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