Academic Integrity in the Classroom and Professional Activities

subduedjourneyΛογισμικό & κατασκευή λογ/κού

28 Οκτ 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 10 μήνες)

85 εμφανίσεις

ACADEMIC
INTEGRITY

in the classroom and

in professional activities

Paul Craig

Linette

Koren

Academic Integrity in the Classroom and in Professional Activities

Date:
Thursday, May 26th

Time:
10:00AM
-

12:00PM (Running Time: 2 hours)

Location:
Salon B


Presenters:

Paul Craig,
Linette Koren

Personal integrity is a core essential in the academic community. Our existence is based on
the trust of parents who send their children to RIT, as well as the trust of our partners (such
as Rochester General Hospital and federal funding agencies) who support our professional
efforts.



The demand for excellence by students and faculty also creates pressure to
produce, which can lead to a temptation to take shortcuts in our 'cut
-
and
-
paste' world. To
grow as an institution, RIT must maintain the highest standards of academic integrity, which
means we need to communicate those standards among students and faculty.



We will
explore current norms for academic integrity as defined by the National Academy of Science
and consider how to apply those standards in our learning and teaching.



ACTION for
Attendees:

Please bring a printed copy of two or three class syllabi so that we can look at
them together in a pair
-
share setting toward the end of our session.

SCHEDULE

10
:00

NSF policies on misconduct in research (Paul)

10
:15

Case students on research misconduct (interactive)

10
:30

Presentation on using EndNote Web (
Linette
)

10
:50

High tech cheating (
Linette
)

11
:20

Questions/comments on high tech cheating (interactive)

11
:30

Preparing an effective syllabus designed to limit cheating (Paul)

11
:40

Modifying your own syllabi to reflect these approaches
(Interactive)

NSF POLICIES ON RESEARCH
MISCONDUCT


NSF Office of
Inspector General


(
http://www.nsf.gov/oig/
misconscieng.jsp
)


Regulations can
be found at 45 CFR 689

(
http://www.nsf.gov/oig/
misconscieng.jsp
)

TYPES OF MISCONDUCT


Fabrication


Falsification


Plagiarism


Does not include honest error or differences of
opinion

45 CFR Part 689


Research Misconduct

FABRICATION

making up
data or
results and recording
or
reporting them

45 CFR Part 689


Research Misconduct

FALSIFICATION

manipulating research
materials,
equipment, or processes
, or
changing or
omitting data
or results
such that the
research is
not accurately
represented in
the
research
recordmaking

up data or
results and recording or reporting them

45 CFR Part 689


Research Misconduct

PLAGIARISM

the
appropriation of
another person’s
ideas, processes
, results
or words
without
giving appropriate
credit

45 CFR Part 689


Research Misconduct

TURNITIN.COM


Papers that have been submitted


Papers pulled from the Internet


Papers from paper mills


An archived copy of the Internet


Books, newspapers and journals


Proprietary database

TURNITIN.COM

DOES NOT FIND


Grant proposals that have been submitted to NSF,
NIH, DOE or similar sources


These organizations keep their own proprietary
databases


NSF
Fastlane

gives you access to abstracts only

NSF INVESTIGATION OF RESEARCH
MISCONDUCT


Inquiry


a fact
-
finding mission


Investigation
-

a
formal development
, examination
and evaluation of
a factual
record to determine
whether
research misconduct
has taken place,
to
assess
its extent and consequences,
and to
evaluate
appropriate action.



45 CFR Part 689


Research Misconduct

RESEARCH MISCONDUCT


A departure from normal practices


Intentional


Knowing


Reckless



45 CFR Part 689


Research Misconduct

NSF ACTIONS. GROUP I


A letter of reprimand


Special approvals required for submission


Additional institutional oversight




45 CFR Part 689


Research Misconduct

NSF ACTIONS. GROUP II


Suspension of an active award


Special reviews of all requests for funding from the
individual
or the institution


A correction to the research record




45 CFR Part 689


Research Misconduct

NSF ACTIONS. GROUP III


Termination of an active award


Prohibit the individual from reviewing grants,
advising or consulting on grants for a specified of
time


Debar or suspend the individual
or the
institution

for a specified period of time




45 CFR Part 689


Research Misconduct

BASIS FOR NSF ACTIONS


Seriousness of the offense


The degree to which the
misconduct was
knowing,
intentional,
or reckless


An isolated incident or part of a pattern


Impact on the research record, subjects, other
researchers, institutions or the public welfare


