Coordinating for Academic Integrity at the Program Level

Academic integrity practice and research has most often looked at action either at the individual instructor level (e.g., classroom strategies) or at the institutional level (e.g., policies). Scholars have called for attention to disciplinary patterns (Bretag et al, 2019; Rogerson et al, 2022) and for increased emphasis on the meso or middle levels of higher education institutions to influence change (Kenny & Eaton, 2022). A coordinated approach at the program level has the potential to better contextualize the values of academic integrity for students in a disciplinary or professional community, build the specific skills students need to avoid forms of academic misconduct of particular concern, and incorporate assessment approaches that translate to students' futures. A framework for assessing multiple approaches will be presented, along with potential limits and benefits of each approach. Participants will have an opportunity to situate their own examples and explore those of others. Participants can expect they will leave the session able to (1) articulate the importance of coordinating for academic integrity at the level of the program, and (2) identify a coordinating approach that they can try or advocate for in their own context

Senior education students' understandings of academic honesty and dishonesty

Academic dishonesty has been widely reported to be a prevalent occurrence among university students and yet little research has been done to explore, in depth, the meanings the phenomenon holds for students. In response to this gap in research, the purpose of this study was to discover senior Education students’ understandings of academic honesty and dishonesty. A naturalistic research design was employed and the data were the verbatim discussions of five groups of senior Education degree program students from two western Canadian universities. Findings were focused on the substantive, structural, and future applicability in students’ understandings. Essential elements of academic dishonesty appearing in students’ understandings were existence of rules, intent to break those rules, and resulting unearned grade advantages. These elements were extrapolated to serve as a baseline definition of academic dishonesty and as principles of culpability. Numerous situational considerations were volunteered by students that described enticements, deterrents, and beliefs about likelihoods associated with academic honesty and dishonesty. These considerations served as structures for the contemplation of risk that appeared prevalent in students’ understandings. Future applicability in students’ understandings was centred on expectations for teaching and professionalism. As teachers, students expected to need to respond to and prevent academic dishonesty. When working in a professional environment, they expected little need to acknowledge sources and a more collaborative climate overall that, for them, meant concerns for academic dishonesty had less relevance. Students’ expectations suggested rules for teaching and they contrasted the environments experienced as students with those anticipated as teachers. The findings of this study were integrated to suggest students’ vision of a system for academic honesty that bears some similarity to a moral system. Also extrapolated were four metaphors for the roles of students in the university related to concerns for academic dishonesty: student as subject, student as moral agent, student as trainee, and student as competitor. Implications for higher education policy development and communication were based on students’ focus on grades and students’ sense of subculture for academic honesty and dishonesty. Students’ deference to the authority of the professor suggested implications for instructional practice. A lack of monitoring of students’ and professors’ behaviours related to academic honesty and dishonesty had implications for administrative practice in terms of fostering norms for academic integrity. A model for discernment of the student voice is proposed for student concerns appearing to be most freely and richly explored in a discussion among students. Recommendations for approaches to future research of this nature and for research questions and student populations bring the dissertation to a close

Enhance, Extend, Empower: Understanding Faculty Use of E-Learning Technologies

[EN] There has been scant nation-wide assessment of institutional use of learning technology in Canada (Grant, 2016) and where assessment has been done of student access to e-resources, considerable variability within and across institutions has been reported (Kaznowska, Rogers, & Usher, 2011). With a broad goal of improved and increased use of learning technologies, one university wanted to explore the use of e-learning technologies across campus. The purpose of this study was to identify instructors' needs and aspirations with respect to how learning technologies at the university could be designed, implemented, and supported. The 3E framework of Enhance, Extend, Empower, proposed by Smyth, Burce, Fotheringham, & Mainka (2011), was useful in examining the underlying purposes of using e-learning technologies. For this qualitative study, the research team engaged 32 instructors in individual interviews or in focus groups to discuss how they currently use e-learning technologies, how they hope to advance their uses of these technologies, and their perceived barriers or enablers to implementation. The study has implications for practice and policy at postsecondary institutions; additionally, this study suggests possibilities for further research into the scholarship of teaching and learning in the context of e-learning technologies.Squires, V.; Turner, N.; Bassendowski, S.; Wilson, J.; Bens, S. (2017). Enhance, Extend, Empower: Understanding Faculty Use of E-Learning Technologies. En Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Higher Education Advances. Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València. 1033-1043. https://doi.org/10.4995/HEAD17.2017.55081033104

Panel: Reflections on academic integrity during remote learning

The pivot to remote teaching and learning in March 2020 as a result of COVID-19 presented numerous challenges for students, faculty, and administrators across higher education in Manitoba, in particular, those related to academic integrity and academic misconduct. Panelists with diverse roles in higher education share their experiences, lessons learned, and successes from the past year. This session highlights the importance of continued conversations, problem solving, and implementation of new solutions for fostering academic integrity, building communities with shared values and priorities, and improving policies and procedures.

