Using Quality Assurance Frameworks to Support an Institutional Culture of Academic Integrity at Canadian Universities

Abstract

In Canada, there is a national academic quality assurance framework—the Canadian Degree Qualifications Framework (CDQF) that guides quality assurance standards within universities across the provinces and territories. These standards exist to support the quality and consistency of postsecondary academic programming in Canada, and provide mechanisms for quality enhancement. The CDQF is supported by further quality assurance mechanisms at the provincial level. While the CDQF includes the notion of academic integrity as a learning outcome requirement, the implementation and review of this quality indicator across the sector is nebulous. The ongoing support for a culture of academic integrity requires a holistic approach, which includes the alignment of various policies and processes. It also involves the inclusion of academic integrity best practices into quality assurance processes, such as curriculum development and program review. In this chapter we discuss several quality assurance tools used in Canadian universities, with a focus on Ontario institutions, and discuss opportunities to leverage them to support academic integrity. The CDQF and provincial/territorial quality assurance frameworks should be better utilized for a holistic response to academic misconduct, to strengthen teaching and learning, and develop a culture of integrity in higher education. Opportunities within cyclical program review, curriculum mapping and educational development are discussed to highlight opportunities for academic integrity specialists, quality assurance staff, faculty, and policy makers to raise academic integrity awareness and weave best practices across an institution. Implications for the community college sector are also included. Recommendations can be applied to postsecondary institutions across Canada and integrated with quality assurance practices promoted by the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) and others academic integrity advocates around the world.

Academic Integrity in Canada: Historical Perspectives and Current Trends

“…There is no national 'system', no national ministry of higher education, no national higher education policy and no national quality assessment or accreditation mechanisms for institutions of higher education. (Jones, 2014, p. 1) Quality assurance for higher education is the primary responsibility of the provinces and territories (Thacker & McKenzie, 2022), although a common body provides oversight in the provinces of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island (see Maritime Provinces Higher Education Commission, n.d.).…”

Conclusions and Future Directions for Academic Integrity in Canada

“…In this volume, contributors share empirical findings (see deMontigny, 2022; Garwood, 2022;Hamilton & Wolsky, 2022;McNeill, 2022;Packalen & Rowbotham, 2022;Peters et al, 2022;Rossi, 2022), as well as conceptual and other forms of scholarly expertise and insights (see Christensen Hughes & Eaton, 2022a, b;Crossman, 2022;Eaton & Christensen Hughes, 2022;Foxe et al, 2022;Hunter & Kier, 2022, Miron, 2022Teymouri et al, 2022, Watson Hamilton, 2022 and perspectives from leadership and professional practice (see Kenny & Eaton, 2022;Morrison & Zachariah, 2022;Morrow, 2022;Penaluna & Ross, 2022;Thacker & McKenzie, 2022). Of particular note are the chapters that broaden understanding of academic integrity beyond the questionable behaviours of students, to include that of faculty, administrators and the history and cultures of institutions of higher learning, as well as those that extend the dialogue around the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) (see Bens, 2022;Kenny & Eaton, 2022;Hamilton & Wolsky, 2022), signalling that academic integrity inquiry can fit within SoTL when the focus is on learning and teaching.…”

“…We recognize the invaluable role that higher education professionals play in contributing to cultures of integrity and to the learning supports for students. We are delighted to have chapters that include perspectives from those working in academic integrity offices, student affairs, the library, academic writing centres, quality assurance and other non-academic units within learning institutions (see, for example, Bens, 2022;Foxe et al, 2022;Garwood, 2022;Gray, 2022;Morrow, 2022;Penaluna & Ross, 2022;Sopcak & Hood, 2022;Rossi, 2022;and Thacker & McKenzie, 2022).…”

Culture of integrity – institutional response to integrity during COVID19

“…Orr (2018) focused on an educational seminar to help transition from punitive systems to educational one; while Cronan et al (2017) presented a case for technology-based intervention to help change knowledge and attitudes of students. Hudd et al (2009) talked about the importance of focusing on full time and part time faculty; Morrow (2022) spoke on the importance of librarians' roles as advocates for academic integrity; Thacker & McKenzie (2022) highlighted the need for quality assurance frameworks that can support culture of academic integrity; Betram- Gallant & Drinan (2006) placed the importance on the administrators of universities, rather than on students, concluding the need to groom faculty as agents of change in developing a culture of integrity.…”