Plagiarism is a familiar concept to the general public and in academia, but research suggests that college students lack specific knowledge of what constitutes unintentional plagiarism, also known as patchwriting (Howard, 1995; Roig, 1997; McCabe, Butterfield, & Trevino, 2012). Patchwriting refers to “passages that are not copied exactly but that have nevertheless been borrowed from another source, with some changes” (Howard, 1995, p. 799). Scholars argue that many students entering university have not developed strong skills in citing and referencing. This may be because traditional education systems often emphasize tests and lectures over writing assessments.

Research in Puerto Rico

In the Puerto Rican context, the problem of academic dishonesty has been thoroughly studied mostly by professors María del R. Medina-Díaz and Ada L. Verdejo-Carrión. The authors conducted a study with undergraduate students at the University of Puerto Rico, Río Piedras Campus, in which “55% admitted that they had copied material without citing it in a footnote more than once. Four out of ten reported that they had done the same in high school” (Medina & Verdejo, 2011, p. 37). Additionally, 47% of the students admitted that they had sometimes added references they had not consulted in the bibliography section. Another study by Medina and Verdejo (2016) highlighted personal and institutional factors related to dishonest acts. Some of the personal factors related to dishonest acts were psychological variables such as “fear of failure, grade orientation and anxiety about performance” (Medina & Verdejo, 2016, p. 4).

In contrast, Vendrell (2012) conducted a study with graduate students at the University of Puerto Rico, Río Piedras. In this case, the author found that 29% of the students admitted that, at least once, they had copied information from the Internet without modifying the text and without giving credit to the author(s). So, although research has been conducted on academic dishonesty among college students in Puerto Rico, few studies have focused on graduate students’ knowledge of unintentional plagiarism in this context.

This research study

The objective of the study reported in this blog was to determine the differences in knowledge about unintentional plagiarism among graduate students (master's and doctoral) at a private higher education institution, the Inter American University, Puerto Rico. An online test with a dichotomous scale (correct or incorrect) was administered to assess students’ knowledge of unintentional plagiarism. The results indicated that knowledge about plagiarism among all participating graduate students was poor, with an overall average score of 43%.

Both groups scored poorly, but the master's students had relatively higher scores than the doctoral students. The master's group scored 46% on knowledge about unintentional plagiarism, while the doctoral group scored 41%. One of the statements on the questionnaire asked graduate students: “Replacing some words in a published work with synonyms and presenting them as your own ideas is not considered plagiarism.” Only 4% of doctoral students, compared to 21% of master's students, correctly identified this behavior as plagiarism.

The study found that although the majority of graduate students (98%) know that engaging in prototypical plagiarism (Pecorari, 2003) (commonly known as copy-and-paste plagiarism) is considered plagiarism; however, most fail to recognize other types of plagiarism, such as patchwriting. While blatant academic dishonesty has been increasing in recent years, subtle plagiarism, such as unintentional plagiarism, is also becoming a widespread issue in the educational system (Tran, Hogg and Marshall, 2022).

The study also assessed graduate students’ knowledge of academic citation standards based on the American Psychological Association (Seventh Edition) guidelines, specifically exploring their knowledge of paraphrasing and citation rules. The results are significant because they reveal that even graduate students have weaknesses in the academic writing process, particularly in citation practices. The study includes material for a graduate-level seminar course focused on writing and publishing research articles to promote academic writing and citation standards. This material is essential for academic institutions; as Witherspoon, Maldonado, and Lacey (2010) argued, educators often mistakenly assume that graduate students already possess the necessary knowledge for academic writing. The findings of the study will be widely disseminated through a series of conferences and published in a book, currently being edited, starting in January 2025.

Howard, R. (1995). Plagiarism, authorship, and the academic death penalty. College English, 57(7), 788-806.
McCabe, D., Butterfield, K. & Treviño, L. (2012). Cheating in college why students do it and what educators can do about it. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Medina, M. y Verdejo, A. (2011). El plagio como deshonestidad académica estudiantil. Pedagogía, 45(1), 29-58. https://revistas.upr.edu/index.php/educacion/article/view/16497/14051
Medina, M. y Verdejo, A. (2016). Una mirada a la deshonestidad académica y el plagio estudiantil en algunas universidades en siete países de América Latina. Paper presented at the Educación Superior, Innovación e Internalización Conference: La situación de la Educación Superior virtual en América y el Caribe.
Pecorari, D. (2003). Good and original: Plagiarism and patchwriting in academic second-language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(4), pp.317-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2003.08.004.
Roig, M. (1997). Can undergraduate students determine whether text has been plagiarized? The Psychology Records, 47, 113-122. Doi:10.1007/BF03395215
Tran, M.N., Hogg, L. & Marshall, S. (2022). Understanding postgraduate students’ perceptions of plagiarism: a case study of Vietnamese and local students in New Zealand. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 18(3) https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-021-00098-2"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-021-00098-2
Vendrel, L. (2012). La honestidad académica estudiantil en los estudiantes graduados de la Facultad de Educación en la Universidad de Puerto Rico Río Piedras. [Unpublished Master dissertation]. Universidad de Puerto Rico.
Witherspoon, M., Maldonado, N., & Lacey, C. (2010). Academic Dishonesty of Undergraduates: Methods of Cheating. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Denver, Colorado.


The author's views are their own.

Thank you for being a member of ICAI. Not a member of ICAI yet? Check out the benefits of membership at https://academicintegrity.org/about/member-benefits and consider joining us by contacting . Be part of something great!

So many of the discussions surrounding academic integrity and generative AI have focused on the implications for teaching, education and learning. My experience is that proficient users of systems like ChatGPT can do so much more than generate academic-sounding text. Academics and students alike can use this to complete research studies, bringing in opportunities for increased productivity, but also raising research integrity risks.

As part of a presentation that I first gave at the ICAI Conference 2024 (and again as part of Steph Allen’s Academic Integrity Speaker Series), I shared several unpublished academic integrity research studies I’d completed using generative AI as an acknowledged aid. The techniques used, of course, can easily be extended to other research fields.

In this blog post, I want to share just a few brief ideas and examples of how ChatGPT (and other similar systems) can be used during the research process. Depending on the approach of those conducting the research and how they acknowledge generative AI, such research could be argued to be completed with or without integrity.

Generating Ideas
I asked ChatGPT to generate ideas for original academic integrity research, which ideally could be completed with as little human intervention as possible, perhaps using hypothetical data.
· Assessing the impact of mindfulness training on academic integrity
· Analysing the linguistic patterns of retracted papers for academic misconduct
· Exploring the relationship between academic integrity and emotional intelligence
· Modelling the impact of academic integrity policies on institutional reputation
Do feel free to explore these ideas.

Here's an interesting example of generative AI produced research which suggests a correlation between preferences for pizza toppings and academic conduct behaviour:

Pizza Slide Thomas

Making Recommendations
Using the idea that it is developing synthetic data for an agent-based simulation, ChatGPT happily came up with the contents for a research paper for the final one of the four listed ideas above. I will fast forward to the simulated recommendations and conclusions to improve institutional reputation.
· Prioritise strict academic integrity policies
· Ensure consistent enforcement
· Promote awareness campaigns
· Provide support resources
· Address departmental and course-level variations
· Foster positive interactions between students, faculty, and administrators
Within the confines of a structured and argued academic paper, these all sound reasonable, although the focus on strict policies and enforcement is likely different to how I would choose to present an academic integrity paper.

Analysing Data
I took the data from a paper published with Benjamin Dent, a previous undergraduate student partner (Lancaster and Dent, 2022). This looked at contract cheating of written assignments seen on a popular freelancing website. I asked ChatGPT to clean up the data, generate research hypotheses and conduct appropriate statistical tests, with as little intervention as possible. The results were fascinating, not least because ChatGPT determined that investigating how freelancers should price writing services would be a publishable paper, even if this was rather different to our original intent.

What does all this mean? Based on a Tukey's Honest Significant Difference (HSD) test (Tukey, 1949), academic writers who say they’re from Turkey have to charge significantly less than writers from the United States. If you want to specialise in high paid academic writing tasks, you should look for customers from Australia, Egypt, Ghana, Indonesia, Netherlands, Norway, Qatar, Singapore, Thailand, UAE and the United States. There is a whole other paper waiting, which, were the data not now rather dated, it would be interesting to formally write up.

The Future?
Generative AI systems continue to advance. The introduction of GPT-4o and the movement of previously paid functionality to the free tier of ChatGPT puts advanced capabilities in the hands of more people than before. Other competitor systems are available.

I have many more examples of how I’ve used ChatGPT and other generative AI systems as part of the research process, including small-scale case studies I’ve produced exclusively for my Academic Integrity in STEMM undergraduate research module. Access to generative AI can make coming up with ideas, processing data, and generative example paper content easy.

A smart researcher, someone with an understanding of their subject area, able to identify the most appropriate tools, to write prompts and direct a system, can become a hyper-productive researcher if they choose to do so.
But one question has to be asked. Should we do this?

I do think we owe it to our students to be aware of what generative AI can do and how to use systems like ChatGPT productively. This means leading by example and ensuring that everyone can do more with ChatGPT than just producing text. But this means extending the academic integrity discussion beyond just trying to stop the use of generative AI. I’m not sure how ready the wider educational community is to do this.

Lancaster, T., Dent, B. (2022). Academic Ghost Writing and Commercial Contract Cheating Provision on a Freelancing Website. In: Bjelobaba, S., Foltýnek, T., Glendinning, I., Krásničan, V., Dlabolová, D.H. (eds) Academic Integrity: Broadening Practices, Technologies, and the Role of Students. Ethics and Integrity in Educational Contexts, vol 4. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16976-2_17
Tukey, J. W. (1949). Comparing Individual Means in the Analysis of Variance. Biometrics, 5(2), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.2307/3001913



 Thank you for being a member of ICAI. Not a member of ICAI yet? Check out the benefits of membership at https://academicintegrity.org/about/member-benefits and consider joining us by contacting . Be part of something great!

Se dice habitualmente que “las palabras mueven, pero el ejemplo arrastra”. Soy un convencido de que esta frase es verdad, especialmente cuando hablamos de valores, moral e integridad. Sin embargo, muchas veces hacemos mucho hincapié en como detectar situaciones o comportamientos de falta de integridad. O trabajamos, en las distintas universidades, en como impulsar la denuncia por parte de los estudiantes y crear una cultura de integridad. Todo esto está bien y claro que hay que seguir haciéndolo. Aún así, poco ponemos el foco en fomentar la integridad y responsabilidad en los docentes.

Asumimos que por el hecho de ser docentes ya van a ser íntegros, responsables y honestos, y la mayoría a si lo son y no tengo duda. Además, en las grandes cuestiones éticas tenemos claro cuál debe ser nuestro actuar como docentes. Es decir, todos sabemos que, si un estudiante nos ofrece algo a cambio de modificar una calificación, no es correcto. Ahí no hay dilema, el dilema ético real surge cuando hay que tomar una decisión entre dos opciones aparentemente positivas o que plantean un conflicto de valores.

Por otro lado, como docentes no dejamos de ser objeto de observación por nuestros estudiantes. Para bien o para mal, lo que hacemos o dejamos de hacer, tanto dentro, como fuera del aula, es observado y en algunos casos analizado y juzgado, por los estudiantes que nos observen. De tal modo, que la manera en la que como docentes afrontamos las responsabilidades propias de nuestra labor docente, así como nuestro actuar frente a los casos de falta de integridad de nuestros alumnos, impacta en la cultura de integridad de la institución y en los comportamientos de los estudiantes.

Por ejemplo, según Cabrera-Gala y Cavazos (2023), algunos profesores prefieren no reportar los casos de falta de integridad de los alumnos y resolverlo por su cuenta. Cuando esto se da y si las medidas adoptadas por el maestro no se consideran suficientemente estrictas, da pie a un relajamiento por parte de los estudiantes en cuanto a la honestidad académica.

Por otro lado, Casado et al. (2018) consideran qué “Es necesario fomentar en los estudiantes la cultura del esfuerzo, del rigor científico, de la curiosidad intelectual, de la participación en la vida académica y en la sociedad, y del respeto propio y ajeno” (p. 49). Pero ninguna de las acciones que implementemos tendrá éxito si no somos los propios docentes quiénes vivimos esa cultura de esfuerzo, rigor y curiosidad. DiPaulo (2022) recoge como “Anderman et al. (2010) encontraron que cuando los estudiantes percibieron al profesor como creíble, esta variable redujo significativamente el compromiso impulsivo de los estudiantes en la deshonestidad académica” (p. 3).

Por tanto, como docentes debemos reflexionar sobre nuestro actuar profesional en las distintas dimensiones y roles que tenemos dentro de la Universidad y fomentar una cultura de ética profesional y responsabilidad.

Cabrera-Gala, R. y Cavazos, J. (2023). La integridad académica del profesor: el camino hacia una reputación positiva (17). A&H, Revista de Artes, Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales. 50-82.
Casado, M., Martínez, M., Neves, M.do C. P., Ayuste, A., Badia, A., Buxarrais, M. R., Carrio, A., Corcoy, M., Esteban, F., Font, A., Gual, A., Gómez, S., Hogan, P., Lecuona, I. de, Leyton, F., López Baroni, M.J., Marfany, G., Payà, M., Puig, J.M., Radeva, P., Román, B., Royes, A., Santaló, J., Tey, A., Trilla, J., & Viader, M. (2018). Declaración sobre ética e integridad en la docencia universitaria. FEM: Revista de la Fundación Educación Médica, 21(2), 65-74. https://dx.doi.org/10.33588/fem.212.941
DiPaulo, D. (2022) Do preservice teachers cheat in college, too? A quantitative study of academic integrity among preservice teachers. International Journal for Educational Integrity 18, 2 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-021-00097-3
Universidad de Deusto (2022). ¿Qué es un dilema ético? | Ejemplo con un coche autónomo. Universidad de Deusto, Disponible a https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgIkHfouAsw



Gracias por ser miembro de ICAI. ¿Aún no eres miembro de ICAI? Consulte los beneficios de la membresía en https://academicintegrity.org/about/member-benefits y considere unirse a nosotros comunicándose con . ¡Se parte de algo genial!

The following blog will discuss the research I conducted regarding student cheating behaviors at Humber College. I had selected this topic for a variety of reasons, but I was most interested in revealing the impact of COVID-19 and the increase in online learning on the student body at Humber. I was also hoping to uncover how students having limited control over their own work impacted engagement in cheating. For instance, I had theorized that assessment types like online quizzes contribute to cheating behaviors by preventing students from engaging in meaningful and creative work.

Existing Data
As predicted, existing data containing themes of online learning did not favor online teaching styles for various reasons. Lee and Choi (2013), state that online learning resulted in higher numbers of post-secondary student dropout rates. This depicts that students are struggling with online teaching platforms, which potentially results in students engaging in cheating behaviors in order to succeed. Other research by Chet, Sok and Sou (2022) argues that online learning decreases student learning experience, “with around 60% of students stating that online learning hindered their studies”. This further proves that online learning results in lower quality education, which could result in students turning to cheating as a way to maintain grades.

In terms of my personal research, one of the most compelling pieces of data I collected is something that I discovered during one of my student interviews: it was considered more socially acceptable for students to cheat on certain assessment types, as opposed to others. Upon discussing this finding with my thesis class, I created a pyramid diagram, or hierarchy, depicting what assessment type students are most likely to cheat on. I have coined this diagram ‘The Hierarchy of Academic Misconduct’. The most likely to cheat was at the bottom of the hierarchy and the least was at the top. On either side of each section of the diagram, arms can be seen. One of these arms depicts the year that is most/least likely to cheat on the corresponding assessment, with the other representing the level of student control over their own work.

Essentially the hierarchy argues that as the year of the student and level of control over student work increases, the risk of students cheating decreases. As stated above, the more control students have over their work, the less likely they will be to engage in cheating behaviors. When the student is in control, this results in students taking greater care and interest in their work. When students participate in an online quiz, they have no interest or care in the work. This is because these online quizzes do not allow for students to engage in creative and meaningful work. With assessments such as a fourth year thesis, the student will not want to risk tarnishing the work that they not only focused their interest in, but also used their creative energy for. With that being said and regardless of the assessment type, it is highly important that Humber faculty follows through with punishments on any student who is caught engaging in cheating. Otherwise, what are students being taught? That it is acceptable to cheat on certain assessment types and not on others.

