Breaking Barriers: Academic Integrity and Neurodiversity

November 20, 2025

When we talk about academic integrity in universities, we often focus on preventing plagiarism and cheating. But what if our very approach to enforcing these standards is unintentionally creating barriers for some of our most vulnerable students?

My recent research explores how current academic integrity policies and practices can negatively affect neurodivergent students—those with conditions like ADHD, dyslexia, Autism, and other learning differences. Our existing systems, structures, and policies can further marginalize students with cognitive differences.

The Problem with One-Size-Fits-All

Neurodivergent students face unique challenges that can be misunderstood or ignored. A dyslexic student who struggles with citation formatting isn’t necessarily being dishonest. They may be dealing with cognitive processing differences that make these tasks genuinely difficult. A student with ADHD who has trouble managing deadlines and tracking sources is not necessarily lazy or unethical. They may be navigating executive function challenges that affect time management and organization. Yet our policies frequently treat these struggles as potential misconduct rather than as differences that deserve support.

Yet our policies frequently treat these struggles as potential misconduct rather than as differences that deserve support.

The Technology Paradox for Neurodivergent Students

Technology presents a particularly thorny paradox. On one hand, AI tools such as ChatGPT and text-to-speech software can be academic lifelines for neurodivergent students, helping them organize thoughts, overcome writer’s block, and express ideas more clearly. These tools can genuinely level the playing field.

On the other hand, the same technologies designed to catch cheating—especially AI detection software—appear to disproportionately flag neurodivergent students’ work. Autistic students or those with ADHD may be at higher risk of false positives from these detection tools, potentially facing misconduct accusations even when they have done their own work. This creates an impossible situation: the tools that help are the same ones that might get students in trouble.

Moving Toward Epistemic Plurality

So what’s the solution? Epistemic plurality, or recognizing that there are multiple valid ways of knowing and expressing knowledge. Rather than demanding everyone demonstrate learning in the exact same way, we should design assessments that allow for different cognitive styles and approaches.

This means:

  • Rethinking assessment design to offer multiple ways for students to demonstrate knowledge
  • Moving away from surveillance technologies like remote proctoring that create anxiety and accessibility barriers
  • Building trust rather than suspicion into our academic cultures
  • Recognizing accommodations as equity, not as “sanctioned cheating”
  • Designing universally, so accessibility is built in from the start rather than added as an afterthought

What This Means for the Future

In the postplagiarism era, where AI and technology are seamlessly integrated into education, we move beyond viewing academic integrity purely as rule-compliance. Instead, we focus on authentic and meaningful learning and ethical engagement with knowledge.

This does not mean abandoning standards. It means recognizing that diverse minds may meet those standards through different pathways. A student who uses AI to help structure an essay outline isn’t necessarily cheating. They may be using assistive technology in much the same way another student might use spell-check or a calculator.

Call to Action

My review of existing research showed something troubling: we have remarkably little data about how neurodivergent students experience academic integrity policies. The studies that exist are small, limited to English-speaking countries, and often overlook the voices of neurodivergent individuals themselves.

We need larger-scale research, global perspectives, and most importantly, we need neurodivergent students to be co-researchers and co-authors in work about them. “Nothing about us without us” is not just a slogan, but a call to action for creating inclusive academic environments.

Key Messages

Academic integrity should support learning, not create additional barriers for students who already face challenges. By reimagining our approaches through a lens of neurodiversity and inclusion, we can create educational environments where all students can thrive while maintaining academic standards.

Academic integrity includes and extends beyond student conduct; it means that everyone in the learning system acts with integrity to support student learning. Ultimately, there can be no integrity without equity.

Read the whole article here:
Eaton, S. E. (2025). Neurodiversity and academic integrity: Toward epistemic plurality in a postplagiarism era. Teaching in Higher Educationhttps://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2025.2583456

______________

Share this post: Breaking Barriers: Academic Integrity and Neurodiversity – https://drsaraheaton.com/2025/11/20/breaking-barriers-academic-integrity-and-neurodiversity/

Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, is a Professor and Research Chair in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of my employer.


AI Use and Ethics Among Jordanian University Students

November 19, 2025

885 university students in Jordan “generally viewed AI use for tasks such as translation, literature reviews, and exam preparation as ethically acceptable, whereas using AI to cheat or fully complete assignments was widely regarded as unacceptable.”

