1

Collaboration, Cheating, & Cultural Expectations

Paul N. Bennett

Panelists: Ariadna Font Llitjos, Francisco Pereira, Tiankai Tu

Immigration Course 2003

August 28, 2003

2

Other People Contributing Ideas to this Talk

Rajesh Balan Jessica Hodgins David Jensen (UMass-Amherst) Lucian Lita Ariadna Font Llitjos Michael Littman (Rutgers) Ray Mooney (UT-Austin) Monica Rogati Joao Pedro Sousa

3

Assumptions about The Audience

No one here intends to cheat.

You are all good and honest people.

You are either studying in a different culture than where you grew up, or you will teach/advise students that have come from a different culture.

You will probably have a teacher/advisor at some point that expects you to know all of this but will be hesitant to discuss it.

4

You Will Wear Two Hats in this Talk

Student Perspective

Teacher Perspective

5

The Goals of this Talk

To increase your awareness as a student of commonly accepted practices of intellectual honesty and collegial behavior at CMU and in the US in general.

You will be required to behave according to these. Ask questions now and avoid problems later!!

To increase your awareness as a teacher that norms are different for students from other cultures.

This will make you more prepared to express to the students how they are expected to behave.

Hesitating to be upfront about these issues with your students may just cause more problems in the long run.

Discuss it once and hope you won’t have to revisit it.

6

The Remainder of This Talk

Consequences of Intellectual Dishonesty

Intellectual Integrity in the Classroom

Intellectual Integrity in Research

Cultural Expectations in Student/Advisor and Other Academic Relationships

7

The Seriousness of Intellectual Dishonesty (Things we expect you will never become familiar with)

Receiving a failing grade on an assignment/exam.

Receiving a failing grade for a course.

Expulsion from the university.

Removing a degree already conferred.

Disdain of colleagues.

There is no “statute of limitations” on prosecuting academic dishonesty.

8

Collaboration in Courses

Definitions Study Group – Meeting together to work out and understand course

lectures and reading material. Collaboration – Meeting together to work out and solve assignments,

exams, etc. Intellectually honest collaboration still indicates everyone who was responsible for the work.

Intellectual Dishonesty – Any way of presenting thoughts, answer, work that is not 100% your own creation as if it were.

Cheating – Intellectual Dishonesty or any form of collaboration not approved by the professor.

The default assumption is that study groups are okay but no form of collaboration is allowed in a class unless given explicit permission of the instructor.

9

A Few Reasons for Rules Regarding Collaboration

Passing a course is a certification that each student is capable of handling the course content individually.

Not everyone learns the same. Some people learn three times as much from collaborating as they

would otherwise. Others feel hampered by working in a group.

Rules try to balance the idea of certification with policies that maximize learning for different types of students.

10

Example Forms of Classroom Collaboration

Gilligan’s Island (GI) Collaboration (via Calvin Lin at UT-Austin via …) Discuss verbally only with use of whiteboard but take

no written notes. Erase the whiteboard. Perform 30 minutes of mind-numbing activity (e.g., watching Gilligan’s Island), then whatever you write is your own.

Group assignments Multiple students write one assignment together and

hand it in with all of their names on it. This type of collaboration implies that each person is

responsible for an approximately equal portion of work.

11

Example Forms of Classroom Collaboration (cont.)

Single assignments with group partners Students work together in a set group but write up their solutions

separately. Each member’s name is still written on each individual’s assignment.

Your assignment is expected to be significantly different in written form. Often following the GI rule is one way to help ensure this occurs – possibly taking minimal notes.

Non-Problem Discussion Only You can ask other students questions about issues not related to solving

the real problem. For example, “Write and code an algorithm that does binary search on integers.”

Okay: How do I get the compiler to run in this environment? Not Okay: Can you tell me how to write this algorithm?

…

12

Summary of Forms of Classroom Collaboration

As a teacher: Not every policy produces the maximum amount of

learning for each student. Okay to experiment with using different forms for each

assignment, but always be clear about what is allowed.

As a student: Understanding the policy is your responsibility. When in doubt, ASK!

13

Outside source materials

There are many other places where you can find information for your course. For example:

The Web Other textbooks, books, research papers, etc.

Is taking information from outside sources cheating? The answer is basically the same as collaborating with people. It’s

okay to use outside sources in the same way as a study group (to understand the basic material and lectures), but you shouldn’t go looking for outside material to specifically answer questions on assignments, exams, etc.

14

Example Situations

The professor asked a question on an assignment that is answered directly in the textbook for the course. Should I just write down verbatim the paragraph in the textbook that answers this question?

Note that the professor probably wants to see a demonstrated understanding and not just your ability to function as an information retrieval system. First, study the text and make sure you’ve come to a complete understanding.

Second, try to put the answer in your own words. The best way to do this is by walking away from the textbook and returning later to answer the question.

It is generally unnecessary to cite the textbook when answering in a class and you have managed to put the answer in your own words, but it’s a good habit to cite anyway. (Use your common sense to decide.)

If you must resort to quoting, you absolutely should cite (including page) the source.

15

Example Situations (cont.)

I read some outside sources to better understand the lectures. We received an assignment, and it contained a question that I had seen the answer to elsewhere in my reading. It’s hard to forget an answer once learned. What can I do that’s intellectually honest?

First, don’t go back and reread the material.

Second, assuming you haven’t read the material in the past hour, see if you can reconstruct the answer in your own words without looking at notes (an adapted form of the GI rule).

Third, preface your answer with something like, “Having previously studied [citation], this proof follows a similar line of reasoning…”

16

Intellectual Honesty in Research (Acknowledgements)

If you have a discussion with someone that really helps your research, consider mentioning them in the acknowledgements.

Acknowledgements are an underused form in Computer Science compared to other areas but don’t be afraid to use them.

Keeping notes on your research as it progresses also gives you a good idea of when you should acknowledge someone.

17

Intellectual Honesty in Research(Co-authors)

If you repeatedly have discussions with someone, consider whether they should be a co-author (they should at least be acknowledged).

Ask yourself how much they contributed relative to the rest of the paper.

Often the answer is they shouldn’t be included on the author list, but be honest with yourself when answering this.

As you’ve probably already heard, it’s a good idea to find out as soon as you get an advisor what the rule is on author ordering and when it’s decided.

18

Intellectual Honesty in Research(Citations)

Two purposes Document so readers can find more detail Properly attributing credit.

A Few Citation Guidelines If you quote, always cite. When referring to common work (e.g., binary search) that would

never be mistaken for your own and the reader could easily locate, a citation is not needed.

Generally, you should include citations when mentioning other methods to solve a problem you are now solving in an improved way.

19

“Open Discussions”

At conferences and at CMU, you will often find yourself in discussions about your research.

The assumption is you are free to discuss your work without the person stealing your ideas, but…

BEWARE: Some people will steal your ideas. How you handle this problem is up to you (i.e., whom to trust and how far).

Note that when someone steals ideas (especially from others at CMU), it will, at the least, destroy that relationship.

20

Managing “Open Discussions”

“This is a cool idea, but I’m not following this line of research anymore.”

When you probably don’t intend to develop some idea you are discussing, say so.

This will let the other researcher know they are free to pursue it without “stepping on your toes”.

“Yeah, I’m doing something like that.” Sometimes, you talk with a “direct competitor”, i.e., it becomes

quickly clear you’re both developing work that is very similar. Express this as soon as you realize it. Then either back away or share knowledge with the realization

you will both try to beat each other to the punch.

21

Avoiding Stepping on Toes

It can be easy to have a discussion with someone or read something, then “forget” about it later.

Somehow, it manages to creep into your thoughts and influence them.

Taking good notes as your research progresses helps to avoid this.

When judging others, temper how quick you are to take offense.

22

Reasons for Intellectual Honesty in Research

Falsifying results can hold the entire field back as they wander down garden paths.

Helps identify the truly novel aspects of new work from the standard approaches – thus better defining the progression of thought.

A free exchange of ideas can accelerate the entire field. You’ll only live a finite time – how many of the questions you care about

do you want to see answered in your lifetime?

A reputation for intellectual honesty and reproducible results will garner respect from others in the field.

23

Cultural Expectations: Student/Advisor Interactions

Feedback is often given very candidly even in front of other research group members.

For example, I think your current solution has some real shortcomings and won’t work in the following situations…

This does not mean your advisor thinks you’re dumb or that your work is poor.

This does mean you should seriously consider the feedback and try to address it.

NOTE: Insults ARE NOT acceptable. If your advisor ever calls you stupid, childish, etc., you should talk to your

PhD program contact. Even if your advisor thinks you are not the most gifted or mature, this is

typically not the way for them to get results – nor is it reasonable behavior.

Note that feedback style within a research lab or within the university will be more direct than at a conference or with a visiting speaker.

24

Some Reasons for Candid Public Feedback

Teaches other audience members (e.g., new grad students) How to formulate critical questions How to identify shortcomings in a work How to identify the interesting directions for future work

Teaches the speaker to deal with audience pressure

We’re all friends here. It’s better to receive harsh criticism here than be unprepared when

presenting your work outside of CMU. We like to see our friends succeed.

25

Cultural Expectations: General Interactions

It’s okay to be direct and is often in your best interest. If you are unsure about how your advisor feels about something, ask. If you don’t feel a solution that your group is suggesting is best, say so

and state your reasons. Insult vs. Feedback

Your talk sucked. vs. Your talk could be improved. Feedback vs. Useful Feedback

Your talk could be improved. vs. I think there are some improvements you can make. Specifically, I was confused by what point you were trying to make with your graphs on Slide 10. Perhaps, if you could tie them to the main conclusions more directly, it would really help me see the big picture.

The people around you are your best resource here. You will get very little of what they have to offer if you avoid talking.

26

General Guidelines for Giving Useful Feedback

Be polite – avoid name calling or condescending tones.

Be direct – get to the point.

Be complimentary – when possible, comment on what you did like. A spoonful of sugar…

Be specific – try to nail down as closely as possible what you think can be improved.

27

Caveats on Personal Interactions

Every person is different Some advisors are hyper-excitable personalities and may seem to

be shouting when giving feedback. Some advisors are very low-key and seem almost uninterested

when giving feedback.

Get to know the people, and you’ll have a much easier time interpreting feedback.

Remember, if you don’t know how to interpret something, it’s always okay to ask (especially during your first year!).

28

Summary

Set rules for classes that help the students identify appropriate behavior. Naming the rules can be helpful to avoid student confusion (e.g., GI’s rule).

Set specific guidelines for yourself to help avoid problems before they arise.

Revisit these guidelines to see if they can be improved to better serve the goals of an academic environment/scientific community.

Whenever allowed, interact with the people around you – remember the goal is for each of you to learn though.

Be a reasonable and self-critical person.