How to deal with suspicion of cheating

How to deal with suspicion of cheating A guide for UiB staff

How to deal with suspicion of cheating A guide for UiB staff

December 2010

Introduction

Ethics and academic integrity have been an important focus area at UiB since the appointment of the Strand Committee in 2007. The Action Plan for Work on Academic Integrity was adopted by the University Board in April 2009.

This guide follows up the plan and it aims to provide guidance for staff by giving a brief overview of procedures and who is responsible for what in cases involving suspicion of cheating.

“The fundamental values relating to academic activities at UiB are openness, verifiability, scientific integrity and critical discussion. ”

2

UiB’s pillars

Contents Introduction 2 What is cheating?

4

How is suspicion of cheating dealt with?

6

Use of Ephorus

7

Cheating in class exams

9

The Appeals Committee

9

Student’s rights

10

More information

10

Content Division of Student Affairs, UiB Layout Division of Communication, UiB Photo Colourbox.no: Cover Paul Sigve Amundsen: p. 8

3

What is cheating?

Cheating and academic integrity are multifaceted concepts. In education, cheating is a term associated with exams and the assessment of students’ work. Pursuant to the Act relating to Universities and University Colleges, The Appeals Committee can annul an exam or approval of a course if the student ‘has attempted to cheat or wilfully or through gross negligence has cheated in the course of or prior to the final assessment of the examination or test concerned, or while taking the course in question’ (§ 4–7). ‘Gross negligence’ is when a student did not mean to cheat, but has failed to comply with an existing norm for how careful one has to be in order not to break the rules.

What is cheating in the educational context? A general definition is that the student ‘has illegal aids available during an exam or otherwise act in conflict with the exam regulations or rules for use of sources in written work. ’1 When a student cheats, it is impossible to give a fair assessment of the student’s work.

It is also a sign that the student has not learned and understood the academic norms that are central to our work. One important category of cheating, therefore, is scientific misconduct, ‘falsification, fabrication, plagiarism and other serious breaches of good scientific practice that have been committed wilfully or through gross negligence when planning, carrying out or reporting on research’.2 Students can be directed to the document “The use of sources in written work at the University of Bergen” which gives an introduction to correct referencing. The document is available at My Space and uib.no/academicintegrity .

1

Proposition No 40 to the Odelsting (2001–2002)

2

Act of 30 June 2006 No. 56 on ethics and integrity in research, Section 5

4

Examples of cheating Not referring to your sources or referring to fake sources.

Not clearly marking text from other sources as citations.

Finding a paper on the internet and submitting it as the student’s own paper.

Submitting a paper used by another person earlier or by the student for another class or assignment.

The paper is written by someone other than the student Breaking the rules regarding collaboration and working together Using aids that are not allowed Signs of cheating/plagiarism Change of writing style The text seems familiar/I have read it before Mix of citation styles, missing citations/references Sources in the bibliography that have not been cited Strange formatting and changes in formatting/lay out The academic quality of the paper is very varied

When cheating is suspected in a written assignment, it is important to consider: • The amount of cheating: identical text, missing citations, missing reference list. • How serious is the plagiarism? The more the student has actively and deliberately tried to cheat and the more the student has tried to cover up the act, the stronger the reaction will be. Repeated attempts to cheat will warrant a stronger reaction.

If you are uncertain whether or not there are reasonable grounds for suspicion of cheating, you should present the documentation to the academic and administrative management of the department or centre.

5

How is suspicion of cheating dealt with?

Ephorus reports text similarities (assign. submitted electronically)

Cheating is suspected in a paper

The Appeals Committee considers the case and makes a decision (can be appealed to the Joint Appeals Commitee for Student Matters).

The other papers are graded in accordance with the normal procedure, and the results are announced as normal by the applicable deadlines.

The paper is not graded

The faculty prepares the case for the Appeals Committee with a cover letter. The student is informed about the faculty’s decision.

Based on the conversation, it is concluded that the student has cheated. The department sends a report to the faculty as an urgent matter.

The examiner/ lecturer* writes a report in which the suspicion of cheating is documented (refer to sources that have been plagiarised).

The student receives a warning, guidance on better work practices, and the paper is graded. A deduction may be made from the grade.

Based on the conversation, it is decided that the case concerns minor violations of academic norms. The case is handled by the department.

The report is presented to the Management of the department (academic integrity committee if applicable).

