academic ethics and integrity essay

• Harvard Library
• Research Guides
• Harvard Graduate School of Design - Frances Loeb Library

Write and Cite

• Academic Integrity

Responsible research and writing habits

Generative ai (artificial intelligence).

• Using Sources and AI
• Academic Writing
• From Research to Writing
• GSD Writing Services
• Grants and Fellowships
• Reading, Notetaking, and Time Management
• Theses and Dissertations

Need Help? Be in Touch.

•   Ask a Design Librarian
•  Call 617-495-9163
•  Text 617-237-6641
•   Consult a Librarian
•   Workshop Calendar
•   Library Hours

Central to any academic writing project is crediting (or citing) someone else' words or ideas. The following sites will help you understand academic writing expectations.

Academic integrity is truthful and responsible representation of yourself and your work by taking credit only for your own ideas and creations and giving credit to the work and ideas of other people. It involves providing attribution (citations and acknowledgments) whenever you include the intellectual property of others—and even your own if it is from a previous project or assignment. Academic integrity also means generating and using accurate data.

Responsible and ethical use of information is foundational to a successful teaching, learning, and research community. Not only does it promote an environment of trust and respect, it also facilitates intellectual conversations and inquiry. Citing your sources shows your expertise and assists others in their research by enabling them to find the original material. It is unfair and wrong to claim or imply that someone else’s work is your own.

Failure to uphold the values of academic integrity at the GSD can result in serious consequences, ranging from re-doing an assignment to expulsion from the program with a sanction on the student’s permanent record and transcript. Outside of academia, such infractions can result in lawsuits and damage to the perpetrator’s reputation and the reputation of their firm/organization. For more details see the Academic Integrity Policy at the GSD. 

The GSD’s Academic Integrity Tutorial can help build proficiency in recognizing and practicing ways to avoid plagiarism.

• Avoiding Plagiarism (Purdue OWL) This site has a useful summary with tips on how to avoid accidental plagiarism and a list of what does (and does not) need to be cited. It also includes suggestions of best practices for research and writing.
• How Not to Plagiarize (University of Toronto) Concise explanation and useful Q&A with examples of citing and integrating sources.

This fast-evolving technology is changing academia in ways we are still trying to understand, and both the GSD and Harvard more broadly are working to develop policies and procedures based on careful thought and exploration. At the moment, whether and how AI may be used in student work is left mostly to the discretion of individual instructors. There are some emerging guidelines, however, based on overarching values.

• Always ask first if AI is allowed and specifically when and how.
• Always check facts and sources generated by AI as these are not reliable.
• Cite your use of AI to generate text or images. Citation practices for AI are described in Using Sources and AI.

Since policies are changing rapidly, we recommend checking the links below often for new developments, and this page will continue to update as we learn more.

• Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) from HUIT Harvard's Information Technology team has put together this webpage explaining AI and curating resources about initial guidelines, recommendations for prompts, and recommendations of tools with a section specifically on image-based tools.
• Generative AI in Teaching and Learning at the GSD The GSD's evolving policies, information, and guidance for the use of generative AI in teaching and learning at the GSD are detailed here. The policies section includes questions to keep in mind about privacy and copyright, and the section on tools lists AI tools supported at the GSD.
• AI Code of Conduct by MetaLAB A Harvard-affiliated collaborative comprised of faculty and students sets out recommendations for guidelines for the use of AI in courses. The policies set out here are not necessarily adopted by the GSD, but they serve as a good framework for your own thinking about academic integrity and the ethical use of AI.
• Prompt Writing Examples for ChatGPT+ Harvard Libraries created this resource for improving results through crafting better prompts.
• << Previous: Home
• Next: Using Sources and AI >>
• Last Updated: Aug 20, 2024 4:05 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.harvard.edu/gsd/write

Harvard University Digital Accessibility Policy

We apologize for any inconvenience as we update our site to a new look.

• Walden University
• Faculty Portal

Evidence-Based Arguments: Writing With Integrity

Writing with integrity: paraphrasing and giving credit.

As we describe in other pages on paraphrasing, successful paraphrasing is the writer’s own explanation or interpretation of another person's ideas or synthesis of other ideas. The goal is to provide a scholarly discussion of other writer’s ideas, provide the original author with credit, and to summarize, synthesize, or expand on the point in an original work.

Ensuring integrity in writing can be a challenge. The standard in American Academic English is to paraphrase and provide a citation to credit the source. This is not the writing expectation in all styles and cultures, so we understand that students sometimes have questions about this. Writing with integrity means the author is writing using his or her own words and being sure to not inadvertently mislead the reader about whether an idea was the writer’s own. Writing with integrity is about rephrasing ideas in the author’s own words and understanding, while also providing credit to the original source.

The example below can be used to understand how to incorporate evidence from previous researchers and authors, providing proper credit to the source. Again, the goal is to write and cite, creating original material and ensuring integrity (avoiding any potential plagiarism concerns).

Example of Uncredited Source

Consider this partial paragraph:

In this example, Organization A is going through a variety of changes in leadership, but this is the norm for organizations in general. Organizations go through change all the time. However, the nature, scope, and intensity of organizational change vary considerably.

Here is the paragraph again, with the second and third sentences bolded and marked in red type:

The red marking is a match from TurnItIn (TII) because those sentences are word-for-word from the original source. TII has matched this text. TII provides an overall percent match in the report.  The percentage itself matters less than the user's review of the report. For example, although text may match the 8-word-standard-match-setting, it may not truly be a copy of others' work.  Also, TII will match full references; this of course adds to the total matching percentage.

Here is a screenshot of a Google Books search where this text can be found online:

In the screenshot, the words highlighted in yellow are the search phrases, and the red box indicates the sentences that appear in the example paragraph. This text was taken directly out of a book on organizational change. This is problematic because it appears in the example paragraph above to be the writer’s own idea when it is not—it came from this book. This misrepresentation, intentional or not, is an academic integrity issue.

Revising a Paragraph With an Uncredited Source

What if the writer adds a citation.

Note the added parenthetical citation, (Nadler & Tushman, 1994), at the end of the third sentence.

In this example, Organization A is going through a variety of changes in leadership, but these types of changes are the norm for organizations in general. Organizations go through change all the time. However, the nature, scope, and intensity of organizational change vary considerably (Nadler & Tushman, 1994).

This change is incorrect because it is still using the original authors’ words. Though a source is provided, the text should be paraphrased, not word-for-word. This citation does not make the reader aware that the words in the preceding two sentences are the original author’s.

What if the writer adds a citation and quotation marks?

In this revision, the writer has added quotation marks around the words borrowed directly from the original author.

In this example, Organization A is going through a variety of changes in leadership, but these types of changes are the norm for organizations in general. “Organizations go through change all the time. However, the nature, scope, and intensity of organizational change vary considerably” (Nadler & Tushman, 1994, p. 279).

Yes, this would be correct APA formatting to use quotations, if a passage is word-for-word, and provide a citation including the page number. However, at the graduate level of writing and academics, writers should generally avoid quoting and opt for paraphrasing. Writers should avoid quoting other authors because this does not demonstrate scholarship. Walden editors suggest that Walden writers reserve quotations for a few specific instances like definitions, if the author’s original phrasing is the subject of the analysis, or if the idea simply cannot be conveyed accurately by paraphrasing.

So, what is the best course of action?

Paraphrasing the idea from the original source and including a citation is the best course of action.

In this example, Organization A is going through a variety of changes in leadership, but these types of changes are the norm for organizations in general. Although the size of the change and the impact on the organization may fluctuate, organizations are constantly changing (Nadler & Tushman, 1994).

This example includes a paraphrase of the passage that was marked as unoriginal. Here is a reminder of the passage:

Organizations go through change all the time. However, the nature, scope, and intensity of organizational change vary considerably

In the paraphrase above, the same idea is provided and the authors are given credit, but this is done using original writing, not what ends up being plagiarism, and not a quotation (as that does not demonstrate understanding and application).

Writing With Integrity in Doctoral Capstone Studies

For doctoral capstone students, it is also important to adequately cite your sources in your final capstone study. Learn more about writing with integrity in the doctoral capstone specifically on the Form and Style website.

• Previous Page: Citing Sources Properly
• Next Page: Types of Sources to Cite in the Doctoral Capstone
• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Cost of Attendance
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

• Columbia University in the City of New York
• Office of Teaching, Learning, and Innovation
• University Policies
• Columbia Online
• Academic Calendar
• Resources and Technology
• Resources and Guides

Promoting Academic Integrity 

While it is each student’s responsibility to understand and abide by university standards towards individual work and academic integrity, instructors can help students understand their responsibilities through frank classroom conversations that go beyond policy language to shared values. By creating a learning environment that stimulates engagement and designing assessments that are authentic, instructors can minimize the incidence of academic dishonesty.

Academic dishonesty often takes place because students are overwhelmed with the assignments and they don’t have enough time to complete them. So, in addition to being clear about expectations and responsibilities related to academic integrity, instructors should also invite students to  plan accordingly and communicate with them in the event of an emergency. Instructors can arrange extensions and offer solutions in case that students have an emergency. Communication between instructors and students is vital to avoid bad practices and contribute to hold on to the academic integrity values. 

The guidance and strategies included in this resource are applicable to courses in any modality (in-person, online, and hybrid) and includes a discussion of addressing generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT with students. 

On this page:

What is academic integrity, why does academic dishonesty occur, strategies for promoting academic integrity, academic integrity in the age of artificial intelligence, columbia university resources.

• References and Additional Resources
• Acknowledgment

Cite this resource: Columbia Center for Teaching and Learning (2020). Promoting Academic Integrity. Columbia University. Retrieved [today’s date] from https://ctl.columbia.edu/resources-and-technology/resources/academic-integrity/

According to the  International Center for Academic Integrity , academic integrity is “a commitment, even in the face of adversity, to six fundamental values: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage.” We commit to these values to honor the intellectual efforts of the global academic community, of which Columbia University is an integral part.

Academic dishonesty in the classroom occurs when one or more values of academic integrity are violated. While some cases of academic dishonesty are committed intentionally, other cases may be a reflection of something deeper that a student is experiencing, such as language or cultural misunderstandings, insufficient or misguided preparation for exams or papers, a lack of confidence in their ability to learn the subject, or perception that course policies are unfair (Bernard and Keith-Spiegel, 2002).

Some other reasons why students may commit academic dishonesty include:

• Cultural or regional differences in what comprises academic dishonesty
• Lack or poor understanding on how to cite sources correctly
• Misunderstanding directions and/or expectations
• Poor time management, procrastination, or disorganization
• Feeling disconnected from the course, subject, instructor, or material
• Fear of failure or lack of confidence in one’s ability
• Anxiety, depression, other mental health problems
• Peer/family pressure to meet unrealistic expectations

Understanding some of these common reasons can help instructors intentionally design their courses and assessments to pre-empt, and hopefully avoid, instances of academic dishonesty. As Thomas Keith states in “Combating Academic Dishonesty, Part 1 – Understanding the Problem.” faculty and administrators should direct their steps towards a “thoughtful, compassionate pedagogy.”

The CTL is here to help!

The CTL can help you think through your course policies and ways to create community, design course assessments, and set up CourseWorks to promote academic integrity. Email [email protected] to schedule your 1-1 consultation .

In his research on cheating in the college classroom, James Lang argues that “the amount of cheating that takes place on our campuses may well depend on the structures of the learning environment” (Lang, 2013a; Lang, 2013b). Instructors have agency in shaping the classroom learning experience; thus, instances of academic dishonesty can be mitigated by efforts to design a supportive, learning-oriented environment (Bertam, 2017 and 2008).

Understanding Student’s Perceptions about Cheating 

It is important to know how students understand critical concepts related to academic integrity such as: cheating, transparency, attribution, intellectual property, etc. As much as they know and understand these concepts, they will be able to show good academic integrity practices.

1. Acknowledge the importance of the research process, not only the outcome, during student learning.

Although the research process is slow and arduous, students should understand the value of the different processes involved during academic writing: investigation, reading, drafting, revising, editing and proof-reading. For Natalie Wexler, using generative Artificial Intelligence tools like ChatGPT as a substitute of writing itself is beyond cheating, an act of self cheating: “The process of writing itself can and should deepen that knowledge and possibly spark new insights” (“‘ Bots’ Can Write Good Essays, But That Doesn’t Make Writing Obsolete” ).

Ways to understand the value of writing their own work without external help, either from external sources, peers or AI, hinge on prioritizing the process over the product:

• Asking students to present drafts of their work and receive feedback can help students to gain confidence to continue researching and writing.
• Allowing students the freedom to choose or change their research topic can increase their investment in an assignment, which can motivate them to conduct their own writing and research rather than relying on AI tools. 

2. Create a supportive learning environment

When students feel supported in a course and connected to instructors and/or TAs and their peers, they may be more comfortable asking for help when they don’t understand course material or if they have fallen behind with an assignment.

Ways to support student learning include:

• Convey confidence  in your students’ ability to succeed in your course from day one of the course (this may ease student anxiety or  imposter syndrome ) and through timely and regular feedback on what they are doing well and areas they can improve on. 
• Explain the relevance  of the course to students; tell them why it is important that they actually learn the material and develop the skills for themselves. Invite students to connect the course to their goals, studies, or intended career trajectories. Research shows that students’ motivation to learn can help deter instances of academic dishonesty (Lang, 2013a). 
• Teach important skills  such as taking notes, summarizing arguments, and citing sources. Students may not have developed these skills, or they may bring bad habits from previous learning experiences. Have students practice these skills through exercises (Gonzalez, 2017). 
• Provide students multiple opportunities to practice challenging skills  and receive immediate feedback in class (e.g., polls, writing activities, “boardwork”). These frequent low-stakes assessments across the semester can “[improve] students’ metacognitive awareness of their learning in the course” (Lang, 2013a, pp. 145). 
• Help students manage their time  on course tasks by scheduling regular check-ins to reduce students’ last minute efforts or frantic emails about assignment requirements. Establish weekly online office hours and/or be open to appointments outside of standard working hours. This is especially important if students are learning in different time zones. Normalize the use of campus resources and academic support resources that can help address issues or anxieties they may be facing.  (See the Columbia University Resources section below for a list of support resources.)
• Provide lists of approved websites and resources  that can be used for additional help or research. This is especially important if on-campus materials are not available to online learners. Articulate permitted online “study” resources to be used as learning tools (and not cheating aids – see McKenzie, 2018) and how to cite those in homework, writing assignments or problem sets. 
• Encourage TAs (if applicable) to establish good relationships  with students and to check-in with you about concerns they may have about students in the course. (Explore the  Working with TAs Online  resource to learn more about partnering with TAs.)

3. Clarify expectations and establish shared values

In addition to including Columbia’s  academic integrity policy  on syllabi, go a step further by creating space in the classroom to discuss your expectations regarding academic integrity and what that looks like in your course context. After all, “what reduces cheating on an honor code campus is not the code itself, but  the dialogue about academic honesty that the code inspires. ” (Lang, 2013a, pp. 172)

Ways to cultivate a shared sense of responsibility for upholding academic integrity include: 

• Ask students to identify goals and expectations  around academic integrity in relation to course learning objectives. 
• Communicate your expectations  and explain your rationale for course policies on artificial intelligence tools, collaborative assignments, late work, proctored exams, missed tests, attendance, extra credit, the use of plagiarism detection software or proctoring software, etc. It will make a difference to take the time at the beginning of the course to explain differences between quoting, summarizing and paraphrasing. Providing examples of good and bad quotation/paraphrasing will help students to know what constitutes good academic writing. 
• Define and provide examples  for what constitutes plagiarism or other forms of academic dishonesty in your course.
• Invite students to generate ideas  for responding to scenarios where they may be pressured to violate the values of academic integrity (e.g.: a friend asks to see their homework, or a friend suggests using chat apps during exams), so students are prepared to react with integrity when suddenly faced with these situations. 
• State clearly when collaboration and group learning is permitted  and when independent work is expected. Collaboration and group work provide great opportunities to build student-student rapport and classroom community, but at the same time, it can lead students to fall into academic misconduct due to unintended collaboration/failure to safeguard their work.
• Discuss the ethical, academic, and legal repercussions  of posting class recordings, notes and/or class materials online (e.g., to sites such as Chegg, GitHub, CourseHero – see Lederman, 2020).
• Partner with TAs  (if applicable) and clarify your expectations of them, how they can help promote shared values around academic integrity, and what they should do in cases of suspected cheating or classroom difficulties

4. Design assessments to maximize learning and minimize pressure

High stakes course assessments can be a source of student anxiety. Creating multiple opportunities for students to demonstrate their learning, and spreading assessments  throughout  the semester can lessen student stress and keep the focus on student learning (see  Darby, 2020  for strategies on assessing students online). As Lang explains, “The more assessments you provide, the less pressure you put on students to do well on any single assignment or exam. If you maintain a clear and consistent academic integrity policy, and ensure that all students caught cheating receive an immediate and substantive penalty, the benefit of cheating on any one assessment will be small, while the potential consequences will be high” (Lang, 2013a and Lang, 2013c). For support with creating online exams, please please refer to our  Creating Online Exams resource .

Ways to enhance one’s assessment approach:

• Design assignments  based on authentic problems in your discipline. Ask students to  apply  course concepts and materials to a problem or concept. 
• Structure assignments into smaller parts  (“scaffolding”) that will be submitted and checked throughout the semester. This scaffolding can also help students learn how to tackle large projects by breaking down the tasks. 
• Break up a single high-stakes exam  into smaller, weekly tests. This can help distribute the weight of grades, and will lessen the pressure students feel when an exam accounts for a large portion of their grade. 
• Give students options  in how their learning is assessed and/or invite students to present their learning in creative ways (e.g., as a poster, video, story, art project, presentation, or oral exam).
• Provide feedback prior to grading  student work. Give students the opportunity to implement the feedback. The revision process encourages student learning, while also lowering the anxiety around any one assignment. 
• Utilize multiple low-stakes assignments  that prepare students for high-stakes assignments or exams to reduce anxiety (e.g., in-class activities, in-class or online discussions)
• Create grading rubrics and share them  with your students and TAs (if applicable) so that expectations are clear, to guide student work, and aid with the feedback process.  
• Use individual student portfolio folders  and provide tailored feedback to students throughout the semester. This can help foster positive relationships, as well as allow you to watch students’ progress on drafts and outlines. You can also ask students to describe how their drafts have changed and offer rationales for those decisions.
• For exams , consider refreshing tests every term, both in terms of organization and content. Additionally, ground your assignments by having students draw connections between course content and the unique experience of your course in terms of time (unique to the semester), place (unique to campus, local community, etc. ), personal (specific student experiences), and interdisciplinary opportunities (other courses students have taken, co-curricular activities, campus events, etc.). (Lang, 2013a, pp. 77).

Since its release, ChatGPT has raised concern in universities across the country about the opportunity it presents for students to cheat and appropriate AI ideas, texts, and even code as their own work. However, there are also potential positive uses of this tool in the learning process–including as a tool for teachers to rely on when creating assessments or working with repetitive and time-consuming tasks.

Possible Advantages of ChatGPT

Due to the novelty of this tool, the possible advantages that might present in the teaching-learning process should be under the control of each instructor since they know exactly what they expect from students’ work. 

Prof. Ethan Mollick teaches innovation and entrepreneurship at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, and has been openly sharing on his Twitter account his journey incorporating ChatGPT into his classes. Prof. Mollick advises his students to experiment with this tool, trying and retrying prompts. He recognizes the importance of acknowledging its limits and the risks of violating academic honesty guidelines if the use of this tool is not stated at the end of the assignment.

Prof. Mollick uncovers four possible uses of this AI tool, ranging from using ChatGPT as an all-knowing intern, as a game designer, as an assistant to launch a business, or even to “hallucinate” together ( “Four Paths to the Revelation” ). For Prof. Mollick, ChatGPT is a useful technology to craft initial ideas, as long as the prompts are given within a specific field, include proper context, step-by-step directions and have the proper changes and edits.

Resources for faculty: 

• Academic Integrity Best Practices for Faculty (Columbia College & School of Engineering and Applied Sciences)
• Faculty Statement on Academic Integrity (Columbia College)
• FAQs: Academic Integrity from Columbia Student Conduct and Community Standards 
• Ombuds Office for assistance with academic dishonesty issues. 
• Columbia Center of Artificial Intelligence Technology

Resources for students: 

• Policies from Columbia Student Conduct and Community Standards
• Understanding the Academic Integrity Policy (Columbia College & School of Engineering and Applied Sciences)

Student support resources:

• Maximizing Student Learning Online (Columbia Online)
• Center for Student Advising Tutoring Service (Berick Center for Student Advising)
• Help Rooms and Private Tutors by Department (Berick Center for Student Advising
• Peer Academic Skills Consultants (Berick Center for Student Advising)
• Academic Resource Center (ARC) for School of General Studies
• Center for Engaged Pedagogy (Barnard College)
• Writing Center (for Columbia undergraduate and graduate students)
• Counseling and Psychological Services
• Disability Services

For graduate students: 

• Writing Studio (Graduate School of Arts and Sciences)
• Student Center (Graduate School of Arts and Sciences)
• Teachers College

Columbia University Information Technology (CUIT) CUIT’s Academic Services provides services that can be used by instructors in their courses such as Turnitin , a plagiarism detection service and online proctoring services such as Proctorio , a remote proctoring service that monitors students taking virtual exams through CourseWorks. 

Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) The CTL can help you think through your course policies, ways to create community, design course assessments, and setting up CourseWorks to promote integrity, among other teaching and learning facets. To schedule a one-on-one consultation, please contact the CTL at [email protected] . 

References 

Bernard, W. Jr. and Keith-Spiegel, P. (2002).  Academic Dishonesty: An Educator’s Guide . Mahwah, NJ: Psychology Press.

Bertram Gallant, T. (2017).  Academic Integrity as a Teaching and Learning Issue: From Theory to Practice .  Theory Into Practice,  56(2), 88-94.

Bertram Gallant, T. (Ed.). (2008).  Academic Integrity in the Twenty-First Century: A Teaching and Learning Imperative .  ASHE Higher Education Report . 33(5), 1-143. 

Columbia Center for Teaching and Learning (2020).  Creating Online Exams . 

Columbia Center for Teaching and Learning (2020).  Working with TAs online . 

Darby, F. (2020).  7 Ways to Assess Students Online and Minimize Cheating .  The Chronicle of Higher Education.  

Gonzalez, J. (2017, February).  Teaching Students to Avoid Plagiarism . Cult of Pedagogy, 26.

International Center for Academic Integrity (2023).  Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity .

International Center on Academic Integrity (2023).  https://academicintegrity.org/

Keith, T. Combating Academic Dishonesty, Part 1 – Understanding the Problem. The University of Chicago. (2022, Feb 16).

Lang, J.M. (2013a).  Cheating Lessons: Learning from Academic Dishonesty . Harvard University Press.

Lang, J. M. (2013b).  Cheating Lessons, Part 1 .  The Chronicle of Higher Education. 

Lang, J. M. (2013c).  Cheating Lessons, Part 2 .  The Chronicle of Higher Education. 

Lederman, D. (2020, February 19).  Course Hero Woos Professors . Inside Higher Ed. 

McKenzie, L. (2018, May 8).  Learning Tool or Cheating Aid?   Inside Higher Ed.

Marche, S. (2022, Dec 6). The College Essay is Dead. The Atlantic.

Mollick, E. (2023, Jan 17). All my Classes Suddenly Became AI Classes. One Useful Thing.

Mollick, Ethan. (2022, Dic 8). Four Paths to the Revelation. One Useful Thing.

Wexler, N. Bots’ Can Write Good Essays, But That Doesn’t Make Writing Obsolete. Minding the Gap.

Additional Resources

Bretag, T. (Ed.). (2016). Handbook of Academic Integrity. Singapore: Springer Publishing.

Ormand, C. (2017 March 6).  SAGE Musings: Minimizing and Dealing with Academic Dishonesty . SAGE 2YC: 2YC Faculty as Agents of Change.

WCET (2009).  Best Practice Strategies to Promote Academic Integrity in Online Education .

Thomas, K.  (2022 February 16). Combating Academic Dishonesty, Part 1 – Understanding the Problem. The University of Chicago. Academic Technology Solutions.

______. (2022 February 25). Combating Academic Dishonesty, Part 2: Small Steps to Discourage Academic Dishonesty. The University of Chicago. Academic Technology Solutions.

______.  (2022 April 28). Combating Academic Dishonesty, Part 3: Towards a Pedagogy of Academic Integrity. The University of Chicago. Academic Technology Solutions.

______.  (2022 June 7). Combating Academic Dishonesty, Part 4: Library Services to Support Academic Honesty. The University of Chicago. Academic Technology Solutions.

Acknowledgement

This resource was adapted from the faculty booklet  Promoting Academic Integrity & Preventing Academic Dishonesty: Best Practices at Columbia University  developed by Victoria Malaney Brown, Director of Academic Integrity at Columbia College and Columbia Engineering, Abigail MacBain and Ramón Flores Pinedo, PhD students in GSAS. We would like to thank them for their extensive support in creating this academic integrity resource.

Want to communicate your expectations around AI tools?

See the CTL’s resource “Considerations for AI Tools in the Classroom.”

This website uses cookies to identify users, improve the user experience and requires cookies to work. By continuing to use this website, you consent to Columbia University's use of cookies and similar technologies, in accordance with the Columbia University Website Cookie Notice .

Academic Integrity

What is academic integrity.

Academic integrity is the commitment to and demonstration of honest and moral behavior in an academic setting. This is most relevant at the university level as it relates to providing credit to other people when using their ideas. In simplest terms, it requires acknowledging the contributions of other people. Failure to provide such acknowledgement is considered plagiarism.

What is plagiarism?

At UNC, plagiarism is defined as “the deliberate or reckless representation of another’s words, thoughts, or ideas as one’s own without attribution in connection with submission of academic work, whether graded or otherwise.” (Instrument of Student Judicial Governance, Section II.B.1.). Because it is considered a form of cheating, the Office of the Dean of Students can punish students who plagiarize with course failure and suspension.

What does “reckless” mean?

Often when international students and scholars plagiarize, they do not intentionally steal another person’s work. Instead, they plagiarize by accident because they do not have a complete understanding of what constitutes plagiarism. This is what we mean by “reckless”. Unfortunately, failure to give proper credit to someone else’s ideas because you didn’t know you were supposed to or because you didn’t know how to do so is considered just as bad as intentionally stealing someone else’s work. Therefore, it is your responsibility to understand when and how to acknowledge someone else’s contribution. See below for strategies.

Cultural Differences

If you are not from the United States, the concept of plagiarism might be hard to understand because what constitutes stealing someone else’s work in the US may not be considered stealing in other cultural contexts. In some domains outside of the US, it is fine to take ideas and even entire passages of text from other authors without mentioning where the information was obtained. This differs greatly from the US (and several other countries) in which all words taken from another author as well as every idea taken from another author – even if the words are changed – must be accompanied by a formal citation or acknowledgment of the original author.

Tell your professors that you’d like to make sure you’re not plagiarizing. Ask them if they’d be willing to meet with you to review your draft *before you turn it in for a grade.* Ask if they’d be willing to help you identify any passages that need better citation. Bring your draft, your notes, and your sources so your professor can see the original. Be proactive in this process! Point out areas you’re not sure about. Don’t wait silently, thinking that a passage must be okay if the professor doesn’t point it out. Have this conversation well before the draft is due, and explain to your professor that you are trying not to be reckless.

Make an appointment with a Writing Center coach. Bring your draft and source materials, and show your coach the passages you’re concerned about. They’ll teach you strategies for paraphrasing, summarizing, and quoting effectively, and for attributing properly.

Read the publication manual of your disciplinary citation style. Undergraduates most often use either MLA or APA style. The Libraries have copies of these manuals and citation tutorials online.

Take full advantage of the resources below.

Avoiding plagiarism and maintaining academic honesty can be learned just as any other skills, and they are essential to your success at UNC and to your work as a professional clinician, academic or researcher. Below are a list of resources to help you learn more.

Office of Student Conduct (for Students)

Instrument of Student Judicial Governance, Appendix A

Why We Cite

How We Cite

Paraphrasing

Citation Resources

If you enjoy using our handouts, we appreciate contributions of acknowledgement.

Perspectives on Positive Academic Ethics: an Introduction

• Published: 08 October 2021
• Volume 19 , pages 305–308, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Diane Pecorari 1 &
• Wendy Sutherland-Smith 2  

6968 Accesses

3 Citations

Explore all metrics

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Integrity and misconduct are two sides of the same coin. Acts of misconduct violate principles of integrity, so promoting integrity implies an interest in combatting acts which challenge and degrade it. There is ample evidence that scholarly institutions and bodies interested in integrity frequently shift their gaze to its converse. For instance, the International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI) defines academic integrity with respect to positive principles, establishing "six fundamental values: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage" ( 2021 , p. 4). Despite this focus on the positive, in a reading list published by the ICAI listing key articles in academic integrity (Bertram Gallant, 2012 ), misconduct leaves a discernable footprint. Of 42 articles, 13 include "cheat" or "cheating" in their titles, six "plagiarism," and 12 "dishonesty" (by contrast, a single article has the word "honesty" in its title). Only nine of the 42 have titles which avoid mention of some negative act. Similarly, a search of the table of contents of the Journal of Academic Ethics finds 20 articles mentioning "plagiarism" in the title, and six naming the relatively recent phenomenon of contract cheating. Sixteen titles include "dishonesty" but only two include the word "honesty."

Therefore, we ask, has the shift to "positive integrity" in the written discourses of institutions been mirrored in practice? Have we really moved to actioning and implementing "positive" rather than "negative" integrity frames? While recognising that it is appropriate and indeed necessary to investigate the transgressive, the objective of this Special Issue is to consider whether the balance is right, or whether greater awareness and implementation of positive ethics can create positive integrity change. What would happen if we were aspirational and kept the question "How can we do better?" front of mind?

We acknowledge that transgressive acts are worthy of attention by virtue of their ability to threaten positive virtues. This gives positive virtues a very real primacy in principle (if not always respected in practice). The ICAI explains the need to emphasise positive values like this:

Many instructors, students, staff, and administrators embrace the principles of academic integrity because they know the goals of teaching, learning, research, and service can only be accomplished in ethical environments. Despite that, scholarly institutions rarely identify and describe their commitment to the principles of integrity in positive and practical terms. Instead, they tend to address academic integrity by identifying and prohibiting behaviors that run counter to the principles of integrity. By articulating the fundamental values of academic integrity, ICAI attempts to frame academic integrity in ways that are both positive and pragmatic. ( 2021 , p. 4)

The first four articles in the Special Issue consider broad areas in which organisations may reimagine their commitment to positive ethics in their tenets and operations. The first proposes a rethinking of institutional ethos to reflect notions of solidarity in the material life of the academy. The second explores the issue of improving working conditions and a sense of belonging for adjunct/sessional staff in the lived experience of institutional life. The third investigates ways in which institutions may review their recognition and reward for high publication rates, which currently allow for exploitation by predatory conferences. The final article examines the history of discourse in research on academic integrity and ways in which positive research integrity may be foregrounded.

Jolante Bieliauskaitė’s article, titled "Solidarity in academia and its relationship to academic integrity," uses the lenses of philosophy and sociology to explore the principle of "solidarity" in the academy as a cornerstone of ethics and integrity. The principle of solidarity encompasses positive notions of co-operation between groups or individuals at different levels of the academy, albeit noting the “dark side” of this principle. The author explains the conceptual connection between solidarity, ethics and integrity and concludes that “academic solidarity and academic integrity are linked through a social ethos that maintains socially significant values.” She argues that solidarity should be reflected in the ethos, structures, codes and regulations of the academy and realised in the embodied lives of institutions.

Congruent with the theme of solidarity and ethics in action, Cecile Sam explores how the “solidarity between tenure lined and non-tenure lined faculty” can build an academic community founded on ethics of care. In “How academic community and an ethic of care can shape adjunct work environments: A case study of a community college” she investigates ways in which one institution has improved the lived experience of adjunct/sessional staff through “work behavior, decision-making and policies.” A positive sense of membership and belonging encourages a “sense of responsibility” within the overall community and negates more divisive notions of “academic community,” which include some staff while excluding others. She concludes that positive ethics provides a useful framework that both “faculty and administrators used to base their decisions and policy rationale” upon.

Diane Pecorari’s article, "Predatory conferences: What are the signs?" explores the issue of choice in conference support and attendance. She identifies and analyses key features of predatory conferences to better inform the academic community about their nature. The author also provides a tool for “scientific literacy by mapping the characteristics which can reliably differentiate between the legitimate and the predatory” in conference selection. From a positive ethics perspective, individual and institutional decisions on conference attendance or publication are moved from the “unethical” to the “virtuous end of the cline.” This positive change may assist institutions, academics and research students make “ethically appropriate choices” about the conferences they support and attend.

Thomas Lancaster investigates the history of discourse in the academic integrity field in " Academic dishonesty or academic integrity? Using Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques to investigate positive integrity in academic integrity research." He analyses data from paper titles written in academic integrity between 1904 and 2019. Whilst establishing three main categories (academic integrity, academic dishonesty and plagiarism detection), he discusses the variations in negative, neutral and positive discourses. He notes a recent trend “has been a move towards neutral integrity” in paper title choice, with higher readerships for negative rather than positive titles. However, the ten most prolific academic integrity researchers defy this trend and employ positive terms which, he hopes, may inspire emerging researchers to adopt a positive ethics approach.

The next three articles in this Issue explore ways in which various stakeholders in the academy may focus more on the negative infractions against principles of integrity rather than positive underpinning values. They thereby highlight what we consider to be a missed opportunity to reimagine positive ethics in action, and one already noted in the area of psychology (e.g., Aoyagi & Portenga, 2010 ). Handelsman et al. ( 2002 ) discuss the ways in which a fixation on the transgressive promotes an unhelpful narrowing of perspectives which may cause the foundational concepts of positive ethics to be overshadowed (e.g., "seminars on academic ethics degenerate into discussions of student cheating," p. 732).

Rebecca Moore Howard and Sandra Jamieson explore the narrowing of perspectives alluded to by Handelsman et al. by describing pedagogies which focus on the positive rather than the transgressive. In their article " The ethics of teaching rhetorical intertextuality " the authors discuss the rhetorical intertextuality approach, which focuses on engaging students in dialogue with texts and their sources. In so doing, they contend, discourses that focus on the transgressive are rendered irrelevant, as the process views students as “authors rather than transgressors” of conventions. Rhetorical intertextuality, they argue, embodies positive ethics as students develop understanding and meaning of the target text in a process of “collaboration with source texts.” The authors advocate that this is a positive approach to student meaning-making.

In a similar vein, Jess Gregory advocates “establishing a consensus of correct behavior in addition to ensuring consent” between academic stakeholders. In her article titled " Plagiarism as a social contract: A new way to approach plagiarism," she cites research that places plagiarism as transgressive behaviour requiring interventionist or, occasionally, positive teaching approaches for its remediation. The author then applies Integrative Social Contract Theory (ISCT), which derives from business ethics in the area of ethical decision-making, to explore twenty years of abstracts to ascertain if such consensus between parties is apparent. She suggests ways in which consensual social contracts may be better achieved in the future and concludes positive ethics is enhanced by applying ISCT as “authors will have meaningfully consented to abide by the shared norms of correct behavior; respecting intellectual property.”

Some psychology researchers have noted that adopting a remedial approach to ethics (i.e., an orientation toward the minimum acceptable standards) reflects an “incomplete” view of ethics (Knapp & VandeCreek, 2006 ). They argue that “most psychologists want to do more than just avoid being punished; they want to have a positive impact on others and to excel in their profession” (p. 4). The impetus to go beyond a remedial approach and adopt a positive ethics framework has been advocated in other fields, such as science and engineering education (Han, 2015 ) as well as business (Sekerka et al., 2014 ). Handelsman et al. advocate a positive ethics approach, the objectives of which are:

to shift the ethics of psychologists from an almost exclusive focus on wrongdoing and disciplinary responses to a more balanced and integrative approach that includes encouraging psychologists to aspire to their highest ethical potential. ( 2002 , p. 731)

Among Handelsman et al.’s recommendations is unequivocal education or training for the field, "mak[ing] an affirmative effort to teach ethical sensitivity” (Handelsman et al., 2002 , p. 741). Kathryn Strong Hansen in "Optimistic fiction as a tool for ethical reflection in STEM" supports the view of explicit ethics education. She argues that to “encourage the replication of ethical behavior,” there needs to be a focus on “exemplary ethical behavior” in the role models presented to students. Utilising optimistic science fiction texts, the author explores how students are encouraged to think and reflect in ethically constructive ways. She contends that the six domains of Fiction for Specific Purposes provide positive notions of hope and creativity inherent in many science fiction texts as they focus on the aspirational, model ethical ideals and norms through positive integrity. Combined with the benefit of no real-life risk for students in terms of positing incorrect solutions and valuable ethical reflection opportunities, the author argues, students learn to “cultivate a sense of ethicality being possible and laudatory” in their various professions.

This diverse collection of research articles demonstrates that a positive ethics framework is timely and suggests ways that it could be discussed, explored and actioned. The articles illustrate the shift in focus which is implied by adopting a positive ethics research perspective. From such a perspective, the question the academy and its members must ask themselves is no longer "Is this good enough?" but "Is this the best it can be?" The latter question is harder to answer. The ambition of this Special Issue is to suggest that this question should be asked more often, by more people and organisations and in more settings.

Aoyagi, M. W., & Portenga, S. T. (2010). The role of positive ethics and virtues in the context of sport and performance psychology service delivery. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 41 , 253–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019483

Article   Google Scholar  

Bertram Gallant, T. (Ed.). (2012). Twenty years of academic integrity: Top articles and book chapters 1992–2012 . Clemson, SC: International Center for Academic Integrity.

Han, H. (2015). Virtue ethics, positive psychology, and a new model of science and engineering ethics education. Science and Engineering Ethics, 21 , 441–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-014-9539-7

Handelsman, M. M., Knapp, S., & Gottlieb, M. C. (2002). Positive ethics. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 731–744). Oxford University Press.

Google Scholar  

International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI).  https://academicintegrity.org . Accessed 8 July 2021.

Knapp, S. J., & VandeCreek, L. D. (2006). Remedial and positive ethics. In S. J. Knapp & L. D. VandeCreek (Eds.), Practical ethics for psychologists: A positive approach (pp. 3–14). American Psychological Association.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Sekerka, L. E., Comer, D. R., & Godwin, L. N. (2014). Positive organizational ethics: Cultivating and sustaining moral performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 119 , 435–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1911-z

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong, China

Diane Pecorari

Deakin University, Geelong, Australia

Wendy Sutherland-Smith

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diane Pecorari .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Pecorari, D., Sutherland-Smith, W. Perspectives on Positive Academic Ethics: an Introduction. J Acad Ethics 19 , 305–308 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-021-09439-9

Download citation

Published : 08 October 2021

Issue Date : September 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-021-09439-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Make a gift
• ConnectCarolina
• Information for:
• Prospective students
• Current students
• Faculty and staff
• Alumni and friends

Academic Integrity and Ethics

Introduction, some causes of academic misconduct, violations and sanctions, data gathering, storage, retention, publication practices: authorship, supervision of research personnel, issues of attribution, being a responsible teacher, teaching responsible conduct, reporting research misconduct, copyright guidelines, patent rights, conflict of interest and commitment, bibliography.

“You know it's not the honors and the prizes and the fancy outsides of life which ultimately nourish our souls. It's the knowing that we can be trusted, that we never have to fear the truth, that the bedrock of our very being is good stuff." — Fred “Mr. Rogers” Rogers

Note: the information below may be outdated, please check the Ethics and Integrity at Carolina website or with your department for the most current guidelines.

As an emerging researcher, the questions you ask and the answers you find will lead you and your colleagues into uncharted waters of knowledge. With intellectual discovery and collaboration come new responsibilities. In conducting and then disseminating the results of your research, you will be accountable both to your colleagues and to the public. The material that follows is intended to help you navigate the complex moral situations that you will encounter in an advanced academic setting.

Trust is the foundation of scholarship at the University. Innovation can continue only in an atmosphere of confidence and fairness. You must be able to trust that your colleagues are honest in presenting their research, and they must have the same trust in your work. The range of research subjects and methods, along with systems of analysis and data presentation that guide each field, give rise to situations of great moral complexity. Likewise, relationships between teachers and students, along with great opportunity, carry important responsibilities and obligations. Students will strengthen the foundation of trust within the University by gaining knowledge of their fields and committing themselves to cultivating collegial relationships.

Academic integrity is essential not only for progress within the academy, but also for maintaining the trust granted by the people of North Carolina, the nation, and the world. The independence and reputation of the University rest in the hands of those who are scrupulous in their search for truth. This responsibility is now yours.

Graduate students are under a lot of pressure while completing their academic programs. These pressures may tempt scholars and researchers to “cut corners,” borrow an idea without proper attribution, or stray from standard practices in a particular academic field. Student teachers and researchers should strive to be attentive to how these pressures impact their conduct in the classroom, the library, and the laboratory. These pressures include:

• Deadlines: Deadlines determined by university calendars and other schedules can complicate the research process and offer a temptation to “cut corners.”
• Productivity and competition: Scholars may feel pressure to increase their output to secure monetary or professional rewards.
• Collaborative and individual work: Research projects offer great opportunities for collaboration—and the need to accept responsibility for one’s own role in the project, as well as the results obtained by the group.
• Criticism and trust: Scholars scrutinize and analyze the work of other academics in order to ensure that research methods are appropriately applied and results rigorously reviewed. Criticism is intended to build trust and increase knowledge; however, dishonest criticism will produce an erosion of that trust.
• Multiple roles: Graduate students often are teachers as well as researchers, and thus must consider the ethical implications of the instructor-student relationship as well as those of relationships between professional equals.
• Processes and products: Elaborate processes may not always produce intended results. Disappointment may tempt one toward misrepresentation.
• Lack of information: Learning new skills can include becoming aware of new ethical dilemmas.

These pressures or some combination thereof will be present throughout your graduate career and beyond. As you make your way in an academic discipline, continue to be aware of the ethical implications of the work that you do. The professional associations that govern your discipline are likely to have published guidelines for professional practice and scholarship. Allow these guidelines to inform your own, personal values in conducting scholarship, teaching, and research.

Continue to include ethical considerations in discussions with your student colleagues, teachers, researchers and others with whom you will be working. A healthy dialogue about academic integrity and ethics will go a long way to ensure that the public trust and the professional trust are in good hands. As times change and knowledge increases, new ethical demands will be placed on you and your work. With a clearly articulated set of standards, you will be able to meet the ethical challenges that this new knowledge presents.

The University, along with professional associations, monitors and applies sanctions in response to violations of normative practices in scholarship, teaching, and research. There are a variety of University agencies and policies that address academic or research misconduct. Consult with your academic advisor, a faculty member, the chair of your department, dean of your school/college, or a dean in the Graduate School if you have questions about the ethical dimensions of any component of your program at Carolina.

Also, consult the resources listed in the enclosed booklet, Responsible Conduct of Research, for more information specifically related to integrity in research. Other University policies relating to ethics in research, scholarship and teaching are found in the third section of this orientation binder, “Policies and Procedures.” They include policies on:

• Amorous relationships between students and faculty
• Ethics in research; conflict of interest
• The Honor Code; Instrument of Student Judicial Governance
• Incidents of racial and sexual harassment, including sexual orientation.

Consult these documents, the Graduate School (966-2611), or the Assistant Dean of Students/Judicial Programs Officer in the Office of the Dean of Students (966-4042) for more information or to register your concern about issues of academic misconduct on campus.

Ethical Issues in Research

Guidelines for research.

There has been a good deal of concern in the U.S. Congress, among grant funding agencies, and among the general public about “fraud in research.” The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has put in place its “Policy and Procedures on Ethics in Research” as required by these agencies. All persons engaged in research should be familiar with these rules. (Copies are available from the Office of Sponsored Research, 966-3412 or 3411.)

Clearly it is important for the Institution as well as for the individual not just to know how to deal with fraud in research when it has occurred but—perhaps more importantly—to prevent such fraud from occurring in the first place. In fact, we should comport ourselves in such a way that even the suspicion of fraud is unlikely to arise and, if it does arise unjustly, we have the records in hand to prove that the allegation was misplaced.

Therefore the present guidelines, relating to Data Gathering, Storage and Retention , to Publication Practices and Authorship and to Supervision of Research Personnel were devised by the Faculty Committee on Research. Many are based on similar guidelines already extant at other institutions or in our School of Medicine. Although they do not have the force of law or regulation, they are strongly commended to your attention as desirable and prudent practices.

The most important ingredients in avoiding fraud are the integrity and high ethical standards of the research project leader. If the project leader cuts corners and is more concerned with next week’s publication or next month’s research grant renewal than with a life-long reputation and the integrity of the research, these guidelines are not likely to be of much help. They have been designed to assist those who are determined to maintain high standards in their research careers.

In making the following recommendations, the Faculty Committee on Research recognizes that there are wide variations from one field to another. Nevertheless we strongly urge adherence to these guidelines, if necessary with appropriate modifications to accommodate solidly established practices within a field.

General University Policies

Anyone engaged in research must abide by University, Divisional and Departmental policies and procedures concerning research.

A common denominator in most cases of alleged scientific misconduct has been the absence of a complete set of verifiable data. The retention of accurately recorded and retrievable results is of the utmost importance for the progress of scientific inquiry. A scientist must have access to their original results in order to respond to questions including, but not limited to, those that may arise without any implication of impropriety. Moreover, errors may be mistaken for misconduct when the primary experimental results are unavailable.

Recommendations:

• Original research results should be promptly recorded, and should be kept in as organized and accessible a fashion as possible.
• The research project leader should retain the raw research data pertinent to publication for a reasonable period of time (normally five years) after publication. In no instance should primary data be destroyed while questions may be raised which are answerable only by reference to such data.
• Documentation of required approvals of the Human Rights and Animal Use Committee should be retained in the research project leader’s files for a period of five years.

A gradual diffusion of responsibility for multi-authored or collaborative studies has led in recent years to the publication of papers for which no single author was prepared to take full responsibility. Two critical safeguards in the publication of accurate scientific reports are the active participation of each coauthor in verifying that part of a manuscript that falls within their specialty area and the designation of one author who is responsible for the validity of the entire manuscript.

• An author submitting a paper should never include the name of a coauthor without that person’s consent. Each coauthor should be furnished with a copy of the manuscript before it is submitted. Coauthorship should be offered to (and limited to) anyone who has clearly made a significant contribution to the work.
• Anyone accepting coauthorship of a paper should realize that this action implies a responsibility as well as a privilege. If a potential coauthor has serious reservations concerning a publication the individual should decline coauthorship.
• The senior author or authors of a paper, individually or in concert, should be prepared to identify the contributions of each coauthor.
• Simultaneous submission of essentially identical manuscripts to different journals is improper.
• As a general principle, research should be published in the scientific literature before reports of such research are released to the public press.

Careful supervision of all research personnel by their research project leaders is in the best interest of the trainee, the institution, and the scientific community. The complexity of scientific methods, the necessity for caution in interpreting possibly ambiguous data, and the need for advanced statistical analysis, all require an active role for the research project leader in the guidance of research personnel.

• All research personnel, such as technicians, graduate students, and postdoctoral trainees, should be specifically supervised by a designated research project leader.
• The ratio of research personnel to project leaders should be small enough that close interaction is possible for scientific interchange as well as oversight of the research at all stages.
• The project leader should supervise the design of experiments and the process of acquiring, recording, examining, interpreting and sorting data. (A project leader who limits their role to the editing of manuscripts does not provide adequate supervision.)
• Collegial discussions among project leaders and research personnel constituting a research unit should be held regularly, both to contribute to the scientific efforts of the members of the group and to provide informal peer review of research results.
• The project leader or supervisor should provide each investigator (whether student, postdoctoral fellow or other research personnel) with applicable governmental and institutional requirements for conduct of studies involving healthy volunteers or patients, animals, radioactive or other hazardous substances, and recombinant DNA.

Ethics in Scholarship

Scholarly research and writing requires a delicate weaving of your ideas with the ideas, research, and methods of other scholars. As isolating (and private) an act as scholarship might feel, after long, lonely hours in a library or a laboratory, scholarship is accomplished within a community of scholars, whether or not you ever meet the people upon whose ideas you build your own. Scholars must rely responsibly on the work of others. Therefore, it is important that you know what constitutes appropriate attribution of source material when you write and conduct research.

Become familiar with the guidelines for attribution outlined in the booklet, Responsible Conduct of Research, or in documents prepared by your department or the professional association in your field. These issues become particularly important when attributing credit for work and authorship in scholarship conducted collaboratively. Do not hesitate to contact your advisor or the chair of your department for guidance.

It is important to know exactly what plagiarism is in order to avoid it in your work. While the Instrument of Judicial Governance addresses academic offenses under the Honor Code (see the Policies section of this orientation binder), several examples of plagiarism may make the concepts clearer.

Plagiarism, as defined by the Instrument of Judicial Governance is the “intentional representation of another person’s words, thoughts, or ideas as one’s own.” Plagiarism is wrong, and should not be condoned. Cases of plagiarism strongly affect the University community. The normal sanction for plagiarism is suspension of the student from the University. For graduate students who may be assigned a failing grade on recommendations of the Graduate Honor Court because of documented plagiarism, the result is expulsion from their program and the end of their graduate career at Carolina.

Independent thought is encouraged in graduate education, but mature scholarship requires that one person’s ideas be built with the help of other scholars and researchers. In the academy it is expected that all “borrowed” material will be appropriately credited to the originator of the thoughts, ideas, and words.

Any amount of material copied from an unacknowledged source, no matter how small, can be considered plagiarism. Ignorance of citation procedures is not an excuse for plagiarism. At the graduate level, it is assumed that all students know the rules of citation and quotation. It is not enough to list a source in the bibliography without proper citation of the material in the body of a text. If you are unsure of the rules of citation and attribution, talk with your instructor or consult any of the style and writing manuals listed at the end of this section of the orientation binder.

One practice that may lead to unintentional plagiarism is careless note taking, but even here, there is no excuse. Take good and thorough notes when reviewing literature or recording data; record exact sources and citations, including page numbers. Students often will forget if a sentence or passage is something they wrote or if it was taken from another source. The following are examples of plagiarism:

1. Quoting Directly without Proper Acknowledgment

In this example, the student made changes to the first part of the sentence, then copied directly from the source. All material borrowed from another source must be placed in quotation marks. Quoted material longer than three sentences should be indented without quotation marks.

For decades, student athletes, usually seventeen-to-nineteen-year-old freshmen, have informally agreed to contract with the university to attend: athletic performance in exchange for an education. The athletes have kept their part of the bargain; the universities have not. Universities and athletic departments have gained huge gate receipts, television revenues, national visibility, donors to university programs, and more, as a result of the performances of gifted basketball and football players, of whom a disproportionate number of the most gifted and most exploited have been black.

From Harry Edwards (1983) “Educating Black Athletes” The Atlantic Monthly, August 1983

From the student’s paper

For years, young student athletes have virtually signed four years of their lives away to compete for a university in exchange for a college degree. The athletes have kept their part of the bargain; the universities have not. Universities and athletic departments have gained huge gate receipts, television revenues, national visibility, donors to university programs, and more, as a result of the performances of gifted basketball and football players, of whom a disproportionate number of the most gifted and most exploited have been black.

2. Paraphrasing

In the passages that follow, the student has recorded the source by substituting words and changing sentences, but keeps the ideas and thoughts of the source. Although the student has reworded the sentences or passage extensively, the author still must be acknowledged. When used properly, paraphrasing can be a valuable tool for summarizing the author’s ideas into your own thoughts. When paraphrasing, if most of the ideas are coming from the source, you must include an appropriate citation to the original author. Paraphrasing, without proper citation, is plagiarism.

Generations of athletes entering colleges and universities across the country have signed a contract with the university to compete in sports, giving their athletic services in exchange for room, board, tuition, and a college degree.

The athletes have kept their part of the bargain by dedicating themselves to the university for four years; the universities have not, with eight out of ten leaving the university without a college degree.

The sports programs at these universities have profited tremendously from the talent of football and basketball players, of whom, blacks tend to be over represented. The dramatic increase in the proportion of black college athletes has paralleled college sports’ ability to attract television revenues, huge gate receipts, and national visibility.

Plagiarism can be easily avoided by consulting any of the many writing manuals. There are many different ways to note a source. The most widely used is the University of Chicago Manual of Style, favored in the traditional humanities. The economy of citation used by the Modern Language Association (MLA) also is widely accepted. The following style and writing manuals are in the library:

• The Chicago Manual of Style (14th edition)
• MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers
• Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (4th edition)
• C.B.E. Style Manual (5th edition): a guide for authors, editors, and publishers in the biological sciences.
• Electronic Style: A Guide to Citing Electronic Information

The secret to using sources productively is to use them to support and develop your own ideas. If you find that too much of your paper is coming from the source, start over. If you have doubts about how to cite material, consult your instructor to see which method is preferred in your department or field.

Ethics in Teaching

Good teaching requires that you both act responsibly and teach your students how to act responsibly.

There are number of ethical issues of which you should be aware when teaching. These include, but are not limited to, confidentiality, racial and sexual harassment, favoritism, exploitation, and conflict of interest. It is crucial that you have an attitude of respect toward your students and that you uphold their right to a fair and impartial classroom environment. If you are unsure about what is required of you, consult the TA coordinator in your department or in the Center for Teaching and Learning. Many of these issues will be discussed in departmental TA training courses or the Orientation Program for TAs conducted by the Center for Teaching and Learning.

In acting respectfully toward your students, you will be teaching them about proper academic behavior. You also have a responsibility to promote and enforce the Honor Code in your classroom (see the Policies section of this orientation binder). The way in which you do this will depend, of course, on your teaching situation; however, there are some general strategies that you can implement.

• Talk about your expectations. Be explicit about what they need to cite when writing a paper and the extent to which they can use notes or work with other people on their assignments.
• When writing a syllabus, include a section on the Honor Code and how it applies to the course you are teaching. You may be able to get ideas about how to do this from faculty members or other graduate students in your department.
• If you suspect that an Honor Code violation has occurred, you have a responsibility to report it to the Student Attorney General (966-4042).

If at any time you have questions about the Honor Code or how it applies to your course, do not hesitate to contact either the Attorney General or Assistant Dean for Students/Judicial Programs in the Office of the Dean of Students (966-4042).

Research Misconduct

Public trust in the integrity and ethical behavior of scholars must be maintained if research is to continue to play its proper role in our University and society. It is the policy of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (hereinafter "University") that its research be carried out with the highest standards of integrity and ethical behavior. While the primary responsibility for maintaining integrity in research rests with those who conduct it, the University has established standards to ensure a healthy environment for research and compliance with law. Such standards include this Policy and Procedures on Responding to Allegations of Research Misconduct (hereinafter "Policy").

Each member of the University community has a personal responsibility for implementing this Policy in relation to any scholarly work with which he or she is associated and for helping his or her associates in continuing efforts to avoid any activity which might be considered in violation of this Policy. Failure to comply with this Policy shall be dealt with according to the procedures specified herein and is considered to be a violation of the trust placed in each member of the University community.

This Policy applies to University research personnel, including faculty, staff, students, trainees, technicians, guest researchers, collaborators and consultants. In addition this Policy applies to all research conducted under the auspices of the University, regardless of the source of financial support.

Any use of this Policy or these Procedures to bring malicious charges or charges not otherwise in good faith against any individual and any act of retaliation or reprisal against an individual for reporting in good faith a charge of misconduct in research shall be violations of this Policy. Such violations shall be dealt with through regular administrative processes for violations of University policies.

1. "Research Misconduct" means fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.

2. Any individual having reason to believe that someone has engaged in research misconduct related to University research has an obligation to report their concerns to their own department chair (or equivalent unit head) or directly to the Research Integrity Officer (RIO). The Department Chair (or equivalent) shall immediately notify the RIO, who will inform the Deciding Official. If the circumstances described do not meet the definition of research misconduct, as set forth in Section IV.A of the Policy , the RIO may refer the individual or allegation to other offices or officials with responsibility for resolving the issue. Research misconduct is a confidential personnel matter.

3. The RIO will assess the allegation to determine whether it (1) falls within the definition of research misconduct in the Policy and applicable federal regulations, including, as applicable 42 C.F.R. § 93.103 and other federal agency guidance, and (2) is sufficiently credible and specific so that potential evidence of research misconduct may be identified. An Inquiry will be conducted if both of these criteria are met. The Inquiry is a step in the process to conduct an initial review of the available evidence to determine whether an Investigation is warranted. An Investigation is warranted if: (1) there is a reasonable basis for concluding that the allegation falls within the definition of research misconduct in this Policy and (2) preliminary information-gathering and preliminary fact-finding from the Inquiry indicate that the allegation may have substance.

5. A research misconduct matter that progresses to an Investigation is the formal development and examination of a factual record leading to (1) a decision not to make a finding of research misconduct or (2) a recommendation for a finding of research misconduct, which may include a recommendation for internal administrative or other appropriate action.

6. A finding of research misconduct requires: (1) the misconduct alleged meets the definition of research misconduct as set forth in this Policy or applicable federal agency policy; (2) the alleged misconduct is a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community; and (3) the misconduct was committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly. A finding of research misconduct must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence. If the respondent presents any affirmative defenses to an allegation of research misconduct, the respondent has the burden of going forward with and the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, such affirmative defenses.

Revised 12/03/2015

You can report research misconduct by:

• Contacting UNC's Institutional Research Integrity Officer
• Reporting to the University's Compliance Line (EthicsPoint) The use of EthicsPoint through the Compliance Line can be anonymous. The University will respond to anonymous concerns.
• You can also bring your concerns to department chairs, unit deans or The Graduate School.

University Policies Affecting Graduate Student Research

Participating in research that is important, challenging, feasible, ethical, and complementary to your needs is fundamental to your success in graduate school. Each graduate research experience involves a unique set of circumstances, including sources of extramural support, involvement of external collaborators, relationships between graduate students and faculty, and supervision of people and resources. Understanding the dynamics of managing a multidisciplinary research project is one of the most valuable aspects of the graduate experience.

In order to prevent misunderstandings, it is essential that faculty and graduate students engage in frequent, candid and thoughtful discussions about the technical and ethical implications of their research. You should ask your research advisor about 1) all sources of extramural funding directly supporting your research experience, 2) all collaborators and co-investigators who may be directly involved in your research, 3) any of his or her personal and/or professional relationships that may be directly involved in supporting your research, and 4) any implied or implicit restrictions on your learning experience related to the preceding items.

As you conduct your research, there will be a number of pertinent institutional policies with which you must comply. A short list may include the protection of research subjects, safe laboratory procedures, animal care policies, grant and contract requirements for disclosure of research findings, and infectious disease control policies. The exact mix of these policies that will affect you depends greatly upon the specific nature of your research project. Ask your research advisor to explain, and make available to you, those policies which affect your lab and your research project. Short descriptions of University policies on copyright, patent rights and involvement of graduate students in the outside commercial interests of faculty members follow.

As a graduate student, you may be both producing works entitled to copyright protection and using, either in teaching or research, materials which are copyright protected. Thus, a thumbnail sketch of copyright guidelines is useful. Subject to important exceptions, one who holds a copyright has the right to prevent others from using or reproducing the copyrighted work without permission. University policy provides that in general, copyright in copyrightable materials (e.g, written or visual works, sound recordings or software) is held by the creator. Creators of a joint work are co-owners of the copyright. In instances where the University does not own all or part of a copyright, distribution of income from the copyrighted work, rare in an academic setting, is a matter of arrangement between the creator(s) and the publishers or licensees. Be aware, however, that many publishers require authors of journal articles to assign copyright as a condition of publication.

General exceptions to the preceding rules apply to those who are hired to produce a specific work, where the University retains copyright, and where a sponsored research agreement requires a different arrangement, where either the University or sponsor retains copyright, depending on the provisions of the research agreement. In the case where an author uses unique University resources on a sustained and significant basis as in the production of software or audio-visual materials, the contribution of the University is acknowledged through joint copyright ownership. Also, some University units or departments, under policies approved by the Chancellor, require faculty, staff and students to assign copyright to the University.

In the case of student works, the University Copyright Guidelines make a couple of special exceptions to the general presumption that the creator holds copyright. When your dissertation, thesis or other student work is part of a larger University research project, original records of the investigation (i. e., data or notebooks) are property of the University, but may be retained by the student at the discretion of the chair of the student’s major department. The University shall also have, as a condition of enrollment in any course or the award of any degree, the royalty-free right to retain and use a limited number of copies of a student work. In the case of theses and dissertations, the University has the right to require their publication for archival use.

The “fair use” doctrine is a defense to claims of copyright infringement. Where the doctrine applies, one may copy and use copyrighted works without permission of the copyright owner. At the University, such copying or use should not be undertaken without consultation with the appropriate legal counsel staff. Students may consult Student Legal Services regarding application of the fair use doctrine to their research activities. Questions about unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted materials in other contexts should be directed to the Office of University Counsel .

In some cases, the research you do as a graduate student might lead to patentable discoveries. Assignment of patent rights and shares of any royalty income for work done by you while at the University is governed by the Board of Governors’ Patent and Copyright Policies and UNC-Chapel Hill’s Patent and Copyright Procedures. The policy applies whenever there is any use of institutional time, resources, or facilities by faculty, staff, or students. If you believe you have made a patentable discovery, you should contact the Office of Technology Development in Bynum Hall.

Patent rights may be affected by contractual arrangements between the University and the sponsor of your research project. Under the terms of some research contracts between the University and various agencies of government, private or public corporations, or other private interests, the University may be required to license all patent rights to the contracting party. In these cases, specific provisions of the grant or contract will govern rights and revenue distribution regarding inventions made in connection with sponsored research.

Funding the research enterprise is becoming a more complex endeavor than in the past. Faculty members are increasingly engaging in consulting and outside commercial interests to capitalize upon the discoveries made in their academic research labs. These developments offer a variety of new opportunities for graduate student research. The Policy on Conflicts of Interest and Commitment helps to assure the primacy of academic integrity in these relationships between faculty members, graduate students, and a faculty member’s outside commercial interests.

The University requires disclosure to academic administration and a heightened level of oversight in cases where 1) a faculty member assigns any students, postdocs or other trainees to projects sponsored by a for-profit or non-profit business in which the faculty member, or a family member, has a significant financial interest, or 2) a faculty member allows participation of students or other trainees in a consulting relationship meeting the definition of a significant financial interest.

In these cases, a management plan must be devised by the Department Chair, with the Dean’s approval, to monitor and correct any adverse effects upon involved, and non-involved, graduate students. Regular monitoring and establishment of open feedback channels for the graduate students should be a normal part of each management plan must be devised by the Department Chair, with the Dean’s approval, to monitor and correct any adverse effects upon involved, and non-involved, graduate students. Regular monitoring and establishment of open feedback channels for the graduate students should be a normal part of each management plan. If you become involved in the outside commercial interests of a faculty member, any concerns that arise should be addressed as soon as they arise to your advisor or your Department Chair or Dean.

This document benefited from the UNC School of Pharmacy’s Rights and Procedure of Recourse for Students Involved in Research and discussions of the Conflict of Interest and Commitment Committee of the Administrative Board of the Graduate School.

American Association of University Professors. (1994). Policy documents and reports. Washington, DC: American Association of University Professors.

————. (1987). Statement on professional ethics. Academe. July-August, 1987. 49. Asmore, R. B. & Starr, W. C. (Eds.). (1991). Ethics across the curriculum: The Marquette experience. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press.

Association of American Medical Colleges. (1994). Teaching the responsible conduct of research through a case study approach: A handbook for instructors. Washington, DC: Association of American Medical Colleges.

Baca, M. C. & Stein, R. H. (Eds.). (1983). Ethical principles, practices and problems in higher education. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher.

Bok, D. C. (1976). Can ethics be taught? Change. October 1976. 4-6.

Cahn, S. (Ed.). (1990). Morality, responsibility, and the university. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Collins, M. J. (Ed.). (1983). Teaching values and ethics in college. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 13, March 1983.

Getman, J. (1992). In the company of scholars. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Kasworm, C. E. (1988). “Facilitating ethical development: A paradox” in Brockett, R. G. (Ed.) Ethical issues in adult education. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Keith-Spiegel, P.; Wittig, A.F.; Perkins, D.V.; Balogh, D. W. & Whitley, R., B. E. (1993). The ethics of teaching: A casebook. Muncie, IN: Office of Teaching Resources in Psychology, Ball State University.

LaPidus, J. B. & Mishkin, B. “Values and ethics in the graduate education of scientists” in May, W. W. (Ed.) Ethics and higher education. New York: Macmillan.

Long, E., Jr. (1992). Higher education as a moral enterprise. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

May, W. (Ed.). (1990). Ethics and higher education. New York: Macmillan. Menand, L. (1993). “The future of academic freedom.” Academe, (May-June 1993).

Payne, S. & Charnov, B. (Eds.). (1987). Ethical dilemmas for academic professionals. Springfield, IL: Thomas Books.

Swartzlander, S. D.; Pace, D. & Stamler, V. L. (1993). “The ethics of requiring students to write about their personal lives.” Chronicle of Higher Education, (February 17, 1993, B1-2).

Swayze, J.P.; Louis, K. S. & Anderson, M. S. (1994). “The ethical training of graduate students requires serious and continuing attention.” Chronicle of Higher Education, (March 9, 1994, B1-4).

Sylvan Lake Associates. (1994). Ethical issues in research and science. (A computer-aided, self-instructional course).

• Original article
• Open access
• Published: 17 February 2020

Impact of academic integrity on workplace ethical behaviour

• Jean Gabriel Guerrero-Dib   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3150-9363 1 ,
• Luis Portales   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1508-7826 1 &
• Yolanda Heredia-Escorza   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7300-1918 2  

International Journal for Educational Integrity volume  16 , Article number:  2 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

81k Accesses

68 Citations

12 Altmetric

Metrics details

Corruption is a serious problem in Mexico and the available information regarding the levels of academic dishonesty in Mexico is not very encouraging. Academic integrity is essential in any teaching-learning process focussed on achieving the highest standards of excellence and learning. Promoting and experiencing academic integrity within the university context has a twofold purpose: to achieve the necessary learnings and skills to appropriately perform a specific profession and to develop an ethical perspective which leads to correct decision making. The objective of this study is to explore the relationship between academic integrity and ethical behaviour, particularly workplace behaviour. The study adopts a quantitative, hypothetical and deductive approach. A questionnaire was applied to 1203 college students to gather information regarding the frequency in which they undertake acts of dishonesty in different environments and in regards to the severity they assign to each type of infraction. The results reflect that students who report committing acts against academic integrity also report being involved in dishonest activities in other contexts, and that students who consider academic breaches less serious, report being engaged in academic misconduct more frequently in different contexts. In view of these results, it is unavoidable to reflect on the role that educational institutions and businesses can adopt in the development of programmes to promote a culture of academic integrity which: design educational experiences to foster learning, better prepare students to fully meet their academic obligations, highlight the benefits of doing so, prevent the severity and consequences of dishonest actions, discourage cheating and establish clear and efficient processes to sanction those students who are found responsible for academic breaches.

Introduction

Corruption and dishonesty are deeply rooted problems and have a long history in many countries and communities and Mexico is no exception. There is usually more attention given to corrupt activities perpetrated by government authorities and public officers. The fact that many of these instances of corruption are carried out with the collusion of private sector businesses and individuals is largely ignored. Private citizens themselves are usually involved in corrupt activities where they can gain a personal benefit through the abuse of their position of power or authority (Rose-Ackerman and Palifka 2016 ).

Rose-Ackerman and Palifka ( 2016 ) affirm that personal ethical standards are one of the three categories of causes that promote corruption. This moral “compass” develops through a long and complex educational process which starts at home and, we could say, ends with death. Education becomes one of the key elements in the global strategy for the promotion of a culture of integrity and the fight against corruption. It is difficult to think that education can contribute efficiently if the phenomenon of academic dishonesty exists within the educational sphere. To develop a moral compass, it is not enough to know what has to be done, it is essential to do good (Amilburu 2005 ).

In almost every educational system in the world, it is a widely held view that all people must receive mandatory basic education, thus, almost all children and youths are subject to experience -or not experience- academic integrity during their education, a period that is long enough to develop habits. Daily behaviours during these mainly formative years may be considered as the standard that can perpetuate itself over time (Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo 2015 ).

In addition to the work carried out by the basic educational system, the university must fully form and develop the moral vision and purpose of its students, since it is not possible to consider professional education separate from ethical formation. Being a professional must include not only mastery of technical, practical and/or theoretical competencies, but also personal integrity and ethical professional behaviour that helps to give an ethical meaning to all university endeavours (Bolívar 2005 ). In so doing, academic integrity is necessary to learn and an essential requirement of academic quality.

Academic integrity is much more than avoiding dishonest practices such as copying during exams, plagiarizing or contract cheating; it implies an engagement with learning and work which is well done, complete, and focused on a good purpose – learning. It also involves using appropriate means, genuine effort and good skills. Mainly it implies diligently taking advantage of all learning experiences. From this perspective, experiencing and promoting academic integrity in the university context has a twofold purpose: achieving the learning intended to develop the necessary competencies and skills for a specific profession and, more importantly, developing an ethical perspective for principled decision making applicable to any context (Bolívar 2005 ).

Orosz et al. ( 2018 ) identified a strong relationship between academic dishonesty and the level of corruption of a country. Other studies (Blankenship and Whitley 2000 ; Harding et al. 2004 ; Laduke 2013 ; Nonis and Swift 2001 ; Sims 1993 ) demonstrate that students who engage in dishonest activities in the academic context, particularly undergraduate students, are more likely to demonstrate inappropriate behaviours during their professional life and vice versa.

From this point of view one can say that: the individual who is used to cheating in college, has a higher probability of doing so in the professional and work fields (Harding et al. 2004 ; Payan et al. 2010 ; Sims 1993 ).

Taking these studies in other parts of the world as a reference, the objective of the current work is to determine the relationship between the most frequent academic dishonesty practices, or lack of academic integrity amongst college students, and their predisposition to demonstrate ethical behaviour at work and in their daily lives within the Mexican context.

This research paper is divided into four sections. The first one presents a brief review of literature on academic integrity, academic dishonesty and its relationship with workplace ethical behaviour. The second section presents the methodology followed during the study, considering the design and validation of the instrument, data gathering, and the generation of academic dishonesty and ethical behaviour indexes. The third section shows the results of the analysis and its discussion. The last section displays a series of conclusions for the research presented, as well as its limitations and scope.

Literature review

• Academic integrity

According to Bosch and Cavallotti ( 2016 ), the term integrity has four common elements that are included in the different ways to describe it: justice, coherence, ethical principles and appropriate motivation. Thus, a definition in accordance to this concept would be to act with justice and coherence, following ethical principles and a motivation focused on good purposes. In the educational context, academic integrity could be understood as the habit of studying and carrying out academic work with justice and coherence, seeking to learn and to be motivated by the service that this learning can provide others. However, there has been a wide variety of interpretations about this concept (Fishman 2016 ).

The International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI), conceptualizes academic integrity as a series of basic principles which are the foundation for success in any aspect of life and represent essential elements that allow achievement of the necessary learning which enable the future student to face and overcome any personal and professional challenges (International Center for Academic Integrity 2014 ).

Academic integrity is considered a fundamental quality for every academic endeavour, essential in any teaching-learning process focused on achieving the highest standards of excellence and learning and thus, it must represent a goal to which every academic institution, seriously engaged in quality, must aspire to (Bertram-Gallant 2016 ). Enacting academic integrity means taking action with responsibility, honesty, respect, trust, fairness, and courage in any activity related to academic work and avoiding any kind of cheating or dishonest action even when the work is especially difficult (International Center for Academic Integrity 2014 ).

The current approaches to academic integrity provide ideas offering a conceptual framework, but there is still the need to specify concrete academic integrity behaviours characteristic of students such as: speaking the truth, complying with classes and assignments, carrying out activities by their own efforts, following the instructions given, providing answers on exams with only the material approved, citing and giving credit to others’ work, and collaborating fairly during teamwork assignments (Hall and Kuh 1998 ; Von Dran et al. 2001 ). To these “observable” behaviours we must add a condition: that they must be preceded by the desire to learn in order to call them genuine manifestations of academic integrity (Olt 2002 ; Sultana 2018 ).

Despite the importance of the academic integrity concept, in most cases it is common to find an explanation of the concept in more negative terms that refers to behaviours that should be avoided. The general idea expressed in most honor codes is that academic integrity is to do academic work avoiding dishonesty, fraud or misconduct.

Dishonesty and academic fraud

Stephens ( 2016 ) argues that the problem of cheating is endemic and is at the root of human nature, thus it should not be surprising that it occurs. It is a strategy, conscious or not, used by humans to solve a problem. However, recognizing that cheating has always existed should not foster a passive and pessimistic attitude since human beings have a conscience that enables them to discern ethical behaviours from those that are not.

Understanding the phenomenon of dishonesty is important since the strategies used to try to counteract it will depend on this. For example, if dishonesty is considered a genetic disorder that some people suffer, the way to deal with it would be to identify those who suffer from it, supervise them, segregate them and/or try to “treat” them. If it is a common deficiency that everyone experiences to a greater or smaller degree, other kinds of tactics should be used to counteract it (Ariely 2013 ).

In general terms, there are different types of academic dishonesty that may be grouped into four major categories:

Copying. Copying or attempting to copy from a classmate during an examination or assessment.

Plagiarism. Copying, paraphrasing or using another author’s ideas without citing or giving the corresponding credit to them.

Collusion. Collaboration with someone else’s dishonesty, and includes not reporting dishonest actions which have been witnessed. The most representative actions of this type of misconduct are: submitting assignments on behalf of classmates, allowing others to copy from you during an exam and including the names of people who did not participate in teamwork assignments or projects.

Cheating. Among the most common actions in this category we find: using notes, technology or other forbidden materials during an exam; including non-consulted references; inventing or making up data in assignments or lab reports; contract cheating; distributing or commercializing exams or assignments; submitting apocryphal documents; impersonating another student’s identity; stealing exams; altering grades; bribing individuals to improve grades.

The list is not exhaustive since it does not include every possible type of dishonesty. Every situation creates unique circumstances and different nuances so it should not be surprising that the emergence of “new” ways to threaten academic integrity arise (Bertram-Gallant 2016 ). Students’ creativity and the continual development of technology will cause different manifestations of academic fraud (Gino and Ariely 2012 ), a fact that has been documented in university contexts in the past.

The results of recent research show that 66% of students have engaged in some type of academic misconduct at least once during their university education (Lang 2013 ). There are similar results in other studies carried out around the world. In the Mexican case, 84% of students in a Mexican university have witnessed a dishonest action during their education (UDEM 2018 ), and 6 out of 10 at another university have engaged in some kind of copying (UNAM 2013 ). In Colombia, a private university reported that 63% of the students accepted the addition of the name of a classmate that did not collaborate actively on a team assignment (EAFIT 2016 ). In England, half of the students would be willing to buy an assignment (Rigby et al. 2015 ). In Ukraine, 82% of students have used non-authorized support during exams (Stephens et al. 2010 ). While in China, 71% of students at one university admit to having copied a homework assignment from his/her classmates (Ma et al. 2013 ).

Academic dishonesty and its relationship with the lack of ethical professional behaviour

Establishing a relationship between the level of corruption in a country and the level of academic dishonesty in its educational institutions is a difficult task to carry out since fraud and corruption have many different forms and causes, particularly in complex contexts such as the social dynamics of a country (International Transparency 2017 ). However, it can be established that academic dishonesty is a manifestation of a culture in which it is easy and common to break rules and where integrity is not as valued as it should be. Under this logic, it is possible to establish a certain relationship between a poor civic culture and academic dishonesty (García-Villegas et al. 2016 ).

This poor civic culture tends to be reflected in the daily activities of the citizens, particularly within organizations, where a relationship between students who cheat and unethical behaviour in the workplace has been identified (Winrow 2015 ). From this point of view, integrity and ethical behaviour, expressed in different terms such as decision making, conflict resolution or accountability, is one of the competencies most requested by employers (Kavanagh and Drennan 2008 ) and one of the critical factors needed to efficiently develop inter-organizational relationships of trust (Connelly et al. 2018 ). This is the reason behind the study, the understanding of this relationship.

A study carried out with 1051 students from six North American universities concluded that students who considered academic dishonesty as acceptable tended to engage in such activities and the same individuals tended to show unethical behaviour later during their professional lives (Nonis and Swift 2001 ). In another study with Engineering students, it was found that those who self-reported having engaged in dishonest actions, also carried it out in the professional field, which suggests that unethical behaviour shown at the college level continued into professional life (Harding et al. 2004 ). Findings of another study carried out at a nursing school demonstrated that students who showed academic dishonesty had a greater incidence of dishonest behaviour once they worked as health professionals (Laduke 2013 ).

In a study carried out with 284 psychology students who reported having engaged in some kind of academic dishonesty, specifically having copied during exams and lying in order to meet their obligations during their college education, also reported participating in actions considered illegal or unethical within the context of the research, specifically those related to substance abuse - alcohol and drugs, risky driving, lying and other sort of illegal behaviours. This data suggests that, besides the contextual factors, there are also individual causes such as attitudes, perceptions and personality traits that can influence the individual’s behaviour in different aspects of their lives (Blankenship and Whitley 2000 ).

In one of the most recent studies, where data from 40 countries was collected, a strong relationship was identified between the self-reporting “copying in exams” of the student population and the level of corruption of the country, expressed in the corruption perception index published by Transparency International (Orosz et al. 2018 ).

Despite the increase in the number of studies related to academic integrity and ethical behaviour in the companies in different parts of the world since the 1990s, it has not been possible to identify any research in Mexico that explores the relationship between the ethical behaviour of an individual in his/her different life stages, as a college student and as a professional; or to put it differently, between academic integrity and ethical performance in the workplace.

Methodology

This study followed a quantitative approach under a hypothetic - deductive approach. Since there is no suitable instrument available that explores the relationship between academic integrity and ethical behaviour, one designed for this study was used. It was based on questions from previous research instruments.

The “International Center for Academic Integrity” (ICAI) perception survey, created by Donald McCabe and applied to more than 90,000 students in the United States and Canada (McCabe 2016 ) was adapted with the addition of a section of questions related to personal and workplace ethical behaviour.

The McCabe survey ( 2016 ) consists of 35 questions that can be grouped into four sections. The first one explores the characteristics of the academic integrity programme, the educational atmosphere in general and the way in which the community is informed and trained in regards to current regulations. The second one requests information about the students’ behaviour. It specifically asks about the frequency with which students are involved in dishonest activities at the moment and in previous academic levels, how severe they considered each kind of misconduct and their perception in regards to the level of peer participation in actions against integrity. The third section collects the opinions of the students regarding different statements related to academic work, faculty and students’ engagement in the development of an academic integrity culture, strategies to fight dishonesty, the degree of social approval towards academic fraud, its impact and the perception of fairness in managing the cases of misconduct. The last group included demographic questions that contained basic information about the person answering the survey. The students were asked to provide their age, gender, marital status, nationality, place of residence, accumulated grade point average (GPA), programme he/she studies and the number of years at the university.

A section was added to this survey (Additional file  1 ) addressing the professional ethical behavioural construct. In this section, items from questionnaires described in Table  1 were used; all related to self-reporting of ethical behaviour. An additional validation was carried out for this instrument section through the assessment of experts from the internal control area of different companies and industries.

Except for a couple of open questions, the rest of the items used responses built under a five-point Likert scale to categorize their judgments in regards to the statements suggested. There are two types of responses used specifically: from totally agree to totally disagree about the perceptions and opinions; and always or never in the case of self-reported behaviours.

The responses were recorded automatically in the data base of the SurveyMonkey technology tool and values were assigned to each one of the responses in order to calculate an index per response, assigning a value of 5 to “Totally agree” and 1 to “Totally disagree” in a positive or favorable statement, and vice-versa, 1 and 5 respectively, in a negative or unfavorable statement.

The sample considers 1203 undergraduate and graduate students from a private university in northern Mexico who chose to respond to their professors’ invitations to answer the survey as part of a diagnostic exercise that the university carries out periodically to learn about the students’ perceptions regarding the degree of academic integrity culture on their campus. The participants were 51% women and 49% men. From them, 31% were in their first year, 25% the second year, 26% the third year, 11% the fourth year and only 7% had been studying for five or more years. Nearly 70% of the students still lived in their parents’ homes and 42% reported having a good or outstanding average grade (higher than 80 over 100).

Once the data was collected, the internal validation of the instrument was done and indexes were generated for each one of the variables introduced into the model, through a factorial analysis of the main components. This type of analysis studies the relationship between a set of indicators or variables observed and one or more factors related to the research to obtain evidence and thus, validate the theoretical model (Hayton et al. 2004 ).

In order to define the indexes related to academic fraud and ethical behaviour there were three factorial analyses carried out, which took as selection criteria eigenvalues higher than one and varimax component rotation with the purpose to maximize the variances explained for each response and identify the items that represented the factors identified by the analysis itself in a linear way (Thompson 2004 ).

The first analysis considered questions related to the level of frequency with which specific dishonest actions were carried out. It included 27 items or questions in total, and five components accounted for 66.33% of the variance, with a KMO (Kaiser, Meyer and Olkin) of 0.955 and being significant for the Bartlett’s sphericity test, a fact that shows the internal consistency of the indicator and its statistical validity. The five components were classified according to the weight that each question had in the rotated and stored components matrix such as regression variables to generate an indicator for each of them (Table 5 in Appendix). These indicators were defined as frequency in: 1) cheating in general, 2) copying in any way, 3) falsifying information, 4) using unauthorized support, and 5) plagiarizing or paraphrasing without citing.

The second analysis took the same criteria of the latter, but it only included the 27 questions related to how severe the misconduct or academic dishonesty was considered. The result was three components that accounted for 67.66% of the variance observed, with a KMO of 0.962 and the Bartlett’s sphericity test was significant. The rotated components were classified and kept as a regression to generate three indicators, related to the perceived severity of: 1) cheating in general, 2) plagiarizing or copying and paraphrasing without citing, and 3) using unauthorized support (Table  6 in Appendix ).

The third factorial analysis included the 47 questions related to the behaviour or ethical attitude of the respondents. This analysis generated six components that accounted for 64.54% of the variance observed, a KMO of 0.963 and the Bartlett’s sphericity test was significant. When analyzing the components generated by the analysis, it was observed that four of them had only two questions with a weight greater than 0.4 in the rotated component matrix. Considering this situation, it was decided to eliminate these questions and a new factorial analysis was carried out considering only 39 questions. The result was two main components that accounted for 58.66% of the variance observed, with a KMO of 0.965 and the Bartlett’s sphericity test was significant. The two components were classified into two indicators: 1) workplace ethical behaviour and, 2) personal ethical behaviour (Table  7 in Appendix ).

Once the indicators for frequency and perceived severity of dishonesty or academic fraud, as well as those related to the behaviour or self-reported ethical attitude (workplace and personal) were generated, a linear regression analysis was carried out to determine how academic dishonesty influences a specific ethical behaviour.

The linear regression analysis took as dependent variables the ones related to ethical behaviour self-reported by the respondents, and the frequency and severity of the academic dishonesty acts reported by the respondents as the independent variables. This analysis was carried out in two stages; the first one considered only the variable of the frequency with which academic dishonesty was reported, and the second one considered the variables related to the severity with which the respondents perceived these actions.

The first analysis took as independent variables the frequency of each component of self-reported academic misconduct: cheating in general, copying in any way, falsifying information, using unauthorized support, and plagiarizing or paraphrasing without citing. The result of the model was significant for the case of workplace ethical behaviour (sig. = 0.001), accounting for only 3.4% of the variance observed (Table  2 ). In terms of analysis by variables, it was found that only the frequency of carrying out any kind of cheating, and copying in any way, had a significant impact on the workplace ethical behaviour of the respondents. The negative coefficient in both cases shows that a frequency reduction in academic misconduct, increased the self-reported workplace ethical behaviour (Table 2 ). The variables for falsifying information, using unauthorized support and plagiarizing didn’t show significance.

In terms of personal ethical behaviour, the model proved significant (sig. = 0.000) explaining 9% of the variance (Table 2 ) thus it may be stated that the severity of academic dishonesty influences personal ethical behaviour. In regards to the impact level that the variables have on personal ethical behaviour, we found that only using unauthorized support did not prove significant. The remaining variables were significant and with negative coefficients, thus we may conclude that the lower the frequency of academic dishonesty reported by the respondents, the higher the reported personal ethical behaviour. In this sense, the variable of cheating in general had a greater weight in this kind of behaviour, followed by falsifying information and lastly plagiarizing.

The obtained results indicate that engaging in academic dishonesty with a greater frequency is directly and negatively related to the respondent’s ethical behaviour and attitude. Therefore, it can be assumed that discouraging students from carrying out academic dishonesty will have a positive effect on their ethical behaviour, both in the work context as well as in their daily lives. In the same way, it was also found that respondents who performed academic dishonest activities less frequently, tended to have better ethical behaviour in general.

It is interesting to observe that the model does little to explain workplace ethical behaviour and that only the variable of cheating in general and copying had significant impacts on this behaviour. While in the case of personal ethical behaviour, academic dishonesty practices occurred more frequently and only the use of unauthorized support had no significant impact. This situation allows us to assume that academic dishonesty practices have a greater impact on daily ethical behaviour but less so in the workplace. This situation can be explained by the fact that organizations have codes of ethics and programmes which guide actions to be carried out by their personnel that are based on specific ethical and moral rules of conduct.

The second regression analysis took as independent variables the ones related to the perceived severity of the respondents in regards to cheating in general, copying and plagiarizing, and using unauthorized support. As in the previous case, the dependent variables were the ones related to the behaviour or ethical attitude in the workplace and in personal contexts. In regards to the workplace, we found that the model proved significant (sig. = 0.000), explaining 10% of the variance observed (Table 3 ). Despite this result, the variable analysis showed that only the cheating in general variable had a significant impact on such behaviour with a positive coefficient, which means that the greater the perceived severity of the misconduct, the better the ethical behaviour within the organization.

In the case of personal ethical behaviour, the model also proved significant (sig. = 0.001), explaining only 5% of the variance observed in the indicator. In the case of workplace ethical behaviour, only the perceived severity of cheating in general variable had a significant impact on personal ethical behaviour. The positive coefficient of this variable enables us to establish that when any type of cheating was rated as severe, respondents tended to have better personal ethical behaviour (Table 3 ).

The findings enable us to recognize the impact that the perceived severity towards cheating in general has on the ethical behaviour of the respondents, since it is the only variable that proved significant in the model. Hence, the extent to which students perceived the committing of any kind of cheating within the university as severe, their behaviour, both inside and outside the workplace, was more ethical.

Additionally, it is interesting to observe that the perception of the severity of cheating, plagiarizing or using any kind of unauthorized help does not have a significant impact on the ethical behaviour self-reported by the respondents. Therefore, it can be assumed that it is not as important to point out the severity of a specific act of academic dishonesty to influence the ethical behaviour of students and professionals, but rather to emphasize the severity of the misconduct that is associated with any act of academic dishonesty.

With the aim to identify the relationship that exists among all the variables of the model (frequency and severity), a third regression was conducted. This regression considered as independent variables, workplace ethical behaviour and personal ethical behaviour, and as dependent variables, the frequency and severity of academic misconduct. Both models, ethical behaviour in the workplace and personal, turned out to be significant. In the case of the workplace ethical behaviour, it was found that the model explains 9.1% of the variance of the indicator, while in the case of personal ethical behaviour, only 7.4% of the variance was explained (Table  4 ). Based on these results, it can be concluded that the lack of academic integrity generally affects people’s ethical behaviour.

It is interesting to note that, in the case of ethical behaviour in the workplace, the only variable that was significant and positive was the severity of widespread dishonesty. That is, those respondents who considered any type of dishonesty as a serious offense had a greater tendency to be ethical in their workplace. This situation may be supported by the fact that academic integrity is presented in institutionalized spaces, such as school, university or business, and where the perception of greater severity tends to limit unethical behaviour within these institutions or organizations.

On the other hand, personal ethical behaviour was significantly influenced by the variables related to committing any act of academic dishonesty in general (frequency and severity). The negative sign in frequency indicates that those who reported having committed less academic dishonesty - whichever it may be - have better ethical behaviour on a personal level. In the same way, those who consider that committing academic dishonesty is something serious, also have a better ethical behaviour on a personal level. Another variable that was significant was the frequency in plagiarism or paraphrasing without citing, in the personal ethical behaviour, being those that had a lower frequency the ones that reported a better ethical behaviour.

The results of this third regression complement the findings of the first two regressions and allow to evidence the specific weight of considering academic dishonesty as a serious fault in people’s ethical behaviour.

Based on the results generated in the previous section, some reflections and conclusions can be drawn related to academic integrity, academic misconduct, and ethical behaviour.

The respondents’ ethical behaviour shows a relationship to the practice of academic dishonesty, both in terms of the frequency with which they carry out these acts, as well as the severity they assign to them. The more severe the students consider an act of academic dishonesty, the more ethically they behave outside of the university. Likewise, it is important to establish measures to discourage or reduce the number of acts of academic misconduct, since the habitual practice of unethical actions may promote a normalization of these behaviours, and reduces a student’s interest in practising ethical behaviours after graduating from college. It is important to disclose a basic assumption, that a person faces ethical dilemmas first, in an educational environment and later, in a workplace context. This situation suggests that, since academic integrity is usually experienced earlier than workplace ethical behaviour in a person’s life, the former may influence the latter.

These results encourage the reflection on the importance of student perceptions about academic dishonesty and the opportunities they have to act on these dishonest practices. Interestingly, in terms of perception, students who have developed a conscience about the severity of any kind of cheating in an academic setting, exhibit a greater degree of ethical behaviour. Likewise, when a student frequently practices academic misconduct shows less ethical behaviour within other contexts. These findings add another reason why higher education institutions should establish systematic programmes focused on promoting a culture of academic integrity to convince students of the severity of these unethical actions, to discourage them from committing them and to punish them if the previous endeavours do not work.

The results of this study suggest that it is not enough to teach academic integrity in a theoretical or conceptual way, but that it is learned and acquired through real contexts and practices, where the prevention or discouragement of gaining benefits through misconduct contributes to student learning and development. This learning goes beyond the classroom and the university context and becomes an ethical behavioural pattern in the work and personal environments. Likewise, organizations should have ethical codes and other elements of a business ethics and compliance programme to foster a culture of integrity and continue the formative process started within educational institutions.

It can be stated that a part of a professional’s ethical behaviour is related to their awareness of the risks or severity of getting involved in academic dishonesty, as well as having the opportunity to engage in these acts. For this reason, it is not enough to convince students of the importance of following integrity criteria, it is also necessary to create an environment where cheating or deceptions are very difficult to practice. It is essential that students are convinced to act with integrity during their college years and that they are made aware of the risks or penalties that come with not doing so. This will strengthen a positive behavioural pattern in different contexts of their lives, and encourage them to become ethical professionals, business people, and citizens.

It is essential for higher education institutions to demonstrate a commitment to building a culture of academic integrity, both in terms of their awareness and their practice, since through them the ethical behaviour of students and future graduates is strengthened and forged. In this respect, the university campus is featured as a favourable environment to train individuals and promote ethical behaviour within and outside the university, meeting its commitment to the community and the world to develop more ethical and engaged citizens who do things well in all aspects of their lives.

Conclusions

There has been little research published regarding the relationship of students perceptions about their behaviour on academic integrity in schoolwork, and on professional performance. This study, like the ones identified previously, points out a relationship that can and should be explored in greater depth. Academic integrity - concept, benefits, strategies - and its counterpart, academic dishonesty - frequency causes, consequences, management - have not received, in México and Latin America, the attention they have earned in other countries and regions.

Considering that corruption is a major problem afflicting Mexican society and that academic dishonesty is related one way or another with corruption, it becomes particularly important to understand the academic dishonesty phenomenon in depth.

In order to achieve this, it is necessary to invest resources to identify the strategies which most effectively promote academic integrity, because doing so, not only prevents fraud and economic losses, but also builds the foundations of a more humane and fair society, resulting in a common interest. Viewed from this perspective, academic integrity is not an issue that should be addressed only within educational institutions, but it should also awaken the interest and the action of the business and production sectors.

Limitations of the research

The instrument used to collect information for this research project was a survey created with the support of others and thus the questions have only been validated in this exercise.

It is a self-reporting tool regarding ethical behaviour, that is, it reflects the self-reported participants’ perceptions of themselves and not about their own behaviours. This situation shows two limitations. The first one is that it does not discuss behaviours per se, but the perception participants have about them. The second limitation is that the results are subjected to the biases of the same person who self-reports. The results depend not only on the “objectivity” of respondent’s perception but also on the sincerity with which each question is answered. Despite the prevailing atmosphere of illegality, it is still desirable to seem somewhat honest to others. Additionally, the application of the survey was done via an electronic format on the personal devices of the participants, which can raise suspicions about the true anonymity of the participants’ responses.

Self-reported surveys leave aside the profound answers related to the causes of correlations found. A qualitative approach to the phenomenon could complement our results and lead to a more in depth analysis of the relationship between corruption and/or unethical behaviour and academic dishonesty in the Mexican context.

Another important limitation of the study, derived from its exploratory perspective, is that the instrument did not consider as a relevant variable the employment situation, years of work experience or hierarchical level of the respondents. This limitation causes the self-report of ethical behaviour in the workplace to be presented in a general way and not with a greater level of depth. However, the results found in this research and the identification of the relationship between academic integrity and ethical work behaviour in an exploratory way, open the door for studies where it is sought to deepen the understanding of this relationship that was identified by this study, as mentioned in the next section.

Implications for future investigations

As mentioned in the previous section, the following works related to the study of the academic integrity and ethical behaviour of individuals could point to the confirmation of the results found in this research. These future studies could be based on the causal relationships found in this research, which were generated based on the review of the literature and the assumptions that arise from it. In this sense, the use of structural equations is necessary as a method of confirmation from a quantitative perspective, as well as the use of a qualitative approach that contribute to a better understanding of this phenomenon. This study is a first step towards the realization of scientific research that demonstrates the impact that efforts to promote academic integrity in universities have on the ethical behaviour of its students and graduates.

It would be useful to replicate the research by gathering information periodically to validate the results and/or conduct a longitudinal study that allows monitoring of the “real-time” habits of the different graduating classes over time. Thereby, self-reporting of what happened at each moment in time would be collected and would enable researchers to explore different associations.

Many questions still remain unanswered in the Mexican context: What is academic integrity? How is it experienced? How is it perceived? How is it assessed? What are the benefits in doing so? What are the most appropriate strategies? What are the levels of academic dishonesty? Who carries it out? Why do they do it? What are the reasons that cause it? What is the mindset of people that behaves ethically? What are the reasons why someone turns out to be more or less ethical? How should it be addressed and managed? What consequences does it trigger? What role do professors and other educational stakeholders play? What is the impact of technology?

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Standardized coefficients

Non-standardized coefficients

International Center for Academic Integrity

Kaiser, Meyer and Olkin

Adjusted R squared

Significance

Amilburu, M. (2005). Literatura, virtudes y educación moral. http://www.redined.mec.es/oai/indexg.php?registro=01420073001633

Google Scholar  

Ariely D (2013) The honest truth about dishonesty (first). Harper Collins Publishers, New York

Bertram-Gallant T (2016) Systems approach to going forward. In: Bretag T (ed) Handbook of academic integrity (First, pp. 975–978). Springer, Singapore

Blankenship KL, Whitley BE (2000) Relation of general deviance to academic dishonesty. Ethics Behav 10(1):1–12 Retrieved from http://ezproxy.udem.edu.mx/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=a9h&AN=3176620&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Article   Google Scholar  

Bolívar A (2005) El lugar de la ética profesional en la formación universitaria. Rev Mex Investig Educ 10(24):93–123 Retrieved from http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=14002406

Bosch M, Cavallotti R (2016) ¿Es posible una definición de integridad en el ámbito de la ética empresarial? Revista Empresa y Humanismo XIX(2):51–68. https://doi.org/10.15581/015.XIX.2.51-68

Connelly BL, Crook TR, Combs JG, Ketchen DJ Jr, Aguinis H (2018) Competence-and integrity-based trust in interorganizational relationships: which matters more? J Manag 44(3):919–945

EAFIT. (2016). Encuesta de auto-reporte de fraude académico

Fishman T (2016) Academic integrity as an educational concept, concern and movement in US institutions of higher education. In: Bretag T (ed) Handbook of academic integrity (First. Springer, Singapore, pp 7–22

García-Villegas M, Franco-Pérez N, y Cortés-Arbeláez A (2016) Perspectives on academic integrity in Colombia and Latin America. In: Bretag T (ed) Handbook of academic integrity, 1st edn. Springer, Singapore, pp 161–185

Gino F, Ariely D (2012) The dark side of creativity: original thinkers can be more dishonest. J Pers Soc Psychol 102(3):445

Hall TL, Kuh GD (1998) Honor among students: academic integrity and honor codes at state-assisted universities. NASPA J 36(1):2–18

Harding TS, Passow HJ, Carpenter DD, Finelli CJ (2004) An examination of the relationship between academic dishonesty and professional behavior. Antennas Propagation Magazine, IEEE 46. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAP.2004.1388860

Hayton JC, Allen DG, Scarpello V (2004) Factor retention decisions in exploratory factor analysis: a tutorial on parallel analysis. Organ Res Methods 7(2):191–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428104263675

International Center for Academic Integrity. (2014). Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity. Retrieved from https://academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Fundamental-Values-2014.pdf

International Transparency. (2017). Corruption perceptions index 2017. Retrieved from https://www.transparwww.transparency.org/cpi

Kavanagh MH, Drennan L (2008) What skills and attributes does an accounting graduate need? Evidence from student perceptions and employer expectations. Accounting Finance 48(2):279–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-629X.2007.00245.x

Laduke RD (2013) Academic dishonesty today, unethical practices tomorrow? J Prof Nurs 29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2012.10.009

Lang JM (2013) Cheating lessons, learning from academic dishonesty (first). Harvard University Press, Cambridge

Lawson R (2004) Is classroom cheating related to business students’ propensity to cheat in the “real world”? J Bus Ethics 49(2):189–199. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000015784.34148.cb

Lombardo MM, Eichinger RW (2009) FYI: for your improvement: a guide for development and coaching (5th ed.). Minneapolis, MN: Lominger International: A Korn/Ferry Company.

Ma Y, McCabe D, Liu R (2013) Students’ academic cheating in Chinese universities: prevalence, influencing factors, and proposed action. J Acad Ethics 11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-013-9186-7

McCabe, D. (2016). Cheating and honor: lessons from a long-term research project. In T. Bretag, Handbook of academic integrity (First, p. 1097). Singapore: Springer

Nonis S, Swift CO (2001) An examination of the relationship between academic dishonesty and workplace dishonesty: a multicampus investigation. J Educ Bus 77. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832320109599052

Olt MR (2002) Ethics and distance education: strategies for minimizing academic dishonesty in online assessment. Online J Distance Learning Adm 5(3):1–7

Orosz G, Tóth-Király I, Bőthe B, Paskuj B, Berkics M, Fülöp M, Roland-Lévy C (2018) Linking cheating in school and corruption. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée 68(2):89–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2018.02.001

Payan J, Reardon J, Mccorkle DE (2010) The effect of culture on the academic honesty of marketing and business students. J Mark Educ 32(3):275–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475310377781

Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo. (2015). Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible. Retrieved from https://www.undp.org/content/undp/es/home/sdgoverview/mdg_goals/mdg2/

Rigby D, Burton M, Balcombe K, Bateman I, Mulatu A (2015) Contract cheating & the market in essays. J Econ Behav Organ 111:23–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2014.12.019

Rose-Ackerman S, Palifka BJ (2016) Corruption and government: causes, consequences, and reform, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York

Book   Google Scholar  

Sims RL (1993) The relationship between academic dishonesty and unethical business practices. J Educ Bus 68. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.1993.10117614

Stephens J, Romakin V, Yukhymenko M (2010) Academic motivation and misconduct in two cultures: a comparative analysis of US and Ukrainian undergraduates. Int J Educ Integr 6:47–60

Stephens JM (2016) Creating cultures of integrity: a multilevel intervention model for promoting academic honesty. In: Bretag T (ed) Handbook of academic integrity (First, pp. 995–1008). Springer, Singapore

Sultana F (2018) The false equivalence of academic freedom and free speech: defending academic integrity in the age of white supremacy, colonial nostalgia, and anti-intellectualism. ACME: An Int E-Journal for Crit Geographies 17(2):228–257

Thompson B (2004) Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: understanding concepts and applications, 1st edn. American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.

UDEM. (2018). Encuesta de Integridad Académica

UNAM. (2013). Reporte de encuesta sobre percepción del plagio en la UNAM. Retrieved from http://www.eticaacademica.unam.mx/encuestas.pdf

Von Dran GM, Callahan ES, Taylor HV (2001) Can students’ academic integrity be improved? Attitudes and behaviors before and after implementation of an academic integrity policy. Teach Bus Ethics 5(1):35–58

Winrow AR (2015) Academic integrity and the heterogeneous student body. Glob Educ J 2015(2):77–91 Retrieved from http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=4e798cc8-2b70-4094-8a36-117ad8990b24%40sessionmgr101

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Victoria Loncar and Veronica Montemayor for their valuable help English editing the manuscript.

Declarations

We confirm that this work is original and has not been published elsewhere, nor is it currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.

We will respond promptly to IJEI correspondence regarding reviewer comments, copyeditor revisions and publishing agreement.

Not applicable

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Universidad de Monterrey, Av. Ignacio Morones Prieto 4500, 66238, San Pedro Garza García, Nuevo León, Mexico

Jean Gabriel Guerrero-Dib & Luis Portales

Instituto Tecnológico de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Av. Eugenio Garza Sada 2501, 64849, Monterrey, Nuevo León, Mexico

Yolanda Heredia-Escorza

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

G-D designed the study and collected the data, P-D performed the statistical analysis, H-E contributed with results analysis. All authors discussed the results and contributed to the final manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors’ information

G-D. J. is Board Member of the International Center for Academic Integrity and Director of the Center for Integrity and Ethics at Universidad de Monterrey

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean Gabriel Guerrero-Dib .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Additional file 1..

ICAI’s Academic Integrity Survey – for students (McCabe 2016 ) plus ethical behaviour.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Guerrero-Dib, J.G., Portales, L. & Heredia-Escorza, Y. Impact of academic integrity on workplace ethical behaviour. Int J Educ Integr 16 , 2 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-020-0051-3

Download citation

Received : 10 September 2019

Accepted : 26 January 2020

Published : 17 February 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-020-0051-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Academic misconduct
• Higher education
• Workplace behaviour
• Work environment
• Latin America

International Journal for Educational Integrity

ISSN: 1833-2595

• General enquiries: [email protected]

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Solidarity in Academia and its Relationship to Academic Integrity

Jolanta bieliauskaitė.

European Humanities University, Vilnius, Lithuania

This paper provides the theoretical analysis of forms of solidarity in academia and its relationship to academic integrity. This analysis is inspired by the Guidelines for an Institutional Code of Ethics in Higher Education drawn up by the International Association of Universities and the Magna Charta Observatory. These Guidelines refer to the principle of solidarity in the context of international cooperation between higher education institutions. However, the author of this paper believes that this principle might also be used in a broader academic context, in particular, in the field of academic ethics and academic integrity. Therefore, this paper aims at revealing the relevance of solidarity in academia and argues that the principle of solidarity can be considered as one of fundamental principles of academic ethics and should be reflected in the structure and provisions of the codes of academic ethics (conduct). For this purpose the author explores the philosophical and sociological approaches towards solidarity and defines the concept of academic solidarity, discusses the conceptual connection between academic solidarity, ethics and integrity and illustrates the impact of solidarity on the development of academic integrity. This analysis allows the author of the paper to recommend embedding the principle of solidarity in the codes of academic ethics of higher education institutions as well as extending the scope of its application by linking the rights and responsibilities of different groups within the academic community in a way that best expresses their unity, shared responsibility, mutual support in meeting the standards of social ethos.

Introduction

The prevailing consumer lifestyle typical of the postmodern era promotes a perception of individuals as objects of consumption, and thus threatens solidarity as a key principle of human relationships and long-term commitment (Bauman, 2007 , 135–136). These tendencies could also be observed in academia. More than twenty years ago Kerr ( 1994 ) noted the transfer from a traditional paradigm of academic life when “most faculty members were part of a particular academic community as the centre of their lives, and they took their on-campus citizenship responsibilities very seriously”, towards a post-modern academic culture, which “places more emphasis on individual and group advantages and concerns, and less on the overall welfare of the college and university as a self-governing community” (9). Thus, academia becomes a unique type of enterprise, which relies on individual preferences toward conduct and “has generally effective legislative processes, less effective administrative processes, and virtually no effective judicial processes” (Kerr, 1994 , 11). The author believes that these issues could still be solved primarily by the internal solidarity of the academic community instead of external authorities (Kerr, 1994 , 11). Yet, consumerisation and marketisation continue expanding in contemporary neoliberal academia at the expense of such notions as public service, social purpose and academic solidarity (Gibbs, 2020 , 226). On the other hand, as revealed later, the achievement of consumer-oriented goals also requires some type of solidarity and therefore, it cannot be stated that this phenomenon is completely absent in neoliberal academia.

The principle of solidarity and its application is widely analysed in philosophical, sociological, political and other contexts. Meanwhile, even the call for solidarity in academia appears in the scientific discourses on the status quo of neoliberal higher education (e.g. McDougall, 2015 ) or on political regime, migration, refugee etc. issues that require international academic collaboration (e.g. Gaidano et al., 2020 ; Levich, 1973 ), the role of the principle of solidarity in academia is still not sufficiently elaborated. One of the most recent attempts to explore the concept of academic solidarity is made by Moroz and Swabovski ( 2017 ), who note the ambivalence of this concept and show how solidarity in the university can easily be modified and how it takes on a very dark character at higher education institutions (HEIs).

The topic of solidarity in the context of academic integrity has also received scarce scientific attention. For example, Balik et al. ( 2010 ) observe the negative impact of students’ solidarity in the passing around of papers, whether directly or indirectly (via the internet) on academic integrity. Rodriguez ( 2013 ) performed a comparative study on ethical issues among college students before and after their application to the programme and provided evaluation of the effectiveness of different active methodologies applied for promotion of the acquisition of solidarity skills, and their impact on performance. Burgess-Proctor et al. ( 2014 ) revealed the impact of five faculty members’ solidarity on implementing effective writing improvement strategies for students. Bieliauskaitė and Valavičienė ( 2019 ) analysed students’ solidarity and their impact on academic integrity as well as manifestations of solidarity within the academic community and its impact on shaping the culture of academic integrity from the perspective of university lecturers. Maley’s ( 2020 ) narrative inquiry revealed students’ solidarity in cases of academic misconduct.

In addition, the principle of solidarity appears in codes of ethics (conduct) and related documents. For example, the Guidelines for an Institutional Code of Ethics in Higher Education (hereinafter – Guidelines ) drawn up by the International Association of Universities and the Magna Charta Observatory, state that a code of ethics for a HEI should, inter alia, uphold the principle of solidarity which is mentioned in the context of international cooperation (IAU-MCO, 2012 , Para. 2.2.vii, 3.2.k). It is also the case that in some codes of ethics of HEIs this principle is applied to specific groups of members of the academic community. 1 Even worse, there are codes of ethics that are applied not for the whole academic community, but for separate parts or just one part of it, usually students (Géring et al., 2019 , 61). This approach disintegrates the academic community. These examples reveal the lack of the conceptual scientific discourse on the impact of the principle of solidarity on academic ethics in general and academic integrity in particular that could reveal the potential of this principle and provide the guidelines of its establishment in codes of ethics (conduct) as well as its application in the academic environment.

This conceptual paper aims at revealing the relevance of solidarity in academia and argues that the principle of solidarity can be considered as one of fundamental principles of academic ethics that could make a positive impact on the maintenance of academic integrity in HEIs and, therefore, this principle should be reflected in the structure and provisions of the codes of academic ethics (conduct).

In order to achieve this goal the author starts with the research of philosophical and sociological approaches towards solidarity. The analysis of philosophical literature helps to reveal the inner dynamic of solidarity, while a sociological approach is employed to determine the main solidarity motives as well as the fundamental characteristic of solidarity. Accordingly, the analogy method (Bermejo-Luque, 2014 ) is used to define the concept of academic solidarity and to model its structure. The second part of the paper employs the analysis of literature that tackles key variables associated with the target phenomenon and defines the conceptual connection between solidarity, ethics and integrity. Finally, based on conceptual analysis provided in previous parts as well as on the analysis of online resources of international networks and generalisation of data of empirical papers, various forms of solidarity in the context of academic integrity are illustrated, and the initial implications for the development of positive impact of solidarity towards academic integrity are provided.

The Concept and Structure of Academic Solidarity

According to Pensky ( 2008 ), solidarity is the status of intersubjectivity, in which a number of persons are bound together into definite relations (9). With reference to Feinberg, Dworkin, Durkheim and Halls, Cureton ( 2012 ) describes solidarity as.

a matter of a group of people being united or at one with regard to something (sympathies, interests, values, etc.), having genuine concern for each other’s welfare, respecting others as group members, trusting one another not to intentionally undermine or free ride on the group, taking pride in the group as a whole, being ashamed of its failures and suffering loss or betrayal if members of the group do not live up to the requirements that the group places on itself, and perhaps having certain other affections for one’s compatriot. (696)

Rorty ( 1989 ) believes that solidarity is not what every person has in advance, it is “not discovered, but created via reflection” (xvi). Creation of solidarity is the community’s task accomplishing which starts at the community itself, the place we are (Rorty, 1989 , xvi). Meanwhile Gadamer ( 2009 ) argues that solidarity could be discovered, not created. Nevertheless, he thinks that a “real solidarity must be conscious” (39), it includes the elements of unity, respect for differences and mutual understanding (Warnke, 2012 , 13). Despite these different approaches, the insights of philosophers reveal the dynamism of solidarity, the ability to consciously create or discover it, and at the same time to encourage and nurture it.

In their analysis of solidarity motives, some sociologists highlight instrumentalism and utilitarianism, while others emphasise values and socially-based obligations. For example, solidarity could be encouraged by the rational egoism, avoidance of punishment and the pursuit of personal gain or reward (Komter, 2005 , 113–115). These approaches express the instrumental solidarity of members of a liberal individualistic society, where cooperation in order to meet personal needs becomes a paramount in a market economy (Bieliauskaitė, 2009 , 83). Proponents of another view equate solidarity not with rational calculation but with a sense of unity and the values of the community in which the person lives. For example, communitarians believe that people have a sense of identity and moral values and feel committed to the community. In other words, people “(…) not only seek pleasure or benefit, but also act on the basis of internalised values and common norms” (Komter, 2005 , 116). This solidarity theory emphasises the person’s belonging to a particular group. In this case, we can speak about ethnic, cultural, intergenerational solidarity, or we solidarity, that does not anonymously unite any member of any society, but exists in particular communities with their own traditions and specificities.

The development of various aspects of togetherness requires social interaction and, accordingly, coordination as a “key feature of solidarity” (Koudenburg et al., 2013 , 1). This coordination is based on rules that are a constitutive part of solidarity relationships with one another (Cureton, 2012 , 692). Here, Cureton ( 2012 ) means social moral rules, while Durkheim saw legal regulation as a key to the maintenance of social solidarity (Johnson et al.,  2017 , 649).

Although different authors indicate different motives for solidarity, it is generally acknowledged that one of the most important features of solidarity is the pursuit of a common goal (Butler, 2010 ; Cureton, 2012 ; Dawson & Verweij, 2012 ; Gadamer, 2009 etc.). Goals can be different and therefore, as Moroz and Swabovski ( 2017 ) observe, solidarity is not an autonomous term. Rather, it depends on social functions: what community is produced by this term and for what purpose (149). In their considerations about academic solidarity, authors assume that it:

has, in fact, two functions. Firstly, it mystifies real conflicts in the university. Secondly, it is a way to keep privileges over other workers (inside and outside academia). In general, academic solidarity, both in the feudal academy and in the neo-liberal education factory, blocks emancipatory practice and the possibility of solidarity that is wider and based on values other than being obedient and deferring to power. This solidarity is very dark. (Moroz & Swabovski, 2017 , 153)

These insights illustrate instrumental solidarity and are definitely worthy attention. However, the author of this paper believes that solidarity has a bright side as well and follows the communitarian line of we solidarity by assuming that the goal of solidarity is oriented towards the welfare of society or community which, accordingly, could be a basis for the welfare of its individual members. What could be the motives of solidarity and common goals in academia?

Individuals become members of the academic community following a variety of reasons. In the ideal case, one or another study programme is chosen in order to become an expert and to provide professional services to society. On the other hand, these motives could also be egoistic: we study because we are convinced that the knowledge, skills, or at least the fact of studies proved by a higher education diploma, will help us getting a (better) job, earning a (higher) salary, etc. or just because we enjoy studying (on the variety of students’ motivation and goals see more: Lieberman & Remedios, 2007 ; Serdiuk, 2012 ). Similarly, professors may deliver their lectures not only because they need to sustain themselves and their families, but because they understand the impact of their professional activity on future society (on the variety of university instructors’ motivation and goals see more: Daumiller et al.,  2019 ). Thus, the definition of a common goal of the academic community becomes complicated, since it is affected not only by motives of a particular person but also by their status in academia.

Nonetheless, the author of this paper believes that it is possible to find a common goal that unites the members of the academic community as well as the whole of society. It is (could be) a sustainable development of society which is inconceivable without respect for each of its members and, accordingly, for human rights and freedoms. This goal is directly linked to the academic community, which not only prepares professionals of various fields to help achieve these goals, but also develops respect for individuals, their rights and freedoms. As it is enshrined in the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (hereinafter – Declaration ), this Declaration is “a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education (emphasised by the author) to promote respect for these rights and freedoms (…)” (The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 ). These provisions are reflected in national legislation and thus shape national (higher) education policies, which accordingly affect both institutional and individual goals and motivation.

In their analysis of the issue of solidarity, sociologists distinguish two – micro and macro – hypothetical contracts (Komter, 2005 , 145–146). The author of this paper presumes that similar contracts could also be detected in an academic environment. For example, a microsocial contract brings together members or their groups of a particular academic community. The existence of this contract could not only be deduced from traditions and values of a particular group or community, but also could have tangible expression in study or job contracts that establish commitment of students, lecturers, and administrative staff to the provisions of regulations of higher education, which in turn can also be considered as agreement to act one or another way and thus to maintain values of a particular academic community. Meanwhile, the macrosocial contract is a hypothetical agreement between members of society on social goals and their establishment in certain legal documents, e.g. a constitution. Thus, solidarity based on macrosocial contract extends beyond a single academic community and brings together not only the academic communities of a given country, but also the relevant governmental and non-governmental institutions, organisations and society in general. In addition, according to the Guidelines, it is desirable that solidarity ties in the academic field should also include the academic communities of different countries as well as international governmental and non-governmental institutions, organisations and the international community in general. In this case, we can talk about a megasocial contract.

On this basis it is possible to define several meanings and forms of academic solidarity (Fig. ​ (Fig.1). 1 ). In the narrow sense , academic solidarity is a sense of community, unity, shared interests, shared responsibility, and mutual support in a particular academic community. Here, relatively small groups – students, lecturers and administration – could be distinguished. The united interaction within these groups in pursuit of their goals can be called fragmented academic solidarity . Such solidarity can be both positive when the individual group focuses on achieving the common goal of the academic community (by sharing material that is difficult to access (students), developing new study programmes (lecturers) etc.) and negative when solid activities of members of these groups contradict or deny goals and values of academia (e.g. tolerance of a fellow’s misconduct). In addition, these groups could also demonstrate their mutual solidarity in both positive and negative ways (see more examples in Bieliauskaitė & Valavičienė, 2019 ; Valavičienė & Bieliauskaitė, 2019 ). Fragmented solidarity could also appear as collegiality, which is explained using such concepts as “community, respect, value of colleagues and their work, concern for one another, and a feeling of inclusion” (Schmidt et al., 2017 , p. 29).

Structure of academic solidarity

However, solidarity of the entire academic community is also important here. In this case, solidarity ties become more complex, i.e. they not only bring together students, lecturers and academic staff individually, but all of these groups into one academic community, united by integral (solid) academic solidarity in pursuit of common goals and values established in academia’s mission, strategy and other documents and maintained by the code of ethics (conduct).

Meanwhile, in a broad sense, academic solidarity is the unity, shared responsibility and mutual support of society that unites individuals as well as various institutions, international or national, state or non-governmental organisations in the academic field. It appears in the context of macro- and megasocial contracts.

Academic Integrity and its Relationship to Academic Solidarity

Professional services provided by members of society are undoubtedly important for its sustainable development. As surveys show, people with higher integrity are more innovative and productive than those with lower integrity (Becker, 1998 , 160). This is presumably because, in performing their duties in good faith, individuals fulfil the expectations of other members of society and this is seen as professionalism. Consequently, the training of professionals in an academic institution is inseparable from the development of honest behaviour.

Academic integrity is a significant value of academia and could be perceived as “one of the most important imperatives of academic ethics and even as its synonym” (Gaižauskaitė et al., 2017 , 0936). It maintains the fluency and transparency of educational processes including provision of knowledge, development of skills and shaping “the moral behaviour of future generations” (Nijhof et al., 2012 , 93). Academic integrity can be understood as: (a) a commitment to such fundamental values as honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage; (b) honest behaviour, e.g. compliance with rules of the code of ethics (conduct); and (c) opposite to dishonesty, misconduct, cheating and plagiarism (Gaižauskaitė et al., 2017 , 0932). Even if academic integrity is often understood as a personal, not institutional, quality (Vasiljevienė, 2014 ), it can also be characteristic to the institution or academia in particular. As Calabrese and Calabrese Barton ( 2000 ) note, “integrity always speaks to wholeness; it does not embrace fragmentation (…). Integrity is the relationship between the people and their chosen leaders. This integrity-driven relationship is built on mutual trust and commitment in solidarity” (281).

In order to reveal the relationship between academic solidarity, ethics and integrity it is necessary to refer to the initial meaning of these concepts. According to Maak ( 2008 ) “someone has integrity if he acts in accordance with important moral principles, does so in a coherent and consistent way, over time (…)” (358). Thus, integrity requires unity of words and actions which enables one to evaluate the person as trustworthy. It also “requires acting in accordance with one’s conscience” (Audi & Murphy, 2006 , 4). One of the philosophers who explored the notion of conscience most precisely is Thomas Aquinas. He understood human conscience as an inner quality which enables us to discern what is right and wrong and to apply this knowledge to particular decisions about some of our actions. According to the philosopher, human conscience consists of: (1) a specific habit of practical reason ( racio practica ) – the inherent knowledge of common moral-practical principles ( synderesis ); (2) an acquired world-view concerning practically important basic beliefs and basic values ( sapientia ); (3) an acquired empirical knowledge ( scientia ) which helps an individual to recognise and judge the actual practice (Anzenbacher, 1998 , 80–81). Synderesis of every person is equal as far as everyone bears a conscience, but sapientia and scientia vary as far as every person may acquire different knowledge. The conviction of personal conscience is always subjective therefore it can be wrong. According to Aquinas, conscience is wrong when individual world-view or empirical approaches do not conform to the widely recognised public standards (Anzenbacher, 1998 , 99). Understanding of right conscience as corresponding to public standards indicates the cohesion of individual conscience and social ethos .

Contemporary researchers on integrity and conscientiousness indicate the relevance of Aquinas’ ideas and provide the basis for the comparison of these notions which finally lead to the conclusion that integrity is a “morally laden element of conscientiousness” (Becker, 1998 , 158; also see: Audi & Murphy, 2006 , 4), i.e. integrity is adherence to the instructions of the right conscience. However, conscientiousness is the internal quality (virtue) of a person. It can be governed by right or wrong conscience which affects his way of thinking, talking and acting. Whereas, integrity is an external quality which can be considered as personal as well as an institutional quality (value) (Bieliauskaitė, 2014 , 4231). It imperatively requires us to address statements and actions to widely recognised moral principles and values, i.e. to meet the requirements of generally accepted standards and comply with consequent responsibilities. This institutionalised duty to meet public expectations (Komter, 2005 , 106) links integrity and solidarity when members of society in corpore engage in activities based on universally recognised (institutionalised) standards and aimed at upholding values of public interest. Accordingly, academic integrity means congruence with the standards of academic community ( academic ethos ) or, as the European Network for Academic Integrity defines it, “compliance with ethical and professional principles, standards, practices and consistent system of values, that serves as guidance for making decisions and taking actions in education, research and scholarship” (Tauginienė et al., 2018 , 7–8).

What can be considered as public standards ( social ethos ) in modern society? As Anzenbacher ( 1998 ) noted, in homogeneous societies conscience and ethos overlap, since here standards are accepted strongly and unanimously, and consciences tend to be oriented uncritically towards social ethos and its norms (110). Meanwhile, in today’s heterogeneous, pluralistic societies, the identification of a common ethos and its impact on human conscience becomes problematic. However, that does not mean that it is impossible to identify it at all. According to Anzenbacher ( 1998 ), an excellent example of universally recognised standards is the ethos of human rights (99). Not only do human rights help for reassurance of values that are important to each individual and society, they are themselves considered as such values. As mentioned above, the Declaration obliges every individual and every organ of society to make every effort to promote respect for these rights and freedoms by training and education (The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 , preamble). In addition, it is recognised that science and research are important values of modern society (e.g. International Covenant of Economic, Social & Cultural Rights, 1966 , Art. 13, Art. 15 Para. 3; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2012 , Art. 13, 14). Consequently, science and education are not only means of protecting human rights, but also values to be protected. In doing so, the international community and each signatory state is obliged to ensure the recognition and enforcement of these values.

Thus, it can be argued that academic solidarity and academic integrity are linked through a social ethos that maintains socially significant values. These values are both standards and goals that require members of society as well as of particular academic communities to behave in a spirit of solidarity and integrity. The later principle requires “acting according to a code (integrated system) of morally justifiable principles” (Becker, 1998 , 158). Then codes of ethics (conduct) as far as they reflect the most important values and moral principles of a particular institution or profession, can be considered as recognised standards. In the context of academia these codes together with other strategic documents of HEIs embed the academic ethos .

Impact of Academic Solidarity on Academic Integrity: Observations and Directions of Development

A growing number of higher education and other governmental and nongovernmental institutions are engaged in combating academic dishonesty, sharing their experiences in promoting academic and research integrity at both national and international levels through mutual collaboration, establishment of centres, associations, and networks. Examples of these are the International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI), the European Network for Academic Integrity (ENAI), the European Network of Research Integrity Offices (ENRIO), and the European Network of Research Ethics and Research Integrity (ENERI), together demonstrating their solidarity at the megasocial level. National governments express their concern about academic integrity issues by means of institutionalisation and legislation, i.e. establishing institutions to promote academic and research ethics and deal with academic misconduct (offices of ombudspersons, ethics committees etc.), as well as by issuing or making amendments to legislation that foster academic and research integrity and apply penalties for academic misconduct. HEIs also establish local offices of academic integrity and commissions of academic ethics, sharing best practice and issues with other institutions, and publicly demonstrating the principled position of institutions towards academic dishonesty. Depending on the scope and the characteristics of these actions, they could be conceived as expressions of either broad or narrow sense academic solidarity.

Unlike compliance-based programmes which embody a coercive orientation with measures designed to prevent, detect and punish violations of present standards of behaviour, integrity-based or values-based ethics programmes incorporate an enabling orientation. These programmes encourage ethical aspirations of autonomous individuals based on their understanding of what is the right way to act in a specific situation, and requires participants “to balance and apply different values in concrete settings” (Nijhof et al. 2012 , 100). The best results can be achieved by the joint effort and commitment of everyone. ICAI, for example, provides ten ways to improve academic integrity, including forming a Campus Academic Integrity Committee consisting of students, faculty and staff representatives, involving students in educating their peers on integrity policy (ICAI, 2020 ). The importance of students’ commitment is also stressed in ENAI materials: “students must be main characters and active change agents” (Guerrero-Dib, 2019 ). This mutual collaboration of each and every member of the academic community in order to promote academic integrity could be considered as an integral positive solidarity . One of many examples of the expression of this type of academic solidarity is a code of academic ethics if it is created by the academic community, i.e. all internal stakeholder groups (see more: Géring et al., 2019 ; Popa & Ristea, 2020 ).

On the other hand, solidarity in the context of academic integrity could bear not only a positive character. For example, students can express their solidarity via mutual consultations during assessments, tolerance (not reporting) of other students’ misconduct, official permission for their fellows to use (plagiarise) one’s own paper (more examples see: Pupovac et al., 2019 ; Valavičienė & Bieliauskaitė, 2019 ). Lecturers also observe some unethical behaviour amongst their colleagues: deliberately ignoring students’ cheating and plagiarism, blaming those lecturers who care about academic integrity for their assumed incompetence and their negative attitude towards students. This experience can make lecturers to look for compromise and to address integrity issues more flexibly, because they want to keep good relationships with their colleagues (Bieliauskaitė & Valavičienė, 2019 , 6767). This manifestation of solidarity within particular groups of the academic community, directed towards pursuit of their personal goals that contradict academic values, could be defined as fragmented negative solidarity . Accordingly, it is also possible to observe integral negative solidarity , when, for example, lecturers allow their students to cheat during an exam, or do not assess a plagiarised paper objectively (Bieliauskaitė & Valavičienė, 2019 , 6768). At some point, questionable collaboration practices (Gladwin, 2018 ) could also be considered as examples of negative solidarity. These and similar attitudes and actions of faculty members, as well as peers’ misconduct, stimulate academic dishonesty (Maloshonok & Shmeleva, 2019 , 315). Meanwhile fragmented positive solidarity is when, for example, lecturers consult each other on issues of academic integrity and provide support for their colleagues while participating together in examinations and thus helping to ensure fair assessment (see more: Bieliauskaitė & Valavičienė, 2019 ). Thus, the manifestations of forms of solidarity depend on what is considered as the main goal: academic integrity as the value and common interest of academia, or individual egoistic preferences (better grade, good personal relationships, saving time and efforts).

These examples suggest that the effective maintenance of a culture of academic integrity requires the creation of such conditions that stimulate positive solidarity and prevent the appearance of any forms of negative solidarity. This could be done by taking, at first glance, simple and obvious measures that many HEIs have already taken: not only inclusion of all internal stakeholders in drafting a code of academic ethics and other internal policies and regulations, but also leading by example. This could also include: increasing awareness of ethical dilemmas and motivation of students, especially freshmen, supporting and encouraging intolerance of academic misconduct as well as other collaborative activities leading to the creation and strengthening of the culture of academic integrity (see more; IAU-MCO, 2012 ; Minarcik & Bridges, 2015 ; Chankova, 2020 ; MacLeod & Eaton, 2020 ; ICAI, 2021 ). The principle of academic solidarity could be enshrined in institutional codes of academic ethics (conduct): (i) literally; (ii) in combination with other principles, for example, the principle of collegiality (Tauginienė, 2016 , 335), fairness (IAU-MCO, 2012 ), or it could be revealed (iii) indirectly. For example, IAU-MCO Guidelines aim at the consolidation of HEIs’ efforts to ensure academic ethics ( mega - and macrosocial level) as well as emphasise the role of each and every member of the academic community ( microsocial level) in the establishment and maintenance of the culture of academic integrity (para. 3.1–3.3). In other words, even if not expressed directly, a call for solidarity is present in this document in a context wider than international partnership.

No less than the academic community, society in general has a significant impact on the promotion and maintenance of academic integrity. Results of numerous research studies indicate correlation between students’ cheating and society’s values (Maloshonok & Shmeleva, 2019 , 315). The interesting fact observed by researchers is that students in so-called collectivistic countries like Russia, Ukraine, and Lebanon, tend to consider peers’ behaviour in performing dishonestly more than in individualistic countries like the US and Switzerland (Maloshonok & Shmeleva, 2019 , 324). These findings might be one of reasons that lead to a moderate approach towards solidarity as a principle of academic ethics, not to mention ambiguity of the content of this principle. For example, after 15 years, solidarity was deleted from the list of principles provided in the Recommendations for Codes of Academic Ethics in Research and Higher Education Institutions in Lithuania (see footnote 1). On the other hand, these risks expose the demand of both deeper analysis of the dynamics of this principle, and the active role of the state in the promotion of academic integrity – not only in the establishment of scientific and educational institutions, but also in protection of intellectual property and copyright, fair competition of students, researchers and others. These activities should be directed towards the encouragement of positive solidarity and prevention of the negative solidarity of academic communities in general and their members in particular. For example, state institutions could stimulate unification of HEIs reaction towards academic misconduct by creating a database of students expelled from HEIs for violations of academic ethics. This could prevent such a situation when a HEI expels a student for severe academic misconduct and sets a time restriction for his/her enrolment, the same student is admitted to another HEI without any restrictions, thus allowing a student to escape responsibility. Moreover, not only the state institutions, but also societies should actively protect their values, demonstrating intolerance of academic dishonesty and providing information for institutions dealing with academic misconduct. If the society remains apathetic or tolerates violations of academic integrity, governmental and HEIs alone will be powerless to deal with the problem. Such a public position sooner or later can become harmful for society itself (Bieliauskaitė, 2014 , 4231, 4234). Therefore, it is highly important to encourage integral positive solidarity not only in a narrow sense (microsocial level), but also in a broad sense (macro and mega social levels).

Solidarity is especially demanded in times of crisis, like the COVID-19 pandemic that has required rapid, and in some cases, radical changes of the process of education and research. Even if not formalised in the documents, academic solidarity is already present. This crisis calls for as much collaborative work of students, lecturers, administrators as never before. In addition, academic institutions are looking for ways to support their members, while governments seek the same for academic institutions. The international academic community (networks, associations etc.) is sharing its best practices, material and recommendations on how to deal with issues that have occurred (Chatfield & Schroeder, 2020 ). This situation demonstrates that solidarity in general and academic solidarity in particular is important not only for the maintenance of academic integrity but also for sustainability or even survival of academia itself.

Conclusions

Solidarity may be encouraged by the pursuit of purely egoistic motives ( instrumental solidarity) as well as by a sense of unity and belief in community values ( we solidarity). In any case, solidarity is about acting together in order to achieve a certain goal. One of the main goals of academia is educating future professionals, thus contributing to the sustainable development of society. However, members of academia could have different goals. These different goals and their scope allow different forms of academic solidarity to be revealed – fragmented and integral , negative and positive solidarity – which appear in different combinations within the academic community.

Solidarity and integrity are linked via social ethos – widely recognised public standards – insofar as they guarantee the maintenance of social values. These values are both standards and goals that require members of society, as well as of particular academic communities, to behave in a spirit of solidarity and integrity. In academia this behaviour is usually regulated by codes of academic ethics (conduct) that embed academic ethos – standards and values of the academic institution.

Academic integrity is the part of academic ethos, the maintenance of which requires involvement of all members of academia and their efforts, i.e. positive integral solidarity . In other words, the culture of academic integrity could be created and promoted via inclusion of all members of academia (at micro level) and society (macro or mega levels) in the process of determination of the main academic values and their communication, thus fostering awareness of academic standards. Here, the motivation, efforts and principled position of each member of the (academic) community is important in order to follow these standards and to eliminate social pressure to commit academic misconduct.

These conclusions support recommendations to embed the principle of solidarity in the codes of academic ethics of higher education institutions, and to extend the scope of its application by linking the rights and responsibilities of different groups within the academic community in a way that best expresses their unity, shared responsibility, mutual support in meeting the standards of academic and, at the same time, social ethos.

1 For example, in the Recommendations for Codes of Academic Ethics , that were approved by the order No. ISAK-2485 of the Minister of Education and Science of the Republic of Lithuania on December 5, 2005 (not valid since June 10, 2009) stated that namely the relations between lecturers are based on the principles of collegiality and academic solidarity (Dėl rekomendacijų akademinės etikos kodeksams patvirtinimo, 2005 , para. 7). In the following Recommendations on the Approval, Embedding and Monitoring Academic Ethics Codes by Research and Higher Education Institutions approved by the order No. V-16 of the Ombudsperson for Academic Ethics and Procedures of the Republic of Lithuania on March 31, 2015 (not valid since August 25, 2020), it was stated that the relations between the members of the academic community (students, lecturers, scientists, other researchers and professors emeritus) are based on the principles of collegiality and academic solidarity (Recommendations on the Approval, Embedding and Monitoring Academic Ethics Codes by Research and Higher Education Institutions, 2015 , para. 3.1, 12). While in the revised Recommendations for Codes of Academic Ethics in Research and Higher Education Institutions approved by the order No. V-38 of the Ombudsperson for Academic Ethics and Procedures of the Republic of Lithuania on August 25, 2020 the principle of solidarity is not listed at all.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Anzenbacher, A. (1998). Etikos įvadas . Aidai.
• Audi R, Murphy PE. The Many Faces of Integrity. Business Ethics Quarterly. 2006; 16 (1):3–21. doi: 10.5840/beq20061615. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Balik C, Sharon D, Kelishek S, Tabak N. Attitudes towards Academic Cheating during Nursing Studies. Medicine and Law. 2010; 29 (4):547–564. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bauman Z. Likvidi meilė. Apie žmonių ryšių trapumą. Apostrofa; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Becker TE. Integrity in Organizations: Beyond Honesty and Conscientiousness. The Academy of Management Review. 1998 doi: 10.5465/amr.1998.192969. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bieliauskaitė J. Solidarumo vaidmuo socialinėje teisinėje valstybėje. Socialinių Mokslų Studijos. 2009; 1 (1):79–94. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bieliauskaitė J. On the way to professionalism – the promotion of law students’ academic integrity. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014; 116 :4229–4234. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.922. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bieliauskaitė, J., & Valavičienė, N. (2019). Shaping culture of academic integrity in corpore: Lecturers’ perspective. INTED 2019. 13th international technology, education and development conference: conference proceedings , 6764–6768.
• Bermejo-Luque, L. (2014). Deduction without dogmas: the case of moral analogical argumentation. Informal Logic , 34 (3), 311–336. 10.22329/il.v34i3.4112
• Burgess-Proctor A, Cassano G, Condron DJ, Lyons HA, Sanders G. A collective effort to improve sociology students’ writing skills. Teaching Sociology. 2014; 42 (2):130–139. doi: 10.1177/0092055X13512458. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Butler, S. (2010). A. Arendt and Aristotle on Equality, Leisure, and Solidarity. Journal of Social Philosophy . 10.1111/j.1467-9833.2010.01511.x
• Calabrese RL, Calabrese Barton A. The Practice of Integrity within the University. The Journal of Educational Thought. 2000; 34 (3):265–284. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chankova M. Teaching Academic Integrity: the Missing Link. Journal of Academic Ethics. 2020; 18 :155–173. doi: 10.1007/s10805-019-09356-y. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. (2012). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT . Accessed 25 April 2020.
• Chatfield K, Schroeder D. Ethical research in the COVID-19 era demands care, solidarity and trustworthiness. Research Ethics. 2020; 16 (3–4):1–4. doi: 10.1177/1747016120945046. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cureton A. Solidarity and Social Moral Rules. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 2012 doi: 10.1007/s10677-011-9313-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Daumiller M, Dickhäuser O, Dresel M. University instructors’ achievement goals for teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2019 doi: 10.1037/edu0000271. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dawson A, Verweij M. Solidarity: a Moral Concept in Need of Clarification. Public Health Ethics. 2012; 5 (1):1–5. doi: 10.1093/phe/phs007. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dėl rekomendacijų akademinės etikos kodeksams patvirtinimo. (2005). https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/TAIS.267686 . Accessed 15 September 2019.
• Gadamer HG. Friendship and Solidarity. Research in Phenomenology. 2009 doi: 10.1163/156916408X389604. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gaidano G, Balocco R, Al Essa W, Turolla A, Barbato R, Dianzani U, Rizzi M, Ravinetto R. European education corridors: opportunity for academic solidarity. The Lancet. 2020; 395 (10233):1343. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30484-0. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gaižauskaitė, I., Bieliauskaitė, J., & Valavičienė, N. (2017). Understanding academic integrity: perceptions of university students and lecturers. EDULEARN17: 9th international conference on education and new learning technologies: conference proceedings , 931–938.
• Géring, Z., Csillag, S., Szegedi, K., & Gyóri, S. (2019). Codes of Ethics in Higher Education. Methodological Insights from a Complex Culture Development Process. Ethical Perspectives . 10.2143/EP.26.1.3286289
• Gibbs, P. (2020). The Marketingisation of Higher Education. In: Rider S., Peters M.A., Hyvönen M., Besley T. (eds) World Class Universities. Evaluating Education: Normative Systems and Institutional Practices. Springer, Singapore.  https://proxy.lnb.lt:2085/10.1007/978-981-15-7598-3_13
• Gladwin TE. Educating students and future researchers about academic misconduct and questionable collaboration practices. International Journal for Educational Integrity. 2018 doi: 10.1007/s40979-018-0034-9. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guerrero-Dib, J. (2019). How to Build a Culture of Academic Integrity at Your Institution? Resource document. European Network for Academic Integrity. http://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/materials/how-to-build-a-culture-of-academic-integrity-at-your-institution/ . Accessed 28 April 2020.
• IAU-MCO Guidelines for an Institutional Code of Ethics in Higher Education. (2012). https://iau-aiu.net/IMG/pdf/ethics_guidelines_finaldef_08.02.13.pdf . Accessed 15 September 2019.
• International Center for Academic Integrity. (2020). Top Ten Ways to Improve Academic Integrity Without (Much) Money . https://www.academicintegrity.org/top-ten-ways/ . Accessed 28 April 2020.
• International Center for Academic Integrity [ICAI]. (2021). The Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity . (3rd ed.). www.academicintegrity.org/the-fundamental-valuesof-academic-integrity . Accessed 13 March 2021.
• International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. (1966). https://www.ohchr.org/EN/professionalinterest/pages/cescr.aspx . Accessed 25 April 2020.
• Johnson P, Brookes M, Wood G, Brewster C. Legal Origin and Social Solidarity: The Continued Relevance of Durkheim to Comparative Institutional Analysis. Sociology. 2017 doi: 10.1177/0038038515611049. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kerr, C. (1994). Knowledge Ethics and the New Academic Culture. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning , 26 (1), 8–15.
• Komter AE. Social Solidarity and the Gift. Cambridge University Press; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• Koudenburg N, Postmes T, Gordijn EH. Conversational Flow Promotes Solidarity. PLoS One. 2013 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0078363. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Levich BG. Soviet professor on academic solidarity. Index on Censorship. 1973; 2 (1):109–110. doi: 10.1080/03064227308532207. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lieberman DA, Remedios R. Do undergraduates’ motives for studying change as they progress through their degrees? The British Journal of Educational Psychology. 2007 doi: 10.1348/000709906X157772. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maak Th. Undivided Corporate Responsibility: Towards a Theory of Corporate Integrity. Journal of Business Ethics. 2008; 82 (2):353–368. doi: 10.1007/s10551-008-9891-0. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• MacLeod PD, Eaton SE. The Paradox of Faculty Attitudes toward Student Violations of Academic Integrity. Journal of Academic Ethics. 2020; 18 :347–362. doi: 10.1007/s10805-020-09363-4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maley B. A Narrative Inquiry of Associate Degree Nursing Students’ Stories About Their Experience of Academic Misconduct. Teaching and Learning in Nursing. 2020; 15 :205–209. doi: 10.1016/j.teln.2020.04.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maloshonok N, Shmeleva E. Factors Influencing Academic Dishonesty among Undergraduate Students at Russian Universities. Journal of Academic Ethics. 2019; 17 :313–329. doi: 10.1007/s10805-019-9324-y. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McDougall H. Challenges of Legal Education in the Neoliberal University. National Lawyers Guild Review. 2015; 72 (2):65–80. [ Google Scholar ]
• Minarcik, J., & Bridges, A. J. (2015). Psychology Graduate Students Weigh In: Qualitative Analysis of Academic Dishonesty and Suggestion Prevention Strategies.  Journal of Academic Ethics,   13 , 197–216. 10.1007/s10805-015-9230-x
• Moroz J, Swabovski O. Solidarity, dark solidarity, the commons and the university. Power and Education. 2017 doi: 10.1177/1757743817715662. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nijhof A, Wilderom C, Oost M. Professional and institutional morality: building ethics programmes on the dual loyalty of academic professionals. Ethics and Education. 2012; 7 (1):91–109. doi: 10.1080/17449642.2012.681236. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pensky M. The Ends of Solidarity: Discourse Theory in Ethics and Politics. The State University of New York Press; 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Popa D, Ristea GA. Theoretical and Practical Aspects Regarding the Universities’ Codes of Professional Ethics and Deontology. International Journal of Communication Research. 2020; 10 (3):257–265. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pupovac, V., Popović, S., & Blažina, V. (2019). What Prevents Students from Reporting Academic Misconduct? A Survey of Croatian Students. Journal of Academic Ethics . 10.1007/s10805-019-09341-5
• Recommendations on the Approval, Embedding and Monitoring Academic Ethics Codes by Research and Higher Education Institutions. (2015). https://etikostarnyba.lt/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Recommendations-1.pdf . Accessed 15 September 2019.
• Rodriguez, F. M. M. (2013). Evaluation by Rubric of Solidarity in Acquisition Skills College. Problems of Education in the 21st Century , 52 , 92–104.
• Rorty R. Contingency, Irony and Solidarity. Cambridge University Press; 1989. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schmidt CE, McNulty B, Howard-Baptiste S, Harvey J. Perspectives about How to Define and Use Collegiality in Higher Education. International Journal of Kinesiology in Higher Education. 2017; 1 (1):28–34. doi: 10.1080/24711616.2016.1277674. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Serdiuk L. Personal-Semantic Characteristics of Higher School Students’ Motivation. Social Welfare Interdisciplinary Approach. 2012; 2 (1):56–62. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tauginienė L. Embedding Academic Integrity in Public Universities. Journal of Academic Ethics. 2016; 14 (4):327–344. doi: 10.1007/s10805-016-9268-4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tauginienė, L., Gaižauskaitė, I., Glendinning, I., Kravjar, J., Ojsteršek, M., Ribeiro, L., Odiņeca, T., Marino, F., Cosentino, M., Sivasubramaniam, S., & Foltýnek, T. (2018). Glossary for Academic Integrity. Resource document. European Network for Academic Integrity. http://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Glossary_revised_final.pdf . Accessed 2 April 2020.
• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (1948). https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ . Accessed 25 April 2020.
• Valavičienė, N., & Bieliauskaitė, J. (2019). Impact of students’ solidarity on the maintenance of academic integrity. INTED 2019. 13th international technology, education and development conference: conference proceedings , 6843–6847.
• Vasiljevienė N. Akademinis integralumas: nuo abstraktaus kalbėjimo apie akademinį sąžiningumą - prie jo valdybos. Socialinių Mokslų Studijos. 2014; 6 (3):535–556. [ Google Scholar ]
• Warnke G. Solidarity and tradition in Gadamer’s Hermeneutics. History and Theory. 2012 doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2303.2012.00644.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

• How it works

"Christmas Offer"

Terms & conditions.

As the Christmas season is upon us, we find ourselves reflecting on the past year and those who we have helped to shape their future. It’s been quite a year for us all! The end of the year brings no greater joy than the opportunity to express to you Christmas greetings and good wishes.

At this special time of year, Research Prospect brings joyful discount of 10% on all its services. May your Christmas and New Year be filled with joy.

We are looking back with appreciation for your loyalty and looking forward to moving into the New Year together.

"Claim this offer"

In unfamiliar and hard times, we have stuck by you. This Christmas, Research Prospect brings you all the joy with exciting discount of 10% on all its services.

Offer valid till 5-1-2024

We love being your partner in success. We know you have been working hard lately, take a break this holiday season to spend time with your loved ones while we make sure you succeed in your academics

Discount code: RP23720

Published by Nicolas at March 20th, 2024 , Revised On March 12, 2024

What Is Academic Integrity – Why Is It Important

In pursuing knowledge, academic integrity serves as a cornerstone, upholding fairness, fostering critical thinking, and ensuring the value of education. But what exactly does it mean, and why is it so crucial in academic environments? Let’s discuss this in detail. 

Table of Contents

What Is Academic Integrity?

Academic integrity encompasses honesty, fairness, and responsibility in all academic endeavours. It is about respecting the intellectual property of others, taking ownership of your work, and upholding ethical standards in research, writing, and assessments. This includes but is not limited to, avoiding plagiarism, cheating, and fabrication of data.

The Foundations Of Academic Integrity

Academic integrity stands on the following foundations. 

Honesty In Intellectual Pursuits

Academic integrity begins with an unwavering commitment to honesty in intellectual pursuits. This aspect emphasizes the importance of original thought, authentic engagement with course materials, and the responsible use of information. 

Students are encouraged to approach assignments, examinations, and research papers with sincerity, cultivating their understanding and skills through genuine effort. By fostering an environment where honesty is valued, educational institutions contribute to developing individuals who can navigate the complexities of academia with integrity.

Avoiding Plagiarism

Plagiarism is one of the most significant threats to academic integrity, posing a direct challenge to originality and intellectual contribution principles. It involves presenting someone else’s work, ideas, or expressions as one’s own without proper acknowledgment. 

Academic institutions like universities in Canada take a strong stance against plagiarism due to its potential to undermine the learning process, erode trust, and compromise the integrity of educational outcomes. 

Students are urged to understand what constitutes plagiarism and employ effective strategies to avoid it, such as paraphrasing, citing sources accurately, and seeking guidance when in doubt.

Proper Citation And Referencing

Proper citation and referencing are fundamental components of academic integrity, serving as a demonstration of respect for the intellectual property of others. When incorporating external sources into academic work, providing due credit through accurate citation is imperative. 

Different academic disciplines may have specific citation styles, such as APA, MLA , or Chicago, and students are expected to adhere to these guidelines meticulously. Understanding the details of citation safeguards against plagiarism and enhances the credibility and legitimacy of one’s own work. 

Through meticulous referencing, students contribute to the broader scholarly conversation, acknowledging the contributions of those who have paved the way for their research and ideas.

Why Does Academic Integrity Matter?

The significance of academic integrity extends far beyond simply avoiding repercussions like failing grades or disciplinary actions. It plays a vital role in various aspects of education, both for individuals and institutions:

Fostering A Fair Learning Environment

Imagine a classroom where some students diligently study and complete assignments, while others resort to plagiarism or shortcuts. This creates an unfair advantage for the latter, undermining the true measure of knowledge and skill.

Academic integrity levels the playing field, ensuring everyone has equal opportunity to learn and excel based on their merit.

Promoting Critical Thinking And Deep Learning

When students engage in honest academic practices, they actively grapple with concepts, analyze information, and synthesize knowledge. This fosters critical thinking skills, problem-solving abilities, and a genuine understanding of the subject matter. 

Conversely, cheating bypasses this crucial learning process, resulting in superficial knowledge and hindering intellectual growth.

Building Trust And Credibility

Academic institutions rely on trust and integrity to maintain their reputation and the value of their degrees. When students uphold these values, it strengthens the institution’s credibility and ensures the quality of its graduates. Moreover, academic dishonesty erodes trust and casts doubt on the legitimacy of academic achievements.

Preparing Students For Ethical Conduct

The principles of academic integrity transcend the classroom, shaping personal and professional conduct. By practicing honesty and responsibility in their studies, students develop valuable ethical values that translate into future careers and interactions with colleagues and clients.

Ensuring The Integrity Of Research And Knowledge Production

Accurate and reliable research forms the foundation of academic disciplines and advancements in various fields. Fabricating data or plagiarizing findings not only undermines the research itself but also hinders the progress of knowledge creation and can have detrimental consequences in fields like medicine and science.

The 5 Fundamental Values Of Academic Integrity 

The five fundamental values of academic integrity are:

This is the most basic value of academic integrity. It means being truthful and forthright in all your academic work. This includes things like not cheating on exams, not plagiarizing, and not fabricating data.

Academic integrity is built on trust. We trust that our classmates and teachers are honest and that they will uphold the same standards of integrity that we do. This trust is essential for creating a healthy learning environment where everyone can feel safe and supported.

Everyone deserves a fair chance to succeed in their academic pursuits. Academic integrity means playing by the rules and giving everyone an equal opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge and skills. This includes things like not taking advantage of others or using unauthorized resources.

We should respect ourselves, our classmates, our teachers, and the academic community as a whole. This means treating everyone with dignity and courtesy, even when we disagree with them. It also means respecting the rules and procedures that are in place to ensure fairness and honesty.

• Responsibility

We are all responsible for our academic integrity. This means taking ownership of our work and making sure that it is up to our own standards. It also means being aware of the rules and regulations that govern academic integrity and following them faithfully.

Common Challenges To Maintaining Academic Integrity

Some challenges that are faced by academics in maintaining academic integrity are listed below. 

Pressure To Perform

• Students may face intense academic pressure, leading to the temptation to take shortcuts or resort to dishonest practices in pursuit of better grades.
• The fear of failure or the desire to meet external expectations can contribute to compromising academic integrity.

Lack Of Understanding

• Some students may not fully grasp the principles of academic integrity, including what constitutes plagiarism or the importance of proper citation.
• Misunderstandings about academic expectations and guidelines can inadvertently lead to unintentional violations.

Online Learning Challenges

• The shift to online education presents unique challenges, as remote assessments may make monitoring and ensuring academic honesty harder.
• The availability of online resources can also increase the likelihood of plagiarism if not properly managed.

Cultural Differences

• International students may face challenges related to differences in academic cultures and expectations, which can inadvertently lead to breaches of academic integrity.
• Varied cultural attitudes towards collaboration and citation may contribute to unintentional violations.

The research paper we write have:

• Precision and Clarity
• Zero Plagiarism
• High-level Encryption
• Authentic Sources

Strategies To Promote And Sustain Academic Integrity

Educational programs.

• Institutions can implement thorough educational programs to raise awareness about the importance of academic integrity.
• Workshops, seminars, and online modules can help students understand the principles, consequences, and techniques to maintain integrity.

Clear Communication

• Academic institutions should communicate clear expectations regarding academic integrity, including definitions of plagiarism, proper citation practices, and consequences for violations.
• Transparent communication fosters a shared understanding among students, faculty, and staff, creating a culture that values honesty.

Technology Solutions

• Implementing plagiarism detection tools and technologies can act as deterrents and help identify instances of academic dishonesty.
• Secure online examination platforms with monitoring features can be employed to maintain integrity in remote learning environments.

Promoting A Positive Learning Environment

• Create an environment where learning is emphasized over grades, reducing the pressure on students to resort to dishonest practices.
• Encourage collaboration, critical thinking, and a growth mindset, fostering a positive academic culture.

Support And Guidance

• Provide students with access to resources, such as writing centers and academic advisors, to seek guidance on proper citation and academic writing.
• Foster a supportive environment where students feel comfortable discussing challenges related to academic integrity.

How To Maintain Academic Integrity: A Shared Responsibility

Upholding academic integrity is a shared responsibility between students, faculty, and institutions. Here are some ways everyone can contribute:

• Familiarize yourself with your institution’s academic integrity policies and resources.
• Seek help and clarification from instructors when needed, instead of resorting to shortcuts.
• Properly cite sources and give credit to the work of others.
• Report any observed instances of academic misconduct.
• Clearly communicate expectations and guidelines regarding academic integrity in your courses.
• Create assessments that encourage critical thinking and independent work.
• Provide timely feedback and support to students struggling with academic concepts.
• Address suspected cases of academic misconduct fairly and transparently.

Institutions

• Develop and implement clear and detailed academic integrity policies.
• Provide accessible resources and workshops on academic integrity for students and faculty.
• Foster a culture of open communication and encourage reporting of academic misconduct.
• Uphold fair and consistent consequences for violations of academic integrity policies.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is academic integrity.

Academic integrity is the ethical framework guiding honest and principled behaviour in educational pursuits. It involves upholding honesty in assignments, avoiding plagiarism, and giving proper credit through citation, ensuring the credibility and authenticity of academic work.

Why is academic integrity important?

Academic integrity fosters trust, maintains ethical standards, and promotes genuine learning. Upholding honesty in intellectual pursuits, avoiding plagiarism, and proper citation contribute to responsible individuals’ development and educational institutions’ credibility.

How to maintain academic integrity?

Maintain academic integrity by prioritizing originality, avoiding plagiarism through proper citation, understanding and adhering to institutional guidelines, seeking clarification when uncertain, and resisting the temptation to cheat. Uphold ethical standards to ensure honest and authentic academic contributions.

What are the 5 fundamental values of academic integrity?

How does plagiarism affect academic integrity.

Plagiarism undermines academic integrity by misrepresenting intellectual contributions. It erodes trust, devalues original work, and compromises the educational process. Consequences may include academic penalties, damaged reputations, and long-term impacts on personal and professional development.

You May Also Like

Check out this comprehensive guide to learn how to write a literature review with the help of multiple good literature review examples.

Cancer research is a vast and dynamic field that plays a pivotal role in advancing our understanding of this complex […]

Learn how to write a finance thesis and more than 30 finance thesis topics to choose from. Start your research with the help of our guide.

Ready to place an order?

USEFUL LINKS

Learning resources.

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

Academic Ethics And Academic Integrity Essay

Academic ethics are the moral codes or the shared standards of an academic enterprise and the core of its success (Occidental College, 2016). Basically, academic ethics require each student, to be honest, responsible, fair, respectful, give credit where it is due, turn in their original work, and etc. (Michigan State University, n.d.). Academic integrity requires students to do their own work without unauthorized help from others, cheating, lying, plagiarizing, and stealing (Valdosta State University, 2016). Academic integrity is important because it shows that the student is trustworthy and honest enough to do his or her own work, whether someone is looking or not. “Learning how to express original ideas, cite sources, work independently, and report results accurately and honestly are skills that carry students beyond their academic careers” (Michigan State University, n.d., para. 2). Professional ethics are guidelines set by professional organizations that guide its members in performing the functions of their job appropriately, while behaving in a professional and ethical manner (Web Finance Inc., 2016). Some of the characteristics of professional ethics include “knowledge, honesty, accountability, integrity, loyalty, compliance with the law and more” (Reference An IAC Publishing Labs Company, 2016, para. 3). Professional ethics are important because it builds credibility and shows that the person is capable of doing their job appropriately, regardless of the situation,

University Of California Riverside's Tartan Soul Analysis

Integrity is being faithful towards your work. Someone must own up to the workload that college has upon every student within its campus and complete

Should Illegal Immigrants Be Deported

It is important for businesses and professionals to be versed in ethical issues because it helps with decision-making when faced with different situations that create a moral dilemma. Business and professional ethics help to develop a certain moral standard and expectation in the business world. The ethics in which a business or a professional operates within benefits both the giver and receiver. Engaging in the exchange of goods, services and information requires some level of trust in order to maintain civility. The thought that a person or a business is doing things that are unethical

Character, Morals, Integrity Essay

Morals, character, integrity, what do these words mean….actually, the question is, do you have them. A man named Dwight Moody once said, “Character is what you are in the dark.” You cannot see your morals, character, or integrity, these are only shown as your values. Someone could only show their own values, which are very important to themselves and everyone else. Integrity is the firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values. The way you show your integrity, character, and morals or how they are effect you in either a negative or positive way. There are many causes to how your values are. So as you know, integrity is very important and it is important to have it.

What Does Academic Integrity Mean To You

In my opinion, Academic Integrity is the honesty of its own work done in University. We are doing assignments, essays, and exams every week or month to prove our academic skills based on our classes.

Ethical and Professional Implications Essay

• 5 Works Cited

The autonomy of a competent patient is an issue not often debated in medical ethics. Refusal of unwanted treatment is a basic right, likened to the common law of battery, available to all people capable of a competent choice. These fundamental rules of medical ethics entered a completely new forum as medical technology developed highly effective life-sustaining care during the 20th century. Several watershed cases elucidated these emerging issues in the 1960’s and 70’s, none more effectively than that of Karen Ann Quinlan. Fundamentally, this case established that a once-competent patient without the possibility of recovery could have their autonomy exercised by a surrogate in regard to the

Compare And Contrast Ethical Research Articles

Academic integrity is the code of academic conduct that is set forth by educational institutions. It is the catalyst for the mission of most institutions. The expectation is that students will be honest and responsible as it pertains to academia. It defines the academic rigor in research and academic publishing and gives value to the institution (Spain & Robes, 2011). Academic integrity also applies to the way that an individual behaves both personally and professionally, and is a true measure to the worth of the degree that is earned. This standard of behavior applies to both students and faculty. In short this is just thief of

College Essay On Integrity

Integrity plays a big role in my academic life. Integrity builds trust between teachers and students. Good student-teacher relationships are developed from trust

Essay about The Importance of Academic Integrity

"Academic integrity is the pursuit of scholarly activity in an open, honest and responsible manner. All students should act with personal integrity, respect other students' dignity, rights and property, and help create and maintain an environment in which all can succeed through the fruits of their efforts."

Professional Values And Ethics Paper

Academic integrity can be summarized as the pursuance of higher education in a scholarly fashion and the value of learning without

Essay on Integrity

We are presented with choices every day. Many are easy to make and cause very little stress, but some choices can be extremely difficult and have significant consequences. The difference between making the right choice or the wrong one is often determined be a persons character, which is based upon the qualities of integrity, responsibility, and honesty. Gaining an understanding of these three character traits and how to build them is critical to creating a lifetime of positive outcomes.

Academic Integrity: The Moral Code Or Ethical Policy Of Academia

As defined by the Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Academic Integrity is the moral code or ethical policy of academia. This includes values such as avoidance of cheating or plagiarism; maintenance of academic standards; honesty and rigor in research and academic publishing. Many believe academic integrity to be a strong, pervasive and understood rule when going to Universities and Community Colleges across the globe; however, in the recent decades, abiding to the rules and policies to uphold academic integrity has slowly become more problematic for students across the board. Thesis?

The Path To Success Essay

Academic integrity holds a great deal of weight. This includes honesty in the work produced, as well as being able to accomplish the work. Responsibility in addition plays important factor into integrity. I see

Ethics And Ethical Standards For Accounting Professionals

Professional, ethical codes and standards expect members of all professions regardless of job title, cultural differences or local laws to act with integrity and place the interest of customers above own interests. It expects professionals to be competent and respectful. Professional codes and standards require members of a profession to maintain and develop professional competence (Sadowski & Thomas, 2012). It covers duties of employees to employers and customers, analysis of investment, responsibilities and conflict of interest, professionalism and integrity of capital markets. Professionals who behave ethically act with integrity, show respect to everyone they interact with, provide a high quality of services, work to enhance trust and loyalty to customers and are responsible.

The Importance of Ethics in Society Essay

Academic dishonesty is another facet of unethical behaviour. It is an action or attempt that results in creating an unfair academic advantage for oneself or a disadvantage for any other member of academic community. A child uses his or her experiences in society to shape personal ethics. Family has a strong influence on one's values and behaviour,parents establish rules from the start and it becomes the basis for our ethics and morals. A personal ethical commitment is part of what makes students a success. A lack of ethical commitment will always result in acdemic failure. I personally believe that students who are academically dishonest cheat themselves out of an education and harm their fellow students by screwing the grading curve for the class as a whole. Therefore academic ethics are vital and students should commit themselves to maintaining highest personal ethical standards.

Code Of Ethics And Ethics

Adhering to professional ethics will strengthen the organization’s pursuit in compliance, marketing, and risk mitigation constructing guidelines for employees and stakeholders to follow. In facing the much-needed attention to the company and staff

Related Topics

• Academic dishonesty

Ethics and Integrity

Whatever your field, it is crucial to ensure that your research project meets all ethical, legal, and safety requirements. Depending on your field of study, you may need to take one or more of the following steps before starting your research project

• Discuss ethical implications of your project with a faculty advisor
• Obtain approval for your project from the Institutional Review Board
• Complete laboratory safety training
• Clarify the roles and expectations of contributors to the research project
• Consider other ethical or legal questions

As part of the Office of Research Support , the Human Subjects and Institutional Review Board oversees approval of qualifying research projects. Ethics training and approval are mandatory for projects involving human or animal subjects.

Research Ethics

Research ethics involves the application of moral principles to academic research. When you decide to become a researcher, you take on an ethical responsibility to consider how your research will affect yourself, other members of your research team, your school and university, colleagues in your discipline, and local, national, and global communities.

Whether you are in the liberal arts, natural sciences, fine arts, or another field, you may face ethical questions in one or more phases of your research, including data collection, writing, or publishing. The basic principles of research ethics are similar for research in all disciplines, but accepted ethical standards sometimes differ from one discipline to the next.

As an undergraduate researcher, it is important to consider ethical implications of your research. During the planning stages of your project, you should talk to a faculty advisor about ethical and legal considerations relevant to your project and discipline.

Research Involving Human Subjects

All projects involving human subjects require approval from the Institutional Review Board ( IRB ) before the research can take place. The IRB considers applications from researchers across the university to ensure that all research projects involving human subjects are conducted in a safe, responsible, and legal manner. IRB approval is required for any project that involves performing physical procedures on a human being, interacting with human beings, collecting private or identifiable information, or otherwise involves studying living persons. As a student doing research involving human subjects, you have the responsibility to ensure that you are conducting your research in an appropriate and ethical manner. If you think your project may involve human subjects, you should contact the Office of Research Support to clarify whether you need IRB approval.

In addition to obtaining prior approval for human subjects research, all researchers (including undergraduates) who will be working with human subjects must first complete a training module on human subjects research

The IRB Application Guide section of the Office of Research Support website gives detailed, step-by-step instructions on how to apply for IRB review, the timeline for the review process, faculty mentor considerations, and additional information on working with human subjects. You will also need to be very familiar with the guidelines and procedures set forth by The University of Texas’ Office of Research Support and Institutional Review Board .

Research Involving Animals

Research projects that work with animals present different ethical problems than those that work with human subjects. One major reason for this is that animals cannot give their informed consent to participate in studies.

In 1959, two scientists, R.L. Burch and W.M.S. Russell, published a set of guidelines to help protect the interests of animals in scientific research. These guidelines are known as the 3 Rs.

• Replace: if possible, inanimate materials should be used in place of animals and invertebrates should be used in place of vertebrates
• Reduce: researchers should reduce the number of animals used in a research project as much as possible
• Refine: researchers should adapt their facilities and research methods to reduce any pain or distress experienced by animals

Much as all human subject research goes through the IRB , all research on vertebrate animals must pass through the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee ( IACUC ), which oversees approval of all projects involving the use of animals. The IACUC considers applications from researchers across the university to ensure that all research projects involving animals are conducted in a responsible manner. The IACUC also periodically inspects facilities where animals are used for research. To learn more, visit the Office of Research Support’s page on animal research .

IACUC approval is required by federal law. If you proceed with a research project before getting your project approved or do not meet the guidelines that it sets for your project, your research may be terminated.

At UT, all research projects involving animals must be led by a faculty member. Thus, as a student researcher, you will not need to seek IACUC approval on your own. If, however, you are working under a faculty member who has an IACUC -approved research project, you may be expected to be familiar with the IACUC ’s requirements.

All researchers (including undergraduates) must complete a training module on working with animals prior to engaging in animal-based research.

Other Safety and Ethics Training

All students participating in laboratory research using hazardous chemicals or biological materials are required to complete an online laboratory safety course, OH 102 .

Students are encouraged to review the material in the Information Security Awareness training module on UTL earn , with a focus on the importance of protecting research data.

Laboratory safety training must be completed within 30 days of the start of any laboratory research; however, many project supervisors and faculty members will ask you to complete it before you begin working with them. For more information, visit Environmental Health & Safety’s Laboratory Safety page.

If all research is ultimately about creating knowledge, then research integrity is about ensuring that this knowledge can be trusted. Trustworthy research maintains its integrity when researchers keep accurate records and data, and follow uniform procedures throughout the research process.

Scholarly misconduct is the intentional falsification, fabrication, distortion, or misrepresentation of data or another part of the research process. This offense can have severe repercussions within the university and the larger research community, and can also have legal ramifications.

Scholarly misconduct is especially harmful because it undermines the integrity of not only the offending work, but of the entire field of research. For example, take the case of a renowned biologist who falsified data about intelligence in monkeys: The researcher lost his job and was forced to retract a scholarly paper, which had been cited over 100 times in the literature. Even worse, this instance of scholarly misconduct cast doubt on the researcher’s other publications, especially those that cited the retracted paper — and some of these other papers had been cited thousands of times in the literature. Ultimately, even when just a small piece of the scientific literature lacks integrity, the science underlying a whole research area can become tainted.

Home — Essay Samples — Education — Academic Performance — The Importance of Integrity in Science

The Importance of Ethics and Integrity in Academic Work

• Categories: Academic Performance Integrity

About this sample

Words: 1139 |

Published: Aug 23, 2018

Words: 1139 | Page: 1 | 6 min read

Table of contents

Introduction, definition of terms, ethics and integrity in academic setting.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Education Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 1406 words

5 pages / 2292 words

10 pages / 4519 words

1 pages / 459 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Academic Performance

In conclusion, now that I have experienced this I know I need to take things in a more relaxed way and know that I shouldn’t worry a lot about my grades just enough to where I am sure I know the subjects and that I will pass [...]

This question has been the subject of much debate and controversy in recent years. In this essay, we will explore the history of school start times, the arguments for and against changing them, and the potential impact of such [...]

In conclusion, the impact of a highly competitive environment on studying is a complex issue with both advantages and disadvantages. While competition can foster motivation, enhance performance, and develop essential skills, it [...]

Technology integration in education has become increasingly prevalent, but its effectiveness in improving student academic performance is a subject of inquiry. This quantitative essay aims to analyze the impact of technology [...]

There are some students in every class whom we call ‘weak students’, ‘low performers’, ‘poor performers’, ‘low achievers’ or ‘underachievers’. Most of these students are trapped in the vicious cycle of underperforming which [...]

In today’s world, stress is unavoidable especially for people who work or study in universities. Studying in a university is very stressful for most of students especially for those who come from another country with different [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Essay Service Examples Philosophy Ethics

Ethics And Integrity In Academic Work

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Our writers will provide you with an essay sample written from scratch: any topic, any deadline, any instructions.

Cite this paper

Related essay topics.

Get your paper done in as fast as 3 hours, 24/7.

Related articles

Most popular essays

• Genetic Modification

After discussing with relatives who have completed their at-home DNA tests, I have been able to...

It was obvious that the conclusion of my tutorial group was against the colonization of Mars...

Throughout the world there are many dangers to the health of humans—war, climate change, and...

• Administration
• Business Ethics

Codes of ethics exist to provide standards of excellence for civil servants to practice (Advanced...

Through generations and generations society has grown and developed into what it is know for...

Integrity can be defined as the quality of being honest and having strong moral principle. A...

• Biotechnology

First product of biotechnology is cheese because chymosin was added to bitter milk exposed only by...

In the case scenario, it is seen that Antonio is having ulcerated sores in his right leg is...

• Family Values

In my discussion board three, I talked about the approach I chose as my metaethics. Discussion...

Join our 150k of happy users

• Get original paper written according to your instructions
• Save time for what matters most

Fair Use Policy

EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via [email protected].

We are here 24/7 to write your paper in as fast as 3 hours.

Provide your email, and we'll send you this sample!

By providing your email, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Say goodbye to copy-pasting!

Get custom-crafted papers for you.

Enter your email, and we'll promptly send you the full essay. No need to copy piece by piece. It's in your inbox!

Undergraduate Education

Academic integrity, the code of academic integrity.

The Code of Academic Integrity is a cornerstone of Cornell's commitment to fostering an environment of honesty, trust, and fairness in all academic endeavors. It provides a comprehensive framework and guides students in upholding the highest standards of integrity. By adhering to this code, students not only reflect personal honor but also uphold the integrity of the entire Cornell community, ensuring that academic achievements are earned through genuine effort and scholarship. The code offers clear examples of violations, specific guidelines for conduct during exams, course assignments, and classroom behavior, and addresses the ethical use of computer and network systems. It also details the processes for reporting and handling violations, as well as procedures for primary hearings and appeals, all of which are integral to maintaining the trust and integrity essential to the Cornell academic community. 

• Skip to main content
• Skip to secondary menu
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

A Plus Topper

Improve your Grades

Academic Integrity Essay | Importance and Essay on Academic Integrity 800 Words in English

October 16, 2021 by Prasanna

Academic Integrity Essay: Academic Integrity is a fundamental part of third-level instruction since it is the major structure block from which we determine our expert morals and integrity. It sets an example for long-lasting respectability in all everyday issues. Our work as understudies is to build information sincerely and reasonably. A culture of genuineness acquires a lot of regards.

Academic respectability is the quest for insightful action in an open, legit and dependable way. All understudies should act with individual respectability, regard other understudies’ pride, rights and property, and help establish and keep a climate wherein all can prevail through the products of their endeavours.

You can also find more  Essay Writing  articles on events, persons, sports, technology and many more.

Essay on Academic Integrity 800 Words in English

Academic integrity implies being ethically and morally upstanding with regards to Academics. Instruction should energize decency, and moral conduct considering assists individuals with developing and accomplish the objectives they merit. It remembers liability and integrity for Academics by keeping away from demonstrations of Academic unfortunate behaviour like cheating, utilizing unapproved materials during tests and ill-advised coordinated effort with different understudies on a given task or undertaking. Academic unfortunate behaviour additionally happens when one somebody duplicates work on the web and presents it as their own. It incorporates giving a task twice for isolated courses, producing, manufacturing or changing archives to get Academic benefit or helping others in the offence. Scary or attempting to pay off somebody to keep them from detailing unfortunate behaviour abuses the code of respectability.

There are six basic beliefs of Academic respectability that incorporate trust, decency, boldness, genuineness, obligation and regard. Deceptive understudies are deceiving the instructor to get a passing mark they don’t merit, and they are likewise misleading themselves. They are distorting their abilities and information. Cheating is indecent as it shows that one isn’t ready to deal with the workspace. Deceptive understudies can keep conning individuals in their social and private lives even after school since they are not used to difficult work. Another worth is the obligation, when an individual holds the title of a specialist, legal counsellor, or designer they are considered liable for their capacity to perform inside their calling.

The training framework is intended to hone understudies for this present reality and on the off chance that they will hold these titles, it is reckless of them as they might possibly jeopardize their lives and of individuals inside their workplace. Trust is another basic belief of Academic respectability. At the point when an understudy does a test or task, they are showing that they have learned and can be trusted with the following stage of the occupation they are seeking after. An expert can’t be trusted with his work in case he was not legit in his understudy function as they can’t play out the assignment they have been dependent on. This is will make an adverse consequence on the general public and the lying proficient.

An individual who maintains the upsides of Academic integrity recognizes his friends and instructors. It is very impolite to cheat in a test that different understudies have forfeited such a lot of time reading for and afterward get a similar grade or better. It is additionally unscrupulous to the experts who put in the energy to instruct and be remunerated for it unjustifiably; it extends an absence of regard and sabotages their insight. It is wrong to meddle with the respectability code and examinations done by the uprightness council. Plagiarism is one more type of unfortunate behaviour and is generally normal among understudies.

It is additionally unjustifiable that an unscrupulous understudy ought to get a passing grade they don’t merit; the understudy enjoys an upper hand over the rest since they don’t have equivalent admittance to data in the test room. It is unreasonable to the legit understudies who stepped up to the plate and try sincerely and afterward get a similar assessment as an in understudy a test. The exploitative understudy may even perform better compared to the rest and end up on the senior member’s rundown along with the understudy who put in a ton of difficult work. It is unjustifiable likewise the experts who get a bogus fulfillment that the understudies have learned and furthermore uncalled for to the understudy since they cheat themselves out of learning freedom to learn and work on their insight into the course. That equivalent an understudy may find a new line of work opportunity dependent on their bogus Academic capabilities locking out meriting understudies who mastered something about the subject and are more equipped for the work.

Mental fortitude is one more excellence in Academic respectability. Gutsy understudies ought to gain from falling flat and try sincerely and perform better the following time. They ought to be sufficiently fearless to be the informant when they witness somebody cheating. They ought not to be terrified of the outcomes of fizzling. Understudies ought to be adequately fearless to oppose pressure from their friends to take the path of least resistance by cheating or not considering when it is required. It isn’t right and an absence of respectability to assume acknowledgment for something an understudy has not buckled down for. An understudy ought not to cheat on the off chance that they don’t anticipate being undermined and in the event that they anticipate reasonable evaluating from their educators.

Cheating subverts the upsides of instruction; it makes understudies indiscreet and lethargic and makes them; subordinate which influences their character and may prompt a disgraceful way of life. An understudy that doesn’t cheat may lose the motivator to work for their grades and select conning that may prompt age of Academic hoodlums. The individuals from the staff are dependent on the troublesome undertaking to implement Academic honesty. They ought to likewise make mindfulness about it and should lead by commendable conduct.

FAQ’s on Academic Integrity Essay

Question 1. What is academic integrity?

Answer: The significant thing about Academic integrity is that is what’s genuinely going on with learning. It gives a chance to an Academic foundation to meet up as a local area since it gives authenticity to the quests for all understudies.

Question 2. Why is academic integrity important?

Answer: Academic honesty is key to picking up, instructing and research at the University. Academic integrity permits understudies and staff the opportunity to assemble novel thoughts, information and innovative works while regarding and recognizing crafted by others.

Question 3. What is an example of academic integrity?

Answer: Academic Integrity is the fundamental center of learning. The more you fill in school likewise implies you become more personal. The more you learn, the more you find out with regards to things you never thought to consider. It esteems keeping away from things like cheating or literary theft.

• Picture Dictionary
• English Speech
• English Slogans
• English Letter Writing
• English Essay Writing
• English Textbook Answers
• Types of Certificates
• ICSE Solutions
• Selina ICSE Solutions
• ML Aggarwal Solutions
• HSSLive Plus One
• HSSLive Plus Two
• Kerala SSLC
• Distance Education

Integrity Essay for Students and Children

500+ words on integrity essay.

There is a famous saying which perfectly describes integrity. “Honesty is telling the truth to other people, integrity is telling the truth to myself.” The word ‘integrity’ itself has a Latin origin. It is derived from the word ‘integer’ and means to feel whole, i.e. a complete person. So it refers to the sense of completeness and togetherness one enjoys when they live their lives honestly and morally. So a person that has integrity will act and behave as per set values and believes they hold dear. Let us explore this concept more in this integrity essay.

Academic Integrity

Academic integrity refers to the ethical policies and moral code employed in the academic world by all members – the students and the teachers. So as we saw previously in this integrity essay, it involves being honest and doing the right thing even if you get no recognition for doing so. It involves being honest and correct when no one is watching.

Academic integrity is important to lay down a good foundation for the student, so he can follow the same principles for the rest of his life. Integrity leads to trust-building among colleagues and friends. It is also the sign of a good future leader. It is a good habit to develop early in your life, it will hold you in good stead as you progress in your life.

So basic things like doing your own homework, writing your own papers, not plagiarizing your essays or dissertations, not cheating on home tests, never cheating on any assignments, and generally doing your work ethically and honestly are the all essential. They are the building blocks of academic integrity.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Professional Integrity

Next, we shall explore professional integrity in this integrity essay. As we know, integrity is one of the essential value an employer always seeks in his employees. So professional integrity is when a person adopts his values and integrity to his chosen profession and job.

Sound moral and ethical beliefs and basic honesty are highly valued characteristics in an employee. Such an employee behaves morally with his co-workers, his superiors and all other stakeholders of the organization.  Acting with integrity and honesty is an actual advantage in the workplace. It builds trust and people are drawn towards such honest and dependable behavior. Integrity in a workplace also promotes a positive environment which encourages higher productivity.

Not only students and professionals, but integrity is also a value that everyone should strive for. Integrity is a trait that goes a long way in making people a better version of themselves, better human beings in general. And a person with true integrity does things because it is the right thing to do, and never for any praise or recognition. True integrity is never practiced for recognition or praise but to fulfill personal values.

FAQ’s on Integrity

Q: State some of the traits of a person with integrity

Ans: A person with true integrity exhibits certain traits such as,

• they take responsibility for all their actions
• always help others in need
• often put the needs of others above themselves
• respect everyone that deserves their respect
• are usually humble and exhibit humility
• generally very reliable in nature
• they are kind by nature

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

A new ‘AI scientist’ can write science papers without any human input. Here’s why that’s a problem

Dean, School of Computing Technologies, RMIT University, RMIT University

Disclosure statement

Karin Verspoor receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Medical Research Future Fund, the National Health and Medical Research Council, and Elsevier BV. She is affiliated with BioGrid Australia and is a co-founder of the Australian Alliance for Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare.

RMIT University provides funding as a strategic partner of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

Scientific discovery is one of the most sophisticated human activities. First, scientists must understand the existing knowledge and identify a significant gap. Next, they must formulate a research question and design and conduct an experiment in pursuit of an answer. Then, they must analyse and interpret the results of the experiment, which may raise yet another research question.

Can a process this complex be automated? Last week, Sakana AI Labs announced the creation of an “AI scientist” – an artificial intelligence system they claim can make scientific discoveries in the area of machine learning in a fully automated way.

Using generative large language models (LLMs) like those behind ChatGPT and other AI chatbots, the system can brainstorm, select a promising idea, code new algorithms, plot results, and write a paper summarising the experiment and its findings, complete with references. Sakana claims the AI tool can undertake the complete lifecycle of a scientific experiment at a cost of just US$15 per paper – less than the cost of a scientist’s lunch.

These are some big claims. Do they stack up? And even if they do, would an army of AI scientists churning out research papers with inhuman speed really be good news for science?

How a computer can ‘do science’

A lot of science is done in the open, and almost all scientific knowledge has been written down somewhere (or we wouldn’t have a way to “know” it). Millions of scientific papers are freely available online in repositories such as arXiv and PubMed .

LLMs trained with this data capture the language of science and its patterns. It is therefore perhaps not at all surprising that a generative LLM can produce something that looks like a good scientific paper – it has ingested many examples that it can copy.

What is less clear is whether an AI system can produce an interesting scientific paper. Crucially, good science requires novelty.

But is it interesting?

Scientists don’t want to be told about things that are already known. Rather, they want to learn new things, especially new things that are significantly different from what is already known. This requires judgement about the scope and value of a contribution.

The Sakana system tries to address interestingness in two ways. First, it “scores” new paper ideas for similarity to existing research (indexed in the Semantic Scholar repository). Anything too similar is discarded.

Second, Sakana’s system introduces a “peer review” step – using another LLM to judge the quality and novelty of the generated paper. Here again, there are plenty of examples of peer review online on sites such as openreview.net that can guide how to critique a paper. LLMs have ingested these, too.

AI may be a poor judge of AI output

Feedback is mixed on Sakana AI’s output. Some have described it as producing “ endless scientific slop ”.

Even the system’s own review of its outputs judges the papers weak at best. This is likely to improve as the technology evolves, but the question of whether automated scientific papers are valuable remains.

The ability of LLMs to judge the quality of research is also an open question. My own work (soon to be published in Research Synthesis Methods ) shows LLMs are not great at judging the risk of bias in medical research studies, though this too may improve over time.

Sakana’s system automates discoveries in computational research, which is much easier than in other types of science that require physical experiments. Sakana’s experiments are done with code, which is also structured text that LLMs can be trained to generate.

AI tools to support scientists, not replace them

AI researchers have been developing systems to support science for decades. Given the huge volumes of published research, even finding publications relevant to a specific scientific question can be challenging.

Specialised search tools make use of AI to help scientists find and synthesise existing work. These include the above-mentioned Semantic Scholar, but also newer systems such as Elicit , Research Rabbit , scite and Consensus .

Text mining tools such as PubTator dig deeper into papers to identify key points of focus, such as specific genetic mutations and diseases, and their established relationships. This is especially useful for curating and organising scientific information.

Machine learning has also been used to support the synthesis and analysis of medical evidence, in tools such as Robot Reviewer . Summaries that compare and contrast claims in papers from Scholarcy help to perform literature reviews.

All these tools aim to help scientists do their jobs more effectively, not to replace them.

AI research may exacerbate existing problems

While Sakana AI states it doesn’t see the role of human scientists diminishing, the company’s vision of “a fully AI-driven scientific ecosystem” would have major implications for science.

One concern is that, if AI-generated papers flood the scientific literature, future AI systems may be trained on AI output and undergo model collapse . This means they may become increasingly ineffectual at innovating.

However, the implications for science go well beyond impacts on AI science systems themselves.

There are already bad actors in science, including “paper mills” churning out fake papers . This problem will only get worse when a scientific paper can be produced with US$15 and a vague initial prompt.

The need to check for errors in a mountain of automatically generated research could rapidly overwhelm the capacity of actual scientists. The peer review system is arguably already broken , and dumping more research of questionable quality into the system won’t fix it.

Science is fundamentally based on trust. Scientists emphasise the integrity of the scientific process so we can be confident our understanding of the world (and now, the world’s machines) is valid and improving.

A scientific ecosystem where AI systems are key players raises fundamental questions about the meaning and value of this process, and what level of trust we should have in AI scientists. Is this the kind of scientific ecosystem we want?

• Artificial intelligence (AI)
• Computer science
• Research integrity
• Paper mills

Want to write?

Write an article and join a growing community of more than 188,700 academics and researchers from 5,030 institutions.

Register now

Discipline Subject Code(s) Subject Business Academic Integrity and Ethics in Business Academic Integrity and Ethics in Business Studies and Research Engineering Engineering Ethics and Academic Integrity Health and Social Science Academic Integrity and Ethics (Health and Social Sciences) Humanities Professional Ethics and Academic Integrity Academic Integrity and Ethics in China-related Humanities Science Academic Integrity and Ethics in Science A student should indicate his/her selected AIE subject in Form GSB/26 for Chief Supervisor’s approval before subject registration. Students can register/drop the AIE subject via the Subject Registration Function at eStudent . Whether an RPg student can register for an AIE subject will depend on the availability of vacancies. Students are required to pass an AIE subject within their first year of study and report the AIE completion status in their first annual progress monitoring exercise . Students of Dual PhD Degree programmes should complete the AIE subject within their first year of study at PolyU. If students fail to pass the AIE subject within their first year of study, they should provide justifications in the annual progress monitoring exercise for consideration of their Chief Supervisors and the respective D/SRC. Under justified circumstances, such as certified health problems, the D/SRC may grant a one-time extension of up to one semester for AIE completion. The approval should be recorded in the progress report. IGCI MPhil Thesis For previous occurrences, try the 2024 version of this year. Additional information Subject regulations Indicative fees current as of 19 Aug 2024 01:20am You’re viewing this website as a domestic student You’re currently viewing the website as a domestic student, you might want to change to international. You're a domestic student if you are: A citizen of New Zealand or Australia A New Zealand permanent resident You're an International student if you are: Intending to study on a student visa Not a citizen of New Zealand or Australia The 9 Best AI Detector Tools to Uncover AI Content Posted on August 22, 2024 AI content creation has rapidly transformed academic and professional writing, with tools like ChatGPT by OpenAI making it easier than ever to generate content. However, relying heavily on AI-generated text without proper oversight can jeopardize a student’s academic integrity or a professional’s credibility.  Misuse of AI writing can lead to serious consequences, including accusations of plagiarism or producing low-quality work that lacks originality. Educators and professionals must be vigilant in using an AI content detector to maintain standards and authenticity. In this blog, we’ll explore and review the best AI detection tools available to identify AI-writing content: Originality.ai Content at Scale Are AI Content Detectors Accurate? How They Work AI content detectors analyze text using advanced algorithms and language models trained on extensive datasets. These detectors, like Quetext, examine the text’s structure, syntax, and patterns to differentiate AI-generated and human-written content.  The process involves machine learning and classifier techniques that evolve with advancements in AI technology. Detectors can alert to content produced by large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, Bard, Claude, and others. AI detection tools accuracy varies, with rates typically ranging from 70% to 95%. While these tools are powerful, they can sometimes produce false positives or miss undetectable content, especially as generative AI continues to evolve. Many people wonder, how do AI detectors work , and it’s important for educators and writers to understand as they need to avoid plagiarism.  Leveraging multiple tools helps humanize AI content and ensures the use of AI in writing remains ethical, authentic, and aligned with academic or professional standards. As AI models become more sophisticated, these tools play a vital role in avoiding unconscious plagiarism and maintaining the integrity of content creation. Common Features of AI Detection Tools AI detection tools are designed to identify and differentiate between AI-generated content and human-written text. The following are the most common features used by the best AI detectors: Plagiarism Checker: The plagiarism checker feature scans content for any matches with existing sources. It helps detect AI-generated text. Paraphrasing Detection: Identifies subtle rewording or paraphrasing often used to disguise AI-generated content. It ensures originality in content creation. Language Model Identification: Detects specific language models like ChatGPT, GPT-3, or Claude. It helps in pinpointing the source of AI writing. False Positive Reduction: Minimizes false positives by refining detection algorithms, ensuring accurate results without mistakenly flagging human-written content. Chrome Extension Integration: Allows users to access AI detection tools directly from the browser, making it easier to analyze content in real-time. API Access: Enables integration of detection tools with other writing tools or platforms, providing seamless functionality across different applications. Multi-Language Support: Supports multiple languages, ensuring AI content detection is effective across different linguistic contexts, including English. Each feature contributes to a detection system for anyone concerned about the authenticity and originality of their content. Top AI Detector Tools AI detection tools are essential for maintaining content integrity in academic and professional settings. Each tool offers unique features to help users effectively identify and manage AI-generated content.  Here’s a look at some of the best AI detectors available: Quetext is a leading AI content detector known for accurately identifying AI-generated content across various platforms. Quetext’s AI content detector is especially valued by educators and professionals who need a reliable tool to ensure content integrity.  Top Features Line-by-line analysis, fast results, accurate AI detection, wide language model coverage Quetext stands out as the best AI detector due to its advanced AI detection tool that provides detailed, line-by-line analysis. It effectively flags content generated by large language models like GPT-3, GPT-4, and ChatGPT.  Additionally, Quetext’s AI content detector can detect subtle paraphrasing and other sophisticated techniques that might otherwise go unnoticed. Users appreciate its high accuracy and fast results, making it a top choice for those needing thorough content checks.  One user noted how Quetext provided “peace of mind by ensuring the content was truly original,” underscoring its reliability for academic and professional use. The tool’s robust functionality also includes Chrome extension integration and API access, enhancing its usability for more users across various platforms. Free to try, with base packages starting at $4.67/month/user. 2. Winston AI Winston AI is another trusted AI content detection tool recognized for its high accuracy in identifying AI-generated content from models like GPT-4 and ChatGPT. It’s particularly valued in academic and SEO contexts for ensuring content integrity and originality. Multi-language support, detects paraphrasing, AI prediction map, line-by-line assessment Winston AI excels as a reliable AI content detector. It offers detailed assessments that help distinguish between machine-generated and human-written text. Its advanced features, which include options for detecting paraphrasing and humanized AI content, make it a strong contender in the AI detection space.  The tool is designed to identify content generated by various AI models, including GPT-3 and GPT-4. Its accuracy is backed by positive user feedback.  One user mentioned, “Winston AI’s interface is intuitive, and it’s a critical tool for maintaining content authenticity.” While powerful, it complements rather than surpasses tools like Quetext, particularly in educational and professional environments. Winston AI also integrates well with Chrome extensions and offers an API for more extensive use cases. A free account is available to try, and base packages start at $18/month/user and $15/month/user annually. GPTZero is another highly reliable AI content detection tool tailored to accurately detect text generated by AI models like ChatGPT, GPT-4, and Claude. It is widely used by educators and professionals to ensure the authenticity of human-written content in academic and professional environments. Advanced AI scan, video verification, LMS integration, multilingual detection GPTZero stands out for its ability to analyze text deeply and detect subtle AI-generated content across different languages. The tool’s advanced scanning capabilities allow users to verify the authenticity of writing through features like video replay, which shows the writing process in real-time.  Its seamless integration with learning management systems (LMS) such as Google Classroom and Canvas makes it an essential tool in educational settings.  A user remarked, “GPTZero’s ability to detect AI use, especially in mixed texts, is unmatched, offering educators a dependable solution.” The tool also includes robust plagiarism detection, making it a comprehensive solution for maintaining content integrity. GPTZero is a valuable asset for anyone looking to ensure the originality of their work. It provides detailed insights into the text’s nature, whether machine-generated or genuinely human-written. Free to try, with packages starting at $10/month/user. 4. TraceGPT by PlagiarismCheck.org (for ChatGPT) TraceGPT is an effective AI content detection tool built by PlagiarismCheck.org. It is tailored for identifying AI-generated content from models like ChatGPT. It’s designed to help educators, SEO experts, and recruiters maintain content integrity across various platforms. AI plagiarism detection, multiple file formats, downloadable reports, confidentiality TraceGPT has become a popular AI detection tool because it specializes in detecting AI-generated text, making it particularly useful for academic institutions and content-driven industries.  The tool provides accurate results by analyzing text through advanced algorithms that differentiate between human-written content and machine-generated text. It supports multiple file formats and offers downloadable reports, adding to its practicality.  A frequent user said, “TraceGPT is a reliable tool that catches even the most subtle AI-generated nuances.” While it offers robust features, it complements other tools rather than competing. TraceGPT is an ideal choice for those needing a dependable AI detection tool emphasizing privacy and accuracy. Starting at $2.99/month for 100,000 words and $4.99/month for 200,000 words. 5. Originality.ai Originality.ai is a comprehensive AI content detection tool for digital marketers, writers, and content creators. It focuses on ensuring the originality of content by accurately detecting AI-generated text across a wide range of AI models, such as ChatGPT and GPT-4. Paraphrase detection, shareable reports, team management, API access Originality.ai stands out for its accuracy in detecting AI-generated content, particularly in digital marketing and publishing environments. The tool is equipped to handle various use cases, from detecting light paraphrasing to scanning entire websites for AI-generated text.  Its robust API and team management features make it ideal for larger organizations managing multiple content creators. A user highlighted that Originality.ai was “remarkably accurate, especially in identifying complex AI-written sections,” making it a dependable tool for maintaining content integrity. Originality.ai is tailored for professionals who need to ensure that their content is free from machine-generated elements. It offers a reliable solution for both small—and large-scale operations. Starting at $12.45/month for 2,000 credits, $179/month for enterprise. 6. Turnitin Turnitin is a trusted name in academic integrity. It is widely recognized for its robust AI content detection tool, which helps educators identify AI-generated content in student submissions. The tool is designed to seamlessly integrate with existing educational systems, providing reliable insights for maintaining academic honesty. AI paraphrasing detection, LMS integration, detailed reporting, false positives management Turnitin offers a comprehensive AI detection tool that goes beyond traditional plagiarism checking by identifying AI-generated text and paraphrased content. This tool is particularly beneficial for educators who must maintain the integrity of human-written content in academic settings.  Turnitin’s AI checker is known for its high accuracy and integration with learning management systems (LMS), making it easy for educators to incorporate into their existing workflows.  One review states, “Turnitin’s AI detection capabilities are a great addition to their already powerful plagiarism checker.” While it excels in educational environments, it must be noted that it complements rather than replaces other tools for broader AI detection needs. Turnitin is ideal for educational institutions committed to upholding academic standards. It ensures that submissions are genuinely human-written and free from machine-generated content. $3 per student per year, no free trial available. 7. Copyleaks Copyleaks is a powerful AI content detection tool designed to handle text from various AI models like ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude. It’s particularly popular among educators and businesses for its ability to ensure content authenticity across multiple languages. Multilingual support, detailed reports, integration options, false positives minimization Copyleaks excels in detecting AI-generated content and human-written content by leveraging advanced AI technology. It supports over 30 languages, making it versatile for global use. Users appreciate its accuracy and the ability to integrate seamlessly with various platforms, making it ideal for educational and business environments.  A user reiterated, “Copyleaks is great at flagging AI-generated text, and its multilingual support is a big plus for international teams.” While it’s a strong contender in the AI detection space, it aids other AI detection tools, particularly when managing diverse content needs. Copyleaks is well-suited for those needing a comprehensive solution that can handle machine-generated content while minimizing false positives and ensuring reliable detection across different languages. Starting at $9.16/month for 120 pages, with various plans available. 8. Content at Scale Content at Scale offers a versatile AI content detection tool that accurately identifies AI-generated content from ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and more. It’s tailored for content creators and businesses that need reliable detection and humanization features for their writing tools. Unlimited scans, undetectable rewrites, plagiarism detection, personalized AI generation Content at Scale provides an advanced AI detection tool beyond simple detection, offering features like undetectable rewrites and integrated plagiarism checks. This tool mainly benefits businesses and content creators aiming to maintain human-written content authenticity while leveraging AI technology.  One user noted, “Content at Scale’s AI detector is incredibly effective, especially with its undetectable rewrite feature.” While it excels in providing robust tools for managing machine-generated content, it serves as a complement rather than a replacement for top contenders like Quetext. Content at Scale is an excellent choice for those seeking a comprehensive solution that detects and humanizes AI-generated text, ensuring content integrity across various platforms. Starting at $49/month for unlimited scans and AI tools. Lastly, is Smodin, a versatile AI content detection tool popular among educators, students, and content creators for its ability to distinguish between human-written content and text generated by AI models like GPT-4 and ChatGPT. It’s designed to ensure originality in your work. High accuracy, multiple file formats, plagiarism checker, easy-to-use interface Smodin offers free AI-generated content detection that stands out for its high accuracy in identifying AI-generated content. This tool supports multiple file formats, making it accessible to many users. It also integrates well with other writing tools, offering a comprehensive solution for maintaining content integrity.  A regular user noted, “Smodin is effective in catching even subtle AI-written text, making it a dependable choice for academic purposes.” While it offers robust features, it complements tools like Quetext rather than serving as a standalone solution for broader AI detection needs. Smodin is an excellent option for those who need a free tool with reliable detection capabilities, particularly in educational and professional settings. Free to try, with base packages starting at $12/month. Use Cases for Identifying AI-Generated Content Identifying AI-generated content is more important than ever as AI writing tools like ChatGPT and GPT-4 become widespread and begin to be used by writing programs. Using the best AI detectors is crucial for maintaining the integrity of your human-written content across various fields, from academia to digital marketing.  AI detectors are already used in various fields to ensure the integrity of human-written content. In academic writing, detecting AI-generated content is crucial for maintaining educational standards. Educators and students rely on AI detection tools to verify the originality of essays, research papers, and dissertations.  Using AI-generated text in these critical documents can result in severe consequences, including academic penalties and lasting damage to one’s reputation. In content creation, businesses and marketers use AI detectors to maintain the authenticity of their work. Authentic content not only resonates better with audiences but also boosts SEO performance.  While each tool discussed here offers unique strengths, Quetext is a practical choice for those who prioritize accuracy and ease of use. By integrating Quetext and other tools into your content creation process, you can better manage the risks associated with AI-generated text and uphold the highest standards of quality and originality.  Explore these AI detection tools to find the one that best fits your needs and helps you maintain the highest standards in your work. AI detection is also becoming increasingly important in journalism and publishing, where trust and accuracy are fundamental.  As language models like ChatGPT and GPT-4 advance, the risk of AI-generated misinformation grows. AI detection tools help prevent this, ensuring published content is reliable and genuinely human-written. Tools like Quetext’s AI content detector are essential for identifying AI-generated text that might undermine a brand’s credibility.  To safeguard the authenticity of your work, try Quetext’s AI content detector for free today. Sign Up for Quetext Today! Click below to find a pricing plan that fits your needs. You May Also Like Tips & Guides The Importance of Proofreading: Techniques for Catching Errors and Polishing Your Writing Posted on August 16, 2024 August 19, 2024 The Benefits of Peer Review: How to Give and Receive Constructive Feedback on Your Writing Posted on August 9, 2024 Teaching Students About Plagiarism: Strategies for Promoting Academic Integrity Posted on August 2, 2024 Encouraging Proper Citation Practices: Tips for Teaching Students How to Cite Sources Correctly and Ethically Posted on July 22, 2024 A Guide to Paraphrasing Poetry, With Examples Posted on July 12, 2024 Preparing Students for the Future: AI Literacy and Digital Citizenship Posted on July 5, 2024 How to Summarize a Paper, a Story, a Book, a Report or an Essay Posted on June 25, 2024 June 25, 2024 How to Use AI to Enhance Your Storytelling Process Posted on June 12, 2024 Input your search keywords and press Enter. 218 IMAGES Essay on Integrity Ethical Integrity Issues Essay Example Validity, Ethics and Integrity Ethics And Integrity Reflection Essay On Integrity Personal Example PPT COMMENTS PDF The Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity academic integrity and ethics in schools and in society at large. To do that, ICAI offers a variety of services, including assessments, resources, and consultations. ICAI believes in the importance of promoting critical conversations about integrity. The Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity was created to facilitate these Research Guides: Write and Cite: Academic Integrity Academic integrity is truthful and responsible representation of yourself and your work by taking credit only for your own ideas and creations and giving credit to the work and ideas of other people. It involves providing attribution (citations and acknowledgments) whenever you include the intellectual property of others—and even your own if ... Academic Guides: Evidence-Based Arguments: Writing With Integrity Writing with integrity is about rephrasing ideas in the author's own words and understanding, while also providing credit to the original source. The example below can be used to understand how to incorporate evidence from previous researchers and authors, providing proper credit to the source. Again, the goal is to write and cite, creating ... Academic Ethics and Academic Integrity Introduction. Academic Ethics and Academic Integrity refers to responsible and ethical conduct in university-based teaching, student performance, research, and in the dissemination of research through publishing. The history of Academic Ethics might be considered opaque given the breadth of what can meaningfully be considered relevant to the ... PDF Reflections on Academic Honesty and Integrity T he foundation to the academic honesty policy is the school's commitment to the values of ethics, integrity, and honesty, The H. Wayne Huizenga School of Business and Entrepreneurship's first precept in its Guiding Principles and Philosophy is that we are driven to "Conduct all our academic affairs with integrity.". Promoting Academic Integrity According to the International Center for Academic Integrity, academic integrity is "a commitment, even in the face of adversity, to six fundamental values: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage.". We commit to these values to honor the intellectual efforts of the global academic community, of which Columbia ... (PDF) Academic Integrity: A Review of the Literature Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China. This article provides a literature review on academic integrity, which encompasses. the values, behaviour and conduct of academics ... Academic Integrity Academic integrity is the commitment to and demonstration of honest and moral behavior in an academic setting. This is most relevant at the university level as it relates to providing credit to other people when using their ideas. In simplest terms, it requires acknowledging the contributions of other people. Perspectives on Positive Academic Ethics: an Introduction Jolante Bieliauskaitė's article, titled "Solidarity in academia and its relationship to academic integrity," uses the lenses of philosophy and sociology to explore the principle of "solidarity" in the academy as a cornerstone of ethics and integrity. The principle of solidarity encompasses positive notions of co-operation between groups or individuals at different levels of the academy ... PDF Academic Integrity at MIT MIT anticipates that you will pursue your studies with purpose and integrity. The cornerstone of scholarship in all academic disciplines is honesty. MIT expects that you will approach everything you do here honestly — whether solving a math problem, writing a research or critical paper, or taking an exam. Academic Integrity and Ethics The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has put in place its "Policy and Procedures on Ethics in Research" as required by these agencies. All persons engaged in research should be familiar with these rules. (Copies are available from the Office of Sponsored Research, 966-3412 or 3411.) An Introduction to 30 Years of Research on Academic Integrity The 20th century witnessed the birth of the contemporary academic integrity research agenda and field of practice. While much of the credit for the movement has been given to Donald McCabe, whose research led to the founding of the International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI) and spawned an extensive amount of research, readers must look back further than McCabe to understand the origins ... Integrity: What it is and Why it is Important Research integrity and academic integrity have become important topics (Bretag, Citation 2016; Macfarlane, ... biases and irrationality; institutions; and context and power). An "ethics and integrity turn" in the dominant fields of study is needed. ... Ethics for bureaucrats. An essay on law and values (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Marcel Dekker. What is academic integrity and why is it important? Academic integrity means acting in a way that is honest, fair, respectful and responsible in your studies and academic work. It means applying these values in your own work, and also when you engage with the work and contributions of others. These values are expected of both staff and students. Academic integrity is a set of values and ... Impact of academic integrity on workplace ethical behaviour Corruption is a serious problem in Mexico and the available information regarding the levels of academic dishonesty in Mexico is not very encouraging. Academic integrity is essential in any teaching-learning process focussed on achieving the highest standards of excellence and learning. Promoting and experiencing academic integrity within the university context has a twofold purpose: to ... Academic Integrity and Plagiarism Integrity is a fundamental principle of academic writing. Be it an essay or a paper for publication, writing with integrity requires us to be honest about the origins of the ideas, information and knowledge we present in our work (Hayes & Introna, 7 ). Writers who disregard this convention are at risk of plagiarism—the focus of this piece. Solidarity in Academia and its Relationship to Academic Integrity This paper provides the theoretical analysis of forms of solidarity in academia and its relationship to academic integrity. This analysis is inspired by the Guidelines for an Institutional Code of Ethics in Higher Education drawn up by the International Association of Universities and the Magna Charta Observatory. These Guidelines refer to the principle of solidarity in the context of ... What Is Academic Integrity Academic integrity encompasses honesty, fairness, and responsibility in all academic endeavours. It is about respecting the intellectual property of others, taking ownership of your work, and upholding ethical standards in research, writing, and assessments. This includes but is not limited to, avoiding plagiarism, cheating, and fabrication of ... Academic Ethics And Academic Integrity Essay Basically, academic ethics require each student, to be honest, responsible, fair, respectful, give credit where it is due, turn in their original work, and etc. (Michigan State University, n.d.). Academic integrity requires students to do their own work without unauthorized help from others, cheating, lying, plagiarizing, and stealing (Valdosta ... Ethics and Integrity Research ethics involves the application of moral principles to academic research. When you decide to become a researcher, you take on an ethical responsibility to consider how your research will affect yourself, other members of your research team, your school and university, colleagues in your discipline, and local, national, and global ... The Importance of Ethics and Integrity in Academic Work Introduction. This essay will aim to demonstrate an understanding of the importance of ethics and integrity in academic work. It will propose to firstly define, in its simplest form, ethics and integrity and basic morals, supported by the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) Code (NMC, 2018), further developing how these can be applied to academic work. Ethics And Integrity In Academic Work Download. The direction of this essay is to explain the ethics and integrity in academic work and how it can affect pre-registration student nurses in their studies to becoming a registered nurse. The essay will include information on plagiarism and how it affects academic work in the future, and what impact it could have on patient care. The Code of Academic Integrity The Code of Academic Integrity is a cornerstone of Cornell's commitment to fostering an environment of honesty, trust, and fairness in all academic endeavors. It provides a comprehensive framework and guides students in upholding the highest standards of integrity. By adhering to this code, students not only reflect personal honor but also ... Academic Integrity Essay Essay on Academic Integrity 800 Words in English. Academic integrity implies being ethically and morally upstanding with regards to Academics. Instruction should energize decency, and moral conduct considering assists individuals with developing and accomplish the objectives they merit. It remembers liability and integrity for Academics by ... Integrity Essay for Students and Children 500+ Words on Integrity Essay. There is a famous saying which perfectly describes integrity. "Honesty is telling the truth to other people, integrity is telling the truth to myself.". The word 'integrity' itself has a Latin origin. It is derived from the word 'integer' and means to feel whole, i.e. a complete person. A new 'AI scientist' can write science papers without any human input Scientists emphasise the integrity of the scientific process so we can be confident our understanding of the world (and now, the world's machines) is valid and improving. Appendix 2 Academic Integrity and Ethics (Health and Social Sciences) Humanities. CBS5R05. Professional Ethics and Academic Integrity. CHC5R06. Academic Integrity and Ethics in China-related Humanities. Science. ABCT/AP/FSN5R07. Academic Integrity and Ethics in Science. Note: The AIE subjects will be offered starting from Semester One of 2024/25. The list ... Bringing ethics to cartography and geographic information science These issues lead to conversations in cartography and GIScience that must consider some mix of integrity, ethics, empathy, and equity. As a result, the primary goal for AutoCarto 2022 was to advance ethical, inclusive, and empathic cartography and GIScience, and thereby stimulate similar advancements in other disciplines. IGCI MPhil Thesis :: University of Waikato Research Rangahau. Discover impactful research at New Zealand's top-ranked research university. The University of Waikato is driving innovation for societal progress and global sustainability, linking knowledge with industry for a better world. The 9 Best AI Detector Tools to Uncover AI Content AI detectors are already used in various fields to ensure the integrity of human-written content. In academic writing, detecting AI-generated content is crucial for maintaining educational standards. Educators and students rely on AI detection tools to verify the originality of essays, research papers, and dissertations. assignment essay homework phd report resume review speech thesis