Transcript Sarah May Clarkson, Amber Helsel-Ickes, Justine Kobeski, Gerald Kruse Juniata College Huntingdon, PA.

Sarah May Clarkson, Amber Helsel-Ickes, Justine Kobeski, Gerald Kruse
Juniata College
Huntingdon, PA
Case Study 1
• You teach a course with an “H” designation, it has a pre-req, but less
than 300-level.
• Roughly half of the students are taking the course for the upper-level
“H” distribution credit.
• Student Assessments include: (1) mid-term exam, (2) final exam,
(3) small group work w/a short presentation, (4) class participation,
and (5) an 8 page research paper.
• The research paper project is designed to avoid end-of-semester
stress:
• A topic proposal is due week 4
• An annotated bibliography (lite for non-H POEs) is due week 6
• A substantial first draft is discussed at a paper conference weeks 8 and 9
• Final draft is due mid-November
Case Study 1 continued
Student “Ron” – bright, but struggling:
initial topic is too broad, but was addressed in office
hours, and the annotated bibliography is “sketchy at
best.”
Case Study 1 continued
 You allow the student to change topics
 The final paper is submitted on time
 You are suspicious of its originality and authenticity
BUT
 This is the first and only draft you have seen
 Google searches on various passages don’t reveal any
matches
 You provide reference librarians a copy of the
anonymized paper with the troublesome passages
highlighted
 The librarians find passages lifted without attribution
from a very small academic journal, maybe 10 or 12
lines in a 6-page paper
Case Study 1 continued
Discuss among yourselves (~3 – 5 minutes):
Poll Everywhere:
http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/
4GMKU6Y6GpSMen3
What is the reason for your choice?
What would your next step be?
Juniata’s Academic Integrity Process
(detailed in Pathfinder and on the Provost’s web-page)
The faculty member should first contact the Asst. Provost. The Asst.
Provost will review the case information, clarify questions the faculty may
have about the process, and guide the faculty member in the next steps. If
there is sufficient evidence to move forward, then the faculty member will
be asked to contact the student(s) involved, and the Asst. Provost then
emails blank allegation sheet to faculty.
1.Faculty completes allegation sheet, which includes the assigned penalty,
and emails to Asst. Provost.
2.Asst. Provost emails PDF version of allegation sheet to student and
faculty and sets up meeting , which happens at least three class days after
the student is presented with the allegations.
3.At the meeting, the allegations are presented to the student, with an
opportunity for discussion. The student then chooses between:

Admitting to the allegation and accepting the penalty

Admitting to the allegation but disputing the penalty*

Denying the allegation*
* - case proceeds to Judicial Board hearing
Examples of Academic Dishonesty
1. Cheating:
2. Plagiarism:
3. Fabrication and Falsification:
4. Multiple Submission:
5. Abuse of Materials:
6. Complicity in Academic Dishonesty:
7. Failing to cooperate
Examples of Academic Dishonesty
1. Cheating: using or attempting to use unauthorized material in any academic exercise. This can
include using unauthorized materials (e.g., notes, examination copies, electronic sources), having or
accessing unauthorized materials during the examination time, or going against explicit instructor
directions for the completion of an assignment or exam.
2. Plagiarism: presenting another’s work (i.e., ideas, representations, or words) as one’s own without
proper acknowledgment of the source.
3. Fabrication and Falsification: altering or inventing any information or citation in any
academic exercise.
4. Multiple Submission: submitting substantial portions of the same academic work for credit more
than once without authorization.
5. Abuse of Materials: damaging, destroying, stealing, or in any way obstructing access to library or
other academic resource material or academic records.
6. Complicity in Academic Dishonesty: intentionally helping or attempting to help another
commit an act of academic dishonesty; unauthorized collaboration on any academic work.
7. Failing to cooperate in the investigation of any student being accused of academic dishonesty.
Diagnostics
 You provide reference librarians a copy of the
anonymized paper with the troublesome passages
highlighted
 File Authorship
 What other
methods do
you use?
Preventative Measures
 What could have been done differently by the student
and/or faculty member in this case?
 What preventative measures can we consider in our
classes?
 Message to students in the Pathfinder
Look at all your course syllabi carefully. Understand that you will sign an
Agreement about the ethical use of the computer. This is very, very serious: if
you present someone else's intellectual property as your own, that is stealing.
Ask questions of your professors: How much collaboration is permissible? How
do I cite this kind of material: Do you allow students to use references found on
the World Wide Web?
Each student's Juniata College degree is diminished by cheating. Don't do it.
Please realize that cases of confirmed academic dishonesty could ruin hopes of
a career in medicine, education, social work, or law enforcement.
TurnItIn Info
warning: copied and pasted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnitin
Turnitin is an Internet-based plagiarism-prevention
service (FERPA and COPPA compliant).
Typically, universities and high schools buy licenses
to submit essays to the TurnItIn website (also has
integration with Moodle), which checks the
documents for unoriginal content.
The results can be used to identify similarities to
existing sources or can be used in formative
assessment to help students learn how to avoid
plagiarism and improve their writing.
Response to TurnItIn
“Citation practices like every other element of good writing
have to be taught, and in writing courses where those
practices are supposed to be taught, sometimes a pedagogical
response is appropriate rather than a punitive response. My
concern with PDS's is that they send the wrong message to
students and set up an adversarial relationship between
students and teachers. Like every other tool, there are certain
things they can show us and certain things they cannot show
us, and I am hesitant to embrace them because I think I can
teach citation practices to my students better than the
technology can, and because I don't want writing courses to
turn in to policing students to make sure they're not
cheating.”
Hannah Bellwoar
See also: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/04/16/writing-professors-question-plagiarism-detection-software
TurnItIn
 Higher Ed Campus fee - $1000 annually
 System Admin set-up Fee - $5000 one-time fee
 TurnItIn with Moodle integration
$2.75 x full headcount, annual charge for unlimited access
 TurnItIn Standalone
$2.30 x full headcount, annual charge for unlimited access
 Compatible File formats
Microsoft Word™ (DOC and DOCX), Corel WordPerfect®, HTML,
Adobe PostScript®, Plain text (TXT), Rich Text Format (RTF), Portable
Document Format (PDF), Hangul (HWP) at this time, no Excel,
Maple, or Minitab…
Poll Everywhere
What do you think of TurnItIn?
http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/
DmHvZKJ9O4ALrgG
Questions / Discussion / Policy Thoughts
TurnItIn Info
warning: copied and pasted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnitin
Students may be required by schools to submit
essays to Turnitin, as a deterrent to plagiarism.
This has been a source of criticism, with some
students refusing to do so in the belief that requiring
it constitutes a presumption of guilt.
Additionally, critics have alleged that use of the
software violates educational privacy and
intellectual property laws.
Stages of Institutional Development
http://www.academicintegrity.org/icai/home.php
 Stage One: "Primitive"
 Stage Two: "Radar Screen"
 Stage Three: "Mature"
 Stage Four: "Honor Code"
Case Study 2
You teach a 100-level math class (with apologies to our
dear mathematicians). When you look out at the sea of
faces, the students represent the full range and variety
(pre-health types, physics and engineering students,
those earning their QM credit, and a few exploring), but
very few majors. So you are providing a service, an
important one.
Case Study 2 continued
As always in a class of 35 or 40, about 5 or 10 request peer
tutoring, which you agree to, but encourage these
students to come to office hours as well. One such
student got tutoring after two very weak tests and crappy
lab/homework grades. She has a friend who tutors in
math, so when she filled out the tutoring request, she
asked to be matched, if possible, with her friend. The
next test improves by 20 points, and it looks like she
could pass, which she needs to do for two reasons: this
class is a specific requirement of her POE and she’s a
first-semester senior who has no wiggle room to add this
class to her spring schedule if she fails it or has to
withdraw.
Case Study 2 continued
Her tutoring arrangement is actually a small group,
which she agreed to because the other tutee is a friend,
though she’s in a different section. At one such session,
the tutor works individually with each student and
because of time constraints and having to focus from
one student to the next, mistakenly provides too much
help to our one student on her homework assignment.
The tutor hadn’t asked specifically what was being
worked on and thought it was practice or a practice test.
Case Study 2 continued
You are surprised that the student does well on this
particular homework assignment because she was
absent both days that the material was covered in class.
You know she’s not confident enough in the material to
submit successful answers without class attendance. You
turn the homework back without a grade and ask the
student to see you during office hours, which she does.
You ask how she determined the answers, especially
when she had been absent twice the previous week. She
told you, truthfully, that the tutor helped her.