalation.

  3. Appeals and Sanction Reductions

    Sanction reductions may be considered by the Appeals Committee for Blue or Yellow violations if the student admits responsibility in writing. This option is not available for Orange- or Red-level violations.

  4. Training Scope for Citation Mistakes

    Citation mistakes at the 300-level and above may require Academic Tutoring in addition to grade deductions. This reinforces proper citation practices and ensures student development in advanced coursework. 

    *same days as integrity training (5 calendar days to contact SEC to schedule it)

    * failure results in integrity violation recommendation

  5. Faculty Sanction Documentation

    Faculty must record the rationale when applying optional sanctions (e.g., resubmission, tutoring referral) to ensure consistency across courses and fairness to students. This documentation should be submitted along with the violation report.

Academic Integrity Training

All violations except expulsion require completion of:

  1. “Your Story” Reflection – describing the violation and lessons learned.
  2. Academic Integrity Module / Meeting – teaching proper research, citation, and AI guidelines.

The AI Training Module must be completed through the Student Enrichment Center (SEC) before the deadline stated in the official notification. Off campus students may make arrangements to complete the module via Skype, Google Meet, or other virtual meeting software).

Students failing to complete the module by the stated deadline will be assessed a $50 fine and suspended from class attendance with unexcused absences until the module has been completed. Failure to complete training may also result in a registration hold and potential further action.

Academic Integrity Process and Appeals

  1. Initial Discovery and Reporting:

Instructors should report a suspected violation to Provost within 7 calendar days of discovery. 

However, when dealing with a possible Artificial Intelligence violation, the offense should be submitted within 10 days of discovery following the steps and timeline below:

  • Contact student within 2 days
  • Student has 5 days to respond
  • Professor has 3 days to submit report to Provost

If the offense is less than 50% according to AI detector and the student fails to respond to the instructor’s initial contact, the violation will be processed. 

  1. Provost or designate should notify the student of the allegation within 48 hours of the receipt of the allegation.
  2. The student responds within 5 days to accept or appeal the sanction or allegation. Students accepting the allegation may proceed with the Integrity Training. For students wishing to appeal their case will be heard by the Appeals Committee. Failing to respond within the 5 days will be treated as an admission of guilt and an appeal will not be afforded to the student without extreme circumstances.
  3. The Appeals Committee meets bi-weekly (as needed) and reviews all available evidence and decides. If within the appeal letter, the student admits responsibility, the Committee may elect to reduce the sanction for blue or yellow-Level violations.
  4. If upheld, the student may further appeal to the Provost as final reviewer. The Provost in consultation with an Advisory Board (composed of at least three institutional leaders) may uphold, reduce, or remand the sanction but will not remove the violation if the student admitted guilt.

Grounds for Appeal:

  1. Procedural error.
  2. New evidence.
  3. Excessively harsh sanction.
Note: For offenses not specifically mentioned in this rubric, faculty members may confer with the Provost and propose a description of the offense and the level of sanctions. The Provost will review the proposed offense and sanction for consistency with existing offenses and sanctions. If a faculty member and the Provost disagree over a particular offense or sanction, the Provost will make the determination with advice and counsel from the College Appeals Committee. In the event of a conflict between a course syllabus and the Academic Integrity Policy, the policy and rubric shall take precedence.

In addition, upon proof by clear and convincing evidence of complicity and pursuant to notice and fair opportunity for a hearing before the College Appeals Committee, offenders not enrolled at the time of the offense, either at the college or in the class where the offense was committed, may be subject to revocation of academic credit, grades, and degrees or other credentials already conferred.

Removal of the ‘X’

After two semesters at the college following the imposition of a penalty with no student conduct or academic integrity infractions, a student may request to have the X removed from the transcript. In order to have the X removed from the transcript, a student should complete the X-Removal Form in the Registrar’s Office (note that the grade of F will remain). Any student qualified to have an X removed, but who transfers or otherwise leaves the college before submitting an X-Removal Form, may do so after leaving the college. The X will automatically be removed from the transcript of any student who graduates from BPC.

