Academic Integrity Self-Evaluation Tool for Institutions

Academic Integrity Self-Evaluation Tool for Institutions

Academic Integrity Self-Evaluation Tool for Institutions

Academic Integrity Self-Evaluation Tool for Institutions

Academic Integrity Self-Evaluation Tool for Institutions

Academic Integrity Self-Evaluation Tool for Institutions

Academic Integrity Self-Evaluation Tool for Institutions

Academic Integrity Self-Evaluation Tool for Institutions

Academic Integrity Self-Evaluation Tool for Institutions

Academic Integrity Self-Evaluation Tool for Institutions

Academic Integrity Self-Evaluation Tool for Institutions

Introduction

Demography

{{showSection+1}}. Institutional governance and strategic commitment towards academic integrity

{{showSection+1}}. Policies, sanctions and procedures for academic integrity

{{showSection+1}}. Engagement and buy-in for deterring academic misconduct

{{showSection+1}}. Institutional culture of integrity and appreciating the value of learning

{{showSection+1}}. The role of students in academic integrity

{{showSection+1}}. Transparency and communication

{{showSection+1}}. Enhancement of strategy, policies, procedures and systems

{{showSection+1}}. Institutional engagement with research and development on academic integrity

For the attention of senior leaders of educational institutions

This self-evaluation tool has been designed specifically for higher education institutions to evaluate their approach to academic integrity. In addition it may be of use in other types of educational institution. It is a free-standing element of a comprehensive set of institutional survey tools. The purpose of this SAID survey is to provide feedback on the effectiveness and maturity of commitment by an institution to promoting and upholding academic integrity. The European Network for Academic Integrity (ENAI) defines academic integrity as “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” (Glossary for Academic Integrity, pp. 7-8).

Ideally the questionnaire should be completed by a senior leader of the institution with responsibility for academic quality and integrity, on behalf of his/her institution. Responses to the questions will provide feedback and scores indicating current status and areas for development.

The self-evaluation tool is composed of eight sections of questions. Most of the questions have scores assigned to the available options and all questions have constructive feedback. There is a summary of the section score and further feedback at the end of each section and also an overall score and status feedback at the end of the survey. Where appropriate the feedback includes suggestions about resources that may be of interest in the development of institutional strategies, policies or practices.

This version of the self-evaluation tool is designed to be administered within the institution being evaluated; therefore the responses and feedback are intended for institutional use only.

Scorecard for Academic Integrity Development (SAID) was initially conceived by Irene Glendinning of Coventry University, UK, and Tricia Bertram Gallant, representing the International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI). Jennifer Eury also contributed to the initial development of content. Key sources that influenced the design and development of SAID are listed in the bibliography at the end of the tool.

The self-evaluation institutional tool has been adapted for use by the ENAI, with input from members of the project team (https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/): Irene Glendinning, Inga GAIŽAUSKAITĖ, Tomáš FOLTÝNEK, Salim RAZI, Laura RIBEIRO, Franca MARINO, Marco COSENTINO. For more information please contact Irene Glendinning (ireneg@coventry.ac.uk) or surveys@academicintegrity.eu.

Directions

It should take approximately 60 minutes to answer the questions. However, you may take as much time as you wish reading through questions, feedback and revising your answers.

Once you have clicked the NEXT button at the end of a section, you cannot return to review or amend the previous page. There is no possibility to save or download your answers and feedback.

Please answer this questionnaire from the point of view of the institution with which you are currently associated.

Data protection statement

This tool is not designed for data collection – any dialogue conducted through this questionnaire will only be available for use within your institution.

Only if you provide your explicit consent by ticking respective consent box under the demographic information, we will save your answers for further processing, analysis and research carried out by the European Network for Academic Integrity and/or its member institutions. Even in this case we do not collect any information which would allow identifying a respondent or an institution.

Please note that in order to use the tool you are not obliged to identify your country, gender or age and/or consent to provide your answers for further analysis.