Check out the latest article in the International Journal for Educational Integrity by Marwa M. Alnsour, Hamzeh Almomani, Latifa Qouzah, Mohammad Q.M. Momani, Rasha A. Alamoush & Mahmoud K. AL-Omiri, “Artificial intelligence usage and ethical concerns among Jordanian University students: a cross-sectional study“.

Screenshot of the title page of a research article published in the International Journal for Educational Integrity. The article is titled “Artificial intelligence usage and ethical concerns among Jordanian University students: a cross-sectional study.” It is marked as “Research” and “Open Access” with a purple header. Authors listed are Marwa M. Alnsour, Hamzeh Almomani, Latifa Qouzah, Mohammad Q.M. Momani, Rasha A. Alamoush, and Mahmoud K. Al-Omiri. The DOI link and journal details appear at the top.

Synopsis

This cross-sectional study examined artificial intelligence usage patterns and ethical awareness among 885 higher education students across various disciplines. Findings showed how Jordanian university students engage with AI tools like ChatGPT in their academic work.

Key Findings

High AI Adoption: A substantial 78.1% of students reported using AI during their studies, with approximately half using it weekly or daily. ChatGPT emerged as the most popular tool (85.2%), primarily used for answering academic questions (53.9%) and completing assignments (46.4%).

Knowledge Gaps: Although 57.5% considered themselves moderately to very knowledgeable about AI, only 44% were familiar with ethical guidelines. Notably, 41.8% were completely unaware of principles guiding AI use, revealing a significant gap between usage and ethical understanding.

Disciplinary Differences: Science and engineering students demonstrated the highest usage rates and knowledge levels, while humanities students showed lower engagement but expressed the strongest interest in training. Health sciences students displayed greater ethical concerns, possibly reflecting the high-stakes nature of their field.

Ethical Perceptions: Students generally viewed AI use for translation, proofreading, literature reviews, and exam preparation as acceptable. However, 39.8% had witnessed unethical AI use, primarily involving cheating or total dependence on AI. Only 35% expressed concern about ethical implications, suggesting many may not fully recognize potential risks.

Demographic Patterns: Female students demonstrated higher ethical awareness than males. Older students and those in advanced programs (particularly PhD students) showed greater AI knowledge and ethical consciousness, with each additional year of age correlating with increased awareness scores.

Training Needs: More than three quarters (76.7%) of students expressed interest in professional training on ethical AI use, with 83.7% agreeing that guidance is necessary. However, 46.6% indicated their institutions had not provided adequate support (which should surprise exactly no one, since similar findings have been found in other studies.)

Implications

The author call for Jordanian universities to develop clear, discipline-specific ethical guidelines and structured training programs. The researchers recommend implementing mandatory online modules, discipline-tailored workshops, and establishing dedicated AI ethics bodies to promote responsible use. These findings underscore the broader challenge facing higher education globally: ensuring students can leverage AI’s benefits while maintaining academic integrity and developing critical thinking skills.

______________

Share this post: AI Use and Ethics Among Jordanian University Students https://drsaraheaton.com/2025/11/19/ai-use-and-ethics-among-jordanian-university-students/

Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, is a Professor and Research Chair in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of my employer.


A Brief History of Postplagiarism: Or, Why Fabrication is Not the New Flattery

October 13, 2025
Infographic titled "Postplagiarism: A Brief History" by Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, showing a timeline from 2021 to 2025 that highlights key milestones in the development of the concept of postplagiarism.
2021: Eaton introduces postplagiarism in her book Plagiarism in Higher Education, building on Rebecca Moore Howard’s work.
2023: Eaton explicitly defines postplagiarism in an article published in the International Journal for Educational Integrity.
2024: Eaton and Kumar launch www.postplagiarism.com, offering multilingual translations and open-access content.
2025: Rahul Kumar publishes the first empirical study on postplagiarism in the same journal, analyzing student reactions.

I am always excited to hear about new work that showcases postplagiarism. Imagine my dismay when I read a new article, published in an (allegedly) peer-reviewed journal, that foregrounded the tenets of postplagiarism, but was rife with fabricated sources, including references to work attributed to me, but that I never wrote.