The student’s paper is graded as usual. The student receives a letter that the case will not be pursued further. Guidance on better work practices may be included.

Based on the conversation, it is decided that the case does not involve cheating.

The case is closed by the department.

Based on the report, the leadership of the department requests the student to attend a meeting. The case is discussed and the student is given an opportunity to explain him/herself.

* The term lecturer refers to everyone who is in contact with students in a teaching context.

6

Examples of non-extenuating circumstances when dealing with cheating In the Act relating to Universities and University Colleges, attempts to cheat are deemed to be on a par with cheating – assuming the student has had the intent to complete the Attempts to cheat act. This means that it is not necessary for the student to have actually completed the exam or other mandatory task in violation of the regulations. It is sufficient that he/she has made preparations to do so (wilfully or through gross negligence).

Strict requirements apply to everyone, but the more experienced the student is, the more stringent the The student’s requirements. There is nothing in UiB’s practice to indicate situation that students are treated differently depending on where they are from or whether they have previously studied at other institutions.

The university is responsible for informing students about the regulations and ensuring that relevant information is readily available. However, the Ministry of Education has stated: ‘In exam and test situations, strict requirements apply to students.

The student did not Each student is responsible for familiarising him/herself before know the rules an exam with what aids are lawful and with the guidelines for their use. ’ (Ruling of 21 March 2001 in an appeal case following the annulment of an exam because of cheating at the University of Oslo).

All written work that is produced and submitted by a student Assignment vs. is subject to the same requirements for academic integrity and exam the use of sources.

Use of Ephorus

The University of Bergen has used the anti-plagiarism program Ephorus since autumn 2004. The program is based on electronic submission of assignments.

It is integrated with the learning support systems Kark and My space. All submitted assignments can be sent directly to Ephorus from these systems.

Ephorus searches the submitted assignments and compares them with text on the internet and in previously submitted assignments. In cases where a sufficient amount of textual similarities are found, notification will be sent

by Ephorus by email. The results must be checked and it will be up to the individual staff member to decide whether there are sufficient grounds for suspecting the student of cheating. All members of staff who want to use Ephorus can do so.

7

8

Cheating in class exams

One of the invigilator’s duties is to check the exam premises before and during an exam. Illegal aids are nevertheless sometimes found on the student’s desk. In recent years, mobile phones have been a particular problem. If an invigilator suspects cheating in a written class exam, the chief invigilator must be informed. The chief invigilator must record the incident, collect any documentation, inform the Division of Student Affairs, and then write a report about what happened. The student is allowed to complete the exam, but is informed that the Division of Student Affairs will not forward his/her exam paper to the examiner. The Division will send the report to the relevant faculty, which is responsible for bringing the case before The Appeals Committee.

The Appeals Committee

Pursuant to the Act relating to Universities and University Colleges § 5–1, the university shall have an Appeals committee. The committee has five members: two university lecturers, two students and a chair (who meets the requirements for a Court of Appeal judge). The committee meets about once a month and hears, among other things, cases involving cheating. The Appeals Committee has the authority to annul a student’s exam or course pass. The committee can also expel a student from UiB and all universities and university colleges in Norway for one or two semesters. No time bar applies to the right to annul an exam. 3 Suspicion of cheating can therefore be investigated long after it happened, even after the student has left the university. If it is decided to annul an exam, transcripts of grades and any diploma must be returned to the university. 4

3

The Act relating to Universities and University Colleges § 4–7 no. 4

4

The Act relating to Universities and University Colleges § 4–7 no. 5

9

Student’s rights

While the department or faculty are carrying out investigations to decide whether or not to initiate a case on grounds of cheating, the student is entitled to see relevant documents, to explain her/himself and to voice her/ his opinion. The student can also be assisted by a lawyer or another person, although such expenses will not be covered by the university.

Once the faculty has sent the case to The Appeals Committee, the student is entitled to a lawyer at the university’s expense. The student is still entitled to have access to the case documents and to comment on the case in writing.

The student can also request a meeting with the board’s secretary. If the student is convicted, he/she can appeal the decision to the national “Felles klagenemnd” (Joint Appeals Committee for Student Matters) within three weeks. The student is entitled to have her/his legal expenses covered if he/she has been expelled, but not otherwise.

More information

Contact your department/centre or faculty or see: uib.no/academic-integrity

10