New article: Understanding the academic integrity policies of publicly funded universities in western Canada

December 23, 2020

Educational PolicyThe latest article in our project, Contract Cheating in Canada: National Policy Analysis has just been published!

Stoesz, B., & Eaton, S. E. (2020). Understanding the academic integrity policies of publicly funded universities in western Canada. Educational Policy. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904820983032

Abstract

We examined 45 academic integrity policy documents from 24 publicly-funded universities in Canada’s four western provinces using a qualitative research design. We extracted data related to 5 core elements of exemplary academic integrity policy (i.e., access, detail, responsibility, approach, support). Most documents pointed to punitive approaches for academic misconduct and were based on the notion that academic misconduct results from a lack of morals. One university used the term “contract cheating,” although nearly all categorized the outsourcing of academic work as plagiarism. Details about educational resources and supports to increase student and staff understanding of academic integrity and prevention of academic misconduct were sparse. This study signals the continuing punitive nature of academic integrity policies in western Canadian universities, the reluctance to address contract cheating directly, and the need to revise policies with deeper consideration of educative approaches to academic integrity that support students and academic staff.

Keywords: academic integrity, Canada, contract cheating, educational supports, higher education, policy

This is an open access article and is free to read and download.

For more information about this article, or the national project, please contact me directly.

_____

Share or Tweet this: New article: Understanding the academic integrity policies of publicly funded universities in western Canada – https://drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/2020/12/23/new-article-understanding-the-academic-integrity-policies-of-publicly-funded-universities-in-western-canada/

This blog has had over 2 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, and the Educational Leader in Residence, Academic Integrity, University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the University of Calgary.


Supporting struggling pre-service teachers: A guide for mentor teachers

January 9, 2020

Cover

In 2017 I joined a project led my my colleague, Dr. Amy Burns, in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary. 

The project was called “Pre-service teachers at risk: Intervention strategies for and by teachers“. It was funded by the Alberta Advisory Committee for Educational Studies (AACES).

The primary question our research addressed was: (RQ1) What strategies do in-service teachers employ to support struggling pre-service teachers in field education?

A secondary question addressed was: (RQ2) How can postsecondary institutions better facilitate placements where a pre-service teacher is struggling before the field placement begins, given the legislative restrictions that exist with regard to privacy?

The research is complete now and as a result, we have developed an entirely open access educational resource to help both pre-service teachers (e.g. teacher trainees) and the mentor teachers they work with. Here are the key themes we identified through our research:

  1. Don’t Do This Job in Isolation: Seek Support
  2. Guide and Model What You Want to See
  3. Provide Immediate and Frequent Feedback
  4. Communicate: Early, Often, Directly, Honestly, and Clearly
  5. Remember the Big Picture
  6. Set Clear and High Expectations
  7. Support Engagement in Self-Reflection
  8. Reflect on the Preservice Teacher’s Difficulties
  9. Recognize Early Warning Signs and Don’t Ignore Them
  10. Identify the Preservice Teacher’s Current Skill Level
  11. Create Goals

 

Download a full copy of the resource free of charge here:

Burns, A., Eaton, S. E., Gereluk, D., Mueller, K., & Craig, H. L. (2019). Supporting Struggling Pre-Service Teachers: A Guide for Mentor Teachers. Retrieved from Calgary, AB: http://hdl.handle.net/1880/111439

______________________________________________________

Share or Tweet this: Supporting struggling pre-service teachers: A guide for mentor teachers – https://wp.me/pNAh3-2pq

This blog has had over 2 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, and the Educational Leader in Residence, Academic Integrity, University of Calgary, Canada. Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the University of Calgary.


Writing Educational Research (EDER 603.23) – Spring 2018

May 8, 2018

Spring 2018 course (image)I am excited to be teaching one of my favourite courses coming up in the Spring 2018 semester. This is the final course for students in the Master of Education with a specialization in Teaching English as an Additional Language (TEAL).

Course description

This course will focus on examining and developing the skills associated with crafting an academic report and discussion on research data. Topics include genres and purposes of academic writing, as well as venues for presentation and publication. An academic paper is more than a compilation of relevant literature, attending information and a conclusion.

An acceptable paper, whether intended for an academic or a professional audience, and whether a report of findings or a theoretical-philosophical argument, takes a clearly defined idea, situates it in the current literature, and supports it with a well-structured discussion. The principal intentions of this course are to introduce students to the various structures of academic and professional papers and to provide support in their efforts to craft, present and potentially publish their written work.

A traditional approach to writing educational research involves first learning about writing, then learning to write. Learners first study sample texts, analyzing them and then dissecting them, examining their structure, argument and style. The next step often involves producing an original piece of writing that mimics the style, tone and structure of the sample text. The final step is to integrate elements of the student’s own voice and style with elements of the texts they have previously studied. The rationale behind this approach is that the student must first learn what counts as excellent writing by learning about writing. Only then are they prepared to write themselves.

