Actively detecting and exploring suspicions
Detection should be carried out as a matter of course – active detection alerts teachers that students might have cheated. Teachers should not rely entirely on familiarity with students to arouse suspicions. If teachers do have suspicions, they need techniques to help them take a closer look.
Detailed advice for teachers is available on Moodle, and is supported by policy and procedure:
Tips for Teachers to detect and minimise Academic Dishonesty
- Ideally teachers should know each student so well that they immediately notice any changes/irregularities in individual student responses/performance. This is a primary detection tool. This ‘pedagogical approach’ ensures teachers know about each student’s understanding of concepts, writing style, ability to organise ideas, etc. Teaching is about helping students to make progress – teachers cannot do that if they do not know what level students are at. Look for “grade shifts” – unexplained discrepancies between levels of performance in different assessments could indicate dishonest behaviour.
- Attendance issues and participation in class discussion and activities can be key indicators – a student who shows little engagement but submits quality work could arouse suspicions.
- Note the limitations of content matching programmes. Most software programmes can help identify plagiarism from public sources, but not plagiarism from other students or other forms of cheating, such as “ghostwriting”.
- Turnitin is integrated into Moodle . Ask TPA for help if you have questions about Turnitin.
In practical assessments, especially on short courses, assess each student in isolation where possible. This is especially relevant if students have been preparing or practising in groups or observing the teacher. Set assessment tasks that are not exactly the same as those demonstrated by the teacher. If students simply need to repeat the assessor’s methods they can superficially adjust their performance to suit. (This is more like mimicry than cheating, but it does mean that students can perform in ways that are not entirely authentic.)
Make the most of evidence from formative assessments. Some of these should be completed under supervised conditions so teachers have samples of each student’s work they know is authentic.
- Keep a file of student work from formative assessments and/or the teacher’s notes/marks. Relatively informal formative assessments can be properly conducted and results documented. Any evidence, even informally collected, can be helpful if there are later suspicions of cheating.
- Conduct brief ‘spot tests’. Teachers use tests and quizzes to reinforce and recap learning but this practice will be more useful later for comparing/contrasting the improvement of students. Spontaneous spot testing (e.g. an informal quiz) could be more appropriate with some programmes/groups but even in these cases information about individual students could be noted.
Written assignments completed in students’ own time. See suggestions on setting assessment tasks in Preventing (above). Additional strategies include requiring students to submit planning notes, worksheets, raw data records, drafts and study/research notes with final assignments, or ask to see them from time to time as assignments are being completed. These can include:
- Requiring students to keep a journal, recording their activities and their thinking as they work toward a finished assignment.
- Interviewing each student after assignments have been submitted – teachers can compare the student’s oral responses with work produced in uncontrolled situations.
- Using content matching software (as above).
Marking (making assessment decisions):
- Be familiar with sources students use. If teachers/markers know about websites and other resources students are likely to refer to, they can spot cheating, especially plagiarism.
- Ideally, have all work marked by teachers who are familiar with students. Where large numbers are involved, some providers have each question/item marked by only one marker.
- Make sure all work is marked by the same teacher. Even if they do not know the students well, markers will be able to notice suspicious patterns and repetition. This should also apply to on-job assessments, assignment and group work.
- Be suspicious if student work does not align with the topic set (questions asked). If students seem to be focusing on a different topic, either across the whole assignment or within sections, they could be using work from other students, engaging a ‘ghostwriter’ or plagiarising sections of work.
- Be alert to signs of ‘ghostwriting’. Indicators include breadth of research, writing style, used of generic terms not specifically related to the topic, spelling or terminology not normally used in New Zealand, referencing, formatting or essay construction a student has not demonstrated previously.
- Keep a central file of all electronically-submitted work – markers will be able to compare work from later assessments. Turnitin does this.
- Ensure that on-job evidence of performance is attested by a responsible senior person – emphasise the importance of the information they are signing off. There may be a tension between getting attestation from a senior person and making sure that person is absolutely sure of the student’s performance. The person attesting might need to confirm from coworkers that data collection was authentic.
Set up a system for ‘whistle-blowers’. Students who become aware that other students are cheating are likely to disapprove or have a sense of injustice. Emails to teachers, course co-ordinators and APMs can provide a confidential channel for student complaints about dishonesty. |
Useful Resources
Relevant Policies and Procedure
AC 2.8 Academic Integrity Procedure 20231025
Student Disciplinary Statute
|
