Student Cheating Understanding the cultural context Understanding the cultural context University of Guelph May 15, 2002

Objectives  Discuss research data on the state of student integrity.  Discuss what faculty can do to reduce student cheating.  Discuss Academic Integrity Policies & Procedures.

Institutional Factors That Influence Cheating  Cheating is campus norm (cheating culture)  School has no honour code  Penalties for cheating are not severe  Faculty understanding/support is low  Little chance of getting caught  Cheating higher at larger, less selective schools

Honour Codes Traditional Unproctored examsPledge Student judiciaryNon-toleration Modified Student judiciaryPledge Academic integrity a campus-wide priority Rehabilitative sanctions

Personal Factors That Influence Cheating  Business/engineering majors  Future plans involve business  Men generally self-report more cheating  Fraternity/sorority members  Younger students  Students with lower GPA’s

Summary Cheating Indicators - Student vs. Faculty Perspectives Students Faculty Students Faculty Test Cheating 23% - 45% (23%) 29% - 55% (51%) Test Cheating 23% - 45% (23%) 29% - 55% (51%) Written Cheating45% - 56% (50%) 76% - 83% (84%) Written Cheating45% - 56% (50%) 76% - 83% (84%) Serious Cheating53% - 68% (55%) 81% - 90% (86%) Serious Cheating53% - 68% (55%) 81% - 90% (86%) All Cheating68% - 83% (73%)* 85% - 91% (90%)* All Cheating68% - 83% (73%)* 85% - 91% (90%)* Repetitive Test 6% - 17% (6%) 6% - 21% (23%) Repetitive Test 6% - 17% (6%) 6% - 21% (23%) * Includes Internet cheating.

Many U of G students see little cheating “Guelph has an extremely low incidence of cheating.” “Cheating is not a problem on this campus.” But not all agree “Cheating has become a social norm amongst students…”

Faculty also hold differing views “I don’t think we have a serious cheating problem on this campus…” “I don’t think we have a serious cheating problem on this campus…” “Cheating does seem to be a serious problem, and the internet has made cheating on essay assignments increasingly easy.”

Serious Cheating Students vs. Faculty Students Faculty Students Faculty Copying on exam 78% (84%) 95% (96%) Copying on exam 78% (84%) 95% (96%) Plagiarism 69% (83%) 92% (95%) Plagiarism 69% (83%) 92% (95%) Collaboration 24% (12%) 52% (57%) Collaboration 24% (12%) 52% (57%) Failure to footnote 35% (29%) 40% (51%) Failure to footnote 35% (29%) 40% (51%) Internet plagiarism48% (27%) 90% (49%) Internet plagiarism48% (27%) 90% (49%)

New technologies are an issue Downloading papers from the Internet Downloading papers from the Internet 5% - 10% (2%) admit they’ve done it and one- quarter (20%) don’t think it’s serious cheating 5% - 10% (2%) admit they’ve done it and one- quarter (20%) don’t think it’s serious cheating Internet plagiarism Internet plagiarism 10% - 20% (41%) have cut and pasted material into a paper without citing the source and almost half (3/4) don’t think it’s serious cheating 10% - 20% (41%) have cut and pasted material into a paper without citing the source and almost half (3/4) don’t think it’s serious cheating

Internet Quizzes Seem To Be An Issue “Internet quizzes permit friends to assist in answering questions.” “Students assisting each other on the internet based tests.” “By far, the most common is cheating on internet based tests. They should be taken in private and are usually taken in groups.”

Collaboration Collaborative learning has great value, but so does teaching students to accept responsibility for their own work. Collaborative learning has great value, but so does teaching students to accept responsibility for their own work. Many students don’t know where to draw the line and faculty often provide little guidance. Many students don’t know where to draw the line and faculty often provide little guidance.

Prevalence of Collaborative Work Unpermitted Unpermitted Collaboration Help Collaboration Help Students 44% (44%) 48% (26%) Faculty 23% (55%) 43% (46%)

Most students don’t view collaboration as serious cheating StudentsFaculty StudentsFaculty Collaboration24% (12%) 52% (57%) Collaboration24% (12%) 52% (57%) Unpermitted Help 38% (18%) 71% (61%) Unpermitted Help 38% (18%) 71% (61%)

Collaboration at Guelph “Collaboration on take-home assignments that are supposed to be independent.” “Group collaboration on non-group projects.” “Group collaboration on non-group projects.” “Students copy and collaborate from each other or from assignments from previous years and hand [it in as]… their own work.”

Preventing Collaboration Reduce the relative importance of assignments that lend themselves to collaboration (e.g., busy work/repetitive problem sets). Reduce the relative importance of assignments that lend themselves to collaboration (e.g., busy work/repetitive problem sets). Minimize individual assignments when course thrust is collaborative. Minimize individual assignments when course thrust is collaborative. Clarify your expectations! Clarify your expectations!

Objectives  Discuss research data on the state of student integrity.  Discuss what faculty can do to reduce student cheating.

Faculty Safeguards Faculty Safeguards NC Mod Code NC Mod Code Change exams 79% 82% 70% (70%) Discuss integrity 63% 59% 55% (63%) Info in syllabus 57% 61% 52% (60%) Remind students 48% 47% 60% (44%) Different exams 49% 42% 28% (38%) Discuss detection 27% 19% 12% (22%)

Faculty reactions to cheating Faculty reactions to cheating 55% have reprimanded a student (37%) 40% have lowered a grade (18%) 30% referred to “authority” (30%) 21% have referred issue to Chair (25%) 32% have done nothing (NA)

Guelph Faculty Issues “Ensure standards of academic integrity are applied even-handedly across everyone (from President to student).” “Ensure standards of academic integrity are applied even-handedly across everyone (from President to student).” “We need a sliding scale of penalties…” “The rules are clear. They musty be evenly implemented. The fear of legal problems is stifling the application of academic misconduct rules at the moment.”

Many Students Seem to Agree “ Cheating policy and prevention at Guelph is a joke. A JOKE!! Even if a student is caught there is little penalty.” “I have witnessed a great deal of cheating – much of it known by TAs or faculty and yet I have never seen any serious consequences.” “I don’t think faculty want to hear about cheating because if means more work for them.”

Students want more guidance “Guelph needs to be tougher on educating the student body on the consequences of cheating…” “Teachers leave it up to the students to educate themselves on the policies via the undergrad calendar… it is not in understandable language…” “At the beginning of the year someone, be it a TA or a prof, should go over all of the plagiarism ‘rules’...”

“Academic Integrity: 10 Principles” McCabe & Pavela December 1997 Principles of academic integrity for faculty.

Faculty Principles  Affirm the importance of academic integrity. Affirm that the pursuit of truth is grounded in certain core values, including diligence, civility, and honesty.

Faculty Principles  Foster an environment of trust in the classroom. Most students are mature adults, and value an environment free of arbitrary rules and trivial assignments, where trust is earned, and given.

Faculty Principles  Clarify expectations for students. Faculty must clarify their expectations regarding honesty in academic work, including the nature and scope of collaboration. Most students want such guidance.

Faculty Principles  Reduce opportunities to engage in academic dishonesty. Students should not be tempted to engage in acts of academic dishonesty by ambiguous policies, undefined or unrealistic standards for collaboration, inadequate classroom management, or poor examination security.

Faculty Principles  Challenge academic dishonesty when it occurs. Faculty who ignore academic dishonesty send the message that the core values of academic life are not worth any significant effort to enforce.

Faculty Principles  Encourage student responsibility for academic integrity. Students want to work in communities where competition is fair, integrity is respected, and cheating is punished.

Objectives  Discuss research data on the state of student integrity.  Discuss what faculty can do to reduce student cheating.  Discuss Academic Integrity Policies & Procedures.

“Some Good News About Academic Integrity” McCabe & Pavela Sept./Oct The basic elements of a good academic integrity policy.

Student Involvement is Critical  Ask students about the nature and extent of campus cheating.  Give interested students and faculty a voice in setting campus policy.  Help student leaders educate their peers.

Addressing Alleged Violations Addressing Alleged Violations  Develop fair, prompt and efficient due process procedures.  Allow students to play a major role in the resolution of contested cases.  Enforce significant sanctions, keyed to an academic integrity seminar.

Other Points Give student leaders support and guidance. Give student leaders support and guidance. Keep faculty/senior administrators informed. Keep faculty/senior administrators informed. Encourage presidential leadership. Encourage presidential leadership. Evaluate and benchmark. Evaluate and benchmark.

Fundamental Values Project Center for Academic Integrity