Other relevant actions




45 CFR Part 689


Research Misconduct

CASE STUDY #1

A graduate student, working on a project that involves extensive DNA sequencing,
provides his mentor with a computer generated sequence of a gene. The student tells
his mentor that the sequence determination has involved complete analysis of both
strands of the DNA molecule. Over the next several months, it is determined that not
all of the sequence data reflects analysis of both DNA strands. Indeed, follow
-
up work
by a postdoctoral in the laboratory reveals several mistakes in the sequence. The
student in question admits to misleading his mentor and, following appropriate
investigation, is convicted of scientific misconduct and dismissed from the graduate
program. The mentor realizes that the student presented some of the erroneous data at
a regional scientific meeting. Proceedings of the meeting were not published but
abstracts of all of the works presented were distributed to approximately 100 meeting
participants. In addition the student, with the mentor's permission, sent the sequence by
electronic mail to three other laboratories. What, if any, responsibility does the faculty
mentor have with regard to disclosing the above developments? What, if anything should
the mentor do about the prematurely released data? Under these circumstances, what
is the potential for harm coming from this incident of scientific fraud? Who might be
harmed?

http://research
-
ethics.net
/topics/research
-
misconduct/#discussion

CASE STUDY #2

You are an editor for the Journal of Novel Diagnostics. Your recently
handled a manuscript that compared two new diagnostic tests for
detection of a genetic defect. Test 1 is marketed by
Genetix
, Inc. and test 2
is marketed by Probes Unlimited. The manuscript concludes that test 1 is
superior in terms of reliability and accuracy. Following peer review and
minor revision, you accept the paper and it appears in print. Shortly after
publication, you receive a letter from the Vice President for Research at
Probes Unlimited. She claims that examination of the methods section of
the paper reveals that the authors used test 2 in a manner that significantly
deviates from the instructions provided by Probes Unlimited. Moreover,
she claims that the senior author on the paper has previously received
research grants from
Genetix
, Inc. Is this "sloppy science" or scientific
fraud. What course of action do you take?

http://research
-
ethics.net
/topics/research
-
misconduct/#discussion

CASE STUDY #3

Dr. Hickory submits a grant application to a federal funding agency. When he receives
the summary statement review of the grant application, he finds that it has been
criticized on several grounds and that it has received a score which will prevent the
application from being funded. He decides to do more experiments to generate
preliminary information and indefinitely postpones resubmitting the grant application.
Approximately 18 months later,
Dr

Hickory is asked to serve as an ad hoc reviewer for
a research grant submitted to a private foundation. The topical area of the grant is
closely aligned with Dr. Hickory's area of expertise. It turns out that the principal
investigator of this application, Dr. Poplar, was a member of the panel that previously
reviewed Hickory's above
-
referenced grant. In reading the introductory section of the
grant application, Dr. Hickory realizes that the structure and content of this section is
strikingly similar to his previously submitted unfunded grant application. In fact there are
several areas of the introduction where wording is virtually identical to his initial grant
application. Moreover, several of the experiments proposed in the application to the
private foundation are quite similar (but not identical) to the ones he had previously
proposed. Dr. Hickory wonders what he can and should do about this situation. He
comes to you for advice. What advice do you give him?

http://research
-
ethics.net
/topics/research
-
misconduct/#discussion

OTHER RESOURCES

Organization

Link

NIH Office of Research Integrity

http://
ori.hhs.gov
/

U.S.

Dept. of Education

http://www2.ed.gov/legislation/
FedRegister
/ot
her/2005
-
4/110205d.html

U.S. Dept.

of Energy

http://
management.energy.gov
/
policy_guidance
/626.htm

U.C. Berkeley

http://
vcresearch.berkeley.edu
/research
-
policies/research
-
compliance/research
-
misconduct

ENDNOTE

WEB


EndNote

Web is a citation management program that allows you to
collect, organize, format, and share your references


Web
-
based for access wherever you are


References can be imported directly from library databases or added
manually


Citation style is easily changed


In
-
text citations are also formatted if using MS Word (requires plug
-
in)


http://infoguides.rit.edu/endnoteweb


HIGH TECH CHEATING


Common Sense Media video


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z98zgsatwAw


WHAT IS HIGH TECH CHEATING?


Cheating using gadgets and technologies such as cell phones,
MP3 players, calculators, and other PDA devices


Using web sites that offer the means to cheat (paper mills,
textbook problem solutions, test sharing sites)


Using technology (such as YouTube videos) to learn about and
then implement low tech solutions (soda bottles, t
-
shirts, baseball
caps, pens)


DO TEENS CONSIDER THIS CHEATING?


Searching the Internet to find a teacher’s manual, or the publisher’s
solutions to problems from a text you are using? (N=1,013)



Yes: Serious Offense: 36%


Yes: Minor Offense: 28%


No, but because not permitted: 20%


Just helping self or friend: 16%


IS THIS CHEATING?


Take pictures of quiz/test questions to send to friends before they take
the quiz/test? (N=1,013)



Yes, serious offense: 51%


Yes, minor offense: 26%


No, but not permitted: 13%


Just helping self/friend: 11%

PAPER MILL SITES


Oppapers.com


Allfreeessays.com


Term Papers Lab


WriteMyEssay.com


Cheathouse.com


TEXTBOOK SOLUTIONS


Cramster.com


Course Hero


Student Testimonials:


I like that I ask questions and get help in a short time.


Nothing but straight A's thanks to
Cramster
.


Man I love
Cramster
. Step by step solutions rock my world!


Cramster

does a better job explaining than my professor!


If
Cramster

ruled the world, all problems would be solved


TEST SITES


Koofers.com


VIDEOS

YouTube videos are a high tech



means to show students

how to cheat in high tech

and low tech ways


Soda bottles


T
-
shirts







Pens



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91lQK5SCzlQ


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZg_G8djiHY&feature=related


THE TECHNOLOGIES


Smart phones have Internet access, voice recording and playback
options,
notetaking

apps, cameras, and text messaging capabilities


MP3 players play more than music; they can have audio files of student
recorded data as well as lists


Calculators are programmable and can hold text, formulas, and more
(TIs are used for SATs and AP exams)


Wireless earphone and microphones allow for whispering questions
and answers


SMART PHONES


have Internet access





voice recording and playback options


note taking apps


cameras


text messaging capabilities




MP3 PLAYERS


Can store:


audio files


Data





SCIENTIFIC/GRAPHING CALCULATORS


Can hold:


Text


Formulas





WIRELESS EARPHONES AND
MICROPHONES


Can allow for:

Whispering of answers



PREVENTING HIGH TECH CHEATING


Ethics


Adopt or enforce an honor code


Discuss all types of academic dishonesty in class


State your policies clearly in syllabus


PREVENTING HIGH TECH CHEATING


Best practices


Require students show their work in exams; especially math and physics (offer
partial credit for this)



Don’t give exams that require memorization which leads to the creation of “cheat
sheets”



Don’t reuse exams


these end up in test bank web sites


PREVENTING HIGH TECH CHEATING


Technological methods


Use high
-
tech detection methods such as Turnitin.com


Limit what is allowed to enter the exam room



no cell phones, iPods, PDAs, backpacks, etc.


Turn off the wireless network in your classroom


PREVENTING HIGH TECH CHEATING


Low tech methods


Consider a dress code


no baseball caps, zippered
hoodies


Establish a no food/drink policy


no candy, gum, soda


Share what’s happening in your classroom with others


EFFECTIVE SYLLABUS DESIGN


Provide information


State policies clearly


Instruct about academic integrity policies and consequences


PROVIDING INFORMATION


Course information


Instructor information


Textbook and other reading materials


Course description and objectives


Calendar and attendance policies


Grading

Altman & Cashin, 1992


POLICIES


Excused and unexcused absences


Accessibility and academic
accomodations


American with disabilities act


Academic Integrity Issues

UNC
-
Chapel Hill

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY


Define plagiarism


RIT library resources


Duplicate submission


Rules
of collaboration


when is it okay or encouraged?


Acceptable and unacceptable resources


can the students
use old exams when they are completing a take
-
home
exam?


Consequences


university policies

UNC
-
Chapel Hill

AVOIDING PLAGIARISM


Teach and demonstrate proper citations in the classroom


Provide resources for citation software such as Endnote Web


Written assignments


Limited topics


Require a proposal, outline and rough draft

over the course of the term


Regularly reinforce RIT’s policies on plagiarism

Craig,
Federici

& Buehler

LINKS


University
of
Delaware Center for Teaching and
Learning
http
://cte.udel.edu/instructional
-
topics/designing
-
courses/designing
-
learning
-
centered
-
syllabus.html


Cornell
Center for Teaching
Excellence
http
://www.cte.cornell.edu/faculty/materials/
CourseMaterials
Checklist.pdf



University of Minnesota Center for Teaching
and Learning

http://www1.umn.edu/ohr/teachlearn/tutorials/syllabus/resources/checkl
ist/
index.html



The Teaching Center at Washington University in St.
Louis

http://teachingcenter.wustl.edu/preparing
-
syllabus
-
checklist




LINKS


HB Altman, WE
Cashin
.
IDEA Paper No. 27, Center for Faculty
Evaluation and
Development. A
Divison

of Continuing Education, Kansas
State
University. September
, 1992.
http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/tea
chtip/
writesyl.htm



Honor in the syllabus. UNC
-
Chapel Hill.
http://honor.unc.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=
106&Itemid=
149



PA Craig, E
Federici
, MA Buehler. Instructing Students in Academic
Integrity.
Journal of College Science Teaching

40
: 50
-
55 (2010)