Decriminalizing the Language of Academic Integrity

October 2, 2025

The first time I heard about decriminalizing the language and processes we use to address cases of plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct; I was riveted. It was at an academic integrity conference in Richmond, Virginia and the lead presenter was Dr. James Earl Orr, who presented together with students on how a developmental and supportive approach to academic misconduct case management can help lead students towards academic success while still holding them responsible for their behaviour.  James Earl Orr, writing together with Karita Orr, published an excellent article on using restorative practices to resolve academic integrity violations.

When I was writing the University of Calgary’s academic integrity Handbook for Academic Staff and Teaching Assistants, I took the opportunity to apply what I had learned from listening to Dr. Orr at conferences and reading his work by including a section on how to decriminalize the language we use to talk about academic misconduct.

Academic integrity violations are rarely criminal in nature and yet, much of the language we use when addressing plagiarism and academic cheating is legalistic, setting the stage for criminalizing student behaviour. One step towards taking a more learner-centred approach to misconduct is to decriminalize the language we use to talk about breaches of academic integrity.

Front cover: Student Academic Integrity Faculty Handbook
Front cover of the Student Academic Integrity Faculty Handbook, published by the Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning at the University of Calgary

The following is an excerpt from the University of Calgary’s academic integrity Handbook for Academic Staff and Teaching Assistants that provides practical guidance on how to do this:

“We know that words matter and the language we use is important. A full list of terms related to academic misconduct is available in our policy. It should be noted that the terms “academic integrity” and “academic misconduct” are not interchangeable.

Academic integrity is about acting ethically in teaching, learning and research contexts. We do not report, investigate or manage cases of academic integrity. We report, investigate and manage cases of academic misconduct.

Academic misconduct is what happens when individuals do not act with integrity. This is currently the language used in our policy and procedures. When speaking and writing about academic misconduct, we can use the terms “breaches of integrity or “violations of integrity” as synonyms for academic misconduct.

At the University of Calgary we take a proactive approach to academic integrity, including in the language we use and in keeping the focus on teaching, learning and fairness to students. In our conversations with students and others, it can be helpful to use the language of integrity that focuses on education and support” (Eaton, 2022, p. 13).

See the table below, which is also an expert from our handbook (with a few minor updates):

The language of academic integrity

Preferred
language
Language
to avoid 
Explanation
Hold responsible Guilt
Guilty

The words “guilt” and “guilty” do not appear anywhere in our
polices or procedures. We do not find students guilty of academic misconduct, but instead we hold them responsible for their
behaviours.
Sanctions
Consequence
Outcome
Punish
Punishment

When disciplinary actions are taken in response to academic
misconduct, we do not use the terms “punish” or “punishment”
in our institutional documents. We opt instead for “sanctions”,
“discipline,” “consequences” or “outcome” which can include educational responses depending on the misconduct.
Hearing Trial 
The University of Calgary does not conduct trials related to
academic misconduct.
In other countries, various forms of academic misconduct can be
considered an offense under the criminal code and students may
be required to attend a criminal trial. That is not the case at the
University of Calgary or anywhere in Canada.
In the case of an appeal, a hearing might occur. In rare cases, an appeal case might escalate to an externally reviewed case in court, but these proceedings are not administered by the university itself.

When I talk about taking a postplagiarism approach to academic integrity I am talking about disrupting historically adversarial and antagonistic approaches to misconduct that pit students against their teachers. It is time to move past crime-and-punishment approaches to student misconduct where students are the villains and teachers are the heroes. When we talk about postplagiarism we talk about social justice and student success as being intertwined, and we focus on students as stewards of the future, who will be best equipped for an increasingly complex world when they understand the importance of ethical decision-making, both in theory and in practice.

Postplagiarism does not mean anything goes, and nor does it mean that we turn a blind eye to misconduct. Postplagiarism is about finding socially just ways to address misconduct include relationally, restoration, and the preservation of dignity and human rights. When we decriminalize language related to student misconduct, we are taking a step towards dignity and   student success.

Our University of Calgary’s academic integrity Handbook for Academic Staff and Teaching Assistants is an open access handbook with a Creative Commons license. This means you can share and adapt the material, providing the original work is properly attributed.

If this is helpful to you, please share this with others.

References and Further Reading

Eaton, S. E. (2022). Student Academic Integrity: A Handbook for Academic Staff and Teaching Assistants. University of Calgary, Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning Guide Series. https://taylorinstitute.ucalgary.ca/resources/student-academic-integrity-handbook

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

Eaton, S. E. (2025). Global Trends in Education: Artificial Intelligence, Postplagiarism, and Future-focused Learning for 2025 and Beyond – 2024–2025 Werklund Distinguished Research Lecture. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 21(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-025-00187-6

Orr, J. E., & Hall, J. (2018). Student-led case adjudication: Promoting student learning through peer-to-peer engagement. 25th Annual International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI) Conference, Richmond, VA.

Orr, J. E., & Orr, K. (2023). Restoring honor and integrity through integrating restorative practices in academic integrity with student leaders. Journal of Academic Ethics, 21, 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-021-09437-x

Orr, J. E., & Orren, S. (2018, March 4). The Development & Implementation of a Campus Academic Integrity Education Program. 25th Annual International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI) Conference, Richmond, VA.

______________

Share this post: Decriminalizing the Language of Academic Integrity – https://drsaraheaton.com/2025/10/02/decriminalizing-the-language-of-academic-integrity/

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 Wraparound Approach to Academic Integrity: Centering Students in the Postplagiarism Era

May 7, 2025


I am trying out SSRN. I feel like this is something I should have known about long ago. Last year, one of the doctoral students whom I supervise, Myke Healy, posted a paper about academic integrity in secondary schools on SSRN. (It’s a really good ready, by the way.)

Then, a research team that I’m on posted our rapid review protocol pre-print on assessment, academic integrity, and artificial intelligence on SSRN. Myke is on our team and posted the paper on our behalf.

On my recent travels, I was listening to Malcolm Gladwell’s podcast, Revisionist History. In one of episodes (I forget which one exactly), Gladwell raves about SSRN. I mean, gushes.

I thought to myself, “Well, it seems the universe is asking me to pay attention to SSRN.” So, I did.

I got working on a paper that had been sort of lingering for a couple of years. (Yes, a couple of years. Good work takes time!) I unpacked the ideas, developed the argument, referenced people whose contributions influenced and shaped my thinking and got it formatted.

So, I’ve now posted my first paper on SSRN:
Eaton, S. E. (2025). A Wraparound Approach to Academic Integrity: Centering Students in the Postplagiarism Era (April 20, 2025). SSRN. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5223911

I’m not really sure what happens next. There doesn’t really seem to be a place for folks to comment on the paper, though you can download it and add it to your library. I guess the next step is to submit it to a journal and go from there.

If you use SSRN and have tips on how to make the most of it, feel free to share. I’m learning as I go and I’m all ears.

________________________

Share this post: A Wraparound Approach to Academic Integrity: Centering Students in the Postplagiarism Era – https://drsaraheaton.com/2025/05/07/a-wraparound-approach-to-academic-integrity-centering-students-in-the-postplagiarism-era/

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.


Action Research for Graduate Program Improvements: A Response to Curriculum Mapping and Review

May 1, 2018

CJHE copy.jpgI’m excited to share news with you about a new article that’s just been released with co-authors Michele Jacobsen, Barb Brown, Marlon Simmons and Mairi McDermott. Here’s an overview:

Abstract

There is a global trend toward improving programs and student experiences in higher education through curriculum review and mapping of degree programs. This paper describes an action research approach to program improvement for a course-based MEd degree. The driver for continual program improvement came from actions and recommendations that arose from an institutionally mandated, year-long, faculty led curriculum review of professional graduate programs in education. Study findings reveal instructors’ perceptions about how they enacted the recommendations for program improvement, including

  1. developing a visual conceptualization of the program;
  2. improved connections between the courses;
  3. articulation of coherence in goals and expectations for students and instructors;
  4. an increased focus on action research;
  5. increased ethics support and scaffolding for students; and
  6. the fostering of communities of practice.

Study findings highlight strengths of the current program and course designs, action items, and research needed for continual program improvement.

___________________
This article is the result of a two-year project with our amazing team. It has been incredible to learn with and from them as we embarked on this journey together. We are eager to share what we learned about how to improve students’ experience in our Master of Education program.

Check out the entire article in the Canadian Journal of Higher Education.

______________________________________________________

Share or Tweet this: Action Research for Graduate Program Improvements: A Response to Curriculum Mapping and Review

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.

Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the Werklund School of Education or the University of Calgary.