Possible Solutions
With the creation of the hierarchy and the findings from it, several recommendations to Humber College can be made. These recommendations include a change in policy, to ensure both consistency amongst faculty and the removal of all online quizzes for assessment. A second recommendation would be the implementation of a specialized course. This course would educate first year Humber students on the harms of academic dishonesty and the importance of academic integrity. By incorporating this type of course, students will gain a greater understanding on these subjects while understanding that Humber takes academic misconduct seriously. Thirdly, professors should serve as moderators on online group chats. This will allow for professors to monitor the group chat, while making it easier for students to report cheating behaviors. Lastly, if Humber College wishes to combat cheating, it would be important for them to continue research on this subject, while using the hierarchy as a reference. It is clear that based on the existing data, online learning is in fact a contributor to cheating behaviors. Therefore, if Humber College wishes to minimize cheating, my recommendations should be considered.

Lee, Y., & Choi, J. (2013). A structural equation model of predictors of online learning retention. The Internet and Higher Education, 16, 36-42.

Chet, C., Sok, S., & Sou, V. (2022). The Antecedents and Consequences of Study Commitment to Online Learning at Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) in Cambodia. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 14(6), 3184-. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063184



Note: This blog post was authored by a student. ICAI takes pride in highlighting student voices as students are a key stakeholder in higher education and the promotion of academic integrity. ICAI does not endorse or advocate for any position or statement made.

Thank you for being a member of ICAI. Not a member of ICAI yet? Check out the benefits of membership at https://academicintegrity.org/about/member-benefits and consider joining us by contacting . Be part of something great!

Last week I participated in an academic integrity panel entitled ‘Navigating academic integrity in the age of breakthrough technologies’. It aimed to be an event to bring together experts from Higher Education and technology (represented through Turnitin staff) to explore how to collectively address current challenges in Higher Education with academic integrity. The other panel members were Tricia Bertram Gallant (who of course needs no introductions to ICAI members!), Leslie Layne (University of Lynchburg, USA), Viatcheslav (Slava) Dmitriev (Rennes School of Business, France) and Patti West-Smith (Turnitin). In this blog, I am going to reflect on some of my takeaways.

My first contribution to the panel discussion was to say that we needed to celebrate this moment of academic integrity. I was looking at the participant numbers which had rocketed up to almost 700! Having worked in academic integrity for 20 years, I am aware that academic integrity events previously did not generate this level of interest, and feel very excited that they now do. I thanked participants and felt it was a moment to take stock of this surge of popularity, with an audience both widespread and eager to engage in academic integrity debate (based on the 50+ questions and comments from participants in many varied global locations).

Responsible use
Of course, the driver for popularity here is the focus on academic integrity AND artificial intelligence (AI). We began by debating ways to ensure students’ responsible use of AI tools while safeguarding academic standards. There were several comments about tools; I commented that our guidance to students should focus on their practices with tools, rather than putting tools into good and bad lists. I gave the example of an institutional course I have developed to guide students with ethical decision making using a traffic light model to distinguish between practices with AI tools that are ok (green), not ok (red) and those that need to be checked (amber), thus offering students a means of navigating AI responsibly with a universally understood symbol.

Writing in the age of AI
There was some contention in our debate on student writing in the age of AI. Slava declared that writing has become an ‘obsolete competency’, given the widespread student use of AI tools for writing. Tricia argued that writing remains a skill we want students to develop for the long term, within a set of ‘durable human skills’ of communication, empathy and interpersonal skills. Tricia also made the point that in secure testing conditions, writing can still be assessed appropriately. I agreed with the importance of still developing these human skills and that in some ways, the emergence of widespread AI has encouraged staff and students to value a closer human relationship with meaningful interactions.

Support for educators
We discussed how educators (faculty/academic staff) could be supported in adapting to the integration of AI into teaching and assessment. We all recognized this is a considerable challenge. I made the point that students, as much younger and more technologically informed, are likely to be much more advanced in their practices and knowledge of AI than educators. Leslie shared that there were huge challenges for educators at their institution with many not knowing what to do with new expectations at every level, including lack of knowledge about whether student use of AI constituted an academic conduct breach. Patti revealed that many queries from educators to Turnitin requested support with decisions about appropriate or inappropriate use of AI. Tricia reminded us that a further issue is that many faculty members may be experts in their academic field but not be trained to teach, therefore grappling with these decisions is especially problematic. I added that it is important to bring the focus back to education by moving away from trying to detect AI use or misuse, and moving back to trying to detect knowledge and whether students are meeting the learning outcomes. This is likely to mean changes to assessment, but assessment must be fit for purpose and appropriate for our current context. Slava mentioned that changes to assessment did not need to present excessive challenges and could be relatively easy for those who embraced technology as early adopters – who could be in any discipline, not necessarily in computer science. We all agreed that educators, whatever their discipline, are recommended to engage in AI, and institutions need to support the AI literacy development not just of students but also educators.

Regulatory frameworks
We ended the panel discussion with some consideration about how institutions may use centrally produced guidance from sector regulatory bodies. In the UK, QAA (Quality Assurance Agency) have been highly active in producing useful guidance for the sector. Similarly TEQSA (Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency) in Australia have extensive guidance. I also recommended the UNESCO international framework for AI which is useful for guidance in any context, especially for a focus on human rights and diversity and inclusion in relation to AI. Overall, I concluded that debates about academic integrity and AI are really beneficial for a community sharing approach.



Thank you for being a member of ICAI. Not a member of ICAI yet? Check out the benefits of membership at https://academicintegrity.org/about/member-benefits and consider joining us by contacting . Be part of something great!

This blog describes how I incorporated Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools into student empirical projects emphasizing academic integrity. In my Econometrics class that I teach to sixth-semester economics students at the University of Monterrey, I designed an activity to solve practical problems and communicate results using AI.

AI Predictive Modeling Projects Emphasizing Academic Integrity
In economics, an empirical project entails producing research with observable and verifiable information. Three examples of empirical projects are 1) the evolution of pollution in Monterrey and Mexico City, Mexico, from 1990-2022; 2) co-movements in the price of steel and copper over time; and 3) predicting the share price of a particular company. This information can come from a database, a survey, or an experiment. Since the course involves time series, the data are observations of one or more variables over time; this information is helpful to study facts over a period, make predictions, and develop public policies in the short, medium, or long terms to solve a problem in a region or country.
The class project involved researching economics or finance topics, socio-demographics, or environmental issues in Mexico or any other country; the objective is to attempt to answer a question using actual data. The study was carried out in three stages following the general structure described by Wooldridge (2015):
1. Phase 1. The topic is chosen, the problem to be solved is defined, and the research question is posed.
2. Phase 2. Students use econometric software to program databases, create variables, make statistics, estimate econometric models or predictions.
3. Phase 3. Presentation of results.
The work was carried out in teams using project-based learning methodology.

Method: How can we use AI tools in empirical economics projects?
Since the course involves learning data processing, applying statistical and econometric techniques, model estimation, and predicting variables, the students must learn to program using econometric software. The course teaches students how to program using specific software (Stata). Throughout the semester, they learn various programming codes that allow them to execute tasks such as graphing, performing descriptive statistics, estimating a model, and predicting variables. However, in the research process, students confront actual data and encounter challenges that require additional codes. Searching for programming codes using traditional search engines can take time and only sometimes results in finding the required information. Students sometimes need help using econometric software due to the nature of the data, choice of model to estimate or the variables to predict. Therefore, using GenAI tools for programming could mitigate these difficulties (IBM Education, 2023). Observing this potential to address the problems raised, I suggested the following tools which can help with information searching, saving time, and producing content variety when editing and generating codes:
Elicit: an AI tool used to search for relevant scientific articles and analyze them.
Perplexity: a chatbot that answers questions and can search for information on specific topics, summarize, and produce programming codes.
ChatGPT: like Perplexity, an AI tool that answers questions, generates text, and automates specific tasks.
AIcyclopedia: a directory of AI tools that suggest which can be used to suit the user’s needs.
I allowed the students to use additional AI tools if they informed me.
To observe students’ adoption of GenAI with an emphasis on academic integrity, I designed a form to track the AI tools students used in my class. If they used GenAI, they had to complete the form when submitting the final manuscript.

In addition to the tracking format, I designed three educational resources (detailed below) to inform students about what was expected in each deliverable and introduced AI tools.
1. I showed students how to pose a research question with and without the tools and how to search for a research topic. Using Perplexity AI, the students had to answer, “What can be investigated in Mexico using time series techniques?” The tool gave a series of results, and from there, the students oriented their search according to their interests.
2. I presented students with an example of how to write the empirical project methodology. Additionally, to broaden their understanding, they used ChatGPT or Perplexity AI to write the method for an empirical project related to time series.
3. I showed students how to search for and edit ChatGPT and Perplexity AI programming codes. It minimized search times and improved the information output.

Having adopted and used the tools, the students were both open and cautious about GenAI at the end of the course. Some teams mentioned that although the tools were helpful, they had to maintain critical thinking regarding their use. Some teams said that searching for reliable information motivated them to use the tools.
Moreover, the AI tools suggested some articles for the literature review that students could not find using traditional search tools. These suggestions led them to search for the articles in the university library databases. The AI tools could motivate students to improve their information searches using reliable sources, thus elevating the quality of the literature review and the discussion of the results. However, some stated they could not access the articles suggested by the tools because “many papers were private,” so they had to look for them in the library. Concerning the programming codes, the students indicated that AI saved them time and resolved several of their concerns.

Currie, G. M. (2023, May). Academic integrity and artificial intelligence: is ChatGPT hype, hero, or heresy? In Seminars in Nuclear Medicine. WB Saunders. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2023.04.00
IBM Education (2023). AI code-generation software: What it is and how it works. https://www.ibm.com/blog/ai-code-generation/
Moya, B., Eaton, S. E., Pethrick, H., Hayden, K. A., Brennan, R., Wiens, J., McDermott, B., & Lesage, J. (2023). Academic Integrity and Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education Contexts: A Rapid Scoping Review Protocol. Canadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity, 5(2), 59–75. https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/ai/article/view/75990
Ta, R & D. West. (2023) Should schools ban or integrate GenAI in the classroom? The Brooking Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/should-schools-ban-or-integrate-generative-ai-in-the-classroom/
Wooldridge, J. M. (2015). Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach. 6th ed.
Based on a publication in Observatorio del Instituto para el Futuro de la Educación del Tec de Monterrey https://observatory.tec.mx/edu-bits-2/how-to-address-academic-integrity-in-practical-projects-using-ai/



Thank you for being a member of ICAI. Not a member of ICAI yet? Check out the benefits of membership at https://academicintegrity.org/about/member-benefits and consider joining us by contacting . Be part of something great!

A culture of academic integrity and sustainable change are achieved by designing and implementing effective policies (Morris, 2016) which are blueprint documents reflecting institutional perspectives to establish a culture of academic integrity. Policies should be carefully developed and implemented with the collaboration of all stakeholders. Policy deficiencies can be seen as a threat to the realization of academic integrity and accordingly, to the quality of educational outcomes. Although most policies focus on detection and reaction to academic misconduct, they are expected to prioritize the deterrence of any misconduct for creating and maintaining a sustainable culture of academic integrity.

Academic integrity is best achieved by the cooperation and the active participation of all stakeholders in an institution. An effective decision-making process involves learning from one’s past experiences and learning from others’ experiences. Relevant to this goal, the "Facing Academic Integrity Threats (FAITH) Project" (Erasmus+ Cooperation partnerships in higher education) brings transnational partners together to have a more robust decision-making process. The three-year project is coordinated by Dr. Salim Razı of Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University Centre for Academic Integrity (COMU CAI) and co-funded by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union, Turkish National Agency; where the European Network for Academic Integrity (Czechia), University of Konstanz (Germany), University of Maribor (Slovenia), and University of Porto (Portugal) are its partners.

The three project results of the FAITH deal with (PR1) policy for good practice by establishing minimum standards for academic integrity in higher education institutions, (PR2) proactive approach to prevent academic misconduct through the help of pedagogical materials, and (PR3) support for victims of academic misconduct via an interactive web portal to promote a culture of academic integrity. The project also deals with the ethical implementation of GenAI from both policy and pedagogy perspectives.

The FAITH Conference, to be hosted by COMU CAI which plays a pivotal role in advancing academic integrity across Türkiye and beyond, is a multiplier event of the project. It will take place from the 5th to the 7th of August 2024 in Çanakkale, Türkiye. The conference mainly aims to highlight innovative research and practical applications that support the establishment of minimum standards for academic integrity in higher education institutions by presenting the results from the FAITH project. The three keynote speakers, namely Professor Mary Davis, Dr. Sarah Elaine Eaton, and Dr. Zeenath Reza Khan, as experts of academic integrity out of the FAITH consortium, will bring their own perspectives to the interpretation of the project results. The conference will also provide a platform for other academic integrity researchers to present their studies.

Çanakkale is steeped in history, most notably for its proximity to the ancient city of Troy and its significant role during the Gallipoli campaign in World War I. Like Istanbul, Çanakkale also connects the two main continents of Europe and Asia to one another via the 1915 Çanakkale Bridge, holding the record of having the longest mid-span suspension bridge which was opened at the same time as the official start of the FAITH project in 2022. Inspired from the bridge, the FAITH consortium has aimed to transfer the project results with the rest of the world, especially in the regions where integrity is much needed. Therefore, in our call for the conference, we specifically invite delegates from all over the world and believe that our gathering in Çanakkale will mark a historic moment in the calendars of academic integrity community members. Registration for the FAITH Conference is open to both presenters and listeners until the 31st of May, and free of charge for all participants. To secure your spot at the conference, please register via our webpage.

Morris, E. (2016). Academic integrity policy and practice: Introduction. In T. Bretag (Ed.), Handbook of academic integrity (pp. 409-411). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_79-1

Salim Razı, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Türkiye



Thank you for being a member of ICAI. Not a member of ICAI yet? Check out the benefits of membership at https://academicintegrity.org/about/member-benefits and consider joining us by contacting . Be part of something great!

Academic integrity in Zambia is generally viewed as essential for maintaining standards and ensuring fairness in education. It is upheld as a cornerstone of the education system, emphasizing honesty, originality, and ethical behavior among students, educators, and researchers. Educational institutions such as assessment bodies and universities often have strict policies and procedures in place to prevent and address academic misconduct. These policies are typically enforced by institutions themselves through academic honesty codes, disciplinary measures, and educational initiatives aimed at promoting awareness.

Additionally, the Ministry of Education collaborates with these institutions to ensure that standards are maintained and students receive a quality education grounded in ethical values. Despite efforts to uphold academic integrity, challenges such as limited resources, cultural attitudes toward cheating, and the increasing availability of online resources may require ongoing vigilance and adaptation of strategies to preserve the integrity of Zambia's education system. The guidelines on plagiarism, cheating, falsification of data, collusion, and unethical research practices are crucial aspects of maintaining a fair and ethical learning environment at my institution, the University of Zambia (UNZA).

At UNZA, students are expected to submit original work and properly cite to avoid plagiarism. Lecturers often orient students on use of properly recognized citation styles. But sometimes a student will still submit an essay without properly citing sources, an act considered plagiarism. I recall very well during my undergraduate studies at UNZA how a course mate could organise ideas into a very catchy essay with properly cited wrong authors. He always scored above 90% on evaluation of his work despite it containing plagiarism. Implementing plagiarism detection software could help identify instances of plagiarism more effectively, deterring students from engaging in academic dishonesty.

The University of Zambia upholds strict regulations regarding cheating during exams. For instance, in 2018 examinations “UNZA disqualified 12 students who were caught cheating with unauthorized materials disguised on their smartphones” (Lusaka Times, 2018). Contract cheating is common at the institution too, more especially in assignment writing during the distance residential schools. You would walk into the university and see how adverts for assignment writing are indiscriminately posted on trees, walls, and notice boards. If this vice did not exist, those who continued to advertise would be discouraged from doing so and the trend could have died naturally. In order to address the issue of contract cheating, especially during distance residential schools, it would require proactive measures such as monitoring and enforcement of policies against advertisement of assignment writing services.

Another problem is sex-for-grades lecturer-student affairs which might have not been reported at the institution before but have made headlines at the country’s second largest public university, Copperbelt University (Lusaka Times, 2023). It is not common that male lecturers would report acts of sexual inducement by female students, but might give good grades for knowledge and skills not earned. Addressing cases of sexual misconduct, including "sex-for-grades" incidents, necessitates a supportive reporting mechanism and decisive action against perpetrators to create a safer learning environment.

In research-oriented disciplines at UNZA, students and faculty members are expected to uphold high standards of research integrity, respect for human subjects, and adherence to ethical principles. So, research must pass through the Directorate of Research and Graduate Studies at proposal level for ethical clearance before it is carried out. Besides, peer review processes and institutional oversight are put in place as mechanisms for detecting and preventing falsification of data in research projects. While collaboration is encouraged for group assignments, clear guidelines should be provided to ensure that students understand the boundaries between collaboration and collusion, and to prevent unintentional breaches of academic integrity.

In summary, matters of academic integrity are highly relevant to the University of Zambia and are enforced through clear policies, guidelines, and disciplinary measures. Upholding these principles ensures fairness, honesty, and accountability within the academic community at UNZA.

Lusaka Times (2018). Cheating among university students worry Zanasu. Available at https://www.lusakatimes.com/2018/12/17/cheating-among-university-students-worry-zanasu/

Lusaka Times (2023). CBU lecturer nabbed for sexual gratification. Available at https://www.lusakatimes.com/2023/10/06/cbu-lecturer-nabbed-for-sexual-gratification/



Thank you for being a member of ICAI. Not a member of ICAI yet? Check out the benefits of membership at https://academicintegrity.org/about/member-benefits and consider joining us by contacting . Be part of something great!

Desde su fundación, el objetivo del Tecnológico de Monterrey es formar líderes capaces de enfrentar con éxito y con valores los retos a los que se enfrentarán a lo largo de su vida para generar un impacto positivo que permee al resto de la comunidad. Con este propósito en mente, toda la comunidad educativa, esto es: estudiantes, profesores, directivos, colaboradores y padres de familia, está llamada a poner en práctica los valores de Innovación, Integridad, Colaboración, Empatía e inclusión y Ciudadanía global, valores que caracterizan nuestra Institución y son la brújula que nos orienta para ejercer un liderazgo con integridad, siempre respetando la dignidad de las personas.

Para fortalecer el valor institucional de Integridad, en agosto de 2017 se lanzó oficialmente el Programa de Integridad Académica, pero ¿cómo se llegó a configurar este programa?

En el pasado, existía el programa de Deshonestidad Académica; sin embargo, se tenía la necesidad de cambiar la narrativa y dejar de hablar de deshonestidad para poner el foco en cómo alcanzar metas personales y profesionales con honestidad, confianza, justicia, respeto, responsabilidad y valentía, que son los valores fundamentales del ICAI. Es por ello que, en 2017, este programa evolucionó para convertirse en el Programa de Integridad Académica, con el objetivo de promover una cultura de integridad en los procesos de enseñanza-aprendizaje y reforzar nuestro compromiso con la excelencia académica.

Esto implicó modificar el reglamento académico para:
1. Empoderar al profesor. Esto significa, respaldar su decisión de reportar una falta a la integridad académica, de manera que no se ponga en tela de duda o se invalide el reporte o que se cuestione la calificación reprobatoria que el profesor aplica en la actividad donde se reporta dicha falta.
2. Establecer un proceso de gestión de las faltas a la integridad académica para brindar atención a los estudiantes reportados, buscando que puedan aprender de sus errores, al mismo tiempo que se aplica y se cumple el reglamento académico de la Institución.
3. Formar Comités de Integridad Académica de Campus y Nacional en los 25 campus que conforman nuestra Institución para atender y dar seguimiento a estudiantes que han cometido faltas.

Una vez establecidos estos cambios, el programa se conformó de dos dimensiones:
1. Dimensión formativa. Lleva a cabo acciones de concientización y formación en integridad académica. El rol que apoya estas actividades dentro del programa es el Embajador de Integridad Académica: profesores que fungen como voceros y asesores del programa en los campus. Realizan acciones de sensibilización, dinamización y prevención de faltas a la integridad académica con la comunidad Tec y trabajan de la mano con los Comités de Integridad Académica de Campus (CIAC) para orientar las medidas formativas asignadas a estudiantes que cometen faltas a la integridad académica. Actualmente contamos con 24 embajadores.
2. Dimensión de gestión. Define los estándares de operación del programa y atiende y da seguimiento a las faltas a la integridad académica. Los profesores que realizan esta labor forman parte del Comité de Integridad Académica de Campus (CIAC) y Nacional (CIAN).
a. Los Comités de Integridad Académica de Campus (CIAC) son grupos de docentes y colaboradores responsables de analizar y deliberar sobre los casos de faltas a la integridad académica que les son notificados. Asimismo, determinan las consecuencias aplicables para los estudiantes que incurren en faltas a la integridad, asegurando en todo momento que estas sean de carácter formativo. Actualmente contamos con 220 profesores que forman parte de 32 Comités de Integridad Académica de Campus (CIAC).
b. El Comité de Integridad Académica Nacional (CIAN) es el órgano encargado de analizar y resolver los casos de apelación que presenten los estudiantes que han incurrido en faltas a la integridad académica y que han sido sancionados con una suspensión temporal o baja definitiva.

En el esfuerzo por promover la integridad en nuestra comunidad educativa, se han realizado acciones enfocadas en la capacitación (cursos, talleres, charlas) y concientización (eventos, dinámicas con estudiantes, campaña de comunicación).

Estudiantes y profesores toman un curso de introducción al programa en el que aprenden sobre la importancia de la integridad para el aprendizaje. En 2024, 12,000 estudiantes y +7,000 profesores han tomado este curso.

Cada año, desde el 2019, formamos parte del Día Internacional de Acción por la Integridad Académica, en el que hemos logrado involucrar +800 estudiantes tanto en concursos como en charlas y paneles sobre cómo viven la integridad en clase.

Desde el 1 de enero de 2024, el Código de Integridad Académica evolucionó y se convirtió en “Mi Compromiso con la Integridad”, una declaración de los valores y los compromisos éticos a los cuales los estudiantes se adhieren como integrantes de la Institución. Dichos valores y compromisos están relacionados no solo con la integridad académica, sino también con otros temas de relevancia, como la dignidad humana, la sostenibilidad y el bienestar de los estudiantes. +30,000 estudiantes han firmado este compromiso a la fecha, pero se continuarán los esfuerzos para lograr que el 100% de nuestros estudiantes firmen su compromiso con la integridad.

En la gestión de faltas, una vez que los estudiantes las han cometido, se ha trabajado para que todos ellos reciban una medida formativa o acompañamiento, y no solamente una sanción. Es así como desde el 2021 a la fecha, casi 900 estudiantes reportados por faltas a la integridad académica han tomado talleres de formación en integridad como medida formativa.

Estos son algunas de las acciones y resultados alcanzados a lo largo de estos años. Ninguno de estas acciones hubiese sido posible sin el apoyo y compromiso de los más de 250 profesores y colaboradores que forman parte del programa de forma voluntaria. Lograr este nivel de compromiso es un reto para cualquier institución educativa; sin embargo, cuando el objetivo es claro, el camino se construye en conjunto, día a día.

El pasado mes de marzo de 2024, en el marco de la Conferencia Anual del International Center for Academic Integrity, el Tecnológico de Monterrey fue reconocido con el premio “Campus de Integridad 2024”, por la labor realizada en el fortalecimiento de una cultura de integridad dentro y fuera de la Institución. Esta distinción nos llena de alegría y orgullo, ya que es el resultado de todo el trabajo descrito en este blog y que toda la comunidad educativa hemos realizado en equipo.

Hacia el fortalecimiento de la integridad, es importante:
• Partir de los valores que definen a la Institución.
• Realizar los ajustes necesarios a los reglamentos y/o políticas para respaldar la integridad.
• Concientizar y educar a la comunidad educativa sobre el tema.
• Realizar actividades y dinámicas que fomenten una cultura de integridad y, sobre todo, que involucren a toda la comunidad.
Es nuestra misión continuar trabajando para fomentar una cultura de integridad académica y responsabilidad en la comunidad educativa, que es necesaria para el éxito a largo plazo de nuestros graduados y de nuestra sociedad.


Gracias por ser miembro de ICAI. ¿Aún no eres miembro de ICAI? Consulte los beneficios de la membresía en https://academicintegrity.org/about/member-benefits y considere unirse a nosotros comunicándose con . ¡Se parte de algo genial!

As students at the American University of Nigeria (AUN), we understand academy integrity as being honest with one's academic tasks. It involves consciously promoting the value in the learning community through awareness drives. The American University of Nigeria has different ways of sensitizing students about academic integrity.

At the beginning of each semester, during orientation week, new students spend time with student volunteers who help them prepare mentally for the expectations of college life. They speak about writing across the curriculum, mandatory writing classes and the written components in each discipline. The new students learn that in a liberal arts institution like ours, communication is essential and that transitioning from high school to university comes with expectations. One is sustaining a culture of academic integrity on and off campus.

During orientation week, the Office of Judicial Affairs meets with new students and explains the Academic Integrity Code, while the Writing Center has a session to promote the related tutorials. When classes begin each semester, the Writing Center also makes presentations in the First Year Experience (FYE) classes to build self-confidence, independent reading, note-taking, and academic writing skills. School-wide policies also encourage students to do the right thing at all times. In addition, student services like the Honor Society, Math Center and Writing Center hold tutorials to support learning during and after school hours. Learning is a process, and the road to mastery means taking small steps to build mastery of requisite skills.

Other measures that promote integrity are course policies discussed with instructors and the support provided by the library staff. Events like the International Day of Action for Academic Integrity also enhance individual and collective efforts as students collaborate with peers globally to exchange ideas which work or discuss measures to strengthen academic integrity on their campuses. These interfaces are an excellent opportunity to promote best practices in academia.

In the digital era, students often face temptations when they have assignments to turn in—these temptations range from contract cheating sites to using free versions of generative AI tools that can churn out responses in seconds. However, while the debate on the accuracy of plagiarism detection tools still rages, the responsible conduct promoted on campus is a good check against adopting academic habits which suppress a student's agency in developing an assignment. Academic misconduct often occurs because of lack of self-confidence, fear of failing, procrastination, poor time management, limited research and undeveloped citation skills. However, adherence to school or departmental policies and participation in tutorials that build communication and academic writing skills can go a long way toward ensuring that students choose the better option when they have assignments.

The International Center for Academic Integrity lists six principles, the fundamental values, associated with academic integrity. They are honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage. Together, they help us remember not to take undue advantage of others and to maintain trust in a healthy environment that sustains honest and responsible learning.

Thank you for being a member of ICAI. Not a member of ICAI yet? Check out the benefits of membership and consider joining us by contacting . Be part of something great.


Note: This blog post was authored by students. ICAI takes pride in highlighting student voices as students are a key stakeholder in higher education and the promotion of academic integrity. ICAI does not endorse or advocate for any position or statement made.