1

Academic Integrity in On-line and

Distance Learning Programmes Securing Authentication and Verifying

Authenticity of Assessment

Dr Irene Glendinning

Office of Teaching and Learning

Coventry University, UK

2

Agenda

• Summary of recent research

• Research findings from South-Eastern Europe

• Applying Research findings to quality assurance and

academic integrity requirements of on-line and distance

learning provision

• Recommendations on the way forward

3

Summary of recent research

• Principal Investigator for EU funded project Impact of Policies

for Plagiarism in Higher Education Across Europe (IPPHEAE)

• Partner in Council of Europe funded project South-Eastern

Europe Project on Policies for Academic Integrity (SEEPPAI)

• Development of benchmarks and tools for evaluating

institutional policies for academic integrity (AIMM, SAID)

• ICAI working group on Contract Cheating: International Day of

Action 19th Oct 2016 18th Oct 2017;

• Partner in EU funded European Network for Academic Integrity

(ENAI), Vice President of ENAI

• Member QAA working group on Contract Cheating- QAA report

• Expert witness to the Advisory Statement on Corruption in

Higher Education Daniel (2016)

• Principal Investigator CHEA / CIQG global study on AQAB*

responses to Corruption in HE (2017-18)

*AQAB = Accreditation and Quality Assurance Bodies

4

Academic Integrity, Research

Integrity, Educational Integrity

• Different aspects of practice, ethos, culture, strategy,

values and policy for maintaining the security of

standards and conduct within an institution, nationally

and internationally

• Converse of academic malpractice, dishonesty and

misconduct

• Comprising honesty, trust, responsibility, respect,

fairness, transparency, courage (ICAI)

• Integrity or not? “How you behave when nobody is

watching”

5

Challenges to authentic assessment

• Plagiarism – deliberate and accidental

• Working together - inappropriate collusion

• Contract cheating

• Self-plagiarism

• Exam cheating

• Impersonation

• Data fabrication, manipulation, selectivity

• Bribery

• Coercion, bullying

• Aiding others to be dishonest

What is

Contract

Cheating?

What levels?School work

Undergraduate

Postgraduate

Doctoral theses

Types of service?Bespoke coursework,

essays, reports

Drafts provided

Exam completion,

impersonation

Research, analysis

Quality of work?Costs more for higher

grades

How fast?Pay more for faster

turnaround – same day

possible

What does it

cost?Personal favours,

Commercially

starting as low as

US$50

Who does the work?Family, friends

Colleagues, students

Alumni

Commercial company

employees or contractors

Web-based services

globally

How is contact

made?Web-based services

Personal, family,

colleagues

Presence on campus

Social media

Advertising

7

SEEPPAI 2016-2017

• South East European Project on Policies for Academic

Integrity – study of 6 countries

• Mendel University in Brno CZ, Coventry University UK

• Funded by the Council of Europe (CoE)

• First of several regional studies to extend IPPHEAE

research to more European countries

• Building on IPPHEAE results (Impact of Policies for

Plagiarism in Higher Education Across Europe 2010-15)

• Survey: institutional, national – local languages;

workshops, resources, report, dissemination

South East European Project on

Policies for Academic Integrity

• Albania

• Bosnia and

Herzegovina

• Croatia

• Montenegro

• Former Yugoslav

Republic of

Macedonia

• Serbia

9

Higher Education in SE Europe

• Culture of corruption in the region– Transparency International Corruption Perception Index

(CPI 2017): Croatia 57th, Bosnia & Herz, Albania 91st

FYR of Macedonia 107th (of 180 countries)

• Large universities, autonomous faculties -institution-wide policies uncommon

• Big differences within and between universities within in countries and across region

• Relaxed attitude to serious forms of cheating

• Awareness, openness and willingness to discuss the problems with academic integrity but not everywhere

10

Evidence from SEEPPAI 2016-7

• Perception that corruption in society makes it difficult to

tackle corrupt practices in education

• Ghost-writing, essay mills, contract cheating very common

• Student assessment relies too heavily on rote learning,

critical thinking not valued by professors

• Major problems with exam cheating, lax invigilation, repeat

assessments, questions

• Reports of professors taking bribes from students

• Almost all respondents wanted more training and guidance

• Some examples of good practice documented

• Keen interest and desire to improve

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

AL BA HR MK ME RS

Research

Training

Knowledge

Communication

Prevention

Software

Sanctions

Policies

Transparency

SEEPPAI: Academic Integrity Maturity Model results for South-Eastern Europe

0

1

2

3

4

Transparency

Policies

Sanctions

Software

PreventionCommunic

ation

Knowledge

Training

Research

Albania

0

1

2

3

4

Transparency

Policies

Sanctions

Software

PreventionCommunic

ation

Knowledge

Training

Research

Bosnia & Herzegovina

0

1

2

3

4

Transparency

Policies

Sanctions

Software

PreventionCommunic

ation

Knowledge

Training

Research

Croatia

0

1

2

3

4

Transparency

Policies

Sanctions

Software

PreventionCommunic

ation

Knowledge

Training

Research

Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia

0

1

2

3

4

Transparency

Policies

Sanctions

Software

PreventionCommunic

ation

Knowledge

Training

Research

Montenegro

0

1

2

3

4

Transparency

Policies

Sanctions

Software

PreventionCommunic

ation

Knowledge

Training

Research

Serbia

SEEPPAI Project: Academic Integrity Maturity Model results for South-

Eastern Europe

Evidence from IPPHEAE & SEEPPAI

COMPARISON OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY POLICIES IN 33 COUNTRIES

