December 2023
Letter from the Guest Editor
‘Tis the Season: For Academic Dishonesty Assessments in the Age of AI ... Tread Carefully!
By: Badri Roysam, University of Houston
As the semester winds down, and our faculty colleagues complete submitting their grades, there is often an unpleasant matter that keeps us from heading home quickly – faculty members and teaching assistants reporting incidents of academic integrity violations. These cases are becoming trickier with the advent of generative AI, online websites, and new types of cheating. Regardless, these incidents must be handled with utmost care since missteps (even minor ones) can result in a lawsuit or worse. Be especially careful if you are a newly appointed Department Chair or if you are mentoring a newly appointed faculty member!
First Things First
Ignoring or trivializing instances of dishonesty or sweeping them under the rug is a bad idea since it sends a loud and clear (unfortunate) message to students that can undermine an entire program’s reputation over time, most likely sooner rather than later.
Unfortunately, academic dishonesty is a multifaceted matter that must be viewed in a legalistic manner. With this in mind, instructors compiling evidence of the alleged academic dishonesty is a vital first step, and this must be done before taking any punitive actions. All subsequent actions should be based on the preponderance of evidence, guided by institutional policy, and aided by peer review. In the recent past, the widespread availability of generative Artificial Intelligence tools like ChatGPT, and other online resources, combined with the need to conduct some or all of a course’s testing online, have complicated matters for instructors and peer reviewers alike. In the end, what matters is the clear and compelling nature of the evidence, and that has not changed.
As I note below, the wisest course of action is to look for ways to preclude the possibility, even the temptation for academic dishonesty.
A well-written Syllabus Sheet is a Great Starting Point
A well-written course syllabus sheet that conveys policies, expectations, and ground rules for students and teaching assistants, and adherence of instructors to the stated rules in the syllabus sheet is extremely important since it minimizes/avoids the possibility of any actions being interpreted as capricious or arbitrary.
Peer Review is Always Good
Assessments of academic honesty violations conducted by a committee of unbiased faculty peers, when possible, are a powerfully protective tool for department chairs compared to a single hearing officer. They are also likely to result in better assessments that will hold up in court should it get to that.
University Policies Are Your Ally
At the next level, most universities have well-developed and published academic honesty policies and procedures in place, and they are your best allies. Here is a link to the policy at my home institution (https://www.uh.edu/provost/policies-resources/honesty/_documents-honesty/academic-honesty-policy.pdf ), and here is a link to the page at MIT (https://policies.mit.edu/policies-procedures/100-academic-and-research-misconduct-and-dishonesty/102-procedures-dealing ). While this is not the most exciting topic on the minds of most people, this document is vitally important since it is designed to protect faculty, administrators, and the university, in addition to students. When you receive notification of a violation of academic honesty, grab your handy copy of your institution’s policy, and follow the prescribed procedures to the letter. Most well-established departments have a designated Hearing Officer for Academic Dishonesty cases. Referring the matter to this officer promptly (typically, in fewer than 10 days) is a recommended first step. At this point, as Chair, you have done your job.
It is not altogether uncommon for students to sue a course instructor or department over the processing of an alleged academic dishonesty case. It is not uncommon for lawyers to set up shop close to campus offering to sue the university at no cost to the student. Poor handling of the case at the department level creates vulnerabilities that are best avoided. Regardless of the student’s guilt or otherwise, it is important to follow the university’s policy of procedures. Following the policy and providing evidence of Due Process is your best defense in court, should you God Forbid, find yourself there. Courts generally do not interfere in academic matters unless instructors or administrators have acted arbitrarily or capriciously without due process (https://www.purdue.edu/odos/osrr/resources/documents/responding_to_academic_dishonesty.html ). Better yet, following the university’s published policy diligently can often keep cases out of the court system to begin with. The tort lawyers look for instances where they can point to a published policy that was not followed accurately.
Educating while Punishing Reasonably
All punishments should be proportionate to the offense. Disproportionate punishments often win appeals or end up in a courthouse. For smaller or ambiguous academic honesty violations, it is best to design the punishment in a manner that helps the student re-learn the honor code and the subject matter. When in doubt, it is best to consult key university personnel, usually the Dean of Students, or University Counsel, before handing out a punishment. These folks can keep Chairs and faculty in safe territory as we go about our jobs.
A Dose of Prevention is Good Defense
Academic testing strategies designed to preclude opportunities and temptations for academic honesty violations are the best strategy overall. As Chair, you may wish to examine courses that incur repeat/frequent instances of academic dishonesty and work with the instructor to make changes designed to prevent future instances, and ideally, even the temptations or loopholes that may lead to future instances. The obvious culprits are take-home examinations, group activities, online testing with insufficient protections, insufficient time for students to complete tests, not citing sources, improper use of online resources, and poorly written course syllabi. Once the biggest culprits are identified, it is helpful to schedule a brainstorming session with the relevant faculty members and work out ways to prevent future instances. For example, replacing take-home activities with in-class exams, and using the old-fashioned viva voce as an evaluation tool can go a long way.
In Summary
Tread with care, use peer review and university resources, and avoid at least the known potholes as you handle academic dishonesty cases, and share best practices with your peers.
As always, we welcome short articles from ECE department heads & faculty on topics of broad interest to our community.
Wishing you a Happy Holiday season,
Badri Roysam, D.Sc., Fellow IEEE, Fellow AIMBE
Hugh Roy and Lillie Cranz Cullen University Professor
Chair, Electrical & Computer Engineering Department
University of Houston
Houston, Texas 77204-4005
Phone: 713-743-1773
Email: broysam@uh.edu