2023-05-04 Zoom Conference Humber College

References of the presentation during Zoom Conference – Humber College – May 4th, 2023

Beyond Plagiarism: Rethinking Assessment Practices to Foster Academic Integrity

Martine Peters, Université du Québec en Outaouais

References extracted from the slides:

Slide 1 : Paul Graham AIgiarism

PUPP web site

Slide 6 : Assessment in higher education

  • Cadez, S., Dimovski, V. et Zaman Groff, M. (2017). Research, teaching and performance evaluation in academia: the salience of quality. Studies in Higher Education, 42(8), 1455-1473.
  • McIntosh, S., McKinley, J., Milligan, L. O. et Mikolajewska, A. (2022). Issues of (in) visibility and compromise in academic work in UK universities. Studies in Higher Education, 47(6), 1057-1068.
  • McKinley, J., McIntosh, S., Milligan, L. et Mikołajewska, A. (2020). Eyes on the enterprise: problematising the concept of a teaching-research nexus in UK higher education. Higher Education, 81(5), 1023-1041.
  • ter Bogt, H. J. et Scapens, R. W. (2012). Performance Management in Universities: Effects of the Transition to More Quantitative Measurement Systems. European Accounting Review, 21(3), 451-497. doi: 10.1080/09638180.2012.668323
  • Vilppu, H., Södervik, I., Postareff, L. et Murtonen, M. (2019). The effect of short online pedagogical training on university teachers’ interpretations of teaching–learning situations. Instructional science, 47, 679-709.
  • Stewart, M. (2014). Making sense of a teaching programme for university academics: Exploring the longer-term effects. Teaching and teacher education, 38, 89-98.
  • Williams, P. (2014). Rethinking university assessment. International journal of technology and inclusive education, 3(1), 257-264.
  • Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Bearman, M., Boud, D., Dawson, P. et Jorre de St Jorre, T. (2022). Assessment for inclusion: rethinking contemporary strategies in assessment design. Higher Education Research & Development, 1-15. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2022.2057451

Slide 9 : Assessment tasks

Slide 10 : When faced with AI : 9 reactions possible

  • Peters (2023). ChatGPT et plagiat: l’avenir de l’apprentissage à l’université. Webinaire donné à l’UQO, le 20-03-2023.

Slide 10 : Redesigning assessment for AI

Slide 16 : Bloom’s taxonomy

  • Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.A., Mayer, R.E., Pintrich, P.R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M.C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Complete edition). New York: Longman.
  • Profinnovant (s.d.). Taxonomie de Bloom révisée : verbes d’action. Section pédagogie. https://www.profinnovant.com/taxonomie-de-bloom-revisee-verbes-daction/

Slide 17 : Assessment and originality

  • (Thomson and Droga 2012).
  • Faculty expectations are often tied to the originality of their students’ work, even though students often do not know what originality is (Thaiss and Zawacki 2006).

Slide 18:  Assessment and originality

  • Johnson-Eilola, J. et Selber, S. A. (2007). Plagiarism, originality, assemblage. Computers and Composition, 24(4), 375-403.

Slide 19 : Originality or creativity

  • Acar, S., Burnett, C. et Cabra, J. F. (2017). Ingredients of Creativity: Originality and More. Creativity Research Journal, 29(2), 133-144. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2017.1302776
  • Sternberg, R. J. et Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. Handbook of creativity, 1, 3-15. 

Slide 20 :

  • Johnson-Eilola, J. et Selber, S. A. (2007). Plagiarism, originality, assemblage. Computers and Composition, 24(4), 375-403.

Slide 21 : Creativity

  • Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.A., Mayer, R.E., Pintrich, P.R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M.C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Complete edition). New York: Longman.

Slide 24: Types of assessments

  • Macdonald, R., et Carroll, J. (2006). Plagiarism—a complex issue requiring a holistic institutional approach. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(2), 233-245.

