Academic Integrity - Deakin University Blogs · June 2015 . Table of Contents ... expectations for...

Academic Integrity Faculty of Business and Law

Handbook

Dr Vikki Pollard & Dr Julia Savage,

Deakin Learning Futures,

Professional Learning Team.

Sharon Berman,

Business and Law Faculty,

Learning Innovations.

June 2015

Table of Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1

Part One: Teaching and assessing for improved Academic Integrity .......................... 1

List of resources to support your teaching about Academic Integrity ........................ 1

Three strategies to improve Academic Integrity ................................................................ 1

Assessment design ................................................................................................................ 2

Tips for good assessment design ........................................................................................ 3

Assessment Examples from within Faculty of Business and Law .................................. 5

Out-of-class teaching ........................................................................................................... 10

Discuss expectations ........................................................................................................... 11

Teach referencing and citations ......................................................................................... 11

In-class teaching using peer review – a formative focus ................................................ 12

Examples of in-class peer review activities ...................................................................... 12

Culturally inclusive in-class activities about plagiarism ................................................. 13

Part Two: The Deakin Guide: definition of terms, policy and procedure, and forms of plagiarism ........................................................................................................................ 15

The Faculty Student Misconduct Committee ............................................................... 15

Plagiarism and Collusion ..................................................................................................... 15

Recognising Academic Misconduct ................................................................................... 17

Types of plagiarism .............................................................................................................. 17

What to look for: .................................................................................................................... 17

Detection technology ........................................................................................................... 18

What is the Turnitin Originality Report? ............................................................................ 18

The Originality Report is NOT a plagiarism report ........................................................... 18

What overall percentage matters? ..................................................................................... 18

Reporting Academic Misconduct ....................................................................................... 19

Appendix One. In-class Activity: Referencing and Citation. Tutor’s introduction and focus questions. ............................................................................................................. 21

Appendix Two. In-class activity: Referencing and Citation. Academic skills descriptors. .......................................................................................................................................... 22

Appendix Three. In-class activity: discipline-specific academic style and protocols26

Introduction by lecturer to seminar .................................................................................... 26

Appendix Four. In-class activity: Discipline-specific academic styles and protocols27

References ....................................................................................................................... 29

Academic Integrity Handbook – Faculty of Business and Law

Introduction

Academic Integrity encompasses the core value of honesty in assessment. For students it refers to the honest behaviour and practices in which they engage when completing and submitting assessments. Academic Integrity is not just with respect to plagiarism but rather the ingrained practices and promotion of academic honesty and ‘good’ academic writing. Students often unintentionally transgress academic integrity principles without having an understanding of what they have done incorrectly. It is up to the Unit Chairs to promote and reinforce academic honesty through examples of good academic writing and evidence specific to discipline areas. In doing this Unit Chairs have the capacity to minimise student academic misconduct and be proactive in the promotion through their assessment guidelines and the authenticity of assessment, the expectations for honesty through academic integrity.

Plagiarism and collusion, Academic Misconduct activities, may be a result of not understanding academic integrity, and are of concern to Australian universities, and Deakin is no exception. Not all plagiarism is intentional, and for a novice, plagiarism and collusion are not easy concepts to understand. To avoid the pitfalls, students need some expertise in note-taking, writing and critical thinking, as well as knowledge of the conventions of academic writing and referencing.

Part One: Teaching and assessing for improved Academic Integrity

List of resources to support your teaching about Academic Integrity

• Deakin guide to referencing – http://www.deakin.edu.au/students/study-support/referencing

• CloudDeakin UniStart – Referencing and academic integrity https://d2l.deakin.edu.au/d2l/le/content/394791/viewContent/2505314/View

• Online tutorials – http://monash.edu/library/skills/resources/tutorials/academic-integrity/

• Short animations and quizzes – http://www.ryerson.ca/academicintegrity/episodes/ep1/

Three strategies to improve Academic Integrity

Assessment design

Out-of-class

teaching

In-class teaching

1

http://www.deakin.edu.au/students/study-support/referencing


https://d2l.deakin.edu.au/d2l/le/content/394791/viewContent/2505314/View

http://monash.edu/library/skills/resources/tutorials/academic-integrity/

http://monash.edu/library/skills/resources/tutorials/academic-integrity/

http://www.ryerson.ca/academicintegrity/episodes/ep1/


Assessment design

At the top of the reducing plagiarism pyramid is assessment design. Deakin has an emphasis on authentic assessments. There are many typical types of tasks to assess learning. These include exams, essays, case studies, reports and presentations. The assessments we consider as typical may not be ‘authentic’.

Authentic assessment is about producing work that mirrors the intended professional life to which the course is, or might be, aimed. It is about students practising and developing the skills of a profession. In designing a robust authentic assessment you’ll need to know what professional skills the assessment is addressing. What type of assessment task can assess that students have not only developed these skills but are aware that these are the skills that are the focus of the task?

Table 1: Traditional v Authentic assessment tasks

Traditional Assessment Task Authentic Assessment Task

Essay • Prepare magazine article for a given publication • Write a book review for a particular journal • Prepare a case for an interest group • Prepare an annotated bibliography • Produce a ‘fact sheet’ • Produce a research ethics application • Write a reflective piece

Seminar Presentation

• Participate in a ‘Court of Enquiry’ • Participate in a debate • Prepare a YouTube clip • Design, produce and present a poster

2


Tips for good assessment design Table 2: Tips for good assessment design

Know what is assessed

Make assessment specific to

Make assessment draw on student experience

Make assessment draw on professional context

What professional skills is the task assessing? What unit learning outcomes is the task assessing? What do students need to know to perform the task successfully?

• Content of the unit

• Unit learning outcomes

• Learning activities

• Context and situation – use current topics from newspaper articles or from current affairs in Victoria

• Multiple solutions

• Improving feedback mechanisms – (and consider feed forward communication)

• Include process – how did they come to their conclusions? How did they learn during the task? How would they do things differently next time?

• Task could include documenting search strategies

• Incorporate reflections about the experience of undertaking the task.

• Use tasks typical of the professional context

• Use professionals to develop/support the tasks – guest speakers, internship experiences, case studies using the internet, interviews

• Consider work-integrated learning – it doesn’t have to be placement

• Model and practice appropriate professional behaviours.

3


Table 3: Tips for good assessment design

Use media Scaffold the assessment

Use rubrics Collaborate with colleagues

Blogs Wikis Video/audio Discussion boards

• Introduce students to the various skills explicit and implicit to the task

• Allow time in class to practise the skills-peer review

• Give regular feedback on how the skills ought to be developing

• Allow students time to discuss the assessment – monitor this in order to avoid collusion

• Use rubrics as a teaching tool and nominate sections for students to ‘teach’ each other

• Assist students with explicit information

• Make learning outcomes explicit

• Rubrics can be used for formative peer review and feedback

• Work with your course team to develop a reducing plagiarism strategy across the course and/or your school

• Language and Learning Advisers (Deakin Student Life) support Course Teams to design assessments

• Deakin Learning Futures and the Learning Innovations team support Course teams to design assessments

4


Assessment Examples from within Faculty of Business and Law

Table 4: Accounting – MediaWiki

Assessment task description

Good authentic assessment design features

Assessment process and context

Accounting Interpretation and assessment of cash flow statement – 10% of total mark for unit Groups of 4 students use Mediawiki to evaluate and apply accounting tasks in relation to cash flows Individual task – use 2014 annual report of four companies to recommend stocks for a client Group task – prepare memo on the four companies and determine most appropriate investment Team evaluation – critique performance and that of the team

• Linked to Accounting Threshold Learning Standards

• Reflective element – including group reflection

• Individual and team element

• Use of Mediawiki • Linked to contemporary

annual reports • Located in student

experiences of teamwork

• Linked to professional skills

• Clear assessment description

• Uses rubrics for different elements of the task

• Assessed by lecturer • Students are asked to

peer review work that other group members have written prior to submission – students within each group can see each other’s feedback

• The original author is then required to improve their response, based on the suggestions provided form other student’s feedback

5


Table 5: Accounting – MAA103 – Business Plan




Accounting – Written Business Plan 30% of total mark for unit Group assignment – 3,500 words business plan Two part assignment Part A Business Plan Part B Team and individual reflection Students are develop a 3,500 word Business Plan within a group. Assessment focuses on Discipline-specific Knowledge, Digital Literacy and Teamwork.

• Reflective element – including group reflection


• Located in student experiences of teamwork

• Clear assessment description that includes ‘note on plagiarism and collusion’ in assessment description

• Uses rubrics • Draws on previous

assessment

• Assessed by lecturer – Undergraduate – 1200 students – Core unit for B.

Commerce, but taken by many students as an elective from other disciplines

– Blended Cohort – 1 x 1.5hr class & 1 x

2hr seminar per week

– 11 week trimester

6


Table 6: Accounting – MAA103 – Video presentation




Accounting – Video presentation – 10% of total mark for unit Group assignment – Present research on a new small business venture. (What structure? Why this business? Who are the customers? Lease or buy? What insurance, equipment etc.) The research collated in this assessment task is then used by the group to develop their Business Plan. The content of the submission is personalised as groups of students select the business they want to research and develop.

• Reflective element – including group reflection and journals


• Located in student experiences of teamwork

• Clear assessment description that includes ‘note on plagiarism and collusion’ in assessment description

• Uses rubrics

• Assessed by lecturer – Undergraduate – 1200 students – Core unit for B.

Commerce, but taken by many students as an elective from other disciplines

– Blended Cohort – 1 x 1.5hr class & 1 x

2hr seminar per week – 11 week trimester

7


Table 7: Accounting – MAA350 – Debate and reflection


Good authentic assessment design features for


Accounting – Debate and written reflection – 20% of the total mark for the unit Part 1 – watch 5 video clips about inmates convicted of fraud and, in a pair, produce a 10 minute video debate on a statement Part 2 – write an 800 word reflection on the repercussions for relatives of inmates

• Reflective element • Topical • Located in student

experiences • Clear assessment

description • Uses rubrics

• Assessed by lecturer • Students are required to

present their arguments and must be included in the video capture – marks are deducted if the student’s face is not included in the video. – Undergraduate – 400 students – Core unit for

Accounting major of B. Commerce

– On and off campus students

– 1 x 2hr class & 1 x 1hr seminar per week


Table 8: Business Process Management – MPM701 – Design advice

Assessment task description Good authentic assessment design features Assessment process and context

