Upload
frank-carroll
View
222
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Staff perceptions of, and responses to, academic integrity
A/Prof Eric Bouvet
2015 EHL Faculty Teaching and Learning Forum
Aim To collect information about staff perceptions
of academic integrity across the Faculty
The Academic Integrity survey for staff
Design
17 questions on they following topics:
- Knowledge of AI policy and procedures - AI support within Schools - AI training for staff - Promoting AI among students - Number and types of AI breaches - Methods of breach detection - Levels of reporting - Emotional involvement in AI cases
SurveyMonkey online survey sent to all teaching staff in the three Schools
Results: percentages and comments
(Interviews of staff in Humanities to complement the survey)
The Academic Integrity survey for staff
Q1: Which School
34.62%
38.46%
26.92%
N = 78
Q2 How familiar are you with Flinders’ AI policy?
82.43% of staff surveyed declared to be familiar with Flinders’ AI policy
Q3 How familiar are you with the AI procedures in your School?
77.74% of staff are familiar with AI procedures in their School
Q4 How did you gain knowledge of Flinders’ AI policy and procedures?
Multiple-choice question
60.81%
50.00%
18.92%
16.22%
29.73%
66.22%
12.16%
Q5 Do you think that Flinders' currentAI policy is adequate?
84.72%
15.28%
Needs to recognize the educative process part of academic writing
Too lenient; too much variation in its implementation across Schools
Does not deal adequately with serious or repeated breaches
The drafting needs to be refined, as parts of the policy are difficult to interpret
I don’t think it has kept pace with changes in technology and advances in access to essays-for-a fee
If inadequate, in what way?Comments
Q6 Do you think that you are well supported
within your School in terms of AI procedures?
81.94%
18.06%
Workshops covering the topic, particularly for casual and contract staff
Consistent and clear, step-by-step procedure across all topics
I would prefer a process that takes the matter off the coordinator's hands once they have reported the issue (…)
Our School offers no induction for new staff, and so until recently, I didn't realize that there was a policy, and this survey is the 1st time I have heard of a University Academic Integrity webpage
If no, what support would you like to see?
Q7 If you are a Topic Coordinator, howaware do you think your casual tutors are of
the AI policy and procedures?
65.38% of staff believe that their tutors are familiar with AI policy and procedures
[Casuals are] barely aware
I am a casual. I would like clarification and a step-by-step procedure
I am not a TC but work with a team of casual tutors; they are not aware
In previous experience teaching with casual staff, I have observed considerable lack of awareness
Awareness of AIComments
Q8 Do you think there should be formal
Academic Integrity training for staff?
70.27%
29.73%
Q9 Do you overtly promote Academic
Integrity to students?
87.84%
12.16%
Q10 Do you overtly teach Academic
Integrity to students?
52.05%
47.95%
The Topic Guide has links to the appropriate policies and sets out all the basic guidelines
I brief [students] at the beginning of each semester on what is/isn’t appropriate
By example, as part of written assignments briefing
I (…) set up assessment tasks so that it is hard if not impossible to copy other students’ work
I emphasise professional ramifications
Through assessment - any lapses in academic integrity are highlighted, commented upon, and students are shown the correct procedures
[By] setting an AI quiz
I put the fear of God into them re plagiarism
If yes, briefly explain how you promote /teach itComments
Q11 How many cases of Academic Integrity
do you usually deal with in one year?
16.67%
22.22%
51.39%
6.94%
2.78%
Q12 What is the most common type of AI breach you have
encountered?
66.15%
18.46%
9.23%
4.62%
1.54%
Q13 What is your method of detection of plagiarism?
89.66%
27.59%
Being very familiar with the topic material [allows you]to see others' ideas used without citation
Comparison with other students' work
Recognition of inconsistent writing style and irrelevant material
High quality work where the student's overall quality of work is low
If the essay is too good to be true, it's probably plagiarised
Other methodsComments
Q14 If you use Turnitin, how useful at
detecting plagiarism do you find it?
50.00 % of staff find Turnitin useful
Q15 Do you systematically report all cases
to you Academic Integrity Coordinator?
51.94%
47.06%
Because I only find it in first year essays and instead of reporting [students] I use it as an opportunity to train them in what not to do
I consider the most important issue to be about the student's learning, and the disciplinary consequences are secondary
The minor breaches are best dealt with by educating the FIRST years. I believe the process is too onerous on the academic. I am not prepared to devote hours to highlighting text to "prove" the case
I was concerned that I would end up wasting a lot of time and educational capital (i.e. it would destroy my relation with the students I suspected) and ended up deciding it wasn't worth the risk
If no, is there a reason why you don't report?Comments
Q16 When you are involved with AI cases, do you deal with groups of
students differently?
44.29%
31.43%
11.43%
48.57%
Q17 Do you find dealing with AI cases emotionally involving?
68.11% of staff feel that dealing with AI cases is emotionally involving
Better promotion of AI is needed especially among non-permanent junior staff
Under-reporting appears to be fairly common practice
A number of respondents are more lenient to First Years
Turnitin is perceive negatively by half of the respondents
AI has repercussions on workloads and the emotional well-being of staff
Conclusion