I have opted not to ‘name and shame’ the authors. Anyone who is curious enough need only do an Internet search to find the offending article and those who wrote it.

Instead, I prefer to take a more productive approach. Here I provide a brief timeline of the development of postplagiarism as both a framework and a theory:

2021: Plagiarism in Higher Education: Tackling Tough Topics in Academic Integrity

The book begins with a history of plagiarism. Then, I discuss plagiarism in modern times. In the concluding chapter I contemplate the future of plagiarism. Building on the scholarship of Rebecca Moore Howard, I proposed that  the age of generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) could launch us into a post-plagiarism era in which human-AI hybrid writing becomes the norm.

2023: Expanding on the ideas first presented in the final chapter of my book, I wrote my first article dedicated to the topic: “Postplagiarism: Transdisciplinary ethics and integrity in the age of artificial intelligence and neurotechnology”, published in the International Journal for Educational Integrity.

2024: Dr. Rahul Kumar (Brock University, Canada) and I launch our website, http://www.postplagiarism.com. We provide open access resources free of charge. Thanks to the generosity of colleagues and friends who speak multipole language, we offer translations of the postplagiarism infographic in multiple languages.

Also, in this year, Rahul Kumar begins a study to test the tenets of postplagiarism.

2025: Rahul Kumar publishes the results of the first empirical article on the tenets of postplagiarism. His article, “Understanding PSE students’ reactions to the postplagiarism concept: a quantitative analysis” is published in the International Journal for Educational Integrity.

If you see references to our work on postplagiairsm as we have conceptualized it that pre-date our work, dig deeper to see if the work is real. There are now fabricated sources published on the Internet that do not — and never did — exist.

Imitation is flattery, as the saying goes. This quip has been used as a way to dismiss plagiarism concerns, as students learn to imitate great writers by quoting them without attribution. The saying digs deep into cultural and historical understandings that are beyond the scope of a blog post. What I can say is that in the postplagiarism era, fabrication is not the new flattery.

One of the tenets of postplagiarism is that humans can relinquish control over what they write to an AI, but we do not relinquish responsibility. The irony of seeing fabricated references about postplagiarism in fabricated is as absurd as it is puzzling. There is no need to fabricate references to post plagiarism, especially since we provide numerous free and open access to resources and research on the topic.

______________

Share this post: A Brief History of Postplagiarism: Or, Why Fabrication is Not the New Flattery – https://drsaraheaton.com/2025/10/13/a-brief-history-of-postplagiarism-or-why-fabrication-is-not-the-new-flattery/

Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, is a Professor and Research Chair in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of my employer.


When Good Ideas Meet Poor Execution: The Humane AI Pin and the Future of Language Translation

May 18, 2025

One of the tenets of postplgiarism is that artificial intelligence technologies will help us overcome language barriers and understand each other in countless languages (Eaton, 2023). 

We already have apps that translate text from photos taken on our phones. These apps help when travelling in countries where you don’t speak the language. Now we have applications extending this idea further into wearable technology.

Wearable technology has existed for years. We wear fitness gadgets on our wrists to track steps. AI technology will become more embedded into the software that drives these devices.

New wearable devices have emerged quickly, with varying levels of success. One example was introduced about a year after ChatGPT was released. The company was called Humane and the device was powered by OpenAI technology.

The Humane pin was wearable technology that included a square-shaped pin and a battery pack that attached magnetically to your shirt or jacket. It was marketed as enabling users to communicate in just about any language (Pierce, 2023). To Star Trek fans, the resemblance to a communicator badge was unmistakable.

The device retailed for $700 US and required a software subscription of $24 USD per month, which provided data coverage for real-time use through their proprietary software based on a Snapdragon processor (Pierce, 2023). The device only worked with the T-Mobile network in the United States. Since I live in Canada and T-Mobile isn’t available here, I never bought one.

Like others, I watched with enthusiasm, hoping the product would succeed so it could expand to other markets. Pre-order sales indicated huge potential for success. By late 2023, the Humane pin was heralded as “Silicon Valley’s ‘next big thing'” (Chokkattu, 2025a). (I can’t help but wonder if the resemblance to a Star Trek communicator badge was part of the allure.)

A person wearing a light blue dress shirt and a dark blue suit jacket. The shirt has a button labeled 'A7' on the collar. Attached to the collar is a small, square electronic device with a screen displaying an icon of a circular arrow, indicating a loading or refresh symbol. The background features an out-of-focus world map.

When tech enthusiasts received the product in 2024, the reviews were dismal. One reviewer gave it 4 out of 10 and called it a “party trick” (Chokkattu, 2024). (Ouch.) The Humane pin did not live up to its promises. Less than a year after its release, the device was dead. HP acquired the company and retired the product at the end of February 2025.

Tech writer Julian Chokkattu declared the device was e-waste and suggested it could be used as a paperweight or stored in a box in the attic. Chokkattu (2025b) says, “In 50 years, you’ll accidentally find it in the attic and then tell your grandkids how this little gadget was once—for a fleeting moment—supposed to be the next big thing.”

Learning from Failure: The Promise Remains

The failure of the Humane AI Pin does not invalidate the vision of AI-powered real-time translation. The device failed because of execution problems—poor battery life, overheating, an annoying projector interface, and limited functionality (Chokkattu, 2024). The core AI translation capabilities were among the features that actually worked.

Real-time translation represents one of the most compelling applications of generative AI. When the technology works seamlessly, it can transform human communication. The Humane pin showed us what not to do: create a standalone device with too many functions, none executed well.

The future of AI translation likely lies not in dedicated hardware but in integration with devices we already use. Our smartphones, earbuds, and smart glasses will become the vehicles for breaking down language barriers. The underlying AI models continue to improve rapidly, and the infrastructure for real-time translation grows more robust.

The Humane pin’s failure teaches us that good ideas require good execution. But we should not abandon the goal of using AI to help humans understand each other across languages. That goal remains as important as ever in our increasingly connected world. The technology will improve, the interfaces will become more intuitive, and the promise of the postplagiarism tenet—that language barriers will begin to disappear—will eventually be realized.

The Humane AI pin may be dead, but we should keep our hope alive that AI technology will help us overcome language barriers and provide new opportunities for communication.

Live long and prosper.

References

Chokkattu, J. (2024, April 11). Review: Humane Ai Pin. https://www.wired.com/review/humane-ai-pin/

Chokkattu, J. (2025a, February 22). The Humane Ai Pin Will Become E-Waste Next Week. Wired. https://www.wired.com/story/humane-ai-pin-will-become-e-waste-next-week/

Chokkattu, J. (2025b, February 28). What to Do With Your Defunct Humane Ai Pin. Wired. https://www.wired.com/story/what-to-do-with-your-humane-ai-pin/

Eaton, S. E. (2023). Postplagiarism: Transdisciplinary ethics and integrity in the age of artificial intelligence and neurotechnology. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 19(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-00144-1 

Pierce, D. (2023, November 9). Humane officially launches the AI Pin, its OpenAI-powered wearable. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/9/23953901/humane-ai-pin-launch-date-price-openai 

Note: This is a re-post of a piece originally posted on the Postplagiarism blog.

________________________

Share this post: When Good Ideas Meet Poor Execution: The Humane AI Pin and the Future of Language Translation – https://drsaraheaton.com/2025/05/18/when-good-ideas-meet-poor-execution-the-humane-ai-pin-and-the-future-of-language-translation/

Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, is a Professor and Research Chair in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of my employer.


UHaveIntegrity: A Strengths-Based Approach to Academic Integrity at the University of Calgary

May 9, 2025
AltText: The image shows a closed laptop with a honeycomb-patterned cover on a wooden surface. On top of the laptop, there is a rectangular sticker that reads "#UHaveIntegrity" with the "integrity" part in red text. The sticker also includes a small logo for the University of Calgary.

I have been doing a lot of travelling lately, giving talks on postplagiarsm and academic integrity in the age of generative artificial intelligence. Recently I was at the Calgary airport and ask I was going through the security screening process, I took out my laptop and placed it in the bin to be screened. A staff member pointed to my laptop and asked, “Are you a professor at the University of Calgary?!”

She recognized the laptop sticker. It says #UHaveIntegrity, which is the slogan for our academic integrity campaign at the University of Calgary.

I replied, “Yes! Yes, I am! Are you a student?” She replied yes, that she was a majoring in political science.

It was most inspiring moment I have ever had going through airport security!

Shifting the Conversation

Traditional academic integrity messaging often starts from a deficit model, emphasizing what students should not do and the consequences of misconduct. This approach inadvertently positions students as potential cheaters rather than developing adults.

The #UHaveIntegrity campaign reframes this conversation. We acknowledge and celebrate  students as whole human beings with existing ethical foundations. Our role as educators shifts from policing to supporting their continued development.

From Classroom to Career

Academic integrity transcends assignment submissions and exam protocols. It forms the foundation for ethical decision-making that extends beyond graduation. The research literature demonstrates that students who develop strong ethical frameworks during their education carry these principles into their professional lives (e.g., Guerrero-Dib et al., 2020; Tammeleht et al., 2022).

When we recognize that students already have integrity, we create space for authentic dialogue about ethical challenges rather than simply enforcing rules. Students become active participants in their ethical development rather than passive recipients of policy statements.

Supporting Student Success

The #UHaveIntegrity campaign represents our commitment to supporting student learning and academic success. By starting from a position of trust, we establish educational environments where:

  • Students feel empowered to ask questions about citation and collaboration
  • Errors become learning opportunities rather than character judgments
  • Discussions about integrity focus on growth rather than compliance

Moving Toward Postplagiarism

The #UHaveIntegrity campaign exemplifies what we call postplagiarism pedagogy—an educational approach that moves beyond rule-based instruction to consider how learning, writing, and collaboration can happen ethically in the age of generative AI.

Postplagiarism does not mean ignoring source citation or academic honesty. Instead, it acknowledges that students develop as writers in a world where information flows differently than in previous generations. ChatGPT was released almost two and half years ago, in November 2022. Here we are in 2025 and our historical norms around citing and referencing are inadequate in the age of remix, mashup, and co-creation with GenAI.

By starting from the premise that students have integrity, educators can engage in richer conversations about:

  • How knowledge creation occurs in digital environments
  • Why proper attribution matters in different contexts
  • How collaboration and individual work intersect in contemporary scholarship

In a small-scale study led by my colleague, Dr. Soroush Sabbaghan, we interviewed ten graduate students about their use of GenAI. They told us that they want and need guidance and support to use GenAI ethically. They also wanted agency to use GenAI tools to help them do their research. They wanted GenAI tools to help them amplify their own voices and discover new perspectives. Although our study was small, the findings are worthy of consideration. You can check out the article here if you are interested.

Moving Forward Together

The sticker on my laptop serves as a daily reminder of our responsibility as educators. It’s up to us educators to create learning environments that nurture the integrity students already possess, providing them with the knowledge and skills to navigate increasingly complex ethical landscapes.

The next time you encounter academic integrity challenges in your classroom, remember: your students have integrity. The question is not about instilling values they lack, but supporting their application of existing values to new academic contexts.

#UHaveIntegrity is more than a hashtag. It is our University of Calgary commitment to educational partnerships built on integrity and mutual respect.

University of Calgary Academic Integrity Week 2025

This year at the University of Calgary, we’ll mark Academic Integrity Week from October 14-17. Our themes are artificial intelligence and engaging students as partners in academic integrity. We are excited to engage with students on these important topics!

References

Guerrero-Dib, J. G., Portales, L., & Heredia-Escorza, Y. (2020). Impact of academic integrity on workplace ethical behaviour. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 16(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-020-0051-3 

Sabbaghan, S., & Eaton, S. E. (2025). Navigating the ethical frontier: Graduate students’ experiences with generative AI-mediated scholarship. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-024-00454-6 

Tammeleht, A., Löfström, E., & Rodríguez-Triana, j. M. J. (2022). Facilitating development of research ethics and integrity leadership competencies. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 18(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-022-00102-3

________________________

Share this post: #UHaveIntegrity: A Strengths-Based Approach to Academic Integrity – https://drsaraheaton.com/2025/05/09/uhaveintegrity-a-strengths-based-approach-to-academic-integrity-at-the-university-of-calgary/

Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, is a Professor and Research Chair in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of my employer.