Student-Staff Discussion Forum on Academic Integrity

Often, we ask: What is plagiarism? Why it’s wrong? How to avoid it? The framing is negative, and that is one way it makes sense to redefine things in terms of academic integrity. My aim is to go one step further and to ask: why does plagiarism happen? And my answer, assuming it’s not intentional, is that happens because we don’t always fully understand what we read. And note how I said ‘we’.

Let me explain.

One way to avoid plagiarism is to paraphrase, to put things in your own words. But what if it’s unfamiliar material, perhaps technical or theoretical? If you don’t fully understand what you’re reading, what’s the best way not to make a mistake, or distort the meaning? To use the same words or phrases. But if you stay too close to the original, you’ve got a problem, because you run the risk of plagiarism. It’s not ideal to have imperfect understanding, but it doesn’t make you a bad person. And it would be a mistake to think that the root cause was dishonesty or even poor citation.

So, what’s the best way to avoid plagiarism? Put in the work, and make sure you understand the material. If you’re not there yet, you’ll know. And when you have got there, you’ll have two things. (1) You’ll know you’re not plagiarising, because it will be easy to put things into your own words. (2) You’ll have the personal satisfaction of knowing you’ve pushed yourself to master something difficult. 

Context

Our project recognises three important points about academic integrity in the context of generative AI:

1. Generative AI can do a decent job with many of the types of assignment we traditionally set in this college. 
2. University policies on plagiarism and academic integrity are lagging behind the development of AI tools. 
3. There is currently no software that reliably detects AI-generated text.

So, how do we respond?

• We need to recognise the genuine interest and curiosity that many of us feel towards AI.
• But we need to be clear that unacknowledged use of GenAI in assignments could violate academic integrity guidelines and the UCD plagiarism policy.
• So, we need a culture of transparency around the use of AI.

Project position

• Our project has developed a traffic light system for the college so that all assignments are marked red, amber, or green to indicate whether or not a student can use AI for that assignment.
• A red-light assignment means that students cannot use GenAI without violating the Plagiarism Policy.
• A green-light assignment means that students may use GenAI if they choose, but they must explicitly acknowledge their use.
• An amber-light assignment means that they can use GenAI for specific purposes only.

My position

• My own modules are green light, which means the students can use AI if they wish but they must provide a written statement outlining how they used it. 
• I explain to my students that I’m agnostic about the circumstances where it may be appropriate to use AI for learning (and where it might lead to learning loss) and I want to work with them to figure this out.
• If my students are required to acknowledge their use of GenAI then so must I.
• I have used it in my teaching (e.g. assignment prompts, templates, and rubrics) but I always describe how I’ve used it and, where possible, link to the conversation.
• You can also see on the AI Futures website that we’ve tried to model how to declare use but also explain why you might use AI in some circumstances but not others.

Key takeaways

• Don’t be afraid of AI and don’t make it taboo.
• Think about how it might support aspects of your work.

1) Courage

A lot of academic work – particularly in relation to critical thinking – includes speaking truth to power. Or at least it should. In practice, I often notice myself and people like me telling students in class not to trust authorities blindly, always check facts and interpretations for themselves, and try to unearth hidden meanings behind what those in charge say. Yet after the class we often cross the corridor, enter a faculty meeting and seem to forget everything we just advocated when being addressed by a principal, vice-president or the likes. That is, we don’t live what we preach. I don’t blame any individual for this, it relates just as much to systemic institutional pressures. Alongside universities all over the world, our institution advances this mindset by strengthening top-down structures and reducing bottom-up initiatives and influences all the time. We need to focus more on the realisation of the results of critical thinking: how to speak truth to power, how to choose the right battles, and how to preserve one’s energy and mental health while doing it – and we need to teach our students this, too.

2) Openness to Alternative Views

In today’s ever-more polarised world dominated by a post-truth mentality there is a risk that conviction turns into righteousness: Traditionally academia operates based on the power of arguments, yet what shall we do if in the case of fundamental societal disagreements arguments alone don’t seem to work anymore, like in the case of climate change, abortion, or most recently the war in Gaza? Social media and populist ideologies on all sides of the political spectrum try to make us act and decide on gut feeling, on immediate emotional and moral reactions alone, suppressing any conscious reflection of complex matters. This may make us feel good, yet it results in us addressing just the people who think like ourselves anyway, never the ones who need to be convinced. Academic integrity as I see it requires us to see the other side, understand where it is coming from, and try to engage with it productively (without sacrificing my own convictions, yet acknowledging that my view is not the only possible one on any given issue).

3) The Challenge of Artificial Intelligence

Generative AI is hyped to be one of the most serious challenges of our time, for both society and academia. Will machines finally take over the world? Again, we should not let irrational fears rule our response, but experiment with AI and look for the pros and cons. My own limited experience thus far indicates that AI can be a valuable assistant for many tasks, while creating serious problems if used to replace human creativity and originality. In the latter case it becomes the ultimate bullshitter: its results look incredibly slick and smooth, yet have not much individuality, are bland, stereotypical and never come up with anything genuinely new. There’s also the problem of AI training itself increasingly on previous products of AI, becoming even blander and more stereotypical all the time. Yet AI can, for example, help people with dyslexia or other writing difficulties, or support finding sources in certain circumstances. We don’t need to fear AI yet should learn as much as possible about its dangers and advantages and in particular make people aware of its limitations. That is the best way to preserve academic integrity.

They seem to think about academic integrity only in terms of practicalities of citation and referencing, and the lack of knowledge about these practicalities is often stress-inducing. In fact, a surprisingly large number of students don’t know that there are referencing guides available on the Library website. Without these guides, they struggle with basic questions on where to put the citation; how often to include it; how to avoid plagiarism when they paraphrase; how to make it clear where the cited section ends, and so on. Inconsistencies between referencing requirements in different modules further contribute to student stress and confusion.

In our experience, the students understand that they need to be truthful about their own work and that the work of others has to be cited.

Sometimes, however, they don’t understand that citation is not about ticking a box, but serves to embed the values of honesty, respect, and responsibility. They often come in afraid that there are all these rules and requirements that they are not fully grasping, which may even change from module to module, and they haven’t been instructed on what to do. Therefore, the perception of citation and integrity is negative at the start and causes frustration.

I think this lack of understanding of citation and referencing as something bigger than just citation – academic honesty, fairness - also comes from a disconnect between the content of student papers and the sources.

Some students come to us with a finished paper and want us to show them how to ‘add’ sources and reference them. This means that sources are almost like an afterthought; yet, if they don’t see sources as part of their writing process, as something that they use to build upon, to enrich or support their argument, they will find it hard to understand the importance of proper acknowledgement, credit, and respect for the work of others.  

Another problem is that students often don’t see the value in their writing, certainly not beyond something they must do for their grade or a degree. They don’t feel they intellectually contribute to the academic conversation so it is difficult to see how the work of others could add to, and strengthen, their own writing, and therefore why it matters and why it should be properly acknowledged.

We should strive to get the students excited about their work, make them aware that they are improving their writing skills (a skill they will use beyond college), and make them feel that their writing matters to the academic community they are in. I think that detailed and specific feedback could be one of the first steps to consider.

Based on the queries we see in the Writing Centre, I think there are a few things we might consider:

• How do we offer proper instruction on academic integrity for all new students, organised in one centralised place, with a possibility of ongoing training
• How do we make sure all students are aware of UCD referencing guides
• How do we ensure our feedback is helpful and offers clear guidelines for improvement
• How do we make students excited about writing
• How do we change the culture around academic integrity so that it is perceived as a necessary and logical part of learning, something that all academic communities practice
• How do we make academic integrity less allusive and more ‘present’ everywhere (e.g. through student involvement, short videos/posters/visual reminders, discussions in class…) so that it is embraced simply as one part of university life, from the moment students start their studies in UCD