Contract Cheating and Freedom of Expression: How the Chicago Principles Can Help You Promote Academic Integrity on Your Campus

October 4, 2022
woman wearing brown shirt carrying black leather bag on front of library books
Photo by Abby Chung on Pexels.com

It’s that time of the year again, when contract cheating and unethical tutoring companies hand out flyers to students as they enter classrooms and leave them all over campus – littered in classrooms, strewn on benches, tacked to bulletin boards, and so on. Historically, it has been difficult for some schools to have these advertisements removed because the companies behind them have claimed censorship and threatened legal action against the institution. However, there is reason for hope, especially if your school as a Statement on Free Expression. Let me explain.

Although the original Chicago statement – and others that were modelled on it – were created to support freedom of expression, there is a small but important detail about the limitations of free speech on campus that is relevant to academic integrity. In the original version of the Chicago Principles of Freedom of Expression, it states:

“The freedom to debate and discuss the merits of competing ideas does not, of course, mean that individuals may say whatever they wish, wherever they wish. The University may restrict expression that violates the law, that falsely defames a specific individual, that constitutes a genuine threat or harassment, that unjustifiably invades substantial privacy or confidentiality interests, or that is otherwise directly incompatible with the functioning of the University.” (Chicago Principles of Freedom of Expression, p. 2, emphasis added.)

I am not a lawyer, but I am a policy scholar. (You can find out more about my academic work on higher education policy here, here, and here, for example.) When examining policy, the devil is in the details, as they say. In this case, there is an argument to be made that when contract cheating companies and unethical tutoring businesses advertise on our campuses, they are acting in a manner that is directly incompatible with the functioning of the university. As such, the institution has a right to remove advertisements from campus that promote academic misconduct.

Every school that has developed its own statement of free expression based on the Chicago principles may have this important detail included that gives it leverage to curtail the blatant advertising of contract cheating services the school, including those in Canada. For example, in 2019, the Alberta government mandated that all post-secondary institutions in the province develop a statement to affirm freedom of expression that aligned with the Chicago Principles on Free Speech. Like all higher education institutions in the province of Alberta, the University of Calgary followed the government mandate, making a formal public announcement on December 16, 2019 that it had published its Statement on Free Expression. Our institutional Statement on Free Expression is publicly available. For quick reference, here is the .pdf statement: https://www.ucalgary.ca/provost/sites/default/files/StatementonFreeExpression.pdf 

The University of Calgary statement includes this sentence: “Free expression is subject to limitations imposed by law and, on our campuses, by University policies and procedures related to the functioning of the University.”

I brought this detail to the attention of our Provost at the time, Dr. Dru Marshall, pointing out that this could give the university leverage to reasonably remove advertisements for contract cheating services.  The Provost agreed and informed me that she would instruct Caretaking to have the advertisements on campus removed on this basis. We currently have an Interim Provost, Dr. Penny Werthner and I recently brought this information to her attention and she responded that she too, would take action.

Any post-secondary institution that has a Statement on Free Expression based on the Chicago principles, may be in a position to mandate the removal of advertisements that promote academic misconduct. Of course, this would need the agreement of the Provost or equivalent. I am sure that some lawyers could debate the nuances of some of this language and its implications. As I said, I am not a lawyer, but it would seem to me that in the case of Alberta at least, given that the provincial government mandated that every post-secondary institution in the province develop its own Statement on Free Expression based on the Chicago principles, and that universities and colleges across North America have widely adopted such statements that would have no doubt been scrutinized by lawyers ad nauseam, this is a policy loophole that could actually work in favour of the institution. There is a strong argument to be made that removal of advertisements that promote academic misconduct is not censorship, because communications that interfere with the functioning of the university (and that includes communications that promote academic misconduct) can reasonably be removed. This is not censorship; it is protecting the integrity of the institution.

If you live in jurisdiction that does not have legislation prohibiting the supply or advertisement of contract cheating services, but your school has a statement on free expression based on the Chicago principles, here are 5 things you can do:

  • Share this blog post with your Provost / Vice-President Academic (or equivalent). Let them consider how the school’s statement can help to promote academic integrity.
  • Ask the Provost (or equivalent) to instruct the head of caretaking that custodial should be instructed to remove the flyers and other advertisements that litter the classrooms and other areas of campus.
  • Ask the Provost to inform the others on the executive leadership team (e.g., vice provost of student affairs, vice provost of teaching and learning, and so on) and deans to share this information with others in their respective units.
  • Request that this information be shared at the next meeting of the University Senate (or in Alberta, the General Faculties Council) to ensure it is widely communicated.
  • Ask how you can help. If your school has an academic committee or task force, offer to join and actively contribute to the ongoing work of upholding academic integrity at your own institution.

Institutions can take action against contract cheating. The annual International Day of Action Against Contract Cheating is fast approaching. It’s on October 19 this year. If your school hasn’t already signed up, you can still do so. Widespread removal of contract cheating advertisements could be a campus-wide event that students, staff, and administrators all participate in on that day, and every day.

_______________________________

Share or Tweet this: Contract Cheating and Freedom of Expression: How the Chicago Principles Can Help You Promote Academic Integrity on Your Campus – https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2022/10/04/contract-cheating-and-freedom-of-expression-how-the-chicago-principles-can-help-you-promote-academic-integrity-on-your-campus/

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.


University’s Proposed Social Media Policy Results in Student Protests

October 27, 2011

The Chronicle of Higher Education recently released an article about an article about how a university’s proposed social media policy backfired on them. Reporter Alexandra Rice reports in “University’s Proposed Social-Media Policy Draws Cries of Censorship” that students at Sam Houston State University didn’t take kindly to the administration having access — and editing privileges — to their social media accounts.

The university released a new social media portal called Social Universe was deemed to be a one-stop portal for social media users at the university. The original policy draft indicated that any department or organization  that joined with a university e-mail account would be required to surrender their account passwords to the university, thus giving the university the right to oversee and edit activity on all accounts.

Essentially, this meant that any student, staff, faculty, department or student club with a Facebook, Twitter or any number of other online accounts that was registered with a university e-mail address could be monitored, edited, censored or even deleted by the university.

The students cried censorship. They staged a demonstration against the policy that included a “free speech wall”. That resulted in campus police citing students for creating a public disturbance… a situation which rolled itself into a second “free speech wall” later on.

In my humble opinion, if this university truly wanted to craft an effective social media policy, it would involve its users. By this I don’t just mean having reps from the student union sit on a committee, but I mean a large-scale public conversations over a period of time with all social media users at the institution.

Writing social media policies is tricky business. As this university found out, social media belongs to its users, not any one service or organization.

Policy makers are used to having all the authority when it comes to developing procedures, processes, and behaviour guidelines. Social media, social networking, flash mobs convened via Twitter and text and other forms of social interaction using technology have changed all that.

Power to the people has a whole new meaning in the era of social media. Policy-makers need to involve people, not tell them what to do. The old ways aren’t working any more, so find new ones that will.

Related article: Anatomy of a social media policy

___________

Share this post: University’s Proposed Social Media Policy Results in Student Protests https://wp.me/pNAh3-YT

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 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.


Happy Banned Books Week!

September 26, 2011

Did you know that September 24 to October 1, 2011 is Banned Books Week sponsored by the American Libraries Association and 5 other organizations.

In celebration of the week, I’m pledging to read at least one banned book (though I haven’t decided which one yet.) Lauren Davis reports in the Eye on Education blog that the Harry Potter series has been the most widely banned book series of the past decade.

My friend and mentor, Dr. Nicholas Zekulin, a professor of Russian at the University of Calgary has what we believe to be the world’s largest collection of Harry Potter books in translation. Maybe I’ll pick up the Spanish version and enjoy Potter en español.

Here’s my invitation to join me in reading a banned book this week, or at least have a conversation with someone else about censorship, freedom of speech or banned books.

Related posts:

_________

Share this post: Happy Banned Books Week! http://wp.me/pNAh3-U9

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 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.


Books Banned in Canada (a partial list)

September 12, 2011

Recently I posted a story about a girl who started a secret library of banned books. The location of her library was a locker at her school.  The article talks about a list of banned books that the girl found and she turned it into her own personal reading list.

That got me thinking about banned books. I did a Google search for “list of banned books”. The search returned over 25 Million results. I found Canada’s Freedom to Read site, which led to the “Challenged books and magazines list” that is released by the Canadian Library Association.

They don’t use the word “banned”, but that’s essentially what they mean. The association maintains a list of books that are prohibited by organizations and community groups. Any organization, group or institution can come up with a list of books they prohibit their members from reading. Whether or not the ban is actually upheld is a different issue entirely.

Because of the number of requests that come forward to ban reading materials, the  produces Canadian Library Association a list of books that are challenged in any given year, if for no other reason than to raise awareness about censorship.

For example, in 2010 in Canada, 74 titles were “officially challenged” by different organizations including:

  • Bateman, Colin. Murphy’s Law.
  • Canfield, Jack, et al. Chicken Soup for the Unsinkable Soul.
  • Lucas, George, Hisao Tamaki and David Land. Star Wars: A New Hope
  • Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter (7 books in series).
  • Twain, Mark. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.

This is only a sampling of the 74 titles that were officially challenged in 2010.

The site also points out that “Censorship studies usually show that most library challenges go unreported and undocumented.”

It’s hard to say what books have been banned (either officially or unofficially and quietly) by school boards across the country.

But for those of you with that same rebellious reading streak that I have, here’s a little gem I think you’ll like: The University of Pennsylvania maintains a list of banned books that are freely available online. 

Happy reading.

____________________

Share this post: Books Banned in Canada (a partial list) http://wp.me/pNAh3-Sv

Update – January 2018 – This blog has had over 1.8 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.