I am always telling my students to find and cite the original sources rather than relying on secondary sources. In the work I do on academic misconduct, the work of William Bowers is often cited as a seminal study in the field. The problem is that Bowers’s original work is hard to get your hands on. I was able to find a copy of his 1966 doctoral dissertation, but the original 1964 book seemed almost impossible to find. The two sources have exactly the same title. Although both texts are based on the same content, it is presented in different ways in both texts.
I can say this because I’ve now read both sources in their entirety.
Thanks to our amazing librarians at the University of Calgary, who were able to track down a copy of Bowers’s original 1964 work. Through the inter-library loan system, they were able to request the book from another library (thanks, University of Waterloo!) and have it sent to the university where I work so I could read it.
It is a beautiful volume, obviously produced on a typewriter with painstaking detail. This work was a true labour of love. I so appreciate having the opportunity to read it for myself. I now understand Bowers’s work much better. (I purposely do not offer a synopsis of his work in this blog post, so as to encourage others to go read the original works themselves, rather than relying on someone else’s summary!) Although more updated studies have been published since then, this nevertheless remains an important foundational book in my field. I am delighted to have had the privilege to read it.
I encourage anyone who wants to undertake deep scholarship in a particular field to find the original works upon which the field was built. If you can’t find the books, ask your friendly neighbourhood librarian for help. You might be surprised how they can help you be a better scholar.
References:
Bowers, W. J. (1964). Student dishonesty and its control in college. New York: NY: Bureau of Applied Social Research, Columbia University.
Bowers, W. J. (1966). Student dishonesty and its control in college. (Doctor of Philosophy). Columbia University, New York.
Share or Tweet this: The foundations of scholarship: Original sources https://wp.me/pNAh3-2ol
This blog has had over 2 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!
Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the Werklund School of Education or the University of Calgary.
Talk to your students about the release of the 7th edition. This is an excellent reason to review citing and referencing expectations with students.
Talk to administrators about what is expected of you with regards to when and how to adopt the 7th edition of the manual. It may make more sense to start and finish the term with consistent use of the same edition of the manual and transition to a new manual at the start of a new term.
Recommendations for Institutions
Develop and deliver campus-wide training programs on the differences between the 6th and 7th editions of the manual. Students, faculty and others will need explicit and supportive instruction on what’s new and how to adapt to the norms of the new edition.
Develop a systematic plan for campus-wide adoption of the 7th edition. Neither instructional staff nor students should be expected to buy a new manual and adopt it during the middle of a term. This could result in both a financial burden and unnecessary stress for everyone involved. It should be OK to stick with the 6th edition of the manual for the fall term (or the spring 2019 semester for the southern hemisphere), so everyone is using the same version consistently in courses. There can (and should) be a period of transition while students and others can learn the details of the latest version in time for start of the next term. There should be clear communication to students about when they are expected to fully adopt the 7th edition, and it should not be in the middle of term.
Develop a unified and supportive institutional stance towards ethical adoption of the latest edition, casting a particular lens to academic integrity breaches and policy. It is imperative that students not be penalized for academic misconduct for failing follow 7th edition in the fall 2019 semester. (This includes not being penalized for having two spaces after a period!) It is important to give students, educators, administrators and others time to learn the new conventions that with come with the latest edition.
This is an exciting time for everyone whose work intersects with the APA manual in a variety of ways, including citing, referencing and academic writing. It is important to create supportive and planned approaches to adoption of the new edition in ways that emphasize teaching, learning and the development of research and writing skills.
Share or Tweet this: 7th Ed. APA Manual – An Academic Integrity Response https://wp.me/pNAh3-2nQ
This blog has had over 2 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!
Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the Werklund School of Education or the University of Calgary.
My colleague, Roswita Dressler and I have just had a new paper published. It all started when I was at an academic integrity conference a couple of years back. I was sitting next to a colleague who works in a language other than English (LOTE). The colleague suggested that contract cheating (e.g. essay mills and other forms of outsourced academic work) was a problem of the English-speaking world, asserting that there simply wouldn’t be enough of a market in other languages.
I thought to myself, “Challenge accepted!” I recruited Roswita Dressler to help me undertake a small-scale pilot study. We both have a background in language teaching and between us, we have some level of proficiency in about four languages. We were also curious about the market for academic outsourcing for younger audiences, in elementary, middle and high school.
The questions that guided our project were:
What evidence exists that online providers offer academic work in languages other than English?
To what degree are K-12 students targeted by these online providers?
We framed our study specifically within the Canadian context.
Our results showed that not only do commercial contract cheating companies market to specifically to students in Canada, they target children as young as Grade six (approximately 11-12 years old). And yes, we found strong evidence that contract cheating happens in languages other than English (ten of them, in fact).
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study on contract cheating published in Canada.
The Alberta Teachers Association is the publisher and copyright holder of this article. They have given us permission to post the article in our university’s digital repository. You can access a copy of it free of charge from here:
Eaton, S. E., & Dressler, R. (2019). Multilingual essay mills: Implications for second language teaching and learning. Notos, 14(2), 4-14. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1880/110695
Share or Tweet this: Multilingual essay mills – New article
This blog has had over 2 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!
Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the Werklund School of Education or the University of Calgary.
Note: This is an early-stage concept draft intended for sharing for developmental feedback.
Direct questions about this proposal to Dr. Sarah Elaine Eaton – seaton (at) ucalgary.ca.
Background
The MEd certificate in Academic Integrity is an opportunity for those interested in this topic to develop as scholars of the profession in a learning community of like-minded students. Situated within the Leadership specialization, students will explore academic integrity through a leadership, policy and governance lens, while also developing an evidence-informed approach to the pragmatic aspects of academic integrity such as case management. Students will examine their personal and professional notions of academic integrity, as situated concepts within institutional and systemic contexts, deepening their understanding of how professional practice related to academic integrity is nested within institutional policies and procedures and how these are related to quality assurance from a systemic perspective, such as ministries of education and/or higher education.
MEd Certificate
The MEd (Master of Education) is a course-based pathway which provides students with a systematic understanding of knowledge, and a critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, much of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of their academic discipline, field of study or area of professional practice in two topic areas, plus additional research methods courses.
Each certificate is based on a topic area comprised for four (4) courses. The MEd Certificate is a pathway to a Master of Education (MEd), Interdisciplinary route, but a graduate level certificate is awarded upon the successful completion of a 4-course certificate, so even if participants choose only to undertake the 4-course topic, they can still be awarded a graduate-level certificate.
Learning Goals and Expected Outcomes
There are three overarching learning goals of this proposed certificate:
This certificate will increase awareness of the role of academic integrity in educational contexts.
It will assist those who have academic integrity as a component of their professional portfolio in furthering discussion and learning about integrity, ethical decision-making, case management and policy.
It will assist current and future educational leaders to envision and develop a personal theory of integrity that enhances the learning experiences of students, while remaining cognizant of institutional policies and procedures, as well as larger systemic realities.
The four (4) courses for this certificate will be developed in consultation with internal and external stakeholders.
Possible formats
Option 1: Completely online format – All four (4) courses offered online using asynchronous (D2L) and synchronous (Zoom) learning technologies. Students could be physically located anywhere in the world and would not be required to come to the University of Calgary for any component of the certificate.
Option 2: Blended – Two (2) courses offered on-campus during an intensive two-week residency in July. This would require students to physically be in Calgary during the mandatory two-week residency. The residency would be followed by two (2) additional courses offered online in the subsequent fall and winter terms.
Anticipated timeline
We do not have an exact timeline for the launch of this program yet, as it would need to receive approval at a number of levels. However, given the amount of interest and support we have at this early stage, it is reasonable to anticipate that it may be available by September 2020.
Feedback Questions
At this point, we are seeking feedback from various stakeholders on these particular points:
Which of the two possible formats (online or blended) is most appealing? Why?
What are some key topics or courses you would like to see included in this program? Why?
What resources (books, articles, etc.) do you see as being foundational for courses offered in this certificate?
For questions about this proposal or to add your name to the mailing list contact:
Dr. Sarah Elaine Eaton, Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, seaton (at) ucalgary.ca
Share or Tweet this: Seeking early-stage feedback about proposed MEd Certificate in Academic Integrity https://wp.me/pNAh3-2nv
This blog has had over 2 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!
Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the Werklund School of Education or the University of Calgary.
The other day I was talking with Dr. Tracey Bretag about her upcoming visit to Calgary for the Canadian Symposium on Academic Integrity. We were talking about the topics of her keynotes for the symposium and our conversation wandered around to contract cheating. I commented that contract cheating is poorly understood, in my opinion, by many faculty members and administrators in Canada. I commented that there are people on our campus who have never heard of it, or don’t believe it to be a widespread. I said that the importance of developing of academic integrity literacy was really important.
And there it was, a term that captures the idea of bringing together the values that underpin the values we are trying to teach our students on campus, with foundational skills we need our students to learn as part of academic literacy.
Weideman offers a comprehensive yet concise definition of academic literacy in this blog post. His definition includes skills such as understanding a variety of academic vocabulary in context, making distinctions between essential and non-essential information and knowing what counts as evidence (Wideman, n.d.). The skills Weideman describes are essential for success in numerous educational contexts.
I would add that academic integrity literacy necessarily goes beyond the development of skills to include an explicit understanding of the values that underpin integrity and a conscious commitment to upholding those values.
What is the difference between academic integrity and academic misconduct?
This is a question that people ask me often.
Integrity advocates differentiate academic integrity from academic misconduct for a couple of reasons. First, misconduct casts a negative lens on the issue, where as a focus on integrity shifts the conversation to a more positive and supportive view. Second, misconduct focuses on unacceptable behaviours or actions that can result in penalties.
Ryerson University explains this key concept: It is the student’s responsibility to know what is expected of them in university.
Memorizing a list of behaviours or skills could seem like an easy way to understand these expectations, but the concept of integrity is more complex than that. It is about taking responsibility for one’s actions and understanding what is acceptable and what is not.
When Julia Christensen Hughes came to our campus in 2017 to talk about academic integrity, she reminded us integrity is rooted in personal code related to morals and values, but misconduct is a violation of laws and standards of practice. She emphasized that values drive behaviour.
Others have mentioned the notion of academic integrity literacy before me. Karanauskienė and colleagues mentioned the term in their paper at a 2018 conference and in another short paper in 2018, as well. However, to the best of my knowledge, no one has yet offered up a concise definition of the term, so let me offer this one:
Definition: Academic integrity literacy is an inseparable combination of values, behaviours, ethical decision-making and skills necessary for academic success.
This is a preliminary definition and we need to talk about and develop further, but it is a place to start.
Here’s a quick video I put together for visual interest:
I’ll wrap up this post by sharing that I’ve just signed a book deal to explore into academic integrity more deeply. I’ll keep you posted on that in future posts, and you can be sure I’ll be digging into this notion as I write.
References
Christensen Hughes, J. (2017, November 24). Understanding academic misconduct: Creating robust cultures of integrity. Paper presented at the University of Calgary, Calgary.
Karanauskienė, D., Česnaitienė, V. J., Emeljanovas, A. n., Miežienė, B., & Mejeryte-Narkeviciene, K. (2018). Educating academic integrity: Obscure forms of academic misconduct at the institutions of higher education. Paper presented at the International Academic Conference, Dresden.
Share or Tweet this: Exploring the notion of academic integrity literacy https://wp.me/pNAh3-2n3
This blog has had over 2 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!
Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the Werklund School of Education or the University of Calgary.
You must be logged in to post a comment.