Provide some preliminary advice to client/client group about redesigning process so that performance can be improved. A 2000 word report is prepared by groups of 3 students, work 40%

• Provides students with some text based information, as well as financial data and reports

• Individualised data set through interactive program

– Post-graduate unit – 419 students – Blended Cohort – 1 x 2hr seminar per

week – 11 week trimester

8


Table 9: Corporate Finance – MAA363 – LinkedIn account




Students are asked to create and then use their LinkedIn account to: Commence developing their professional identity Progress their understanding of potential careers within the accounting profession, leadership and management as well as technical skills and knowledge An ePortoflio of approximately 1000 words is created on an individual basis, worth 10% The focus of this assessment item is to evidence the development of a student’s Self-management skills, as well as provide an indication of what level of Self-management the student has achieved. As such, the quality of the student’s goal and action plan are assessed, but not the content of their LinkedIn accounts.

• Student experience • Professional context • Use of social media • Reflection

• Students are asked to develop their own career objective and then develop an action plan that will help them work towards that objective – Undergraduate – 315 students – B. Commerce

students mainly majoring in Accounting

– Blended Cohort – mainly on-campus

– 1 x 1.5hr class & 1 x 2hr seminar per week


9


Table 10: Design Thinking – MIS276 – Design Manifesto




Assessment items undertaken within the workshops Students to create a Design Manifesto 20% individual task, presented as an ePortfolio

• Professional context • Scaffolded

development of task • Student experience • Reflection

• Students work in different teams throughout the trimester, but are required to produce and submit individual work

• They are required to document the process that their team undertakes to complete the task

• Students are asked to also provide an one page explanation of their manifesto to substantiate the content of the manifesto – Undergraduate – 89 students – Mainly Information

Systems students – Blended Cohort –

mainly on-campus – 1 x 3hr seminar per

week – 11 week trimester

Out-of-class teaching

Out-of-class teaching refers to sending students to external websites and support systems only. While there is certainly nothing wrong with letting students know their responsibilities and sending them to appropriate resources, it really is the bare minimum of academic responsibility.

In-class teaching

One of the ways we can combat plagiarism and collusion is to teach about it. While it is normal to tell students what it is, describe the consequences and alert them to resources, it is less usual to design learning activities aimed at its reduction as part of a unit. In-class teaching, which refers to both face-to-face and in the Cloud, is about using class time to teach about plagiarism and to share resources. This includes spending

10


time on describing plagiarism and collusion but also on teaching to the assessment tasks in a manner aimed at minimising both.

Do you currently spend time teaching students about plagiarism through in-class learning activities? It is a good for students to learn from each other about plagiarism, to try a quiz or watch a video together and for you to cover your responsibilities. Here are some activities that you might adopt/adapt.

Discuss expectations

• Spend time in class discussing plagiarism and collusion • Let students know where resources are – perhaps look at some together in class • Bring in an expert to discuss academic writing and how to avoid plagiarism –

Language and Learning Advisers (Deakin Student Life) • Allow students to work together on a plagiarism learning activity like the one below

(especially good for first year)

Teach referencing and citations

Table 11: In-class activity: referencing and citation

Title of activity for seminar

Summary description of activity

Lecturer’s Introduction and Main instruction

Student activity

Resources for lecturer and students

Self-assessment of academic skills (paraphrasing, summarising, quoting, citing in-text)

Awareness-raising activity where students identify their stage of skill development on a continuum

Tell a story of unintentional plagiarism (self or anonymous student). Main point: ‘This self-awareness activity will help you to understand how your academic skills are developed’ Main instructions: ‘Tick your skill level individually’ ‘In groups, respond to 3 focus questions’

1. Students use a continuum table to identify their current skill level (individually) 2. Students form groups to discuss key reflective questions 3. Students share discussion across whole seminar

Lecturer’s intro and focus questions document (appendix 1) Two tables of skill descriptors (continuum table) for distribution to all students (Modified Gaspar table) (appendix 2)

(Gasper, 2015)

11


In-class teaching using peer review – a formative focus

Introducing peer review to teaching is an excellent opportunity for students to experience working together to achieve a learning goal. When doing peer review students review each other’s work. ‘Peer review is understood to mean the educational arrangement in which students consider or evaluate the value, quality or success of work produced by their fellow students and provide each other with feedback, (Pearce, Mulder & Baik 2009, p. 3). Peer review, in this sense, involves a great deal of design and scaffolding for the teacher. For example, it is essential to provide criteria, examples and practice. Students need to be supported to be able to review their peer’s work in a manner that is supportive yet critical. There are also issues of some students feeling more confident than others and thus being heard (while others are not). However, peer review can be adapted and does not have to be a high stakes activity.

Peer review can become part of the normal classroom routine. It doesn’t have to involve reviewing each other’s work. Peers can work together to review a rubric, review a piece of work from outside the group, review the assessment task or review an example of plagiarism. The point is for students to work together to come to a shared understanding of a piece of work. In doing so, they can clarify aspects of the text they don’t understand. These forms of peer review are an excellent opportunity to learn about plagiarism and the assessment tasks.