Students Rights and Academic Integrity Appeals

What rights do students have?
If an instructor alleges a student’s involvement in academic misconduct, students have the right to a fair process including:

  1. The right to be notified: Students will receive notification of the allegation after an instructor reports it to the Provost. The instructor is not required to notify the student(s) before making this report.
  2. The right to receive a copy of the documentation or other evidence supporting the allegation.
  3. The right to be heard: Students have the right to appeal an alleged violation of the academic integrity policy.

Students do not have the ability to:

  1. Appeal the severity of the imposed sanctions: All sanctions are imposed based on cumulative points and the Academic Integrity Sanctions Rubric.
  2. Appeal violations due to intention: Students should accept responsibility if their actions violated the academic integrity policy, regardless of whether or not the violation was “intentional.”
  3. Appeal violations based on ignorance: Arguments of “I didn’t know” are irrelevant, as students are afforded numerous opportunities to undergo academic integrity training. Students also are responsible for reading and understanding the terms of their course syllabi and any policies published in the academic catalog.
  4. Bring legal representation to any appeals committee meeting.
Student Rights and Grade Appeal Procedures
Students have the right to appeal final course grades after they have been posted in the college’s official gradebook, MyWeb. The College utilizes both an informal and a formal process for grade appeals.
  1. The student should first discuss the matter directly with the instructor and make a reasonable effort to resolve the issue. The student must begin such an informal resolution process within seven calendar days of the release of final course grades.
  2. If the student is uncomfortable trying to resolve the issue directly with the instructor, the student should request informal resolution by the Division Chair. If the instructor is the Division Chair, then the student should request informal resolution by the Provost. This step must begin within seven calendar days of the release of final course grades. The Division Chair nor the Provost play a decision-making role; rather, he or she facilitates a resolution when possible.

If no resolution is reached with the instructor, a student may initiate a formal appeal with the Provost.

  1. In order to complete a formal grade appeal, a student must submit a Grade Appeal Form to the Provost within seven calendar days of the close of the informal resolution process. Students may ask the ASC professional staff for assistance in completing their appeal (not peer tutors).
  2. Upon receipt of an appeal, the Provost will acknowledge its receipt with a copy to the instructor. The instructor will have the opportunity to write a letter of response, of which the student will receive a copy.
  3. Both letters will be forwarded to the College Appeals Committee, who will meet to consider all facts presented in both letters. If the committee feels as though any party needs to be present at an appeals meeting, then both parties will be afforded the opportunity to appear. The individuals will not be required to discuss the appeal in front of one another. The committee will deliberate in closed session. All decisions are made by majority vote unless otherwise noted.

The Grade Appeal Form serves to remind students that an appeal must contain the following information:

    1. the course number, name, instructor, and the letter grade which the student is appealing;
    2. the basis for the student’s appeal;
    3. a statement of the remedy the student is seeking;
    4. evidence to support the basis for appeal, such as, but not limited to
      • syllabus information
      • assignment instructions
      • assignment evaluations
      • evaluations of prior learning
      • evidence of student attempts to contact an instructor outside of the classroom prior to the grade appeal
      • information on when and with whom the student attempted an informal resolution.
    5. Incomplete Grade Appeal Forms will be returned to the student to be corrected before being forwarded to the College Appeals Committee.
Student Rights and Non-Academic Appeal Procedures

The College Appeals Committee will also hear appeals of disciplinary, financial, and other matters designated by the President. [Appeals of persons denied admission to the College will be dealt with by the Admissions Committee.]

Appeals of non-academic matters are a safeguard against errors or unfairness. Students may appeal the determination of responsibility, the sanction(s) imposed, or both. A written letter of appeal must be submitted to the Provost within seven calendar days of the time the student was notified of the action.

Appeals must be based on one or more of the following:

  1. Significant new information not available at the time of the original decision
  2. Evidence that the person who made the original decision
    • refused to hear all witnesses brought forward by the student,
    • applied rules not actually in effect,
    • did not give fair process to the student,
    • did not follow the rules as set in place in the Brewton-Parker Christian University Student Handbook and Academic Catalog,
    • made a decision that is contrary to or disregarded entirely the evidence that was presented, or
    • made a decision that was biased.
  3. Evidence that the action taken was excessive for the charge made against the student
 
General Policies Regarding Academic Integrity and Other Appeals

In counting the deadlines specified in the Academic Integrity and Appeals policies “calendar days” shall include official college holidays, breaks, and weekends; however, if the last day of a deadline falls on one of these, then the delay will be extended to the next work day (Mon.-Fri).  The Provost shall have discretion to waive or extend any such deadline under circumstances that warrant an exception.

Within seven calendar days from notice of an adverse decision by the College Appeals Committee and upon presentation of new evidence unavailable at the time of the appeal, an aggrieved student may petition the Provost for further review and/or for a rehearing of the committee’s decision.  Such petition must be in writing and submitted to the Provost by email.  Upon receipt of a petition for final review, the Provost has full discretion to grant or deny the request, amend or vacate the committee’s decision, or remand the case for further consideration by the committee.  Such review or rehearing is a discretionary appeal of last resort, after which a student has no further recourse under Brewton-Parker policy.

After all avenues of redress afforded by the College’s published policies and procedures have been exhausted, if a student feels that a fair and reasonable resolution was not achieved, students hereby also are advised of their right to file a complaint with the Georgia Nonpublic Postsecondary Education Commission (GNPEC). A copy of the “GNPEC Authorized School Complaint Form: may be found on the agency’s web site at www.gnpec.ga.gov 

Content on this page and in the catalog policy is a combination of portions of integrity polices at UCSD, UC Denver, and the University of Arkansas, put together by an Academic Integrity Study Group and approved by the BPCU Academic Council and Faculty Assembly.

Physical Address
201 David-Eliza Fountain Circle
Mount Vernon, GA 30445

Mailing Address
P. O. Box 197
Mount Vernon, GA 30445

912-583-2241 |  1-800-342-1087

Get Started

Apply Visit Request Give

Resources

My BPC Employment Alumni Library
Section 504 Accommodation Policy and Grievance Procedure Title VI and IX Policy and Grievance Procedure

Brewton-Parker Christian University is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) to award associate, baccalaureate, and master's degrees. Degree-granting institutions also may offer credentials such as certificates and diplomas at approved degree levels. Questions about the accreditation of Brewton-Parker Christian University may be directed in writing to the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges at 1866 Southern Lane, Decatur, GA 30033-4097, by calling (404) 679-4500, or by using information available on SACSCOC’s website.

Copyright © 2025 Brewton-Parker Christian University
Non-Discrimination Policy

Purpose

The purpose of the nursing program is to prepare graduates who have the knowledge and skills to provide patient-centered holistic care that is safe, compassionate, honoring to Christ, and that meets the healthcare needs of diverse populations.

Mission Statement

In concert with Brewton-Parker Christian University’s mission, the School of Nursing is committed to provide nursing education through the application of biblical truth to promote the formation of graduates who engage in evidence-based practice, lifelong learning, and servant leadership through the development of clinical reasoning, professional nursing skills, and Christian values.

Candace Lilford

Profeessional Tutor

Candace Lilford graduated with her bachelor’s degree in Theatre Generalism in 2021 from Anderson University and with her master’s degree in English Literature in 2023 from the University of Alabama. She presently serves as Professional Tutor for the Student Enrichment Center while also teaching sections of ENG 101 and 102. 

As part of her two-year master's program, Ms. Lilford taught sections of ENG 101 and 102, while also serving as teaching assistant for British Literature Survey courses and volunteering in the university’s Writing Center. Ms Lilford has also presented papers at the Hudson Strode Conference and the South Eastern Christian and Literature Conference as well as working on various theatrical productions.

