Project Team

Jo Badge, Alan Cann, Stuart Johnson, Jon Scott, Chris Willmott

Executive summary of final report

AItefFinalExecSummary

Focus

The School of Biological Sciences has pioneered the use of the plagiarism detection software, Turnitin, within the University.  Following a controlled pilot study, we successfully implemented the use of the scanning system across all second and third year undergraduate assessed course work in 2005/6, and saw a drop in rates of detected plagiarism from 2.7% to 0.9% over the course of two academic years. Several elements were essential to this success: planning exercises involving both the Board of Studies and the Staff-Student Committee, the careful examination and revision of disciplinary procedures within the School regarding plagiarism, the widespread use of an interactive exercise on plagiarism (Willmott & Harrison, 2003) and formal teaching aimed at developing good academic practice, which included the demonstration of the scanning software to promote awareness amongst the student population of the system.

The strong departmental structure of the University inevitably means that there are significant variations in locally applied procedures for the detection of plagiarism and in the disciplinary policies followed to deal with suspected cases.  We propose a cross-faculty survey and analysis of these policies and procedures in order provide an operating benchmark and a set of recommendations to improve practice in the institution. At the national level, the independent adjudicator for higher education, Baroness Deech, has called for policy alignment across the sector on several occasions (Baty, 2006; EducationGuardian.co.uk, 2006; Tysome, 2006). Not withstanding the possibility of litigation on the matter, it is vital that we ensure consistency and fair process in the Leicester context.

At a recent leading conference on the subject (Second International Plagiarism Conference, 2006), the focus among the academic community was clearly moving towards promotion of academic integrity.  This is a positive representation of the ideas behind the avoidance of plagiarism as it promotes good academic practice, careful referencing and a culture within an institution of upholding these principles.  At the extreme end of a spectrum of practice is the American ‘Honor Code’ system, where universities operate on a trust system (McCabe & Trevino, 1993). Students take a pledge to uphold the principles of academic integrity and in return are awarded certain privileges and responsibilities. These include examinations that are not invigilated by staff, a student judiciary that polices the honor code, involvement in the organization of training and promotion of academic integrity and a student body to discipline students found in breach of the code. Sanctions applied may even lead to expulsion of the student from the University by their peers.  Several universities in the US have introduced similar systems in the past decade, incorporating key elements of the original honor codes, notably the involvement of students in the disciplinary procedures for plagiarism (McCabe, Trevino, & Butterfield, 2002). Perception of peer behaviour and very clear communication of the principles of academic integrity were shown to be instrumental in the reduction in rates of plagiarism (McCabe & Trevino,1993). It is believed that American universities with strong honor codes provide students with a clear ethical stance in the workplace following their university career (McCabe & Trevino, 1993) and that their involvement in the judiciary process enables students to develop key leadership skills and provides responsibilities essential for good citizenship and employability.

The concept of academic integrity has been introduced for the first time into the new Learning and Teaching strategy and this project will provide a catalyst to embed this principle into the undergraduate curriculum. The project will initiate student focus groups across three faculties to propose a new definition of academic integrity for the University of Leicester.  These focus groups will solicit staff and student views on the introduction of student involvement in the disciplinary procedures for plagiarism. If feedback is positive, a student judiciary scheme will be trialed in the School of Biological Sciences.

The bid team is well placed to carry out the project with an established track record in pedagogic research and technical developments in the use of plagiarism scanning software (Badge et al. in press). It is envisaged that the project will require the creation of a new part-time research post. The GENIE CETL will support the project through the contribution of additional funding and by the use of the CETL network for dissemination of the results of the project. The post-holder will be encouraged to attend regular CETL progress meetings and to work with the CETL staff. The student perspective is key to the success of this project. SSDS involvement will ensure that this focus is practical and input from the student union will be sought.

The new definition of academic integrity and the outcomes of the student involvement in the disciplinary process will be published as a resource for other departments wanting to review their policies on plagiarism. The results from the cross faculty survey will be analysed to provide key recommendations for changes to institutional policy in order to provide alignment. The bid team has close links with the HE Academy Centre for Bioscience, which will be an avenue for wider dissemination. We intend to approach the HEA to discuss the publication of the project at a national level.

Methodology

A paper-based review of policies and practices across the institution will be carried out Content analysis will be used to extract the key common elements of the policies and to look for alignment with institutional policy. A more detailed analysis of these practices will be conducted by face-to-face semi-structured interviews with a selection of staff that play key roles in the administration or development of these policies. These staff will be identified through consultation with the chairs of faculty learning and teaching committees.

Three undergraduate student and three staff focus groups from CLMS and the Schools of Historical Studies and Biological Sciences will be initiated to draft a proposed statement of academic integrity. The School of Historical Studies has embarked upon the full scale use of Turnitin this year and therefore the approach of these students can be compared to those in Biological sciences who have had their work scanned for the past two academic years.  The inclusion of CLMS will bring the perspective of distance learners to the project. The focus groups will discuss the operation of a student judiciary to deal with cases of plagiarism. Outcomes of the group meetings will be recorded online in a shared blog or wiki such that all of the focus groups can contribute and view one another’s discussions. The trial of the student judiciary will be carefully controlled and monitored by the Board of Studies and the Staff-Student Committee. It is proposed that the trial run in parallel to the existing system.

Deliverables

• Cross-faculty survey results can be used to stimulate a review of policy and strategy at a university level.
• Recommendations for policy changes to ensure fair and consistent treatment within the institution for all students with regard to academic dishonesty.
• Proposed statement of academic integrity as an example for use at institutional level.
• Report on the trial student judiciary and recommendations for implementation.
• Recommendations on activities to foster student involvement in academic integrity.

Dissemination

All materials produced will be hosted on the University content management system, plone, as a permanent record for future reference. We would seek external publication in a suitable peer-reviewed academic journal and a presentation at the next JISC Plagiarism Advisory Service conference or similar international conference. The bid team would promote the work through TAN sessions and involvement in the university-wide plagiarism awareness programme. The GENIE CETL and HEA would play important roles in the dissemination of the data gathered, through their national and regional networks of stakeholders.