academic integrity in on-line and distance learning ... - srce · higher education in se europe •...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Academic Integrity in On-line and
Distance Learning Programmes Securing Authentication and Verifying
Authenticity of Assessment
Dr Irene Glendinning
Office of Teaching and Learning
Coventry University, UK
2
Agenda
• Summary of recent research
• Research findings from South-Eastern Europe
• Applying Research findings to quality assurance and
academic integrity requirements of on-line and distance
learning provision
• Recommendations on the way forward
3
Summary of recent research
• Principal Investigator for EU funded project Impact of Policies
for Plagiarism in Higher Education Across Europe (IPPHEAE)
• Partner in Council of Europe funded project South-Eastern
Europe Project on Policies for Academic Integrity (SEEPPAI)
• Development of benchmarks and tools for evaluating
institutional policies for academic integrity (AIMM, SAID)
• ICAI working group on Contract Cheating: International Day of
Action 19th Oct 2016 18th Oct 2017;
• Partner in EU funded European Network for Academic Integrity
(ENAI), Vice President of ENAI
• Member QAA working group on Contract Cheating- QAA report
• Expert witness to the Advisory Statement on Corruption in
Higher Education Daniel (2016)
• Principal Investigator CHEA / CIQG global study on AQAB*
responses to Corruption in HE (2017-18)
*AQAB = Accreditation and Quality Assurance Bodies
4
Academic Integrity, Research
Integrity, Educational Integrity
• Different aspects of practice, ethos, culture, strategy,
values and policy for maintaining the security of
standards and conduct within an institution, nationally
and internationally
• Converse of academic malpractice, dishonesty and
misconduct
• Comprising honesty, trust, responsibility, respect,
fairness, transparency, courage (ICAI)
• Integrity or not? “How you behave when nobody is
watching”
5
Challenges to authentic assessment
• Plagiarism – deliberate and accidental
• Working together - inappropriate collusion
• Contract cheating
• Self-plagiarism
• Exam cheating
• Impersonation
• Data fabrication, manipulation, selectivity
• Bribery
• Coercion, bullying
• Aiding others to be dishonest
What is
Contract
Cheating?
What levels?School work
Undergraduate
Postgraduate
Doctoral theses
Types of service?Bespoke coursework,
essays, reports
Drafts provided
Exam completion,
impersonation
Research, analysis
Quality of work?Costs more for higher
grades
How fast?Pay more for faster
turnaround – same day
possible
What does it
cost?Personal favours,
Commercially
starting as low as
US$50
Who does the work?Family, friends
Colleagues, students
Alumni
Commercial company
employees or contractors
Web-based services
globally
How is contact
made?Web-based services
Personal, family,
colleagues
Presence on campus
Social media
Advertising
7
SEEPPAI 2016-2017
• South East European Project on Policies for Academic
Integrity – study of 6 countries
• Mendel University in Brno CZ, Coventry University UK
• Funded by the Council of Europe (CoE)
• First of several regional studies to extend IPPHEAE
research to more European countries
• Building on IPPHEAE results (Impact of Policies for
Plagiarism in Higher Education Across Europe 2010-15)
• Survey: institutional, national – local languages;
workshops, resources, report, dissemination
South East European Project on
Policies for Academic Integrity
• Albania
• Bosnia and
Herzegovina
• Croatia
• Montenegro
• Former Yugoslav
Republic of
Macedonia
• Serbia
9
Higher Education in SE Europe
• Culture of corruption in the region– Transparency International Corruption Perception Index
(CPI 2017): Croatia 57th, Bosnia & Herz, Albania 91st
FYR of Macedonia 107th (of 180 countries)
• Large universities, autonomous faculties -institution-wide policies uncommon
• Big differences within and between universities within in countries and across region
• Relaxed attitude to serious forms of cheating
• Awareness, openness and willingness to discuss the problems with academic integrity but not everywhere
10
Evidence from SEEPPAI 2016-7
• Perception that corruption in society makes it difficult to
tackle corrupt practices in education
• Ghost-writing, essay mills, contract cheating very common
• Student assessment relies too heavily on rote learning,
critical thinking not valued by professors
• Major problems with exam cheating, lax invigilation, repeat
assessments, questions
• Reports of professors taking bribes from students
• Almost all respondents wanted more training and guidance
• Some examples of good practice documented
• Keen interest and desire to improve
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
AL BA HR MK ME RS
Research
Training
Knowledge
Communication
Prevention
Software
Sanctions
Policies
Transparency
SEEPPAI: Academic Integrity Maturity Model results for South-Eastern Europe
0
1
2
3
4
Transparency
Policies
Sanctions
Software
PreventionCommunic
ation
Knowledge
Training
Research
Albania
0
1
2
3
4
Transparency
Policies
Sanctions
Software
PreventionCommunic
ation
Knowledge
Training
Research
Bosnia & Herzegovina
0
1
2
3
4
Transparency
Policies
Sanctions
Software
PreventionCommunic
ation
Knowledge
Training
Research
Croatia
0
1
2
3
4
Transparency
Policies
Sanctions
Software
PreventionCommunic
ation
Knowledge
Training
Research
Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia
0
1
2
3
4
Transparency
Policies
Sanctions
Software
PreventionCommunic
ation
Knowledge
Training
Research
Montenegro
0
1
2
3
4
Transparency
Policies
Sanctions
Software
PreventionCommunic
ation
Knowledge
Training
Research
Serbia
SEEPPAI Project: Academic Integrity Maturity Model results for South-
Eastern Europe
Evidence from IPPHEAE & SEEPPAI
COMPARISON OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY POLICIES IN 33 COUNTRIES
Based on ~5800 survey responses (CoE SEEPPAI report 2017, AIMM)
0,00
5,00
10,00
15,00
20,00
25,00
Research
Training
Knowledge
Communication
Prevention
Software
Sanctions
Policies
Transparency
14
Applying findings to On-line and
Distance Learning provision
• Establishing the identity of students not on campus
for admissions and assessment
• Educating students about academic integrity
• Creating assessments that both challenge and
measure learning and achievement
• Controlling the assessment process
• Ensuring students are doing the assessments
themselves
• Consistency of approach from tutors
15
Oversight and quality assurance
• Internal moderation and oversight for
consistency pre- and post-assessment
• Internal quality assurance process – eg double
marking, anonymous marking
• External examining – independent monitoring
• External accreditation, validation
• External quality assurance, scrutiny, audits,
visits, self-evaluation
16
Academic integrity: institutional
• Institution-wide strategy, policies, procedures for
– Discouraging academic misconduct
– Handling accusations of academic misconduct
• Decisions on misconduct
– sanctions / penalties available
– who decides?
• Records of misconduct cases & outcomes
• Consistency from academic tutors
• Academic misconduct not detected or not penalised
• Academic integrity of academic staff
17
Teaching, learning and assessment
• Contact time and methods, class sizes
• Rote learning / assessment design?
• Teacher-led / student-led
• Discourage / Invite critical thinking
• Practical, project-based, problem-based (PBL)
• Individual / group work / collaboration
• Diversity of student population
• Extra-curricular activities / campus culture
International Day of Action
against Contract Cheating
19th Oct 2016,18th Oct 2017
#ExcelwithIntegrity
#DefeattheCheat
http://contractcheating.weebly.com/
19
Deterring misconduct
• View students as allies, know your students
• Education on academic writing & consequences
• CPD for academic tutors: on the front line for
detecting and correcting students’ problems
• Encourage transparency, consistency
• Whistle-blowing policy - students & staff
• Provide opportunities for formative learning
• Don’t repeat the same assessments
• Robust policies and sanctions
20
Consequences of condoning or
ignoring academic misconduct
• Threat to quality and standards
• Insecure academic qualifications
• Professional incompetence of graduates
• Research results unreliable
• Unfair advantages / disadvantages
• Institutional reputation
• Waste of public money
21
Priorities globally informed by
Europe• Establish a common understanding of acceptable academic
practice: convince academic leaders to make this a priority
• Roles of quality assurance & accreditation bodies
• Outlaw services that facilitate cheating
• Guide and support students and academics to follow academic
integrity values and principles
• Encourage aspirations for scholarship and high standards
• Collect examples of effective policies & managing change (eg
Morris 2011, Bretag et al 2014, QAA 2017, TEQSA 2017)
• Support HE institutions to develop effective, workable policies
through guidance, training, funding and monitoring
• Protect whistle-blowers identifying poor practice
• Engage students as partners in the process of reform
• Start education on integrity at school level
22
References, resourcesAcademic Integrity Rating System on-line: http://www.academicintegrity.org/icai/assets/AIRS.pdf [10/10/2017]
Bertram Gallant, T., & Drinan, P. (2006). Institutionalizing academic Integrity: Administrator perceptions and institutional
actions. NASPA Journal, 43 (4), 61-81.
Bertram Gallant, T., & Drinan, P. (2008). Toward a Model of Academic Integrity Institutionalization: Informing Practice in
Higher Education. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 38 (2), 25-44.
Bretag, T., Mahmud, S., Wallace, M., Walker, R., McGowan, U., East, J., Green, M., Partridge, L.’ James, C. (2013): ‘Teach
us how to do it properly!’ An Australian academic integrity student survey, Studies in Higher Education,
DOI:10.1080/03075079.2013.777406 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.777406 [10/10/2017]
Bretag, T., Mahmud, S. (2014) Exemplary Academic Integrity Project, Academic Integrity Toolkit.
http://resource.unisa.edu.au/course/view.php?id=6633 [10/10/2017].
Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/, http://cmmiinstitute.com/ [10/10/2017]
Carroll, J. (2005) Handling Student Plagiarism: Moving to Mainstream [online] http://bejlt.brookes.ac.uk/articles/handling-
student-plagiarism-moving-to-mainstream/ [accessed 10/10/2017].
Carroll, J. and Appleton, J. (2001) Plagiarism: A Good Practice Guide http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/resources/institutional-
approaches/item/carroll-goodpractice-2 [10/10/2017].