This course takes a non-traditional approach to learning to write about research for scholarly or professional purposes. Students will focus on writing, offering feedback to peers, revising, and incorporating feedback.

Students take on three key roles during this course:

  1. Writer – Crafting an original work intended for sharing in a public forum.
  2. Reviewer – Developing your skills offering substantive and supportive feedback to peers to help them improve their writing so that they, too, are successful in sharing their work in a public forum.
  3. Reviser – Learning to consider and incorporate peer feedback thoughtfully. As scholars and professionals, we recognize that our work is stronger when we incorporate revisions from trusted colleagues whose intention is to help us succeed.

Check out this .pdf of the entire course outline.

Why I love teaching this course

I love working with students who are also professionals to show them how they can craft a research term paper into a manuscript for publication. I’ve taught this course about a dozen times before and I marvel at how students can develop competence and confidence as writers during this course.

Some students who have taken this course have gone on to publish their work and it inspires me to see them grow in this way. I am looking forward to creating opportunities for more students to become published writers!

______________________________________________________

Share or Tweet this: Writing Educational Research (EDER 603.23) – Spring 2018 https://wp.me/pNAh3-2hV

This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.

Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the Werklund School of Education or the University of Calgary.

 


Action Research for Graduate Program Improvements: A Response to Curriculum Mapping and Review

May 1, 2018

CJHE copy.jpgI’m excited to share news with you about a new article that’s just been released with co-authors Michele Jacobsen, Barb Brown, Marlon Simmons and Mairi McDermott. Here’s an overview:

Abstract

There is a global trend toward improving programs and student experiences in higher education through curriculum review and mapping of degree programs. This paper describes an action research approach to program improvement for a course-based MEd degree. The driver for continual program improvement came from actions and recommendations that arose from an institutionally mandated, year-long, faculty led curriculum review of professional graduate programs in education. Study findings reveal instructors’ perceptions about how they enacted the recommendations for program improvement, including

  1. developing a visual conceptualization of the program;
  2. improved connections between the courses;
  3. articulation of coherence in goals and expectations for students and instructors;
  4. an increased focus on action research;
  5. increased ethics support and scaffolding for students; and
  6. the fostering of communities of practice.

Study findings highlight strengths of the current program and course designs, action items, and research needed for continual program improvement.

___________________
This article is the result of a two-year project with our amazing team. It has been incredible to learn with and from them as we embarked on this journey together. We are eager to share what we learned about how to improve students’ experience in our Master of Education program.

Check out the entire article in the Canadian Journal of Higher Education.

______________________________________________________

Share or Tweet this: Action Research for Graduate Program Improvements: A Response to Curriculum Mapping and Review

This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.

Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the Werklund School of Education or the University of Calgary.


Who falls prey to predatory publishers?

April 24, 2018

A while back I wrote Avoiding Predatory Journals and Questionable Conferences: A Resource Guide. As I started digging into the research on the topic, I found that that the people who fall prey to these scams, basically fall into three categories. Here’s an excerpt from the report:

Those who contribute to predatory or parasitic publications or events seem to fall into three main categories: (a) those who are too naïve to know; (b) those who know, but do not mind; and (c) those pseudo-scientists who are masquerading as legitimate scholars or researchers, but are essentially quacks or charlatans themselves (Beall n.d., 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 a, b, c; Grove, 2017; McCrostie 2016, 2017; Nicholl & Chinn, 2015; Nolfi, Lockhart & Redgate, 2015;Ruben, 2016; Vinny, Vishnu & Lal, 2016; Xia, Harmon, Connolly, Donnelly, Anderson, & Howard, 2015):

The Naïve Contributor ultimately recognizes that their contribution will bring them little benefit and their reputation may even be damaged.

The Cognizant Contributor has a more symbiotic relationship with the parasitical publication or conference because they perceive some benefit to their own advancement.

Like the Cognizant Contributor, the Pseudo-Scientist also receives (or at least perceives) benefit because questionable conferences or publications give them a venue to proclaim their own expertise, unproven results or absurd theories. (p. 10).

Here’s an infographic:

Who falls prey to predatory publishers_.jpg

The full report contains a full reference list and much more content. You can check it out here: Avoiding Predatory Journals and Questionable Conferences: A Resource Guide

______________________________________________________

Share or Tweet this: Who falls prey to predatory publishers? https://wp.me/pNAh3-2id

This blog has had over 1.8 million views thanks to readers like you. If you enjoyed this post, please “like” it or share it on social media. Thanks!

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a faculty member in the Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada.

Opinions are my own and do not represent those of the Werklund School of Education or the University of Calgary.

 


%d bloggers like this: