Ghost Grading: Part 1 – A New Twist on Contract Cheating

August 19, 2021

You likely already know about commercial contract cheating (e.g., term paper mills, essay mills, assignment completion services, and so on.) It seems some companies behind these services are pursuing a new line of business, targeting educators. Companies are targeting graduate student teaching assistants (TAs) and faculty members offering “grading” assistance. Grading is a term we use a lot in Canada, but it can also be called marking or assessing. Although this is a new twist on contract cheating, it would stand to reason that this type of service might be called contract grading, but that term already exists in Canada and the United States and it has an entirely different meaning, so I have dubbed this service “ghost grading”.

With ghost grading, third party commercial entities offer to do grading for TAs and profs on their behalf.

It seems to work like this: a company approaches the TA or instructor individually, often via e-mail. The company offers to provide grading services for a fee. The company operates as a third party to complete grading work on behalf of instructors, who pay a fee to outsource this work.

Instructors and TAs are being pitched on the idea that the rate they pay for sub-contracting out grading duties is less than their own hourly rate would be, so they are gaining back time to work on other, more interesting projects.

The prof or TA makes a private side deal with a third party company. The educators give the company their learning management system (LMS) login credentials and their grading is “taken care of” by the contractor.

These companies sometimes allege or insinuate they are reaching out to the TA or the prof with the permission of the administration or the school. Of course, this isn’t at all the case. The school administration might have no idea this is happening, or at least, not until after it has been discovered. By that point, might be considered misconduct on the part of the TA or academic staff member who has engaged with one these companies and dealt with as such.

Remember, contract cheating companies are predatory and they care about one thing: generating profit, lots and lots of profit.

They are known for having sophisticated marketing and they know exactly what messages to send to get new customers. A naïve teaching assistant who actually believed that the company is operating with the permission of the administration can be completely duped and even though they might be committing an act of misconduct by engaging with the company, they might also be a victim of the scam.

So far, I can find little documented about this phenomenon, but I am hearing increasing reports of it happening. If you have been approached by a company offering such services, please feel free to reach out to me. In Part 2, I’ll share more about this practice and its impact.

Read more:

Ghost Grading: Part 2 – Examining Possible Legal Loopholes in Canada

Related posts:

______________________

Share or Tweet this: Ghost Grading: Part 1 – A New Twist on Contract Cheating – https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2021/08/19/ghost-grading-part-1-a-new-twist-on-contract-cheating/

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, PhD, is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, and the Educational Leader in Residence, Academic Integrity, University of Calgary, Canada.

Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the University of Calgary or anyone else.

Comments Off on Ghost Grading: Part 1 – A New Twist on Contract Cheating | academic integrity, contract cheating | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D.

Why Universities and Colleges Need Clear Policies to Deal with Fake COVID-19 Vaccination Records and Test Results

August 17, 2021
Image courtesy of patrisyu at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Image courtesy of patrisyu at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

With the new academic year just around the corner, universities and colleges are grappling with a return to campus. Some institutions are calling for mandatory vaccine requirements, and the list continues to grow. In Canada, for example, journalists are sharing news of this rapidly changing landscape on a daily basis. Here are just a few examples of news stories from major news outlets:

Just this morning, the President of the University of Calgary sent a campus-wide e-mail stating:

“Starting September 1, the University of Alberta, the University of Calgary, and the University of Lethbridge will require all those coming to campus to undergo regular rapid testing. Those who are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 are exempt from this requirement.

Students, faculty, and staff who are not fully vaccinated, and those who would prefer not to disclose their vaccine status, will need to regularly complete a rapid screening test and receive a negative result before they participate in in-person activities.

Any individual who cannot be tested or vaccinated based on medical or other protected grounds recognized by the Alberta Human Rights Act can request an accommodation.”

The e-mail was signed by all three Alberta university presidents:

  • Bill Flanagan, President and Vice-Chancellor, University of Alberta
  • Ed McCauley, President and Vice-Chancellor, University of Calgary
  • Mike Mahon, President and Vice-Chancellor, University of Lethbridge

I applaud this decision – wholeheartedly and unequivocally.

What was absent from this communication, and most of the communication I have seen about vaccine requirements on campuses, is what the consequences will be for falsifying vaccine documents. On August 9, the Associated Press published an article on how “Fake COVID-19 vaccination cards worry college officials” in the United States.

It is utterly naïve to think that fake COVID-19 test results or vaccination records are limited to the United States or other countries. These are already available for sale for Canadians. I will not include links to these services in this blog post because I do not want to give the impression that I am endorsing any of these services, but you can do a simple Internet search yourself to find out how easy it is to buy these in Canada.

One Canadian news report claimed that fake COVID-19 vaccine passports were available for purchase online for as little as $12. That’s about the same cost as a box of donuts and a couple of coffees from a popular Canadian donut chain restaurant.

A critical question that remains unanswered is: What are the consequences for presenting fake or fraudulent COVID-19 documents on our campuses?

For staff and professors, I expect that human resources departments will be involved. For students, I expect that presenting fake COVID-19 would be a violation of student conduct rules (e.g., academic or non-academic misconduct). What is unclear is how such cases will be dealt with.

Falsifying COVID-10 vaccination status or test results is a willful act of dishonesty and needs to be treated as such.

I contend that such consequences need to be articulated through institution-wide policies and procedures and must be consistent across the institution. For example, it would be ridiculous for a student in arts to receive a warning and a student in science to receive an expulsion for the same offence of presenting a fake COVID-19 vaccination record. Similarly, it would diminish public trust in the institution if contract-based staff were dismissed from their employment for presenting faked COVID-19 documents, but tenured faculty members or administrators received a warning.

Universities and colleges need to take a strong and public stance on the issue of fake COVID-19 documentation.

This is no time to hide behind political-speak such as, “Violations will be addressed on a case-by-case basis” or “We do not expect this to be a problem”. This is a time for universities and colleges to communicate clear and firm expectations that presenting accurate and honest information regarding COVID-19 vaccination status or test results is essential for upholding the academic integrity and ethical standards. In addition, institutions need to develop and communicate clear and firm consequences for presenting fake or falsified COVID-19 documents.

Further, it would be useful for institutions to track and report on misconduct that occurs related to COVID-19, for all campus stakeholders including students, staff, faculty, and administrators and report back to the community on how cases are addressed. This is a not only a matter of public interest, it is a matter of public health. Lives are literally at stake.

Related posts:

______________________

Share or Tweet this: Why Universities and Colleges Need Clear Policies to Deal with Fake COVID-19 Vaccination Records and Test Results – https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2021/08/17/why-universities-and-colleges-need-clear-policies-to-deal-with-fake-covid-19-vaccination-records-and-test-results/

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, PhD, is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, and the Educational Leader in Residence, Academic Integrity, University of Calgary, Canada.

Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the University of Calgary or anyone else.

Comments Off on Why Universities and Colleges Need Clear Policies to Deal with Fake COVID-19 Vaccination Records and Test Results | academic integrity, education | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D.

New article: “Career development, academic integrity and counterfeit credentials: Understanding the connections”

July 26, 2021

Last year, my friend and colleague, Ann Nakaska, invited me to contribute an article to a special issue of the Career Planning & Adult Development Journal for which she was serving as guest editor.

CPAD Journal

The theme of this special issue is: “How we will work in the future”. This is a robust issue, spanning 291 pages, and is divided into 3 parts:

  • Part 1: The impact of technology on the workplace
  • Part 2: Working in the fourth industrial revolution
  • Part 3: How career practitioners will work in the future

My contribution to this robust publication is in included in Part 2. My piece is, “Career development, academic integrity and counterfeit credentials: Understanding the connections” (pp. 98 – 106).

Ann’s invitation challenged me to write for a different audience: career development professionals. This piece is for a professional practitioner audience, though it may also be of interest to others interested in the topic of fake degrees and fraudulent or faulty credentials.

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to highlight ethical aspects of career development through the lens of academic integrity. I begin with an overview of academic integrity and the fundamental values that underpin it. Then I discuss fake and faulty academic credentials, including degrees, diplomas, transcripts, and related documents. I explore the impact of fake credentials on society, highlighting a few significant examples that have been featured by mainstream media. Finally, I examine the role that career development professionals play in promoting academic integrity and professional ethics to their clients. I conclude with concrete recommendations for career development professionals to inform themselves and their clients, and in doing so, to become partners in integrity and advocates of ethical education.

The issue has just been released and Ann shared with all of the contributors that just before the issue was published, her co-guest editor, Steven Beasley, who had served as managing editor of the journal for 20 years passed away. My deepest condolences to Steven and all who knew him.

The entire issue can be accessed free of charge here: https://files.ctctusercontent.com/56f4bf3f301/4ffe3e3a-9252-46b4-b19c-c9913e1fec19.pdf?rdr=true

 #AcademicIntegrity #FakeDegrees

Related posts

_____

Share or Tweet this: New article: “Career development, academic integrity and counterfeit credentials: Understanding the connections” https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2021/07/26/new-article-career-development-academic-integrity-and-counterfeit-credentials-understanding-the-connections/

This blog has had over 3 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, PhD, is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, and the Educational Leader in Residence, Academic Integrity, University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the University of Calgary or anyone else.

1 Comment | academic integrity, education | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D.

The impact of text-generating technologies on academic integrity: AI & AI

July 13, 2021

I’ve been a bit behind with my blogging recently, so I’m going to try and catch up by sharing some recent conference presentations. This one I presented in June with Mike Mindzak and Ryan Morrison at the annual conference of the Canadian Association for the Study of Educational Administration (CASEA) [online].

Eaton, Mindzak & Morrison - GPT-3 and academic integrity

First, let me tell you the story of how I got connect with these two. In the early fall of 2020, Mike Mindzak at Brock University in St. Catharine’s, Ontario (Canada) reached out to me via e-mail to introduce himself. A colleague we have in common had pointed him in the direction of my work on academic integrity. He connected the dots, that I was the person who’d left him a comment on a piece he’d written for University Affairs, entitled, “What happens when a machine can write as well as an academic?” 

Mike let me know about some work he was doing with Ryan Morrison at George Brown College in Toronto related to artificial intelligence and algorithmic writing. He asked if I might be interested in collaborating with them. Naturally, I was interested, but also recognized that the field of artificial intelligence is outside of my area of expertise and the demands on time were preventing me from doing a deep dive into any new projects. I suggested that we continue to chat throughout the fall and winter, and look at a possible collaboration for 2021.

In the meantime, I invited the two of them to present at the Academic Integrity Urgent and Emerging Webinar Series I was putting together for the Taylor Institute of Teaching and Learning. They accepted the invitation.

I submitted the manuscript for my book, Plagiarism in Higher Education: Tackling Tough topics in Academic Integrity in the final days of May, 2020. In the final chapter of the book I take a future-focused perspective, offering ideas about what the emerging challenges to plagiarism and academic integrity would look like in the not-too-distant future. I cite Mike’s article and contend that the role that artificial intelligence and machine learning will play with regards to ethics in teaching and learning will become a topic that we, educators and educational leaders, will have to contend with.

In late September of 2020, the three of us started working on a proposal to present at the 2021 Canadian Association for the Study of Educational Administration (CASEA). Proposals are normally due in the fall, around October, and undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process before presenters are notified about whether their presentations have been accepted to the conference.

The three of us stayed in touch during the fall and winter months, as we all observed that the open artificial intelligence technologies (OpenAI) were developing fast. OpenAI’s latest version of its Generative Pre-Training Transformer (GPT),  GPT-3 had been released in summer 2020. The technology uses machine learning to simulate human writing through text-generation. We kept an eye on news and developments about the GPT-3 technology, exchanging e-mails with links to new stories we’d seen. 

By the time Mike and Ryan presented their webinar, “Exploring the Impacts of Text Generating Technologies on Academic Integrity” at the Taylor Institute of Teaching and Learning  on April 9, 2021, our proposal to present at the CASEA conference had been accepted. I was excited to host them for this webinar to kick off this work. I knew the topic of artificial intelligence and machine learning truly fit the theme of the webinar series – urgent and emerging topics in academic integrity. They presented to a small but engaged crowd and as the webinar series convener and host, I watched carefully as questions poured in. As with other topics we had covered in the series, connecting the dots between the new topic and academic integrity was the key.

On June 1, 2021 we had our presentation for CASEA, a scholarly society dedicated to the study of educational administration. I’d been a member of the society since I was a PhD student, as my own supervisor had introduced me to the society and the work years before. My work has focused mainly on higher education, and many of the CASEA members focus on K-12 educational administration, so it hasn’t been a perfect fit for me, but close enough that I have stayed connected over the years. Here’s the abstract for our session:

Abstract

Paper presented at the Canadian Society for the Study of Education (CSSE) 2021 – Canadian Association for the Study of Educational Administration (CASEA) (June 1, 2021) The purpose of this paper is to provide a theoretical and conceptual discussion of the rapidly emerging field of artificial intelligence (AI) and algorithmic writing (AW). The continued development of new tools—most notably at this time, GPT-3—continues to push forward and against the boundaries between the writing of human and machine. As issues surrounding AI continue to be actively discussed by scientists, futurists and ethicists, educational leaders also find themselves front and centre of debates concerning, academic writing, academic integrity and educational ethics more broadly. Three points of focus provide the basis for this analysis. Firstly, we examine the impact of AW on student writing and academic integrity in schools. Secondly, we discuss similar issues in relation to publication and academic scholarship. Finally, taken together, we discuss the broader ethical dimensions and implications that AI and AW will, and are, quickly bringing into education and the field educational administration and leadership.

We had lots of questions and reactions in the Zoom chat, as the conference was held online this year. We have archived our slides publicly online, so anyone can access them. Here is the reference with the link:

Eaton, S. E., Mindzak, M., & Morrison, R. (2021, June 1). The impact of text-generating technologies on academic integrity: AI & AI. Paper presented at the Canadian Association for the Study of Educational Administration (CASEA), University of Alberta [online]. http://hdl.handle.net/1880/113569

We are excited to see where this work will take us next. I have a feeling that the ethics of technology is going to become inextricably intertwined with academic integrity. How that develops is yet to be determined.

_____

Share or Tweet this: The impact of text-generating technologies on academic integrity: AI & AI https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2021/07/13/the-impact-of-text-generating-technologies-on-academic-integrity-ai-ai/

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, PhD, is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, and the Educational Leader in Residence, Academic Integrity, University of Calgary, Canada.

Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the University of Calgary or anyone else.

Comments Off on The impact of text-generating technologies on academic integrity: AI & AI | academic integrity, education, research | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D.

Academic Integrity: Transforming Invisible work into Visible and Valued Work

July 7, 2021

In a previous post I talked about how the work of academic integrity is often invisible and unrecognized. Today I wanted to share some exciting news. Over the past couple of years, colleagues at the University of Calgary have been working hard to update an old and outdated manual to address hiring, merit assessment, tenure and promotion for academic staff.

In the fall of 2020, I had an opportunity to connect with the two project leads, Dr. Florentine Strzelczyk and Dr. Francine Smith, to speak specifically about matters relating to ethics and integrity. We talked about the invisible nature of academic integrity work and how I’d heard anecdotally from colleagues that for those without a formal leadership appointment, such as an Associate Dean who investigates and adjudicates academic misconduct allegations and cases, had no formal mechanism to have work relating to academic integrity recognized when it came to our bi-annual review as faculty members. Similarly, there was no formal way to showcase this work in an application for hiring, tenure or promotion.

Dr. Strzelczyk and Dr. Smith listened closely and asked insightful questions about how academic integrity work could be better recognized as legitimate academic work at our university. Generally, our work as professors is broadly classified into three main categories: Research, Teaching, and Service. The amount of time we spend working in each area depends on the type of appointment you have, but in most cases, academic staff are expected to contribute to all three areas.

We had an open and collegial exchange about which categories academic integrity work would fall into. There are a limited number of us at our university who conduct research into academic integrity, so instead we focused on teaching and service. It became obvious that academic integrity work certainly counts towards service when it involves reporting and preparing evidence when a breach of integrity (i.e., academic misconduct) is suspected. We also talked about how it should also be recognized as a teaching and learning contribution. We talked about the need to recognize effort that goes into conceptualizing, designing, and implementing ethical assessments, for example. We explored the idea that when a professor takes time to prepare materials to teach their students how to learn ethically (e.g., developing tip sheets for their students on how to cite and reference properly) that these activities are related to teaching and learning, rather than service. We talked about how faculty work relating to academic integrity isn’t about teaching or service, but rather teaching and service.

I was really impressed with how my colleagues listened and responded. They incorporated changes into the handbook that I’m really quite ecstatic about and I wanted to share with you the specific language around these updates, so that if you are thinking about updating your own faculty handbooks on your campus, this might serve as a model.

The new University of Calgary GFC Academic Staff Criteria & Process Handbook was officially approved last month by our General Faculties Council (GFC) one of the highest governance bodies of the university. In the handbook, academic integrity is now officially recognized as part of our Teaching (Section 1.3) and Service (Section 1.4) responsibilities. The specific passages where academic integrity is highlighted are as follows: 

“Teaching may take different forms such as direct or classroom instruction at undergraduate and/or graduate levels, as well as competency-based education, and/or field and practicum supervision. Teaching activities may include lectures, seminars, tutorials, laboratories, clinical sets, advising/counselling, creating lesson plans, assessments, grading, and examinations, and upholding academic integrity. Delivery of instruction and support of student learning may be face-to-face, on-line and blended and may occur inside and outside of the classroom, on and off campus (including land-based education), in collaboration with other instructors, other faculties, associated institutions, community organizations or with Indigenous knowledge-keepers and communities.” (Bolding added).

GFC Academic Staff Criteria & Process Handbook (Section 1.3.3, p. 10)

and

“Service to the University may include participation in Program or Unit-level, Department or Division, Faculty, and University committees, councils, task forces, ad hoc teams, and governing bodies, or other parts of the University including the Faculty Association. Activities that contribute to upholding academic and research integrity across various parts of the academy shall also be considered as important service contributions to the University.” (Bolding added).

GFC Academic Staff Criteria & Process Handbook (Section 1.4.3, p. 11)

This is the first time, to the best of my knowledge, that academic has been explicitly named in our institutional faculty handbook in this way. To say I am excited about this is an understatement!

The details of exactly how this work can be recognized has yet to be determined, and the devil is always in the details, as they say. Nevertheless, we now have a mechanism by which it can be recognized and that in itself is a huge step forward.

I am hopeful that this will provide colleagues on campus with a means to move academic integrity work from being invisible to being not only visible, but also valued. I also hope that other institutions, both universities and colleges alike, will take similar action to ensure that the work that goes into upholding and enacting academic and research integrity is clearly acknowledged as being legitimate and important contributions to the role of an academic staff member.

_____

Share or Tweet this: Academic Integrity: Transforming Invisible work into Visible and Valued Work – https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2021/07/07/academic-integrity-transforming-invisible-work-into-visible-and-valued-work/

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, PhD, is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, and the Educational Leader in Residence, Academic Integrity, University of Calgary, Canada.

Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the University of Calgary or anyone else.

Comments Off on Academic Integrity: Transforming Invisible work into Visible and Valued Work | academic integrity, education | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D.

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »