Academic Integrity and assessment

In recent times, unfortunately, an issue that has been drawing attention (internationally) in discussions and in the development of assessment strategies, is that of the likelihood of breaches of academic integrity, through cheating, plagiarism, impersonation, or other types of misconduct.  In some countries, headline news Links to an external site. has been made by stories of politicians who allegedly plagiarised their masters or doctoral dissertations. Concern too has grown over the false qualifications for people working in a number of professions. The higher education sector has had to focus on ensuring the integrity of any qualifications or awards which they make and there has been a tightening of oversight of these aspects by national quality assurance agencies.

Much of the types of misconduct that are being detected in higher education are actually facilitated through the use of technology and so it is important that we address the issue here and consider the implications for assessment design as well as for ensuring examination security and assessment integrity.

The European Network for Academic Integrity Links to an external site. defines academic integrity as:

"Compliance with ethical and professional principles, standards and practices and consistent system of values, that serves as guidance for making decisions and taking actions in education, research and scholarship."

In terms of the application of these principles to assessment practices (QQI, 2021 Links to an external site.):

A key component of academic integrity is assessment integrity, i.e., the principles of honest and trustworthy assessment, are upheld so that the learner undergoes a fair assessment of their learning to determine whether programme / module learning outcomes have been achieved.

Conversely, academic misconduct has taken place when a learner has behaved in a way which undermines and corrupts the integrity of the assessment.

Some examples of misconduct in this context include:

• copying the work of someone else (including authors of books and articles, websites, other students) and submitting it under your name without proper acknowledgement or referencing of the source(s);
• claiming academic credit for work that someone else has done or which you have obtained from elsewhere other than your own efforts;
• using the services of a contract cheating provider to obtain materials that you submit under your own name;
• having un-permitted access to materials and resources during a restricted assessment and using these to complete the task and obtain advantage over others;
• undertaking work for another student which is then submitted for credit by them, or providing other students with your work for copying;
• cheating in examinations;
• impersonating another during an examination or assessment;
• using tools such as Generative AI Links to an external site. to complete an assignment or assessment either without permission or without full acknowledgement of the extent to which it was used.

 

Most universities have policies in place for dealing with suspected cases of academic misconduct, although until recently these tended to concentrate on plagiarism rather than anything else and may also have underestimated the extent to which misconduct had been taking place.  Tools such as Turnitin Links to an external site. are often used to match texts to check for potential plagiarism, poor academic practice (eg in terms of referencing and citations), or other issues.

The sudden pivot to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic brought huge challenges to maintaining the integrity of assessments and examinations, and whilst institutions sought out viable solutions, including seeking alternative forms of assessment, there was also an observed dramatic growth in cases. Some companies with wide international reach offered contract cheating services, and although many denied responsibility for 'what users do on our platform', it is clear to any outsider what type of business they were engaging in. Some of these companies received huge market valuations Links to an external site. as their 'services' showed dramatic growth and the extent to which investors understood the premise of their business, or were sufficiently dissuaded from probing too deeply by the claims that they were merely providing 'learning support',  has been teased out in newspaper reports and legal cases.  

Unfortunately, students did, and do, avail of such services, whether due to misunderstanding what is appropriate, stress over deadlines and fear of failing their course, or (in extreme and rare cases) simple disregard for integrity and regulations. Some have found themselves subsequently to be victims of blackmail, with the cheating provider threatening to inform their institution unless the student provides additional customers or payments. Many of the providers use sophisticated marketing techniques to target particularly vulnerable students or groups, often popping up on social media responding to posts about students being under stress or having an essay deadline, etc. This can even include intrusion into relatively closed networks such as WhatsApp communities.  It is clear that there is a need to ensure that students are aware of these tactics and of what is acceptable behaviour when it comes to assessment.

At the legal level, a some countries (including Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, England, have implemented new laws to specifically address the problem, allowing cheating providers to be charged and/or fined. The international and transnational nature of many of these companies can make this difficult to enforce.

Potential responses to this challenge include:  (a) tightening up assessment security; (b) improving detection and reporting; (c) sharpening penalties and the consequences of being caught; (d) educating students more effectively on what constitutes good academic practice; (e) using alternative (perhaps more authentic) assessment methods which are less vulnerable or which focus on more developmental aspects; (f) support the growth of a culture of integrity as a core value of academic practice and institutions.  

Educational institutions and teachers have also had to respond rapidly to a completely new challenge to integrity that arose in late 2022 when the first of the major Generative (Gen) AI (Large Language Models (LLMs) specifically) were publicly released. Powerful technologies that enable essays, reports, or any form of writing to be automatically generated on the basis of a simple statement or 'prompt', these have demonstrated that options (d), (e), and (f) are more appropriate responses than engaging in a 'technology war' of pitting detection tools against the increasing number of writing generation and 'humanising' tools.

For those working in educational and academic development, this particular 'crisis' has presented an opportunity to raise the bigger questions about assessment and the methods we use, shedding light on the inappropriateness of some standard methods, issues of over-assessment in modular programmes, and the lack of diversity or authenticity of many assessment practices. Indeed, some, such as Philip Dawson and colleagues Links to an external site., have suggested that we need to focus the conversation more on the validity of our assessments rather than just on assessment integrity.  A 'sketchnote' summary of a presentation by Prof. Dawson captures the main essence of the issue.

 

Sketch summary of a keynote presentation by Philip Dawson. (Ireland's National Integrity Network, 2023)

 

---

 

---

References and further information

Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Dollinger, M., & Boud, D. (2024). 'Validity matters more than cheating.' Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2386662 Links to an external site. 

Eaton, S.E.,(ed), (2024) 'Second Handbook of Academic Integrity', Springer Nature. https://link.springer.com/referencework/10.1007/978-3-031-54144-5 Links to an external site. 

NAIN (National Academic Integrity Network), (2021), 'Academic Integrity Guidelines Links to an external site.', QQI, Dublin

NAIN (National Academic Integrity Network), (2023), 'Framework for Academic Misconduct Investigation and Case Management Links to an external site.', QQI, Dublin

NAIN (National Academic Integrity Network), (2023), Generative AI Guidelines for Educators Links to an external site., QQI, Dublin