Survey Results

What percentage of students and faculty consider the following to be “serious cheating”? Students Faculty

Copying from another student during a test or exam without their knowledge

Working on an assignment with others when instructor asked for individual work

Turning in work done by someone else

Fabricating / falsifying research data

Getting Q/A from someone who has taken test

Altering graded test and submitting it for additional credit

Using a false excuse to obtain extension on due date

Source: Student data from survey at Wilfrid Laurier University, Orientation Week, 2004. Faculty data from survey at Simon Fraser University, see: www.sfu.ca/integritytaskforce/Faculty-Report.htm, accessed August 28, 2006

Survey Results

What percentage of students and faculty consider the following to be “serious cheating”?

Students Faculty

Copying from another student during a test or exam without their knowledge

88% 87%

Working on an assignment with others when instructor asked for individual work

Turning in work done by someone else

Fabricating / falsifying research data

Getting Q/A from someone who has taken test

Altering graded test and submitting it for additional credit

Using a false excuse to obtain extension on due date

Source: Student data from survey at Wilfrid Laurier University, Orientation Week, 2004. Faculty data from survey at Simon Fraser University, see: www.sfu.ca/integritytaskforce/Faculty-Report.htm, accessed August 28, 2006

Survey Results

What percentage of students and faculty consider the following to be “serious cheating”?

Students Faculty

Copying from another student during a test or exam without their knowledge

88% 87%

Working on an assignment with others when instructor asked for individual work

5 16

Turning in work done by someone else

Fabricating / falsifying research data

Getting Q/A from someone who has taken test

Altering graded test and submitting it for additional credit

Using a false excuse to obtain extension on due date

Source: Student data from survey at Wilfrid Laurier University, Orientation Week, 2004. Faculty data from survey at Simon Fraser University, see: www.sfu.ca/integritytaskforce/Faculty-Report.htm, accessed August 28, 2006

Survey Results

What percentage of students and faculty consider the following to be “serious cheating”?

Students Faculty

Copying from another student during a test or exam without their knowledge

88% 87%

Working on an assignment with others when instructor asked for individual work

5 16

Turning in work done by someone else 82 90

Fabricating / falsifying research data

Getting Q/A from someone who has taken test

Altering graded test and submitting it for additional credit

Using a false excuse to obtain extension on due date

Source: Student data from survey at Wilfrid Laurier University, Orientation Week, 2004. Faculty data from survey at Simon Fraser University, see: www.sfu.ca/integritytaskforce/Faculty-Report.htm, accessed August 28, 2006

Survey Results

What percentage of students and faculty consider the following to be “serious cheating”?

Students Faculty

Copying from another student during a test or exam without their knowledge

88% 87%

Working on an assignment with others when instructor asked for individual work

5 16

Turning in work done by someone else 82 90

Fabricating / falsifying research data 39 94

Getting Q/A from someone who has taken test

Altering graded test and submitting it for additional credit

Using a false excuse to obtain extension on due date

Source: Student data from survey at Wilfrid Laurier University, Orientation Week, 2004. Faculty data from survey at Simon Fraser University, see: www.sfu.ca/integritytaskforce/Faculty-Report.htm, accessed August 28, 2006

Survey Results

What percentage of students and faculty consider the following to be “serious cheating”?

Students Faculty

Copying from another student during a test or exam without their knowledge

88% 87%

Working on an assignment with others when instructor asked for individual work

5 16

Turning in work done by someone else 82 90

Fabricating / falsifying research data 39 94

Getting Q/A from someone who has taken test 28 61

Altering graded test and submitting it for additional credit

Using a false excuse to obtain extension on due date

Source: Student data from survey at Wilfrid Laurier University, Orientation Week, 2004. Faculty data from survey at Simon Fraser University, see: www.sfu.ca/integritytaskforce/Faculty-Report.htm, accessed August 28, 2006

Survey Results

What percentage of students and faculty consider the following to be “serious cheating”?

Students Faculty

Copying from another student during a test or exam without their knowledge

88% 87%

Working on an assignment with others when instructor asked for individual work

5 16

Turning in work done by someone else 82 90

Fabricating / falsifying research data 39 94

Getting Q/A from someone who has taken test 28 61

Altering graded test and submitting it for additional credit 79 92

Using a false excuse to obtain extension on due date

Source: Student data from survey at Wilfrid Laurier University, Orientation Week, 2004. Faculty data from survey at Simon Fraser University, see: www.sfu.ca/integritytaskforce/Faculty-Report.htm, accessed August 28, 2006

Survey Results

What percentage of students and faculty consider the following to be “serious cheating”?

