Academic integrity and computing assessments

Abstract

A recent Australian project has investigated academics' and students' understandings of and attitudes to academic integrity in computing assessments. We explain the project and summarise some of its findings, which have been presented in a number of prior papers. In an extended discussion section we then raise a number of questions that we believe must be addressed by the computing education community if it is to be seen to take academic integrity seriously. We question the value and the validity of a number of current educational practices, and urge the community to work towards resolutions of the unanswered questions.

Victorian Aboriginal life and customs through early European eyes

“…Hence, submitting handwritten assignments is still a common experience for mathematics students across Australia. Simon and Sheard (2016) and Dick et al (2003) found that manual detection of misconduct by computer science academics is commonplace (more so than automated techniques). This detection involves, for example, noticing similarities in code, uneven quality or sudden improvement in a student's work, or the incorporation of content that is beyond the scope of the course.…”

“…Simon et al (2014) undertook a comparative study of perceptions regarding non-text (coding and visual design) tasks and essays, and recommended that context-specific issues be considered both in disciplinary processes and in education about academic integrity. For those who are not experts, it is difficult to appreciate how unlikely it is that certain subtle correspondences between students' work have arisen by chance (Roberts, 2002;Simon & Sheard, 2016). Just as different academic disciplines can have their signature pedagogies, they may have distinctive assessment tasks; this means that idiosyncratic forms of academic misconduct can arise (Borg, 2009), which overarching, generic university policies can barely address.…”

“…One skill that universities seek to teach and assess is that of realising what existing or known components can be used in solving a particular problem, then combining them in a suitable way. This skill is also needed in computer science (Simon & Sheard, 2016), where code recycling and use of source-code libraries can be contested practices. You might be surprised to realise that a similar tension between novelty and imitation arises in fashion design, which makes visual and cultural references, or 'invoke[s] a persona -whether athletic, formal or casual -based on a repertoire of existing models (i.e.…”

“…If contract cheating is found to have taken place, exclusion from the university is a possible penalty. Asking students to explain submitted work is a way that lecturers check whether the student actually produced it (Simon & Sheard, 2016). if these students do not fully understand the questions taught to them by the others, then they will not have used the assignments formatively as a way to prepare for the final assessment, which is generally the purpose of low-stakes work assigned during the semester.…”

“…Zsa might not be able to explain the code for a number of valid reasons, such as having got it to work by tweaking or trial and error, or being better at writing code than with verbal expression (Simon & Sheard, 2016), but the Gmail message that the demonstrator has seen belies this. This is blatant misconduct, both collusion and copying, and the demonstrator has evidence of it.…”