Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to introduce the concept of a couple-level shared identity as forming the basis for the development of dual-career couples' strategies regarding involvement in work and family roles. A model is developed that is intended to help researchers in this area conceptualize the relationship between career choices and career progression between members of a dual career couple. Examining career development at the couple-level extends one's understanding of how the decisions made by one member of the dyad influence the career of the other. Design/methodology/approach -In order to develop this model, the theories of cognitive interdependence and gender role ideology are examined and applied to the formation of a shared identity. Findings -Development of the model, as well as a review of the extant literature, revealed that career decisions in dual career couples are made at the level of the dyad. Practical implications -The findings demonstrate that organizations cannot view their employees in isolation, but that important transitions such as relocation, and taking on more responsibility are decisions that increasingly are made at the couple level. Employers may need to consider the dyad when offering career advancement opportunities and when implementing work-life balance programs. Originality/value -The career progression of one member has implications for the other. Therefore, it is insufficient for an individual to have a career in isolation when the individual is part of a dual career couple. Examination of career at the dyad level will advance one's knowledge of how careers unfold.

In this article we report findings from a review of universities’ academic integrity policies in Ontario, Canada. The research team systematically extracted, reviewed, and evaluated information from policy documents in an effort to understand how these documents described contract cheating in Ontario universities (n = 21). In all, 23 policies were examined for contract cheating language. The elements of access, approach, responsibility, detail, and support were examined and critiqued. Additionally, document type, document title and concept(s), specific contract cheating language, presence of contract cheating definitions and policy principles were reviewed. Findings revealed that none of the universities’ policies met all of the core elements of exemplary policy, were reviewed and revised with less frequency than their college counterparts, lacked language specific to contract cheating, and were more frequently focused on punitive rather than educative approaches. These findings confirm that there is further opportunity for policy development related to the promotion of academic integrity and the prevention of contract cheating.

No abstract

No abstract

Prior researchers have used surveys to identify frequencies and types of academic integrity violations among students and to identify factors correlated with academically dishonest behaviours. Some studies have also explored students’ justifications for their behaviors. Comparatively little work, however, has explored students’ opinions on academic integrity using more nuanced and conversational, but still rigorous, methodologies. To address this gap in the literature, we gathered written and oral comments from 44 Canadian undergraduate business students who participated in one of four year-specific computer-facilitated focus groups. Specifically, we analyzed students’ responses to questions about the general attitudes among themselves and their peers with respect to academic integrity. We also analyzed students’ suggestions of steps that both they and faculty could take to improve the culture of academic integrity in their program. Our contributions to the field of academic integrity were three-fold. First, we gave voice to students in an area in which historically their opinions had been lacking, namely in the generation of specific actions that students and faculty can take to improve academic integrity. Second, we connected students’ opinions and suggestions to the broader literature on academic integrity, classroom pedagogy, and organizational culture to interpret our findings. Third, we introduced readers to an uncommon methodology, computer-facilitated focus groups, which is well suited to gathering rich and diverse insights on sensitive topics.