Born in North Carolina of South African descent, Ms. Lilford has lived in Uganda, Botswana, South Africa, and Trinidad before settling in Mount Vernon with her family in 2016, where she attended Brewton-Parker Christian University as a dual enrollment student. She presently resides in Mount Vernon with her family and spends her free time watching old TV shows.

Linda Armstrong

Academic Advising and Career Specialist

Linda Armstrong earned an Associate Degree in Criminal Justice Technology from Southeastern Technical College and a Bachelor of Science degree in Psychology from Walden University. Throughout her career, Linda has worked with diverse populations, including at-risk youth and families and youth in crisis because of mental health and other issues. Her empathetic nature has made her an effective advocate for those in need. In addition to her professional work, Linda is also is committed to volunteerism. She has dedicated countless hours as a youth mentor, and to teaching about her faith at various Christian organizations. She believes in the power of positivity and its ability to transform not only her life but also the lives of others.

"If you must look back, do so forgivingly. If you will look forward, do so prayerfully. But the wisest course would be to be present in the present gratefully." ~ Maya Angelou

Willie Ford

Academic Advising and Career Specialist

Greetings, Baron Nation!

It's truly a joy to be back in a place that has shaped me so profoundly. I'm Willie Ford, a proud 2022 graduate of historic Brewton-Parker Christian University, holding a Bachelor of Arts degree in Psychology with a Minor in Education. Following my graduation, I embarked on a journey in education, teaching Special Education within the Vidalia City School District. In addition to my role as an educator, I had the privilege of serving as the Unit Director at the J.D. Rabun Boys and Girls Club. All the while, I was honored to pastor at the esteemed New Hope Baptist Church of Rhine, Georgia. With God's grace, I managed these responsibilities, and now, I'm thrilled and ready to contribute to the welfare of our students, aiming to inspire through service.

Dusty Arnold

Mental Health Counselor

Dusty Arnold  is a Licensed Professional Counselor and a Board Certified Behavior Analyst as well as a BPC alumnus. He has years of experience working with a variety of mental health issues including anxiety, grief, and challenges related to Autism. He specializes in behavior-related interventions that can help college students build on their strengths to set achievable goals while also learning how to deal with the thoughts and feelings that sometimes get in the way. He incorporates Biblical values and evidence-based treatments to meet students wherever they happen to be on their journey to spiritual and psychological health. 

Carl Anthony "Tony" Wardlaw

Assistant Student Enrichment Director & Student Success Coach

Carl Anthony “Tony” Wardlaw – For over 25 years, Dr. Wardlaw has worked in leadership, counseling, and pastoring. Beginning with working in middle management for a manufacturing company in Douglas, GA, Dr. Wardlaw has also worked in the academic, nonprofit, public, and private sectors. Additionally, he served over 7 years in the United States Military as a Military Intelligence Officer before resigning his commission as a Captain in the Army.

Currently serving as the Assistant Director of the Student Enrichment Center, Student Success Coach, and Adjunct Faculty at Brewton-Parker Christian University in Mount Vernon, GA, he also serves as the Pastor of The Green Grove Missionary Baptist Church in Dublin, GA.

As a member of the renowned International Gospel Singing Group, The Wardlaw Brothers, Dr. Wardlaw has traveled all over the nation and abroad ministering and singing the Gospel of Christ Jesus. Dr. Wardlaw has served as a consultant for various agencies and has worked as a Fatherhood Coordinator and G.E.D. instructor within the Technical College System of Georgia and participates in local and national civic and philanthropic work.

Dr. Wardlaw holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree in International Business from the University of Georgia, two master's degrees from Troy University (Master of Science in Clinical Counseling and Psychology and Master of Education in Counseling), and a Doctorate in Education from Argosy University in Organizational Leadership. Dr. Wardlaw is a Lifetime Silver Member of The NAACP and a member of The Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, Inc. He is happily married to the former Mrs. Stephanie Scott. They have 3 Children; Chambria, Marc, and Carleigh.

Translate »