Administrative Assessment Unit Profile Report

Contact Us

Visiting Scholar - Dr. Tom Tobin

On Wednesday, January 29, in collaboration with the Center for Academic Technology and Support, Faculty Development is pleased to present an opportunity to learn from and discuss pedagogical practices and issues with EIU faculty who are actively engaged in examining teaching and learning in their disciplines.

This spring 2014, our conversation will be sparked by a visiting scholar, Dr. Tom Tobin, who will give an opening talk. Lunch will be provided for faculty who register. Please register here.

For more information, please contact 581-7051 or email facdev@eiu.edu


Tom Tobin, Northeastern Illinois University

 

Biography

Dr. Tom Tobin is the Coordinator of Learning Technologies at the Center for Teaching and Learning, Northeastern Illinois University.        

Tom's work focuses on using technology to extend the reach of higher education beyond its traditional audience. He advocates for the educational rights of people with disabilities and people from disadvantaged backgrounds. Tom serves on the editorial boards of the Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration and the Journal of Interactive Online Learning, and he is a speaker and author in many areas related to distance education, including copyright, evaluation of teaching practice, universal design, academic integrity, and institutional project management.

His research focuses on key areas related to the use of technology to increase access to higher-education:

  • Copyright and Intellectual Property
  • Accessibility and Universal Design
  • Evaluation of Online Teaching
  • Project Management in Higher Education
  • Academic Integrity

 

Schedule

 

Time

Activity

9:30 - 10:00am

Registration

10:00 - 10:15am

Welcome & Introduction

10:15 - 12:00nn

Plenary Talk: Creating A Climate of Academic Integrity on Campus

 

Plenary Talk:

Creating a Climate of Academic Integrity on Campus 

Summary: 

This session 1) addresses the different concerns—and definitions—of “originality” across the units of the higher-education institution; 2) provides a framework for identifying various types of academic-integrity strategies, and for matching those strategies to the needs of instructors, departments, and institutions; and 3) offers examples of each academic-integrity “path,” best practices for each, and practical implementation tips

Workshop Description: 

Instructors and administrators utilize many tactics to help ensure that the work their students perform is conducted under rigorous conditions, and is actually created by or performed by the students themselves. Especially with the rise of online learning, academic integrity has created a business model, with companies like Turnitin and SafeAssign (now part of Blackboard) offering to compare student submissions against large databases of previous student work.

This session first addresses the different concerns—and definitions—of “originality” across the units of the higher-education institution.  For example, liberal-arts disciplines such as English and philosophy place a premium on originality of content, where learners incorporate research materials within an argument largely of their own devising. However, in the sciences, such as biology and chemistry, the goal is originality of design, with experimentation being the area where learners demonstrate originality. In disciplines like education and psychology, academic integrity is measured by originality of method, where learners rely on—and sometimes duplicate—previous inquiries in order to build on the body of knowledge in the discipline.

Next, this session provides a framework for identifying various types of academic-integrity strategies, and for matching those strategies to the needs of instructors, departments, and institutions. The “three paths” mentioned in the title of this session have to do with the three levels of academic-integrity approaches, which cascade into each other:  Trust, Verification, and Observation.

Finally, this session offers examples of each “path,” best practices for each, and practical implementation tips. For instance, at the level of Trust, an example is the academic-integrity statement. The statement is adopted by the institution, and may appear on syllabi, in the directions for assignments, and in the introductory materials for assessments. It is passive—learners are expected to read and abide by the code, but are not required to take any concrete action to acknowledge their acceptance. The best practices for Trust-based policies include publicizing the policy in several ways, asking students to respond to the policy, and “branding” the institution as one that fosters open and trusting dialog with its learners. To implement a Trust-based policy effectively, ensure that instructors, students, and administrators create the wording of the statement together, and that the statement features prominently in student-facing communications, such as the course schedule, institution web site, and learning management system.

Participants in this session should expect to learn to be able to differentiate among the three levels of academic-integrity approaches, create an implementation plan for academic-integrity techniques, and select academic-integrity tools and techniques based on course, program, and institutional needs.