Based on ~5800 survey responses (CoE SEEPPAI report 2017, AIMM)

0,00

5,00

10,00

15,00

20,00

25,00

Research

Training

Knowledge

Communication

Prevention

Software

Sanctions

Policies

Transparency

14

Applying findings to On-line and

Distance Learning provision

• Establishing the identity of students not on campus

for admissions and assessment

• Educating students about academic integrity

• Creating assessments that both challenge and

measure learning and achievement

• Controlling the assessment process

• Ensuring students are doing the assessments

themselves

• Consistency of approach from tutors

15

Oversight and quality assurance

• Internal moderation and oversight for

consistency pre- and post-assessment

• Internal quality assurance process – eg double

marking, anonymous marking

• External examining – independent monitoring

• External accreditation, validation

• External quality assurance, scrutiny, audits,

visits, self-evaluation

16

Academic integrity: institutional

• Institution-wide strategy, policies, procedures for

– Discouraging academic misconduct

– Handling accusations of academic misconduct

• Decisions on misconduct

– sanctions / penalties available

– who decides?

• Records of misconduct cases & outcomes

• Consistency from academic tutors

• Academic misconduct not detected or not penalised

• Academic integrity of academic staff

17

Teaching, learning and assessment

• Contact time and methods, class sizes

• Rote learning / assessment design?

• Teacher-led / student-led

• Discourage / Invite critical thinking

• Practical, project-based, problem-based (PBL)

• Individual / group work / collaboration

• Diversity of student population

• Extra-curricular activities / campus culture

International Day of Action

against Contract Cheating

19th Oct 2016,18th Oct 2017

#ExcelwithIntegrity

#DefeattheCheat

http://contractcheating.weebly.com/

19

Deterring misconduct

• View students as allies, know your students

• Education on academic writing & consequences

• CPD for academic tutors: on the front line for

detecting and correcting students’ problems

• Encourage transparency, consistency

• Whistle-blowing policy - students & staff

• Provide opportunities for formative learning

• Don’t repeat the same assessments

• Robust policies and sanctions

20

Consequences of condoning or

ignoring academic misconduct

• Threat to quality and standards

• Insecure academic qualifications

• Professional incompetence of graduates

• Research results unreliable

• Unfair advantages / disadvantages

• Institutional reputation

• Waste of public money

21

Priorities globally informed by

Europe• Establish a common understanding of acceptable academic

practice: convince academic leaders to make this a priority

• Roles of quality assurance & accreditation bodies

• Outlaw services that facilitate cheating

• Guide and support students and academics to follow academic

integrity values and principles

• Encourage aspirations for scholarship and high standards

• Collect examples of effective policies & managing change (eg

Morris 2011, Bretag et al 2014, QAA 2017, TEQSA 2017)

• Support HE institutions to develop effective, workable policies

through guidance, training, funding and monitoring

• Protect whistle-blowers identifying poor practice

• Engage students as partners in the process of reform

• Start education on integrity at school level

22

References, resourcesAcademic Integrity Rating System on-line: http://www.academicintegrity.org/icai/assets/AIRS.pdf [10/10/2017]

Bertram Gallant, T., & Drinan, P. (2006). Institutionalizing academic Integrity: Administrator perceptions and institutional

actions. NASPA Journal, 43 (4), 61-81.

Bertram Gallant, T., & Drinan, P. (2008). Toward a Model of Academic Integrity Institutionalization: Informing Practice in

Higher Education. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 38 (2), 25-44.

Bretag, T., Mahmud, S., Wallace, M., Walker, R., McGowan, U., East, J., Green, M., Partridge, L.’ James, C. (2013): ‘Teach

us how to do it properly!’ An Australian academic integrity student survey, Studies in Higher Education,

DOI:10.1080/03075079.2013.777406 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.777406 [10/10/2017]

Bretag, T., Mahmud, S. (2014) Exemplary Academic Integrity Project, Academic Integrity Toolkit.

http://resource.unisa.edu.au/course/view.php?id=6633 [10/10/2017].

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University

http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/, http://cmmiinstitute.com/ [10/10/2017]

Carroll, J. (2005) Handling Student Plagiarism: Moving to Mainstream [online] http://bejlt.brookes.ac.uk/articles/handling-

student-plagiarism-moving-to-mainstream/ [accessed 10/10/2017].

Carroll, J. and Appleton, J. (2001) Plagiarism: A Good Practice Guide http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/resources/institutional-

approaches/item/carroll-goodpractice-2 [10/10/2017].

Drinan, P., & Bertram Gallant, T. (2008). Academic Integrity: Models, Case Studies, and

Strategies. In, J. M. Lancaster & D. M. Waryold (Eds.), Student Conduct Practice: The Complete Guide for Student Affairs

Professionals (pp. 258-278). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Etined Council of Europe Platform on Ethics, Transparency and Integrity in Education (2018) Volume 5: South-East European

Project on Policies for Academic Integrity. https://rm.coe.int/prems-016918-gbr-2512-etined-vol-5-couv-texte-recadre-8482-

bat-16x24-w/168078499c [08/03/2018]

European Science Foundation (2008) Stewards of Integrity report

http://www.esf.org/fileadmin/Public_documents/Publications/StewardOfIntegrity.pdf [accessed 10/10/2017].

Foltynek, T., Glendinning, I. (2014) Impact of Policies for Plagiarism in Higher Education Across Europe: Results of the

Project, International conference in Academic Integrity, Florida, USA February 2014.

Glendinning, I (2013) Comparison of Policies for Academic Integrity in Higher Education across the European Union, On-line

at http://www.plagiarism.cz/ippheae/ [10/10/2017]

Glendinning, I. (2014) Responses to Student Plagiarism in Higher Education Across Europe, International Journal for

Educational Integrity, Vol 10(1) June 2014

IPPHEAE project results: http://www.plagiarism.cz/ippheae/ [10/10/2017]

23

References, resourcesGlendinning, I. (2014a). Responses to Student Plagiarism in Higher Education Across Europe. International Journal for Educational

Integrity, Vol 10(1) June 2014 pp. 4-20.

Glendinning, I. (2014b). Assessing maturity of institutional policies for underpinning academic integrity, 6th International Integrity and

Plagiarism conference, Sage, Newcastle, 15-18th June 2014.

Glendinning, I. (2016) Book Chapter: European Perspectives of Academic Integrity in the Handbook of Academic Integrity, edited by

Tracey Bretag, Springer Science + Business Media Singapore 2015. DOI 10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_3-2.

International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI) (2012) Academic Integrity Assessment Guide.

http://www.academicintegrity.org/icai/home.php [accessed 10/10/2017].

JISC Electronic Plagiarism Project (2001):

https://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20140617112811/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/plagiarism/archive/det

ection [accessed 10/10/2017].

Macdonald, R. and Carroll, J. (2006) Plagiarism: A Complex Issue Requiring a Holistic Institutional Approach. Assessment and

Evaluation in Higher Education 31 (2), 233-245.

Morris, E. (2011) Policy Works - Recommendations for Reviewing Policy to Manage Unacceptable Academic Practice in Higher

Education. UK: Higher Education Academy.

Park, C. (2004). Rebels without a Cause: Towards an Institutional Framework for Dealing with Student Plagiarism. Journal of further

and Higher Education, 28 (3), 291-306.

Pecorari, D., Shaw, D., (2012) Types of student Intertextuality and Faculty attitudes, Journal of Second Language Writing 21 (2012)

149–164 Elsever.

QAA, The Quality Code: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code [10/10/2017].

QAA (2017), Contracting to Cheat in Higher Education: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/Contracting-to-cheat-in-

higher-education.pdf [10/10/2017]

Respect Project (2004) RESPECT code of practice http://www.respectproject.org/code/respect_code.pdf [accessed 10/10/17].

TEQSA (2017) guidance on contract cheating: http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/GoodPracticeNote-ContractCheating.pdf

Tennant, P. and Rowell, G. (2010) Benchmark Plagiarism Tariff for the Application of Penalties for Student Plagiarism and the

Penalties Applied. UK: Plagiarismadvice.org

Tennant, P. and Duggan, F. (2008) Academic Misconduct Benchmarking Research Project: Part 2. The Recorded Incidence of

Student Plagiarism and the Penalties Applied. UK: The Higher Education Academy and JISC

Transparency International (2013) Global Corruption report on: Education. http://www.transparency.org/gcr_education [accessed 10/10/2017].

Transparency Internationsl (2017) Corruption Perceptions Index 2017.

https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2017?gclid=CjwKCAiA24PVBRBvEiwAyBxf-

YGtGwviJpNBGIdlwI1QGkM1co4JNLISftrpmLgy347dAfDvwkHSdBoCtrwQAvD_BwE#table [accessed 08/03/2018]

www.plagiarism.cz/ippheae www.plagiarism.cz/seeppai www.facebook.com/seeppai www.coe.int/etined

24

Research collaborators and funders

25

Erasmus Lifelong Learning Project, budget €369,419October 2010-September 2013

Lead Partner: Principal Investigator Irene GlendinningCoventry University, United Kingdom;

Other partnersAleksandras Stulginskis University, LithuaniaMendel University, Czech RepublicTechnical University of Lodz, PolandUniversity of Nicosia, Cyprus

Project Consultant:Jude Carroll, Educational Consultant, UKProject Conference Sponsors:Turnitin / iParadigms / IS4U

510321-LLP-1-2010-1-UK-ERASMUS-EMHE

Impact of Policies for Plagiarism in Higher Education Across Europe