Creating a Culture of Integrity Through Understanding, Discouraging, and Dealing with Academic Dishonesty

Bill Hill, PhD

Professor Emeritus of Psychology, Kennesaw State University Presented as part of the USG Faculty Online Development Series November 9, 2011

Defining Academic Integrity

The Center for Academic Integrity (CAI) defines academic integrity as a commitment, even in the face of adversity, to five fundamental values: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, and responsibility.

Defining Academic Integrity

Some other definitional sources to consider: Institutional definitions and policies AAUP policy statements on Professional Ethics, Freedom and Responsibility, and Plagiarism Disciplinary ethical guidelines

Some Data for Context

Self-report surveys indicate that between 40-70% of undergraduate students admit to cheating of some type Some studies indicate that online cheating occurs less than on-ground classes One of the most common forms of cheating is unauthorized collaboration with other students

Some Data for Context

Students generally view academic dishonest more leniently than faculty, but less leniently as they progress through college Faculty are often unaware of student attitudes about academic dishonesty Faculty often lack an accurate understanding of why students cheat

Pavelas (1978) Typology of Academic Dishonesty

Cheating intentionally using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information, or study aids in any academic exercise

Examples of Cheating
Crib notes Looking at another students answers Using stolen test Using cell phones (for web search; sending text messages) Constructing web site to access during test Unauthorized collaboration Stealing from computer or flash drive

Pavelas (1978) Typology of Academic Dishonesty

Fabrication intentional and unauthorized fabrication or invention of any information or citation in an academic exercise

Examples of Fabrication
Excuses that are lies to buy time Making up bibliographical sources Faking lab results Changing answers when test is returned Dont turn in exam, claim instructor must have lost it, and want a retake

Pavelas (1978) Typology of Academic Dishonesty

Plagiarism deliberate adoption or reproduction of ideas or words or statements of another person as ones own without acknowledgement

Examples of Plagiarism
Submitting another students paper Buying a paper Submitting the same paper to multiple classes Copying a published or unpublished paper (e.g., thesis) Unattributed citations (i.e., cut and paste)

Pavelas (1978) Typology of Academic Dishonesty

Facilitating Academic Dishonesty intentionally or knowingly helping or attempting to help another

Examples of Facilitation
Sharing answers Stealing a test Impersonators taking a test Creating distractions during exam to help others cheat Sharing papers/assignments/lab reports Unauthorized collaborating

The recurring theme across Pavelas typology is that academic dishonesty is intentional. Determining intention can present a challenge in concluding whether academic dishonesty occurred.

Consider Cultural Background

When determining intentionality take into possible cultural differences in the acceptability and practices related to Collaboration Citations

Technology & Academic Dishonesty

Survey data collected by Stephens, Young, & Calabrese (2007) suggested that digital methods of academic dishonesty have not replaced conventional methods like collaboration on homework or test copying, just made it easier.

Technology & Academic Dishonesty

New methods and temptations:
Word processing programs Crib notes made easy Ease of transfer between sources (cut and paste) Cell Phones Easy Internet access Text messaging Taking pictures

Technology & Academic Dishonesty

New methods and temptations:
Blaming Technology Hard drive crashes and printer failure File corruption tricks Hacking Gaining unauthorized access to instructor materials Using the Internet Easy access to information What might be out there (faculty posting test bank items) Facilitating plagiarism

Technology & Academic Dishonesty

Internet behavior may contribute to moral disengagement. Research reported by the Business Software Alliance (cited in Stephens, Young, & Calabrese, 2007) found:
69% of students download music.75% of whom never pay 26% of students download movies.84% of whom never pay 75% state that it is okay to pirate music and movies

Student & Faculty Perceptions

Student beliefs that lead to dishonest behavior (Whitley & Keith-Spiegel, 2002)
Studying previous tests is okay, if not stolen Shortcuts are okay (reading summaries, faking/fudging data) Collaboration is okay, even if not allowed---especially when helping a friend Some forms of plagiarism are okay (e.g., omitting sources) Its a game and conning teachers is part of it (e.g., false excuses, marking multiple answers for item on a test)

Student & Faculty Perceptions

Some Faculty-Student Belief Disconnects
(Whitley & Keith-Spiegel, 2002)
Intentionally looking at another students test answer and keeping yours if they match Studying old tests without permission Getting external help on graded aspects of paper (e.g., spelling, grammar) Using information from another students paper without citation Using a term paper in multiple classes without instructor permission

Student & Faculty Perceptions

More Disconnects
Leaving out sources in bibliography Changing lab report data Submitting lab report when research not done False excuses Reading condensed versions

Why Students Do It
Based on a review of 14 studies, Whitley and Keith-Spiegel (2002) identified three categories of factors contributing to academic dishonesty
Motivational Justifications Situational

Discouraging: Institutional Perspective

Institutional culture
Honor codes Clear policies Administrative support and encouragement Faculty commitment (reputation) Departmental commitment

Discouraging: Classroom Climate

Focus on positives, not negatives Establish culture of fairness Syllabus content Classroom discussion Supportive learning environment Reduce student anxiety

Discouraging: Tests
Restate your expectations prior to tests Implement test security measures, before and after Create a testing situation that discourages cheating Used timed tests in online courses

Discouraging: Homework & Lab Reports

Monitor lab attendance Tell them you keep copies of student homework Vary assignments across classes and semesters Avoid using assignments for which answers are available online or otherwise Be explicit about collaboration Warn about unintended sharing possibilities (trash-diving; shared computers)

Discouraging: Papers
Teach the students appropriate behaviors Tell students you keep past papers Tell them you use e-resources to check (TurnItIn, SafeAssign) Manage paper topics Require submission of related materials Assess knowledge of paper Warn about unintended sharing possibilities (trash-diving; shared computers) Be clear about using the same paper across classes

Discouraging: Term Papers

Use online resources for designing activities to assist students in understanding paraphrasing and citation Example: Indiana University Bloomington, School of Education http://www.indiana.edu/~istd/plagiarism_test.html

Discouraging: Selecting Assessments

Use multiple methods

Prevention: Assessing Your Course

Jared Stein of Utah Valley University has developed an instrument that measures the Cheatability of your course. Although geared toward an online course, it can also provide feedback on on-ground courses. Web site: http://jaredstein.org/cheat/

Detection: Tests
Be vigilant during the test Watch for inappropriate behaviors Give discreet warnings when necessary Note similarities in error patterns Copy and compare answer sheets

Detection: Homework & Lab Reports

Keep copies of student work Watch for variations in answer quality Grade all in one sitting Lab reports turned in by absent students

Detection: Term Papers

Keep copies of student papers Watch for signs of plagiarism
Paper too good Unusual content Variations in writing style (within paper; with other assignments)

Use TurnItIn or other similar tools

Dealing with Suspected Instances

McCabe (2005) reported that 33% of faculty reported being aware of cheating but doing nothing.

Dealing with Suspected Instances

Factors contributing to faculty avoidance (Whitley & Keith-Spiegel, 2002):
Beliefs: Doesnt happen in my classes I dont want to know They are only hurting themselves

Dealing with Suspected Instances

Factors contributing to faculty avoidance (Whitley & Keith-Spiegel, 2002):
Barriers: Difficulty in proving it Time consuming Fear of negative impressions of themselves Fear of litigation Perceived lack of support Student retaliation

Dealing with Suspected Instances

Some Final Advice:
Take action Follow institutional policy Do your research---gather evidence Dont always assume guilt Pay attention to due process Maintain confidentiality Notify your department chair Consider having a witness when discussing with student (e.g., department chair)

Bottom Line
Make academic integrity central to your teaching and a shared responsibility with your students Deal with academic dishonesty even though it is difficult and unpleasant.