Using a Modified Bookmark Procedure to Help Identify Reasonable Consequences for Academic Integrity Violations
Author(s) -
Kenneth D. Royal,
Jennifer A. Neel,
Karen R. Muñana,
Keven Flammer
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
journal of veterinary medical education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.457
H-Index - 35
eISSN - 1943-7218
pISSN - 0748-321X
DOI - 10.3138/jvme.0816-126r2
Subject(s) - misconduct , sanctions , variety (cybernetics) , psychology , academic integrity , compliance (psychology) , variation (astronomy) , research integrity , computer science , medical education , applied psychology , political science , public relations , social psychology , law , medicine , artificial intelligence , physics , astrophysics
It is recommended that institutions develop academic conduct policies to help preserve academic integrity, enforce compliance, and aid in legal defensibility. These policies should also articulate reasonable consequences for persons found in violation. The problem, however, is that all academic misconduct offenses are not created equal, and determining reasonable consequences for these violations can be particularly challenging due to their subjective nature. Thus, the purpose of this study was to introduce a novel method for more objectively determining reasonable sanctions for several academic misconduct offenses of varying degrees of severity. We utilized a variation of the Bookmark procedure, a popular standard-setting technique used primarily by psychometricians in high-stakes testing environments, to investigate empirical survey data and develop policy recommendations. We encourage others to use this procedure, where appropriate, to identify appropriate cut scores and ranges to aid in policy development across a variety of contexts.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom