MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411089294 · doi:10.55016/ojs/cpai.v8i3.79408

Toward a Nuanced Understanding: Faculty Barriers to Navigating Academic Integrity Violations

2025· article· en· W4411089294 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAcademic integrity and plagiarism
Canadian institutionsConestoga College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcademic integrityPsychologyResearch integrityEngineering ethicsMedical educationPedagogySocial psychologyMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents the early results of an all-faculty survey conducted at one Ontario Polytechnic institution wherein the focus is on barriers encountered by faculty in the course of navigating and filing academic integrity violations (AIVs). While the general findings corroborate previous work, this research reveals that the number of years a faculty member has taught influences the barriers they experience. These findings have important implications for institutions as they suggest they should consider implementing a more targeted approach to conversations and assurances depending on the number of years a faculty member has taught.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0040.035
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.299 · 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