Examples of in-class peer review activities

Table 12: In-class activity: peer review

Name Description Time Benefits Resources required

Follow-up

Turnitin review

Groups of 4 students Students submit draft written piece to Turnitin and bring reports to class Students to discuss reports with each other – focusing on what they ‘don’t know’ and share

30 mins

If students know they have to share report with peers they are less likely to plagiarise Lecturers/tutors become more familiar with Turnitin reports and common misunderstandings Share support resources with students and learn from peers

Turnitin reports Student support resources (online resources etc.)

Can continue to discuss misunderstandings Groups can reform later to discuss how they have overcome their initial misunderstandings re plagiarism – discussion board topic

12


Review the rubric used for the assessment task

Groups of students review rubric a few weeks prior to assessment – look for areas of potential difficulties Share difficulties, misunderstandings and questions with class – lecturer/tutor clarifies

15 mins

Assessment task is discussed Common understandings established Rubric becomes an aspect of learning

Rubric Can do similar activity after assessment has been marked. Students can look for where they might improve Can also be a topic on CloudDeakin discussion

Review a plagiarised versus non-plagiarised text

Groups or pairs – review a section of an assignment that has been plagiarised versus another assignment that uses the same text but has paraphrased properly

15 mins

Paraphrasing is explained with strategies

Two examples of a section of an assignment – a plagiarised one versus one correctly paraphrased and referenced

Culturally inclusive in-class activities about plagiarism

It is challenging for students working in English as their second, third or fourth language to identify the most salient points about learning in a new environment, and to understand and adopt new academic protocols. Additionally, students new to Deakin might also be new to Western higher education settings. In-class opportunities (like the one below) to explore, discuss and question the key issues and processes of academic integrity is very helpful to EAL and/or international students. Happily, when you plan culturally inclusive teaching you also help new domestic students adapt to higher education protocols too.

13


Table 13: In-class activity: discipline specific style and protocols

Title of activity for seminar Summary description of activity Lecturer’s introduction and main instruction Student activity Resources for lecturer and students

Discipline-specific academic style and protocols

Students use a table of teaching topics about specific academic protocols to identify what to learn first

1 minute individual writing task. ‘3 things I know about plagiarism’ Share. Main points: ‘Most plagiarism is unintentional’ ‘Demonstrating your understanding is the big picture of assessment’ ‘It takes time to learn protocols’ Main instructions: ‘Score the table’s topics for usefulness 1=low, 5=high’ ‘What are the group’s top 3 topics for teaching about plagiarism?’

1. Quick thinking writing activity warm-up 2. Individual scoring of table for useful teaching topics about plagiarism 3. Group discussion to identify 3 top teaching about plagiarism topics

Lecturer’s intro and focus questions document (appendix 3) One table of teaching topics about plagiarism (appendix 4)

(Carroll, 2007)

14


Part Two: The Deakin Guide: definition of terms, policy and procedure, and forms of plagiarism

The Deakin Guide’s procedure regarding plagiarism can be accessed here. Additionally, this section of the handbook describes types of plagiarism, and Deakin technology to detect plagiarism and how academics might respond to incidences of plagiarism in the first instance.

In brief, academic staff are responsible for:

• educating students about the expected conventions, within a Western educational framework, for authorship and the appropriate use and acknowledgement of all forms of intellectual material relevant to their discipline

• designing approaches to assessment that reduce the possibility for students to submit plagiarised material, or collude with others

• ensuring that students understand when it is appropriate to collaborate in the preparation and submission of assignments and when it is not initiating appropriate actions in suspected cases of plagiarism or collusion

• ensuring that answers to questions cannot be re-used in a way that might allow any act of academic misconduct.

The Faculty Student Misconduct Committee Within the Faculty of Business and Law, the Faculty Student Misconduct Committee (FSMC) considers allegations of Academic and General Misconduct against students of the Faculty. The Committee consists of a Chair (or Co-Chairs) and members nominated by their Department/School. Formal misconduct hearings are the process by which allegations against students are considered – each hearing is attended by the FSMC Chair and at least two other academic staff members. Students have the option to make a written statement and/or attend the hearing in person to address the allegation. In matters found proven, the Committee has a range of penalties that can be applied, from issuing warnings or marking penalties to exclusion from the University.

Plagiarism and Collusion

Plagiarism and Collusion constitute extremely serious Academic Misconduct, as referenced in Regulation 04.1(2) – Academic Misconduct under the following subsections:

3 Academic Misconduct includes but is not limited to:

(a) passing off the work of any other person as the Student's own work

(c) failing to comply with the University's directions given in connection with any examination or assessment, including having, possessing, accessing or using unauthorised material in the examination or assessment, whether or not with the intention of using the material to obtain an advantage

The University’s definitions of Plagiarism and Collusion for students are as follows:

15

https://theguide.deakin.edu.au/TheGuide/TheGuide2011.nsf/191d0d51322b3a04ca2576be00064063/f1c36bcc517ab096ca257b8000061680?OpenDocument


Plagiarism is the use of other people's words, ideas, research findings or information without acknowledgement, that is, without indicating the source. Self-plagiarism occurs when an author reuses text in subsequent writings without attributing the previous publication. As a guideline, you cannot submit the same assignment (or parts thereof) twice. You will find that lecturers and tutors will not accept this, even if you reference your previous assignment. The reason for this is that previous assignments are normally not viewed as an acceptable academic reference source for your unit assignments.

Collusion is acting with another person with the intention to deceive. It is unacceptable to submit the work, or part of the work, of someone who studied the subject previously, even with their permission. It is also unacceptable to have someone else write any part of an assignment for you.

http://www.deakin.edu.au/students/study-support/referencing/?a=60101

Self-plagiarism and collusion are areas of confusion for many students, although the rules about these areas are clearly stated in the unit guides. For students who are used to working with friends, knowing when collaboration crosses over into collusion can be difficult. Similarly, self-plagiarism is a new concept to many students (even those who are aware of plagiarism regulations). There is a common assumption by students that they can reuse work if it is their own (ie. previously submitted for a Deakin unit or at a different institution). Students should be advised to verify with individual Unit Chairs to confirm that work already submitted can be reused, and should be reminded that they should retain the confirmation as evidence that verification has been sought and approved. Their academic recycling will also be detected by Turnitin (see below for more details). Unit Chairs are advised to address these potential problem areas early by discussing rules about self-plagiarism and collusion with their students ahead of assignment submission.

I certify that the attached work is entirely my own (or where submitted to meet the requirements of an approved group assignment is the work of the group), except where work quoted or paraphrased is acknowledged in the text. I also certify that it has not been previously submitted for assessment in this or any other unit or course unless permission for this has been granted by the Unit Chair of this unit. I agree that Deakin University may make and retain copies of this work for the purposes of marking and review, and may submit this work to an external plagiarism-detection service who may retain a copy for future plagiarism detection but will not release it or use it for any other purpose.

Contract Cheating (the act of a student paying someone to complete an assessment item and then passing it off as his/her own) is another area of concern for the Faculty. Websites and social media sites offering ‘assignment writing services’ have proliferated over the last few years, targeting university students and offering a seemingly easy way to cheat on assignments. This kind of Academic Misconduct is regarded as particularly serious by the Faculty and suspected cases should be reported to the FSMC. If required, the FSMC Secretary can give advice on evidence requirements for this type of allegation.

16




Recognising Academic Misconduct

Table 14: Suggested methods to recognise Plagiarism

What to look for:

• language which would seem to be above the normal capabilities of the student level

• changes in writing style and language throughout the assignment • changes in font size or type • content that does not reflect the question • discussion is very theoretical • text which is cited in the assignment but the source is not listed in the

bibliography/references • inconsistencies in formatting • phrases which seem familiar to you (may be from another student or a particular

reference several students are sharing)

Types of plagiarism

Fraud: Copying: Plagiarism of ideas:

Plagiarism of sources:

Submitting work that was written by, or stolen, or purchased from another author

Collusion

Deliberate, unacknowledged self-plagiarism (recycling previous work)

Copying from a source without acknowledgement

Patch-writing – partial copying and word-switching

Failure to indicate a quote – copying from a source with acknowledgement of the source, but failing to indicate it is a direct quote. This common student error may indicate poor referencing skills rather than intentional plagiarism

Failure to cite another author's idea

Plagiarism of reasoning style or organisation

Using another author's citations without acknowledgement

17


• a mixture of citation methods - e.g., some footnotes mixed in with some author/date citations

• lack of recent sources listed in the bibliography/references • contract cheating • paraphrasing software, looking for wording that does not fit in • student discussion about ‘back-translating’ (the masking of plagiarism technique of

running a plagiarised document through language translation software) • http://www.pserie.psu.edu/faculty/teachingcentre/teaching/indes.htm#plagiarism

Detection technology

Students at Deakin submit written assignments through Turnitin. This helps them, and you, assess unoriginal material in their assessments by comparing it to a database of print and online materials. Click on the link for more information: Turnitin

What is the Turnitin Originality Report?

An Originality Report is an indication of similarities between a piece of work submitted by a student and a database of previously submitted work, websites, journal articles and other sources. If a match between a submitted piece of work and an existing work is found, Turnitin will highlight the matching text and provide a summary on the Originality Report (SEBE – Assessment Procedure Interpretation 2015).

The Originality Report is NOT a plagiarism report

The matching text found is not an assessment of whether work has, or has not been, plagiarised. Originality Reports can help academics locate potential sources of plagiarism. The decision to deem any work plagiarised is made only after careful examination of both the submitted paper and the suspect sources. In some cases, the originality report can identify where one student has similar work to another student. After examination of this similar material, academics may choose to make an allegation of misconduct against both students (SEBE – Assessment Procedure Interpretation 2015).

What overall percentage matters?

There is no right or wrong percentage because there is no right or wrong amount of unoriginal text in any piece of work. Students can use quotations (i.e. words copied directly from a source) in submitted work and this will be detected as unoriginal text. If the student has used and cited each quotation appropriately then the academic will not make an allegation of plagiarism. If, however, quotations are not used and cited appropriately then an allegation of academic misconduct may proceed.

Staff should not just look at the similarity index and immediately assume that the student has plagiarised. Staff must consider the sections identified and determine if the work is referenced. A poor attempt at referencing is not plagiarism, it is poor scholarship and should be handled in the marking of the assessment item and appropriate feedback provided to the student (SEBE – Assessment Procedure Interpretation 2015).

18

http://www.pserie.psu.edu/faculty/teachingcentre/teaching/indes.htm%23plagiarism

http://www.deakin.edu.au/learning/cloud-learning/clouddeakin/guides/assessment/turnitin-plagiarism-and-grademark


For information on how to use Turnitin, contact Learning Innovations [email protected] or 03 5227 3303. Sessions can be arranged through your Department or on an as-needs basis.

Reporting Academic Misconduct

All cases of suspected Academic Misconduct should be reported to the FSMC by submitting a Misconduct Allegation Form and other required documents to [email protected]. A copy of the allegation form (which includes a document submission checklist) can be downloaded here:

https://wiki.deakin.edu.au/display/BUSILAW/Student+Academic+Misconduct

The above link also includes links to Regulation 04.1(2) – Academic Misconduct and detailed instructions for reporting Academic Misconduct.

When deciding whether to report a student to the FSMC, a Unit Chair may take the following factors into consideration:

• The extent of the identified misconduct – (e.g. the percentage indicated in a Turnitin Originality Report) • The perceived intent of the student – for example, is this a case of poor academic writing skills on the part of the student (i.e. incorrect attempts at referencing) or a deliberate attempt to commit misconduct? • The weighting of the assessment – Misconduct allegations relating to assessments worth less than 10% of the total unit mark can be heard by a single member of the Committee, but in these cases it might be appropriate for the case to be addressed at the Unit Chair level in the first instance.

It is appropriate for the Unit Chair to look at the marking rubric for an assignment when deciding whether it is sufficient to give the student a marking penalty in a particular area (rather than requiring the student to answer an allegation of plagiarism). If in doubt, the Unit Chair is encouraged to contact the FSMC Secretary (at [email protected]) for advice on the procedure and to get clarification from the FSMC Chair.

When Academic Misconduct has been reported to the FSMS, the Unit Chair will be informed of the proceedings via the following email:

19

mailto:[email protected]








Staff can access a University wide guide to academic integrity at the following site:

https://collaborate.deakin.edu.au/division/governance/qs/SitePages/Staff guide to student academic integrity.aspx

Dear Unit Chair,

Re: Academic Misconduct Hearing – «First_Name» «Last_Name» «ID» – «Unitcode»

I advise that a hearing regarding the alleged academic misconduct by the above student will be held by the Faculty Student Misconduct Committee (FSMC) on «Hearing_Date». The student has been notified of the allegation by email today.

You will be advised of the outcome as soon as possible after the hearing however in the meantime please ensure that the student does not receive his/her result for this assessment item.

If you receive any enquiries from the student, please respond using the template below:

Your <insert unit code> assignment has been forwarded to the Faculty of Business and Law Student Misconduct Committee (FSMC) due to an allegation of academic misconduct being made against you. The FSMC will notify you in due course of what action will follow. Please make sure you regularly check your Deakin email address as this is how FSMC will send you information.

Now that your <insert unit code> assignment has been forwarded to the FSMC there is nothing further that I or the <insert unit code> teaching team is able to do. We are also not able to make any comment about this matter.

If you have any questions regarding this please feel free to contact me at [email protected]

20

https://collaborate.deakin.edu.au/division/governance/qs/SitePages/Staff%20guide%20to%20student%20academic%20integrity.aspx

https://collaborate.deakin.edu.au/division/governance/qs/SitePages/Staff%20guide%20to%20student%20academic%20integrity.aspx



Appendix One. In-class Activity: Referencing and Citation. Tutor’s introduction and focus questions.

Introduction by tutor: Tell a story about unintentional plagiarism (self or anonymous student)

For example: ‘When I was a first year UG a million years ago I wrote an essay. I remember the topic. ‘Research the time-line of human existence and discuss the contentious theories in the field of evolution’ I did a great job I thought. Lots of info of the whole timeline. Detailed what the different theorists said. Submitted. Got the message from the lecturer, ‘You need to see me’. I learned that day the word ‘plagiarism’. I had never heard or read the word before. It made sense what he was saying though. (Paraphrase and cite, and paraphrase and summarise what the theorists say (and cite)) in order explain your analysis of what they said. The lecturer was nice about it but I felt a bit embarrassed not knowing about plagiarism. Now I am the lecturer I try to make sure I teach about it so my students don’t have the same experience. Many of you will know quite a bit about academic skills and knowledge, and some of you won’t have much experience with it’.

‘Today’s focus is becoming aware of your own stage of developing; a self-assessment of the important citing and referencing skills we all need to learn in a higher Ed setting and beyond’.

Organisation

• Place students in groups of four for discussion. • Provide individual students with a copy of the two Gaspar* tables. Ask them

to tick individually where their skills are currently across each of the four columns. Emphasize that like all skill development, it takes practice and perseverance to learn over time, and, learning doesn’t all happen at once.

• Ask students to talk with each other in their groups – To explain how they assessed their own skills (describe their practices good and

bad). What evidence do they have of their own current development in academic skills? (their own knowledge, what teachers have said about their work)

– Ask students which skills are the hardest for them. Which skill would they prioritise to learn?

– Ask students how they would best learn their priority skill? (can be creative in their strategies)

• Share discussion across seminar to emphasize the how to learn these skills. • Show students support material links for more information and learning about

academic literacies (including School or Faculty support)

Resource – *Modified skill acquisition chart (modified and adapted from Jean Marie Gaspar’s work, Deakin Language and Learning Adviser, May 2015).

(www.deakin.edu.au/students/study-support/referencing , http://www.deakin.edu.au/students/study-support, Study skills team)

21


http://www.deakin.edu.au/students/study-support


Appendix Two. In-class activity: Referencing and Citation. Academic skills descriptors.

Table 15: Integrating the ideas of others: paraphrasing, summarising and quoting

Proficient Maturing Developing Beginning Consistently and correctly acknowledges a range of print and electronic sources in text.

Correctly acknowledges some types of print and electronic sources in text.

Acknowledges a limited range of print and electronic sources in text with varying degrees of accuracy and completeness.

Acknowledges a limited range of print and electronic sources in text often inaccurately and incompletely.

Skilfully integrates the ideas of others to support own argument.

Integrates the ideas of others to support own argument with some success.

Attempts to use sources with limited success.

Uses the words of others predominantly.

Paraphrases and summarises sources and seamlessly integrates the ideas of others into own writing. When paraphrasing, varies the sentence structure of the original and uses a wide range of synonyms.

Paraphrases and summarises sources and integrates the ideas of others into own writing with some success. When paraphrasing, varies the sentence structure of the original and uses synonyms with some success.

Attempts to paraphrase and summarise sources. Paraphrases and summaries exhibit awkwardness/ungrammatical features and sometimes fail to display the writer’s understanding of sources.

Shows reluctance to paraphrase and summarise sources Copies large extracts from sources and/or makes minimal changes, leaving sources substantially unchanged.

Succinctly conveys gist as well as tone of the original in summaries.

Conveys main ideas in summaries.

Sometimes conveys main ideas in summaries.

When using own words, the writing is sometimes unintelligible.

Uses summary words (e.g. trends, events, data) to condense long lists and descriptions.

Beginning to use a limited range of summary words.

22


Uses a wide range of language techniques to comment on sources, e.g. choice of reporting verb, selection of tense, use of qualifiers to express own point of view on sources.

Beginning to use a limited range of reporting verbs and other techniques to comment on sources.

Uses sources to convey information and uses a very limited (and sometimes inappropriate) choice of reporting verb.

Does not comment on sources used.

Uses quotes sparingly and judiciously. Integrates quotes well into own writing.

Usually uses quotes sparingly and judiciously. Integrates quotes into own writing with some success.

Has a tendency to overuse quotes.

Uses quotes to excess.

When quoting, uses the conventions to indicate ellipsis, interpolations and own comments, correctly and consistently.

Uses some of the conventions to indicate ellipsis, interpolations and own comment.

Has some difficulty in altering the grammar of own sentences in order to integrate quotes.

Leaves other writers’ texts to ‘speak for themselves’; makes little or no attempt to explain or integrate them into own writing.

23


Table 16: Acknowledging sources in text (in-text citations)

Proficient Maturing Developing Beginning Consistently and correctly acknowledges a range of print and electronic sources in text.

Correctly acknowledges some types of print and electronic sources in text.

Acknowledges a limited range of print and electronic sources in text with varying degrees of accuracy and completeness.

Acknowledges a limited range of print and electronic sources in text often inaccurately and incompletely.

Understanding and knowledge

Understands the nature of academic writing and what constitutes plagiarism.

Alert to the possibility of unintended plagiarism.

Knows what constitutes plagiarism.

Aware of how unintended plagiarism can occur.

Aware of the issue of plagiarism. Largely unaware of how unintended plagiarism can occur.

Has heard of the consequences of plagiarism. Unaware of how unintended plagiarism can occur.

SKILLS (providing and formatting in-text citations, i.e. author-date; in-text note identifiers, i.e. superscript numbers or numbers

Consistently and correctly provides and formats in-text citations/in-text note identifiers for a range of publications and scenarios, e.g. → multiple authors → chapter in an

edited book → online journal

article → online book → webpage → television and

radio programs → podcast,

YouTube, DVD, video

→ secondary sources

→ several publications by the same author in the same year

Correctly provides and formats in-text citations/in-text note identifiers for some of the following publications and scenarios, e.g. → multiple authors → chapter in an




YouTube, DVD, video



Sometimes provides and formats in-text citations/in-text note identifiers for a limited range of the following publications and scenarios, with varying degrees of accuracy and completeness, e.g. → multiple authors → chapter in an



radio programs → podcast, YouTube,

DVD, video → secondary sources → several

publications by the

Sometimes provides and formats in-text citations/in-text note identifiers for a limited range of the following publications and scenarios, often inaccurately and incompletely, e.g. → multiple authors → chapter in an




YouTube, DVD, video


24


→ repeat citations within a paragraph

→ more than one source referred to at the same point in the text

Sustains acknowledgement of sources throughout paper at sentence level, so it is always clear whose ideas are whose.



Usually sustains acknowledgement of sources over a paragraph or paragraphs. It is sometimes not clear whose ideas are whose.

same author in the same year



When using sources, acknowledgement is sometimes provided at the beginning or the end of paragraphs, but attribution may not be sustained. This can result in unintended plagiarism.




Ideas from sources are acknowledged in an idiosyncratic manner or not acknowledged at all, resulting in unintentional plagiarism.

Resource – *Modified skill acquisition chart (modified and adapted from Jean Marie Gaspar’s work, Deakin Language and Learning Adviser, May 2015)

25


Appendix Three. In-class activity: discipline-specific academic style and protocols

Introduction by lecturer to seminar

Warm up activity

• Ask students to write down three things they know about plagiarism. They have one minute.

• Ask students to share their lists with the whole seminar group. Key point to elicit: most important side effect of plagiarism is it creates a barrier to our own development (becomes arrested development at pre-university level)

Focus question: What do we mean by ‘your own understanding’ and why is it important to academic integrity?

Suggested answer to students: ‘Most plagiarism is unintentional. The majority of students want to complete assignments honestly but sometimes there are obstacles in their way. It takes time and guidance to transition successfully to university study and it is important to know where you will find most obstacles’.

The obstacles could be:

• Previous education experiences did not emphasise original (student’s own understanding) work supported by in-text citation and full referencing protocols (e.g., in Australian schools, there are differences in approach, and internationally, there is diversity in how original work is defined and taught)

• English as a second, third or fourth language makes learning in a new environment challenging (stress, time, access to complex ideas)

• There are university cultural protocols that take time to learn

In Australian universities there is an assumption that all students must construct their own understanding rather than remember and reproduce that of others (Carroll 2007, p. 6). Universities based on Western models (predominately USA, UK, Australia and New Zealand) interpret understanding to mean:

• A student can use a fact in a new setting • A Student can analyse a theory by taking it to bits • A student can explain something ‘in their own words’ (Carroll 2007, p. 7)

Therefore, learning academic protocols is essential in order for you to demonstrate your own understanding.

26


Appendix Four. In-class activity: Discipline-specific academic styles and protocols

Demonstrating your understanding is at the heart of all assessment at Deakin. Look at the following learning activities your lecturer could do in class.

1. Evaluate each activity’s usefulness, allocating a score of between 1 and 5 (1 = lowest, 5 = highest)

2. Which three of these learning activities would be most useful to you? Why? 3. In a group discuss together your top three learning activities. What are the

group’s top three activities?

Classroom topic activity

Your personal score of usefulness 1– 5

Explain your top 3 choices

What are the group’s top three activities?

Talk about the meaning of plagiarism

See the ‘rules’ for avoiding plagiarism in practice

Talk about your previous education experiences and the rules of plagiarism(did you have to follow the rules?)

Talk about your personal study challenges

Talk about the discipline’s idea of reliable sources of information

Talk about typical discipline format for assessment

Talk about the structure/tone of

27


written work in the discipline (Can I use first person? What’s passive voice? What does ‘discuss’ mean in this unit?) Is there a preferred way of citing in this discipline? Why?

How does the lecturer give feedback about unintentional plagiarism in this unit?

Talk about working in groups and the rules for avoiding plagiarism

Talk about how lecturers ‘catch out’ plagiarism

Talk about plagiarism penalties

Note: This activity is exploratory for students and a safe way to discuss matters of originality. It also provides a way of identifying specific skills to be taught.

A follow up learning idea is assigning one topic from each group’s priority list for the group to become ‘expert’ in and explain ‘in their own words’ for posting on a class wiki or discussion post. More detailed work could involve ‘re-teach’, where students are responsible for teaching the topic to others.

(Carroll, 2008)

28


References

Carroll, J, 2008, ‘Assessment issues for international students and teachers of international students’, The Enhanced Series Case Studies: International Learning Experience, Higher Education Academy, UK.

Gaspar, JM, 2015, Using and acknowledging sources in academic writing: stages in developing competence and confidence.

Gray, K, Waycott, J, Thompson, C, Clerehan, R, Sheard, J, Hamilton, M & Richardson, J 2011, Using social web (web 2.0) activities for student assessment: resources for University learning and teaching, University of Melbourne, Monash University and RMIT University, Australian Learning and Teaching Council, retrieved 9 June 2015, <https://web2assessmentresources.wikispaces.com>.

Gulikers, J, Bastiaens, T & Kirschner, P 2004, ‘A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment’, Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 67–85.

Pearce, J, Mulder, R & Baik, C 2009, Involving students in peer review: case studies and practical strategies for university teaching, CSHE, Centre for the study of Higher Education, Melbourne University, pp. 1–29, retrieved 9 June 2015, <http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/resources_teach/teaching_in_practice/docs/Student_Peer_Review.pdf>.

Websites

Web2assessmentresources, <http://web2assessmentresources.wikispaces.com/2.5.+Using+blogging+in+a+Criminal+Law+subject>.

29

http://web2assessmentresources.wikispaces.com/home

http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/resources_teach/teaching_in_practice/docs/Student_Peer_Review.pdf

http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/resources_teach/teaching_in_practice/docs/Student_Peer_Review.pdf

http://web2assessmentresources.wikispaces.com/2.5.+Using+blogging+in+a+Criminal+Law+subject

http://web2assessmentresources.wikispaces.com/2.5.+Using+blogging+in+a+Criminal+Law+subject

Date post:	07-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	3 times
Download:	1 times

Academic Integrity - Deakin University Blogs · June 2015 . Table of Contents ... expectations for...

Documents