18.9 Academic Integrity

This is a sad topic to write about. It is a great waste of time and energy for instructors to have to deal with things that should not happen. Reflect on the number of hours and days you have spent on cases. We actually think that upon proof of the crime, the student should have a financial penalty as well, to cover the true cost of their actions to the institution. Time and material. Including opportunity cost. We have ALWAYS had better things to do with our time than deal with a student who crossed the line. The time and effort to deal with cases is usually over and above planned activities and other obligations are not reduced. For example, if 25% of the class is invovled in academic integrity cases, there is a significant effort to deal with all of the cases and this can take time away from other obligations. Does anyone care about this during the yearly merit review?

We will not repeat here the litany of reasons why academic integrity is important. If you do not think that cheating is an important topic, and must be dealt with in a serious, consistent fashion, beyond the 'I am sorry, I will not do it again' sing-song, you should probably go talk to the Dean.

However, we will repeat one or two points. A student cheating impacts the other students in many ways. A student cheating impacts the program as well. The impact is not limited to the student cheating. There is the whole honesty and integrity thing, but if that is not enough to motivate instructors, the reduced currency associated with the course and program might.

Here are some thoughts about handling academic integrity cases...

• Part of the analysis should be a root cause analsyis. Why did the student cheat? What were the decisions that led to the infraction? Were you part of the cause? Never rule that out without serious reflection.
• We do not believe in one-size-fits-all justice that say for any type of infraction, x is the minimum. We believe that compassion, understanding, and common sense is required. We know that some administrators hate to have exceptions, odd cases, but that is often making it easier for them and is not thinking about the actual cases and student situations.
• We need to remember that into the mid 20's, the human brain is still maturing: judgement, executive functions, and emotions. This is a biological fact. Growing up, they will make bad choices, not out of malicious or intent, but just a bad decision in the moment. On top of the physical reality of the biology, there are additional social, cultural modifiers. Basically, we need to remember we are dealing with 'children'. As the phrase goes. 25 is the new 15 or 18. Do not assume that they are true adults!
• We believe that there is a category which is a true mistake, oversight, not intentional, done once, dealt with, never to be done again. This one-off could be a serious issue that substantially changes the mark on the assessment (e.g., D to A) or a minor point that could have the impact of a mark or two, not enough for a grade change.
• If it is a minor issue, just deal with it, perhaps a stern lecture, discussion about how the mistake came about, what the student is going to do in the future so that the mistake is indeed one-off. There is no value being punitive in this case.

• If the infraction was large enough for a grade change, then it is large enough, even if you know and think it is a one-off, just an oopsy, not to be done again, for the matter to be raised at the next level. While it depends on the institution, the instructor often has the chance to deal with the case in an informal manner, take a few marks off, perhaps even a zero if the assessment is not big. And, these should be escalated so that the high power can see trends across courses, terms. However, even if escalated, we do not think that true mistakes, the one-offs, where there is no trend, no repetition, deserve severe penalties like a zero on the assignment and a -5 on the course mark. If they repeat, that is a different story.
• Repeated behaviour and trends relating to infractions is a different situation than the one-off oopsy. As an instructor, you should have mechanisms in place that monitor and detect out-of-the-ordinary results.
• You need to do a solid, thorough job in building the case. It is worth it. You want to get a conviction if the student is guilty. After the conviction, there can be reformation and redemption, but you want the charge and conviction on record.
• If the student is cheating with malious, intent, and forethought, they must be dealt with. It is not fair to other students to accept the 'I am sorry' apology without some kind of squaring the circle.
• Depending on the powers-that-be, all of your efforts may be for not, advantage to the student, even for repeated offences. This destroys morale and can lead instructors to turn a blind eye, to not bother. The student gets a stern lecture and that is it. No real incentive to change, no deep understanding about the issues, and the student gets away with it.
• You can do the baselines at the start of term. Odd and significant improvements should raise an eyebrow. Two in a row? Really?
• You can personally review all assessments > 90 that your TAs mark. It might get by the TA, but you should be able to identify results too good to be true.
• Some tools can automatically suss out odd things for you to investigate (e.g., tools like turnitin - link). Logs can help identify the improper accessing of material during an exam. Certain tools look for similarities across students within a specific topic area.
• You need to assume that 50% of the students will cross the line at some point. If not more. In some cases, they do not know they are crossing the line. They think everyone is doing it. They will not get caught by the TA. They work together with other students to muddy the water and confound any analysis. Unfortunately, you have to plan for a serious infraction every term and have the ways and the means to collect the evidence needed for a conviction.

Further reading

• Whitley, B.E., and P. Keith-Spiegel (2001). Academic Integrity as an Institutional Issue. Ethics and behavior, 11, 3, pp. 325-342.
• Macfarlane, B., Zhang, J., and A. Pun (2014). Academic integrity: a review of the literature. Studies in higher education (Dorchester-on-Thames), 39. 2, pp. 339-358.