Drinan, P., & Bertram Gallant, T. (2008). Academic Integrity: Models, Case Studies, and
Strategies. In, J. M. Lancaster & D. M. Waryold (Eds.), Student Conduct Practice: The Complete Guide for Student Affairs
Professionals (pp. 258-278). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Etined Council of Europe Platform on Ethics, Transparency and Integrity in Education (2018) Volume 5: South-East European
Project on Policies for Academic Integrity. https://rm.coe.int/prems-016918-gbr-2512-etined-vol-5-couv-texte-recadre-8482-
bat-16x24-w/168078499c [08/03/2018]
European Science Foundation (2008) Stewards of Integrity report
http://www.esf.org/fileadmin/Public_documents/Publications/StewardOfIntegrity.pdf [accessed 10/10/2017].
Foltynek, T., Glendinning, I. (2014) Impact of Policies for Plagiarism in Higher Education Across Europe: Results of the
Project, International conference in Academic Integrity, Florida, USA February 2014.
Glendinning, I (2013) Comparison of Policies for Academic Integrity in Higher Education across the European Union, On-line
at http://www.plagiarism.cz/ippheae/ [10/10/2017]
Glendinning, I. (2014) Responses to Student Plagiarism in Higher Education Across Europe, International Journal for
Educational Integrity, Vol 10(1) June 2014
IPPHEAE project results: http://www.plagiarism.cz/ippheae/ [10/10/2017]
23
References, resourcesGlendinning, I. (2014a). Responses to Student Plagiarism in Higher Education Across Europe. International Journal for Educational
Integrity, Vol 10(1) June 2014 pp. 4-20.
Glendinning, I. (2014b). Assessing maturity of institutional policies for underpinning academic integrity, 6th International Integrity and
Plagiarism conference, Sage, Newcastle, 15-18th June 2014.
Glendinning, I. (2016) Book Chapter: European Perspectives of Academic Integrity in the Handbook of Academic Integrity, edited by
Tracey Bretag, Springer Science + Business Media Singapore 2015. DOI 10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_3-2.
International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI) (2012) Academic Integrity Assessment Guide.
http://www.academicintegrity.org/icai/home.php [accessed 10/10/2017].
JISC Electronic Plagiarism Project (2001):
https://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20140617112811/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/plagiarism/archive/det
ection [accessed 10/10/2017].
Macdonald, R. and Carroll, J. (2006) Plagiarism: A Complex Issue Requiring a Holistic Institutional Approach. Assessment and
Evaluation in Higher Education 31 (2), 233-245.
Morris, E. (2011) Policy Works - Recommendations for Reviewing Policy to Manage Unacceptable Academic Practice in Higher
Education. UK: Higher Education Academy.
Park, C. (2004). Rebels without a Cause: Towards an Institutional Framework for Dealing with Student Plagiarism. Journal of further
and Higher Education, 28 (3), 291-306.
Pecorari, D., Shaw, D., (2012) Types of student Intertextuality and Faculty attitudes, Journal of Second Language Writing 21 (2012)
149–164 Elsever.
QAA, The Quality Code: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code [10/10/2017].
QAA (2017), Contracting to Cheat in Higher Education: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/Contracting-to-cheat-in-
higher-education.pdf [10/10/2017]
Respect Project (2004) RESPECT code of practice http://www.respectproject.org/code/respect_code.pdf [accessed 10/10/17].
TEQSA (2017) guidance on contract cheating: http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/GoodPracticeNote-ContractCheating.pdf
Tennant, P. and Rowell, G. (2010) Benchmark Plagiarism Tariff for the Application of Penalties for Student Plagiarism and the
Penalties Applied. UK: Plagiarismadvice.org
Tennant, P. and Duggan, F. (2008) Academic Misconduct Benchmarking Research Project: Part 2. The Recorded Incidence of
Student Plagiarism and the Penalties Applied. UK: The Higher Education Academy and JISC
Transparency International (2013) Global Corruption report on: Education. http://www.transparency.org/gcr_education [accessed 10/10/2017].
Transparency Internationsl (2017) Corruption Perceptions Index 2017.
https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2017?gclid=CjwKCAiA24PVBRBvEiwAyBxf-
YGtGwviJpNBGIdlwI1QGkM1co4JNLISftrpmLgy347dAfDvwkHSdBoCtrwQAvD_BwE#table [accessed 08/03/2018]
www.plagiarism.cz/ippheae www.plagiarism.cz/seeppai www.facebook.com/seeppai www.coe.int/etined
24
Research collaborators and funders
25
Erasmus Lifelong Learning Project, budget €369,419October 2010-September 2013
Lead Partner: Principal Investigator Irene GlendinningCoventry University, United Kingdom;
Other partnersAleksandras Stulginskis University, LithuaniaMendel University, Czech RepublicTechnical University of Lodz, PolandUniversity of Nicosia, Cyprus
Project Consultant:Jude Carroll, Educational Consultant, UKProject Conference Sponsors:Turnitin / iParadigms / IS4U
510321-LLP-1-2010-1-UK-ERASMUS-EMHE
Impact of Policies for Plagiarism in Higher Education Across Europe