MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800079115 · doi:10.11575/prism/5479

Understanding Faculty Perceptions and Approaches to Academic Integrity in a Canadian School of Education

2018· article· en· W2800079115 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah Elaine Eaton, Stefan Rothschuh, Cristina Fernández Conde, Melanie Guglielmin, Benedict Kojo Otoo, Jenny L. Wilson, Ian Burns

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAcademic integrity and plagiarism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcademic integrityHigher educationPerceptionPedagogyMathematics educationMedical educationEngineering ethicsPsychologySociologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schools of education are in a unique position to foster a culture of academic integrity among pre-service teachers who will go on to careers as K-12 educators. This presentation presents the results of a year-long mixed methods study to understand the perceptions and approaches to academic integrity taken by academic staff in a Canadian school of education. Participants (N = 38) included tenured, tenure-track and contract faculty at a variety of ranks and positions. Findings revealed that faculty had different perceptions on how cases of academic misconduct should be addressed, but had little awareness of how to prepare pre-service teachers as future mentors when it comes to cultivating academic integrity among their own future K-12 students.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0490.017
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.464
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.038 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicAcademic integrity and plagiarismFrench-language works237,207