Slide 26 : Cognitive offloading

  • Risko EF, Gilbert SJ. (2016). Cognitive offloading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 20(9):676–688. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2016.07.002.

Slide 27-28 : Cognitive offloading

  • Dawson, P. (2020). Cognitive Offloading and Assessment. In: Bearman, M., Dawson, P., Ajjawi, R., Tai, J., Boud, D. (eds) Re-imagining University Assessment in a Digital World. The Enabling Power of Assessment, vol 7. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41956-1_4

Slide 30 : Authentic assessment

Slide 31 : Authentic assessment

  • Frey, B. B., Schmitt, V. L., & Allen, J. P. (2012). Defining authentic classroom assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 17(2).
  • Kashani-Vahid, L., Afrooz, G., Shokoohi-Yekta, M., Kharrazi, K., & Ghobari, B. (2017). Can a creative interpersonal problem solving program improve creative thinking in gifted elementary students? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 24, 175-185.
  • Wadaani, M. R. (2015). Teaching for Creativity as Human Development toward Self-Actualization: The Essence of Authentic Learning and Optimal Growth for All Students.Creative Education, 6,669-679.
  • Wiggins, G. (2011). A true test: toward more authentic and equitable assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(7), 81–93.  

Slide 32 : Characteristics of an authentic assessment task

Slide 33 : Characteristics of an authentic assessment task with integrity

  • Eid, M. I. M., & Al-Jabri, I. M. (2016). Social networking, knowledge sharing, and student learning: the case of university students. Computers & Education, 99, 14–27.
  • Fan, M. et Cai, W. (2020). How does a creative learning environment foster student creativity? An examination on multiple explanatory mechanisms. Current Psychology, 1-10.
  • Yeh, Y.-chu, Yeh, Y.-ling, & Chen, Y.-H. (2012). From knowledge sharing to knowledge creation: a blended knowledge-management model for improving university students’ creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 7(3), 245–257. 

Slide 35 : Authentic assessment tasks

  • Fahim, S. (n.d.). Assessments – Prevention Strategies to Combat Plagiarism [PowerPoint presentation]. The British University in Egypt. https://www.bue.edu.eg/powerpoints-academic-honesty/
  • Culwin, F., et Lancaster, T. (2001). Plagiarism, prevention, deterrence and detection. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?
  • Gibelman, M., Gelman, S. R., et Fast, J. (1999). The downside of cyberspace: Cheating made easy. Journal of Social Work Education, 35(3), 367-376.
  • Sotiriadou, P. Logan, D., Daly, A. et Guest, R. (2020). The role of authentic assessment to preserve academic integrity and promote skill development and employability. Studies in Higher Education. Vol. 45, no. 11, 2132-2148. 

Slide 37 : Instructions

  • Harris, Robert (2015).  Antiplagiarism Strategies for Research Papers. Virtual Salt. http://www.virtualsalt.com/antiplag.htm
  • Smith, C. D., Worsfold, K., Davies, L., Fisher, R. et McPhail, R. (2013). Assessment literacy and student learning: the case for explicitly developing students ‘assessment literacy’. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(1), 44-60. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2011.598636

Slide 38: Rules for tools

Slide 39 : AI-proof instructions

Slide 41: Evaluation criteria

  • Davies, D., Jindal-Snape, D., Collier, C., Digby, R., Hay, P., & Howe, A. (2013). Creative learning environments in education–a systematic literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8, 80–91.
  • De Bruijn-Smolders, M., Timmers, C. F., Gawke, J. C. L., Schoonman, W., & Born, M. P. (2016). Effective self-regulatory processes in higher education: research findings and future directions. a systematic review. Studies in Higher Education, 41(1), 139–158.
  • Shin et al. (2012)
  • White M, Kern ML. Positive education: Learning and teaching for wellbeing and academic mastery. International Journal of Wellbeing. 2018;8(1):1-17. DOI: 10.5502/ijw.v8i1.588