We would appreciate any feedback you can provide about the survey questions and about good practice at your institution that we can share (you can reach use by email surveys@academicintegrty.eu).

Country:

Gender:

Age:

I am giving my consent to save all my answers for further processing, analysis and research carried out by the European Network for Academic Integrity and/or its member institutions.

{{showSection+1}}.1 Please respond to each question by selecting one of the options.

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	Not at all	To a limited extent	To a moderate extent	Enthusiastically	Don't know	Not applicable
To what extent is your institution’s commitment to academic integrity reflected in statements of institutional values.
To what extent is the need for a culture of academic integrity supported by the institutional leadership.
To what extent do the institutional leaders set a good example on integrity and ethical conduct.

{{showSection+1}}.2 Is there an individual, unit, group or committee with responsibility for leadership and policy setting in academic integrity? (select all that apply)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Yes, there is an individual person or officer

Yes, there is a designated unit

Yes, there is a group or committee

There are several groups or individuals with such responsibility

There is no person, unit or committee responsible for supporting academic integrity

Don't know

Other

Note: If you selected “Other”, we would appreciate feedback on options we can add to the list. Please, use the contact email provided at the end of the questionnaire to provide your feedback.

{{showSection+1}}.3 If an individual person is responsible are they (select one)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Student

Academic staff / Faculty

Admin / Professional staff

Dean / Departmental leader

Researcher

Not applicable

Don't know

Other

{{showSection+1}}.4 If a unit/committee/group, which of the following constituencies are involved? (select all that apply)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Students

Academic staff / Faculty

Admin / Professional staff

Dean / Departmental leader

Researchers

Alumni

External people

Not applicable

Don't know

Other

Note: If you selected “Other”, we would appreciate feedback on options we can add to the list. Please, use the contact email provided at the end of the questionnaire to provide your feedback.

{{showSection+1}}.5 At what level(s) does the responsibility of this individual / unit / committee / group apply? (select all that apply)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Institutional or Campus level

Division, Faculty or School level

Academic Department or Subject level

Don't know

Not applicable

Other

Note: If you selected “Other”, we would appreciate feedback on options we can add to the list. Please, use the contact email provided at the end of the questionnaire to provide your feedback.

{{showSection+1}}.6 The individual / institutional group or committee is based (please select one):

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

within the institution

external to the institution

don't know

not applicable

{{showSection+1}}.7 What types of decisions are made by this group or individual? (select all that apply)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Establishing a new strategy

Adding new policies

Changing existing policies

Meeting with students accused of academic integrity breaches

Deciding on sanctions for when accusations against students are upheld

Providing advice and guidance

Consulting and investigating

Other

{{showSection+1}}.8 Do any decisions taken by the individual / institutional group or committee need to be ratified by the parent board or committee?

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Yes

Don't know

Not applicable

{{showSection+1}}.9 After considering your answers to this set of questions, please rate your institution's strategy for academic integrity.

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

There is no institutional strategy

Weak

Could be improved

Developing

Effective

Excellent

{{showSection+1}}.1 Please respond by selecting one of the options

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	institution / campus	division / faculty / school	department / subject	individual faculty / academic staff	student led	don't know	other
At what level within your institution is strategy for upholding academic integrity decided?
At what level within your institution are policies for upholding academic integrity decided?
At what level within your institution are processes and systems for academic integrity designed and maintained?

{{showSection+1}}.2 How are suspected academic integrity breaches reported? (select all that apply)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Requirement to report suspicions to an external organization

Formal process at Institution or Campus level

Formal process at Division, Faculty or School level

Formal process at Department or Subject level

Requirement to notify the dean or director

Students are encouraged to report suspected breaches

Students are required to report suspected breaches

Faculty / academic staff are required to report suspected breaches

No formal process for reporting breaches

Don't know

Other

If you selected “Other”, we would appreciate feedback on options we can add to the list. Please, use the contact email provided at the end of the questionnaire to provide your feedback.

{{showSection+1}}.3 How are suspected academic integrity breaches recorded? (select all that apply)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Formal process of recording externally

Formal process of recording at Institution or Campus level

Formal process of recording at Division, Faculty or School level

Formal process of recording at Department, or Subject level

Dean's or Director's office keeps records

No formal process for recording (suspected breaches)

Don't know

Other

{{showSection+1}}.4 How are outcomes of academic integrity hearings recorded? (select all that apply)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Formal process of recording external to the institution

Formal process of recording at Institution or Campus level

Formal process of recording at Division, Faculty or School level

Formal process of recording at Department, or Subject level

Dean's or Director's office keeps records

No formal process for recording outcomes

Don't know

Other

Note: If you selected “Other”, we would appreciate feedback on options we can add to the list. Please, use the contact email provided at the end of the questionnaire to provide your feedback.

{{showSection+1}}.5 Please answer the following questions by selecting one of the options

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	For the whole institution	For parts of the institution	No	Not sure
Does the authority for decisions on sanctions differ according to severity of suspected breach?
Does the authority for decisions on sanctions differ according to level of sanction?
Is there a standard reporting form used to report breaches and their adjudication?
With respect to hearings for considering academic integrity breaches, are there materials that describe this process clearly and accurately?
Are there materials (e.g. handbooks, role descriptions) identifying the participants of hearings and describing their roles?
Are there materials describing the rights and responsibilities of students accused of academic integrity breaches?
Are there materials indicating who is authorized to hear and decide an appeal?
Are there materials that indicate the permissible grounds for an appeal?
Is the appeal process independent of the initial hearing?
Do you know where to find details and materials about policies for handling accusations of academic integrity breaches?

{{showSection+1}}.6 Please answer the following questions by selecting one of the options

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

{{showSection+1}}.7 How regularly is training provided for people participating in the Academic Integrity adjudication processes? (select one answer)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Several times per year

At least once per year

Every 2-3 years

Every 4-5 years

Never

Don't know

Other

{{showSection+1}}.8 What measures are taken to ensure suspected breaches are handled fairly and consistently? (select all that apply)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

A committee or panel deals with all cases

Academic integrity officer(s) operate according to a set of clear and consistent procedures

Regular training is provided for people involved in adjudication

The adjudication process and justification of decisions are appropriately documented

There is regular moderation and review of the procedures

Academic staff / faculty are trained on how to assess and examine student work

There is a clear and independent appeals process

There is a standard set of sanctions and clear guidance on how to apply

Don’t know

Other

If you selected “Other”, we would appreciate feedback on options we can add to the list. Please, use the contact email provided at the end of the questionnaire to provide your feedback.

{{showSection+1}}.9 Please estimate the percentage of academic integrity breaches by students that you believe go through a formal hearing process (compared to breaches dealt with informally and those not detected).

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

0-20%

21-40%

41-60%

61-80%

81-100%

{{showSection+1}}.10 How often do you think sanctions are applied to students who do not go through a formal hearing process?

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Never

Occasionally

Often

I don’t know

{{showSection+1}}.11 Are records kept of sanctions resulting from informal decisions?

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Yes

Not sure

Not applicable

{{showSection+1}}.12 Who maintains the records of sanctions resulting from informal decisions? (select all that apply)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Faculty / Academic staff

Faculty level admin / professional staff

Institutional level admin / professional staff

Institutional leader / Provost

Don’t know

Other

Not applicable

Note: If you selected “Other”, we would appreciate feedback on options we can add to the list. Please, use the contact email provided at the end of the questionnaire to provide your feedback.

{{showSection+1}}.13 What does your institution hope to achieve in its responses to academic integrity breaches by students? (select all that apply)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Make clear a judgement about the student's conduct

Sanction the student as a punishment

Sanction the student to be fair to other students

Sanction the student to reflect the true value of the academic achievement

Deter the student from committing further breaches

Send a message to deter other students

Educate the student against such conduct

Using leniency, persuade the student that such conduct is wrong

Don’t know

Other

Note: If you selected “Other”, we would appreciate feedback on options we can add to the list. Please, use the contact email provided at the end of the questionnaire to provide your feedback.

{{showSection+1}}.14 Please answer the following questions by selecting one of the options

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	Strongly disagree	Disagree	Not sure	Agree	Strongly agree	Not applicable
The policy for academic integrity distinguishes between different types of breaches.
There is a standard institutional list of sanctions to be applied in proven cases of academic integrity breaches by students.
Sanctions applied to students vary according to the severity of the breach committed.
Sanctions vary according to the number of times a student has been found to have breached academic integrity.
Sanctions vary according to students’ seniority or academic standing.
Students are given time to become familiar with institutional expectations for academic integrity before they are assessed.
All students committing similar breaches receive the same sanction in different parts of this institution.
The sanctions applied in this institution for breaches to academic integrity are fair, proportionate and consistent.
This institution has a well-defined appeals process for students accused of academic integrity breaches who are dissatisfied with the process or the outcome.

{{showSection+1}}.15 Sanctions can be adjusted to take into account student circumstances or mitigating evidence

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Agree

Disagree

Don't know

{{showSection+1}}.16 Who makes the decision on whether and how mitigating evidence affects sanctions? (select one)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Panel or committee

Individual faculty member or tutor

Departmental head or dean

Specially designated officer

Not sure

Not applicable

Other

{{showSection+1}}.17 Reviewing your answers to this set of questions, do you believe there are consistent, proportionate and fair processes and outcomes when students in your institution are accused of academic integrity breaches?

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	Always	Usually	Sometimes	Never	Don’t know
Consistent
Proportionate
Fair

{{showSection+1}}.1 My institution uses the following mechanisms to deter academic misconduct and encourage academic integrity (select all that apply)

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Assessment design to deter academic integrity

Innovative teaching and learning

Training and education about academic integrity for all students

Training and education about academic integrity for faculty / academic staff

Guidance on academic integrity for academic staff / faculty

Guidance materials, (e.g. web site, leaflets, videos)

Publicity about policies and sanctions

Student ambassadors or champions helping to signpost advice

Use of software tools to help detect plagiarism

Use of software tools to guide students on academic writing

Training on academic writing techniques for students

Training and education on academic writing techniques for faculty / academic staff

Don't know

Other

Note: If you selected “Other”, we would appreciate feedback on options we can add to the list. Please, use the contact email provided at the end of the questionnaire to provide your feedback.

{{showSection+1}}.2 Please answer the following questions by selecting one of the options

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Not sure	Agree	Strongly Agree	Not applicable
All faculty/academic staff are actively applying ways to deter academic misconduct by students.
When faculty/academic staff design assessments they are mindful of ways to prevent or deter breaches to academic integrity by students.
Routine checks are in place to ensure assessments set for students have been designed to deter academic misconduct (particularly plagiarism and inappropriate collusion).
Students receive adequate instruction about academic integrity, including information about policies and sanctions.
Students are given ample opportunity to understand the consequences of academic misconduct.
Students are given ample opportunity to understand what is acceptable practice and what constitutes cheating.
My institution implements an honour code system that is effective in encouraging a culture of academic integrity.
My institution requires students to declare their honesty and integrity either in writing or orally at a ceremony.
All faculty / academic staff in this institution have a common view of what constitute breaches to academic integrity.

{{showSection+1}}.3 Please complete the sentence: Faculty / Academic staff are [...] to attend staff development sessions / training about academic integrity.

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Required

Expected

Encouraged

Unlikely

{{showSection+1}}.4 Please answer the next questions by selecting one of the options:

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

{{showSection+1}}.1 Please answer the following questions by selecting one of the options

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Not sure	Agree	Strongly Agree	Not applicable
My institution models and promotes a set of values to students that encourages a culture of integrity and appreciation of the value of learning
There is an institutional community of practice that promotes the value of learning and encourages a culture of academic integrity
I believe that students in this institution understand and share a vision about the need for academic integrity.
I believe my colleagues understand and share a vision about the need for academic integrity.
Input is welcome from all members of the academic community for developing an institutional culture in which learning and academic integrity are valued.
All parts of my institution apply the same policies for academic integrity.
Differences in how academic integrity policies are applied across my institution have a negative impact on the overall institutional culture.
My institution has a strategy for developing pedagogical practices for promoting sustained and deep learning.
My institution values academic integrity more highly than measures like student grades.
More could be done in my institution to strengthen quality and standards by promoting academic integrity
There is a well understood process for handling suspected breaches to academic integrity by faculty / academic staff.
Suspected breaches to academic integrity by faculty /academic staff are dealt with fairly.
This institution has a rigorous system for ethical approval of research proposals by faculty / academic staff / researchers.
This institution has a rigorous system for ethical approval of research proposals by students.
This institution has a rigorous system for monitoring research by faculty / academic staff / researchers to ensure it is conducted ethically and with integrity.
This institution has a rigorous system for monitoring research by students to ensure it is conducted ethically and with integrity.

{{showSection+1}}.1 Please answer the following questions by selecting one of the options.

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	A leading role	As an equal partner	An advisory role	Not involved	Don't know
In what way are students involved in the development of policies relating to academic integrity?
In what way are students involved in operational activities for handling student academic integrity breaches?
In what way are students involved in applying sanctions for academic integrity breaches by other students?
In what way are students involved in the delivery of training for students relating to academic integrity?
In what way are students involved in the delivery of training for faculty / academic staff relating to academic integrity?

{{showSection+1}}.2 Please answer the following questions by selecting one of the options.

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Not sure	Agree	Strongly Agree	Not applicable
I believe students can make a valuable contribution to the processes surrounding academic integrity.
I believe that student leaders make a valuable contribution to the academic integrity processes in my institution.

{{showSection+1}}.1 Please answer the questions below by selecting one of the options.

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	Yes, available to the public	Yes, only available for the institutional community	Yes, only available for faculty	No	Don't know
My institution makes procedures for encouraging / improving academic integrity available on-line.
My institution makes policies for encouraging / improving academic integrity available on-line.
My institution makes strategies for encouraging / improving academic integrity available on-line.

{{showSection+1}}.2 Please answer the questions below by selecting one of the options.

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	Yes, legal requirement	Yes, routinely on-line	Yes, routinely on request	Yes, to selected enquirers	Yes, other	No	Don’t know
My institution makes statistics publicly available on accusations and reports of academic integrity breaches by students.
My institution makes outcomes publicly available from student academic integrity hearings.

{{showSection+1}}.3 The outcomes from academic integrity hearings are communicated directly to the person who raised concerns

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Always

Sometimes

Never

Don’t know

{{showSection+1}}.4 This question explores the level of consultation in your institution prior to the introduction of changes to strategies, policies or procedures for academic integrity. Please select one of the options for each role.

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	Consulted	Notified	Neither consulted nor notified	Don’t know
Institutional leader
Dean / Departmental leader
Admin / Professional staff
Academic staff / Faculty
External reviewer
Student

{{showSection+1}}.1 Our academic integrity policies and procedures are monitored:

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Routinely – as issues or problems arise, they are noted

On a term by term basis – policies and systems are reviewed every term for any problems or issues

Biannually - policies and systems are reviewed twice per year

Annually - policies and systems are reviewed once per year

When requested by external reviewers, including accrediting bodies

Never

Don't know

Other

{{showSection+1}}.2 Who is involved in monitoring policies and procedures for academic integrity?

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Institutional leaders

Deans / Departmental heads

Academic staff/ Faculty

Admin / Professional staff

Students

Alumni

External reviewers or consultants

Don’t know

Other

Note: If you selected “Other”, we would appreciate feedback on options we can add to the list. Please, use the contact email provided at the end of the questionnaire to provide your feedback.

{{showSection+1}}.3 Our academic integrity policies and procedures are revised:

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Routinely – as issues or problems arise, they are noted

Termly - Policies and systems are reviewed every term / semester for any problems or issues

Biannually - policies and systems are reviewed twice per year

Annually - policies and systems are reviewed once/year

When requested by external reviewers

Don’t know

Other

{{showSection+1}}.4 Who is involved in revising policies and procedures for academic integrity?

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

Institutional leaders

Deans / Departmental heads

Academic staff/ Faculty

Admin / Professional staff

Students

Alumni

External reviewers or consultants

Don’t know

Other

Note: If you selected “Other”, we would appreciate feedback on options we can add to the list. Please, use the contact email provided at the end of the questionnaire to provide your feedback.

{{showSection+1}}.5 Please answer the following questions by selecting one of the options:

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	Strongly disagree	Disagree	Not sure	Agree	Strongly agree	Not applicable
Institutional statistics on academic integrity breaches are used to refine strategy, policies and procedures.
Findings from monitoring and review of academic integrity feed into institutional quality systems.
This institution’s strategy, policies and procedures for managing academic integrity breaches are working well.

{{showSection+1}}.1 Please answer the following questions by selecting one of the options:

Don't evaluate and skip this question.

	Strongly disagree	Disagree	Not sure	Agree	Strongly agree	Not applicable
This institution supports requests from academic staff / faculty to conduct research into academic integrity.
This institution supports students wishing to conduct research into academic integrity.
People in my institution with responsibility for aspects of academic integrity try to keep up- to-date with research and best practice in this field.
People in my institution with responsibility for aspects of academic integrity make use of evidence from recent research in this field to inform institutional strategy, policy and procedures.
People in my institution with responsibility for aspects of academic integrity regularly attend seminars, conferences and events in order to keep updated on developments and to share good practice in this field.
Funding is readily available for individuals to attend conferences, seminars and events about academic integrity.
New and emerging threats to academic integrity are factored into our revisions to institutional policy and systems.
The sanctions we apply for academic integrity breaches are broadly in line with those applied elsewhere.
There is institution-wide agreement and understanding about definitions relating to academic integrity.
Our institutional definitions relating to academic integrity are in-line with those for other similar institutions.
Our institutional definitions relating to academic integrity are in-line with internationally recognised definitions.
People from my institution are contributing to the understanding of concepts and practices about academic integrity, either within this institution or externally.
This institution makes every effort to ensure that policies for academic integrity are in line with good practice elsewhere.

Strongly disagree

Strongly agree

Not applicable

The available materials on academic integrity policies are easy to understand.

The procedures for handling cases of academic integrity breaches by students are clearly communicated.

Formal processes and systems in this institution for handling academic integrity breaches committed by students are fair, proportional and consistently applied.

The measures for managing suspected academic integrity breaches committed by students serve to deter students from academic misconduct.

Points: {{feedbacks[feedbacks.length-1][1]}} / {{feedbacks[feedbacks.length-1][2]}}

No evaluation for the whole section.

{{(showSection + 1)}}.{{index+1}} Question: {{feedback[0].question}}
Points received: {{feedback[0].ptsFinal}} / {{feedback[0].max}}

Line: {{option.option}}
Your choice: Selected Not selected
Points: {{option.value}} / {{option.value}} {{option.value_not_checked}}0 / {{option.value}} {{option.value}} / {{option.value_not_checked}} {{option.value_not_checked}} / {{option.value_not_checked}}

Line: {{question.option}}
Your choice: {{question.value}}
Points received: {{question.pts}} / {{question.maxPtsPerLine}}

Line: {{question.option}}
Your choice: Selected Not selected
Points: {{question.value}} / {{question.value}} {{question.value_not_checked}}0 / {{question.value}} {{question.value}} / {{question.value_not_checked}} {{question.value_not_checked}} / {{question.value_not_checked}}