Group work Assessment at stake?

1. Group workAssessment at stake? Release was granted by the students for use of the images i

2. Purpose of case study • Target audience:Students, lecturers and academic integrity decision makers • Key issue:Academic integrity as a problem of taking responsibility for honest scholarship. • Purpose:To build awareness of (student) responsibilities for academic integrity and how to assist students to achieve their best learning outcomes. • Materials: Full case scenario; University policy; Readings Academic Integrity Standards Project 2010-2012

3. Our research • Interviews with 28 senior academic integrity stakeholders at 6 Australian universities No. 1 recommendation for good practice: • Provide appropriate and on-going professional development for all staff in relation to academic integrity policy and process. Academic Integrity Standards Project 2010-2012

4. Case Study: Mimi’s group • Meetings for the group task have been infrequent • Close to the deadline and Mimi’s contribution is a copy and paste • The other 4 students request that they not be penalized because of Mimi’s poor work • They are told to return to their ‘working in a team guidelines’ Academic Integrity Standards Project 2010-2012

5. Working in a team is an important competency • They feel this is unfair • Despite a hasty rewrite of Mimi’s text, this section receives low marks. • Responding to complaints, the subject coordinator reviews the case. Academic Integrity Standards Project 2010-2012

6. Mimi’s story • “I am not a cheater!” • Her work was not cheating because she had understood the texts and had found the best answers. • Excluded by the group. • According to her, they lacked integrity because they did not follow the team guidelines. Academic Integrity Standards Project 2010-2012

7. Questions for student discussion • What do you predict happened as a result of the meeting between the student copyist and the coordinator? • What does academic integrity mean to you? • How does your policy define academic integrity? • List student responsibilities to support academic integrity. • What does your university policy say about responsibilities for academic integrity? • Are the students in the group dealing with academic misconduct or poor scholarship? • Re-tell this case so that learning opportunities for all the students are maximised, in a context where academic integrity is fostered. • Would you like to know what happened following the meeting with the coordinator? Academic Integrity Standards Project 2010-2012

8. Questions for staff discussion • What should happen to the student copyist? • What does academic integrity mean to you? • How does your policy define academic integrity? • List staff responsibilities to support academic integrity and ensure proper assessment takes place. • What does your university policy say about responsibilities for academic integrity? • Discuss the role of the tutor and / or coordinator in this case. • What are the issues of assessment in group work? • Re-tell this case so that learning opportunities for all the students are maximised, in a context where academic integrity is fostered. • Would you like to know what happened following the meeting with the coordinator? Academic Integrity Standards Project 2010-2012

9. Outcomes The group mark was reassessed without taking into account Mimi’s section. Mimi was sent to the Academic Language and Learning Centre for advice about proper acknowledgement and was advised to have regular consultations for help with her academic writing. The university instituted an introduction to academic integrity principles, mandatory for commencing students. The subject coordinator asked the Teaching and Learning staff to work with her on the curriculum so that assessment tasks matched the learning activities. Further complaints had been received from local and international students about the difficulties of trying to work together in a group. This led to a ‘working with culturally and linguistically diverse students’ workshop for staff. A peer marking system was trialed with mixed results. Academic Integrity Standards Project 2010-2012

10. Useful references Baurain, B (2011). Cross-cultural moral explorations in plagiarism. In Phan Le Ha & B. Baurain (Eds.) Voices, Identities, Negotiations, and Conflicts: Writing Academic English Across Cultures. Bradford, UK: Emerald. Bretag, T. (2008) Responding to plagiarism: The need to engage with students’ ‘real lives’, Refereed paper presented at the ATN Assessment Conference: Engaging students in assessment, University of South Australia, 20-21 November. Bretag, T., Mahmud, S., East, J., Green, M., James, C., McGowan, U., Partridge, L., Walker, R. & Wallace, M. (2011). Academic Integrity Standards: A Preliminary Analysis of the Academic Integrity Policies at Australian Universities, Australian Universities Quality Forum, 29 June-1 July, Melbourne, Australia. Bretag, T., Mahmud, S., Wallace, M., Walker, R., James, C., Green, M., East, J., McGowan, U. & Partridge, L. (2011). Core elements of exemplary academic integrity policy in Australian higher education, International Journal for Educational Integrity, Vol 7(2), pp. 3-12, available online: http://www.ojs.unisa.edu.au/index.php/IJEI/article/viewFile/759/574 Devlin, M., & Gray, K. (1995). In their own words: A qualitative study of the reasons Australian university students plagiarize. Higher Education Research & Development, 26(2), 181-182. Academic Integrity Standards Project 2010-2012

11. For further information, references and resources from the Academic Integrity Standards Project, please go to: http://www.aisp.apfei.edu.au Support for this project/activity has been provided by the Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching. The views in this project do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Australia License. Academic Integrity Standards Project 2010-2012