Deciphering colorectal cancer genetics through multi-omic analysis of 100,204 cases and 154,587 controls of European and east Asian ancestries

In the version of this article initially published, the author affiliations incorrectly listed “Candiolo Cancer Institute FPO-IRCCS, Candiolo (TO), Italy” as “Candiolo Cancer Institute, Candiolo, Italy.” The change has been made to the HTML and PDF versions of the article

Resolving the Ambiguous Expectations of Academic Integrity

Students encounter wide-ranging teaching and learning contexts and approaches in Canadian post secondary institutions. As a result, they receive and perceive mixed messages when it comes to academic integrity. The purpose of this session is to remind us, as educators/ scholars/researchers what it is like to be the “novice” in our disciplines and fields. The presenter calls for more explicit and contextual teaching of the norms and skills required for academic integrity. This will lead to discussion of (1) what should be done at the program level to explain and educate students on ethical academic and professional practices; and (2) the value and the limits of awareness campaigns and standardized syllabus statements. The session foreshadows a chapter in a forthcoming edited book about academic integrity in Canada and fits with “best practices and emerging ideas in academic integrity policy development.

Designing an Indigenous Wellness University Course: A Reflective Case Narrative

Postsecondary institutions across Canada have implemented various Indigenization strategies. Critical reflection is needed about the development, implementation, and impact of these strategies to ensure they serve more than checked boxes, and that they strive towards institutional decolonization. The purpose of this article is to present the development of an undergraduate course on Indigenous wellness at a Canadian postsecondary institution. Applying a reflective case narrative scholarly approach, we self-situate to present contextual information about ourselves and the course, as well as our motivation for course development and the scope of curriculum design. We consider five indicators of course design success within Dimitrov and Haque’s (2016) intercultural curriculum design competencies, and we recommend changes to the course design process for Indigenization sake. Reflecting on and interpreting our approach, we propose a three-party relational model to Indigenous course development consisting of the course instructor, a keeper of traditional knowledges, and a teaching and learning expert. In doing so we attempt to inform and prompt the thinking of others with similar or related course design goals

Conception d’un cours sur le bien-être des autochtones : un récit de cas réflectif

Postsecondary institutions across Canada have implemented various Indigenization strategies. Critical reflection is needed about the development, implementation, and impact of these strategies to ensure they serve more than checked boxes, and that they strive towards institutional decolonization. The purpose of this article is to present the development of an undergraduate course on Indigenous wellness at a Canadian postsecondary institution. Applying a reflective case narrative scholarly approach, we self-situate to present contextual information about ourselves and the course, as well as our motivation for course development and the scope of curriculum design. We consider five indicators of course design success within Dimitrov and Haque’s (2016) intercultural curriculum design competencies, and we recommend changes to the course design process for Indigenization sake. Reflecting on and interpreting our approach, we propose a three-party relational model to Indigenous course development consisting of the course instructor, a keeper of traditional knowledges, and a teaching and learning expert. In doing so we attempt to inform and prompt the thinking of others with similar or related course design goals.Les établissements d’enseignement supérieur d’un bout à l’autre du Canada ont mis en oeuvre diverses stratégies d’indigénisation. Il est nécessaire de faire appel à la réflexion critique sur le développement, la mise en oeuvre et l’impact de ces stratégies pour garantir qu’elles servent davantage que des cases cochées et qu’elles s’efforcent de décoloniser les établissements. L’objectif de cet article est de présenter le développement d’un cours de premier cycle sur le bien-être des autochtones dans un établissement d’enseignement supérieur du Canada. Grâce à une approche de récit de cas réflectif, nous nous situons nous-mêmes pour présenter des renseignements contextuels sur nous-mêmes et sur le cours, et nous présentons notre motivation lors de la conception du cours et de la portée du programme d’études. Nous prenons en considération cinq indicateurs de réussite pour la conception d’un cours dans le cadre des compétences de conception de cours interculturel présentées par Dimitrov et Haque (2016) et nous recommandons des changements à la conception du cours pour le bien de l’indigénisation. Suite à notre réflexion et à l’interprétation de notre approche, nous proposons un modèle relationnel en trois parties pour le développement d’un cours sur le bien-être des autochtones: l’instructeur du cours, un gardien du savoir traditionnel et un expert en enseignement et en apprentissage. Ce faisant, nous tentons d’informer et d’inviter la réflexion d’autrui avec des objectifs de conception de cours semblables ou connexes