Students Faculty

Copying from another student during a test or exam without their knowledge

88% 87%

Working on an assignment with others when instructor asked for individual work

5 16

Turning in work done by someone else 82 90

Fabricating / falsifying research data 39 94

Getting Q/A from someone who has taken test 28 61

Altering graded test and submitting it for additional credit 79 92

Using a false excuse to obtain extension on due date 18 40

Source: Student data from survey at Wilfrid Laurier University, Orientation Week, 2004. Faculty data from survey at Simon Fraser University, see: www.sfu.ca/integritytaskforce/Faculty-Report.htm, accessed August 28, 2006

Academic misconduct

“Academic misconduct is an act by a student, or by students … which may result in a false evaluation of the student(s), or which represents an attempt to unfairly gain an academic advantage … Whether or not a student intended to commit academic misconduct is not relevant for a finding of academic misconduct.”

Source: WLU Undergraduate Academic Calendar 2007-2008

Faculty Teaching Responsibility

“to be fair and objective in relations with students and in grading of student assignments;”

Source: Section 18.2.4.1 Collective Agreement between Wilfrid Laurier University and Wilfrid Laurier University Faculty Association for Full-time Faculty and Professional Librarians

July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2008

New educational initiatives

Academic integrity information sent through Headstart program

Orientation week sessions run by student ambassadors

Upgraded academic integrity website

www.wlu.ca/academicintegrity New teaching cases on academic integrity Information for faculty and TAs about

academic integrity policies/procedures

Overview of new procedures

New forms to help streamline and clarify the process

Explicit penalty guidelines Central registry of offences More student involvement in the adjudication

process

TAs’ responsibilities in upholding our fundamental values:

1. Inform the prof when misconduct is suspected2. Assist in documenting the incident, completing the relevant

forms

Trustworthiness Honesty Integrity Reliability Loyalty

Adapted from: Schwartz, M. (2002) “A code of ethics for corporate codes of ethics” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.41, 27-43.

Fundamental Values

Respect Responsibility Fairness Caring Citizenship

Ethics in Academic Work

Wilfrid Laurier University

Student to Student

2008 - 2009

Introduction

The presenters... The purpose… Agenda

1) Cheating – what it is

2) Detection

3) Consequences

4) Importance of academic integrity

www.wlu.ca/academicintegrity

Discussion

What are your personal experiences with cheating? (Not expecting confessionals)

How did you react to cheating in your high school?

www.wlu.ca/academicintegrity

Discussion

How did teachers catch students in high school? Did students ‘tell’ on one another?

www.wlu.ca/academicintegrity

Discussion

What did your previous school do to deal with cheaters?

www.wlu.ca/academicintegrity

Who does cheating harm?

The following groups of people are all affected by academic misconduct: The university Your classmates YOU!

www.wlu.ca/academicintegrity

Headlines…

University

uncovers

plagiarism

bombshell Simon Fraser wants to give

failing grades to 47 copycats

(National Post, January 7, 2002 p. A1)

Cheating scandal shocks

university (The Record, January 7, 2002, p. D9)

You

No learning Penalties up to and including expulsion from

the university Career difficulties (incidents of academic

misconduct are noted on your transcript!) Stigmatization, ostracism Embarrassment, lowered self-concept Stress

www.wlu.ca/academicintegrity

Get help, ask questions

Your professor / teaching assistant University Calendars (www.wlu.ca/calendars)

Learning Services (www.wlu.ca/learningservices)

Library (www.wlu.ca/library)

Counselling Services (www.mylaurier.ca/counselling)

Academic Integrity Website (www.wlu.ca/academicintegrity)

Academic integrity

Integrity is defined as: "moral uprightness; honesty...unimpaired or uncorrupted..."  Canadian Oxford Dictionary (2004)

The expectations placed on students at Laurier include honesty and integrity in both their academics and behaviour on and off campus.

www.wlu.ca/academicintegrity

Reflections from Ambassadors

“I didn’t think that that kind of dishonesty was so commonplace.”

“I became more aware of my actions and how I handled my work and others.”

“I will be more aware of group work and adequate sourcing.”

“…taking a leadership role… has reinforced that I can make a difference and that everyone helps to set an example for somebody else.”

Source: 2006 Academic Integrity Ambassadors

Reflections from Ambassadors

“Academic Integrity: What you do today, echoes in eternity.”

“To show that WLU cares enough to warn students about the penalties before having to implement them if needed.”

“….understanding that a person’s flawed sense of ethics can affect a larger group of people.”

Source: 2006 Academic Integrity Ambassadors

Reflections on Prior Volunteering/Community Service

Survey of Bu 288 students, Winter 2007 found the following outcomes:

-skill development

-personality traits affected

-career possibilities explored

Beyond Laurier

Other institutions begin to adopt the model (Queen’s University, Conestoga College)

New joint initiatives Laurier, Conestoga College,

University of Waterloo Public and Catholic school boards Training and development for

vice principals and teachers Long term – secondary school

curriculum change

Detection - technology

Turnitin.com Compares your paper to:

other student papers submitted (over 40 million)

Internet websites (over 12 billion) Major newspapers/magazines/journals

(over 10,000)

Facebook groups Google searches

Source: Turnitin.com

www.wlu.ca/academicintegrity