Download
9 000 freshmen one common foundation academic integrity n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
9,000 Freshmen, One Common Foundation: Academic Integrity PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
9,000 Freshmen, One Common Foundation: Academic Integrity

9,000 Freshmen, One Common Foundation: Academic Integrity

173 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

9,000 Freshmen, One Common Foundation: Academic Integrity

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. 9,000 Freshmen, One Common Foundation: Academic Integrity Joe Buenker, Leslee Shell & Julie Tharp LOEX 36th National Conference

  2. Academic Integrity @ ASU • Spring/Summer 2007: ASU Libraries developed an academic integrity module for the new ASU 101 course • ASU 101 • freshman-level • mandatory course

  3. ASU Campuses • 4 campuses • 8 libraries • 60,000+ students

  4. “One University in Many Places” • Increasingly students take courses on two or more campuses over ASU career • Single university accreditation • Single university governance/Senate • Increased collaboration

  5. Unified Curriculum

  6. ASU 101 vs. FYE University Success Course FYE: • Coordinated by University Academic Success Program • Taught by graduate students • Not required for all freshmen • Colleges not participating have little or no awareness of course content ASU 101: • Coordinated by the University Provost’s Office • Taught by administrators, faculty and advisors • Required of 9,000+ freshmen • All colleges and departments participate

  7. How We Got Involved • Task force: curriculum planning • Model syllabus • Expert teams • Instructional design support

  8. Academic Integrity Expert Team • 2 librarians from Tempe campus • 3 librarians from West campus • 1 instructional designer • 2 month timeline • Weekly meetings

  9. Structure of ASU 101 • Hybrid format • 5 week course • 1.5 hours/week in-class time • Administered through Blackboard

  10. ASU 101: Module Standards • For continuity, each module must have: • Introductory activity that facilitates learning • “Overview” • PowerPoint and Macromedia Breeze narration • Discussion board questions • Assessment / quiz

  11. Academic Integrity Issues in Higher Education • Not a new phenomenon • Different findings regarding prevalence and frequency • Not just plagiarism • Large body of literature • Relies on self-reported behavior

  12. Large-Scale Surveying • Prof. Donald McCabe of Rutgers • Center for Academic Integrity (Clemson U) • 80,000+ students and 12,000+ faculty • 83 American and Canadian institutions (McCabe, Trevino and Butterfield, 2001)

  13. Academic Dishonesty Over Time 1963 1993 • Serious test cheating 39% 64% • Serious cheating on 65% 66% written work • All cheating 75% 82% (McCabe, Trevino and Butterfield, 2001)

  14. Factors at Play • Students: • behaviors determines frequency of misconduct • Faculty: • behaviors can deter misconduct (use of plagiarism detection tools, use of proctors during exams, etc.) • Institutional Culture: • Student Code of Conduct • Honor Code (Hard, Conway and Moran 2006)

  15. Why Do Students Cheat? • Ignorance • Not invested in learning • Situational ethics • Low risk of detection (Auer and Kupar, 2001)

  16. What Students Say • Time pressures (stress) • Ease of cut-and-paste plagiarism • Low risk of detection • Dislike for the class or professor (Lester and Diekhoff, 2002) • Peer behavior (situational ethics) (McCabe, Trevino and Butterfield, 2001)

  17. Who Cheats? • High school students cheat at higher rate. • Majority of high school cheater continue to cheat in college. • Cheating is more widespread at larger university campuses. • High cheating rates among sororities / fraternities and college athletics. (Miller, Murdock, Anderman and Poindexter 2007)

  18. Major U.S. Plagiarism Studies I • College students and print sources 1964 = 43% (Bowers) 2003 = 40% (Hansen)

  19. Major U.S. Plagiarism Studies II • High school students and print sources 1985 (California) = 51% 1989 (Georgia) = 76% • Internet Plagiarism 2001 (high school) = 52% 2003 (college) = 38% (Hansen 2003)

  20. Blackboard Module

  21. Narrated PowerPoint (Breeze) • https://www.asu.edu/courses/asu101/breeze/academic_integrity_intro/index.htm

  22. Academic Honesty / Dishonesty Survey • ACTIVITY: Decide if the behaviors described in the scenarios are honest or dishonest

  23. Secondary Learning Objective: Avoiding Plagiarism • Avoiding plagiarism handout • Test your understanding • Discussion

  24. ASU 101 Evaluations: W.P. Carey College of Business • Discovering Campus Resources and Academic Advising: Very, Somewhat Helpful – 83% Not Helpful – 16% No Response – 1% • Academic Success / Integrity: Very, Somewhat Helpful -79% Not Helpful – 20% No Response -1% • Getting Involved on Campus: Very, Somewhat Helpful – 77% Not Helpful – 22% No Response – 1% • Managing Time Effectively, Study Skills: Very, Somewhat Helpful – 73% Not Helpful – 22% No Response – 5% • Stress Management: Very, Somewhat Helpful – 66% Not Helpful – 27% No Response – 7%

  25. Next Steps: Library Module 2 for ASU 101 • 3 librarians and 1 instructional designer currently developing a second module • Focus of Module: • Locations, services and collections of ASU Libraries • Relevance and importance of academic libraries in the Google Era

  26. References I • Auer, N.J. & Kupar, E.M. (2001). Mouse click plagiarism: The role of technology in combating plagiarism and the librarian’s role in combating it. Library Trends, 49(3): 415-432. • Hansen, B. (2003). Combating plagiarism. CQ Researcher, 13(2): 773-796. • Hard, S.F., Conway, J.M., & Moran, A.C. (2006). Faculty and student beliefs about the frequency of student academic misconduct. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(6): 1058-1080. • Lester, M.C. & Diekhoff, G.M. (2002). A comparison of traditional and Internet cheaters. Journal of College Student Development, 43(6): 906-911.

  27. References II • McCabe, D.L., Trevino, L.K., & Butterfield, K.D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics and Behavior, 11(3): 219-232. • Miller, A.D., Murdock, T.B., Anderman, E.M. and Poindexter, A.L. (2007). Who are all these cheaters? Characteristics of academically dishonest students (pp. 9-32). In Anderman and Murdock.

  28. Recommended Sources • Anderman, E.M., & Murdock, T.B. (eds.). (2007). Psychology of academic cheating. Amsterdam; Boston: Elsevier Academic Press. http://www.elsevierdirect.com/product.jsp?isbn=9780123725417 • ASU Libraries. Academic integrity & plagiarism. http://library.west.asu.edu/refguides/integrity/ • The Center for Academic Integrity, Rutland Institute for Ethics, Clemson University. http://www.academicintegrity.org/ • Stern, L. (2007). What every student should know about avoiding plagiarism. New York: Pearson/Longman. http://www.pearsonhighered.com/educator/academic/product/0,,0321446895,00%2ben-USS_01DBC.html

  29. Questions?