Who teaches academic integrity and how do they teach it?

被引:54
作者
Lofstrom, Erika [1 ]
Trotman, Tiffany [2 ]
Furnari, Mary [3 ]
Shephard, Kerry [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Helsinki, Ctr Res & Dev Higher Educ, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland
[2] Univ Otago, Div Humanities, Dunedin, New Zealand
[3] Univ Otago, Higher Educ Dev Ctr, Dunedin, New Zealand
基金
芬兰科学院;
关键词
Academic integrity; Higher education; Research supervision; Values education; Q methodology; HIGHER-EDUCATION; RESEARCH ETHICS; STUDENT; PLAGIARISM; DISHONESTY; STRATEGY;
D O I
10.1007/s10734-014-9784-3
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Whose role is it to teach academic integrity to university students? We explored academics' conceptions about their role in promoting academic integrity in two countries, namely New Zealand and Finland. We used Q methodology to find common configurations of perspectives that can help us understand the premises based on which academics approach the tasks and roles associated with teaching academic integrity. The 56 academics in our sample were asked to sort 42 statements highlighting a broad spectrum of perspectives on academic integrity and the teaching of it, and answer some related interview questions. A centroid factor analysis using PQMethod software resulted in five configurations of views with distinctive characteristics. We used three frameworks to interrogate these differences: (1) possible narrative from a students' perspective, (2) Biggs's levels of thinking about teaching, and (3) an ethical interpretation. Academics at our institutions appear united in respecting the importance of academic integrity, but not of one mind about what it is, how it should be taught, whether or not it can be taught, whose responsibility it is to teach it, and how to handle cases of misconduct. The results suggest that teachers are confused about integrity policies extant in higher education and about their roles within these.
引用
收藏
页码:435 / 448
页数:14
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]   The University and the Responsible Conduct of Research: Who is Responsible for What? [J].
Alfredo, Katherine ;
Hart, Hillary .
SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, 2011, 17 (03) :447-457
[2]  
Aluede O.O.-E., 2006, Reading Improvement, V43, P97
[3]   THE GRADUATE STUDENT EXPERIENCE AND SUBSCRIPTION TO THE NORMS OF SCIENCE [J].
ANDERSON, MS ;
LOUIS, KS .
RESEARCH IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 1994, 35 (03) :273-299
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2009, ETH PRINC RES HUM SO
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2007, TEACHING QUALITY LEA
[6]   Q methodology and qualitative research [J].
Brown, SR .
QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH, 1996, 6 (04) :561-567
[7]   'You're in Cruel England Now!': teaching research ethics through reality television [J].
Burr, Viv ;
King, Nigel .
PSYCHOLOGY LEARNING AND TEACHING-PLAT, 2012, 11 (01) :22-29
[8]  
East J, 2012, J UNIV TEACH LEARN P, V9
[9]   Judging plagiarism: a problem of morality and convention [J].
East, Julianne .
HIGHER EDUCATION, 2010, 59 (01) :69-83
[10]   Restructuring university degree programmes: a new opportunity for ethics education? [J].
Escamez, Juan ;
Lopez, Rafaela Garcia ;
Jover, Gonzalo .
JOURNAL OF MORAL EDUCATION, 2008, 37 (01) :41-53