Beating Cheating: Teachers and the Capital Intellectual Crime

Beating Cheating: Teachers and the Capital
Intellectual Crime
Ben Frenken*
The literature on fair process in academic misconduct, such as plagiarism,
has generally focused on the rights of the students charged with the offence,
whereas little attention has been paid to the rights, interests, obligations, and roles
of the teachers or evaluators of students alleged to have cheated. That is the focus
of this article. The evaluating teacher is in the best position to defend a significant
set of interests affected by plagiarism. Often that teacher is merely a gatekeeper
without a meaningful or active role in a university’s disciplinary process. The contractual model of the university, the traditional judicial deference paid to the academic disciplinary process, and the principle of academic freedom all suggest that
there is room for universities to expand the rights and roles of teachers in the academic discipline process, especially where plagiarism is concerned. It is in the university’s best interests for evaluating teachers to be given a more substantial role
in the disciplinary process so that plagiarism may be tackled more effectively and
academic integrity better ensured.
La littérature portant sur le processus équitable dans les cas de mauvaises
conduites en milieu d’études, comme le plagiat, a généralement mis l’accent sur les
droits de l’étudiant accusé d’inconduite et peu d’attention a été portée aux droits,
intérêts, obligations et rôles des professeurs et des évaluateurs des étudiants accusés d’avoir triché. Il s’agit du sujet de cet article. Le professeur-évaluateur est
celui qui est le mieux placé pour défendre l’ensemble des intérêts concernés par le
plagiat. Souvent, ce professeur n’est qu’un observateur qui n’est pas appelé à jouer
un rôle important ou actif dans le processus disciplinaire de l’université. Le modèle
contractuel de l’université, la retenue judiciaire qui est traditionnellement accordée au processus disciplinaire universitaire et le principe de la liberté universitaire suggèrent tous qu’il est approprié que ces établissements étendent les droits
des professeurs et les rôles qu’ils jouent dans le processus disciplinaire universitaire, surtout lorsqu’il est question de plagiat. Il est dans le meilleur intérêt des
universités que les professeurs-évaluateurs se voient accorder un rôle plus important dans le processus disciplinaire afin que les problèmes de plagiat soient traités
plus efficacement et que l’intégrité universitaire soit protégée.
1. INTRODUCTION: KING’S COLLEGE, FALL 2010
The University of King’s College in Halifax, Nova Scotia, is a small liberal
arts undergraduate college associated with Dalhousie University. King’s offers a
first year program, the Foundation Year Programme — a study of the Western tradition — in which students are evaluated largely on the basis of bi-weekly 1,200-
*
Graduate of the Schulich School of Law at Dalhousie University and current studentat-law at Norton Rose Canada LLP in Toronto.
122
EDUCATION AND LAW JOURNAL
[22 E.L.J.]
word papers in response to material covered in the previous two weeks’ lectures
and tutorials. Tutors, ranging from teaching fellows to assistant and full professors,
are responsible for grading the papers.1
In November 2010, between fourteen and twenty students submitted essays
that were flagged for plagiarism by various tutors who had found a passage from a
single website reproduced in each paper.2 In the end, seven students were considered to have plagiarized, and no more than six were penalized.3
These events sparked a plagiarism fiasco when social media, especially Twitter, allowed the rest of the campus, city, and anyone else to engage in a conversation about plagiarism and penalties before the students had been dealt with through
normal administrative procedures. The events came at a time in the process that
exposed the tension between tutors and administration over what to do about student plagiarism.
A number of interests were at play: the public was generally concerned about
standards; a local university professor called for specific anti-plagiarism legislation;
some students were disappointed at the lack of discipline meted out to their unscrupulous fellows; and, teaching fellows were perturbed by what they perceived to be
a frustrated and discouraged role in stamping out the capital intellectual crime.4
This article was prompted by the frustration of those tutors. I will examine the
rights and roles of the teacher in the academic discipline process at the university
with a view to suggesting several points of entry for expanding those rights and
roles. I will touch on the contractual model governing university affairs, the judicial
deference accorded academic disciplinary review processes, and academic freedom
as the signal right of university teachers. Finally, this article highlights the advisability of making those expansions.
While the confluence of these areas is properly geared towards resolving academic dishonesty issues between the university and the student, recognizing in policy the value of broader teacher involvement would contribute to the integrity and
accountability of the university community. The events at King’s College in November 2010 suggest that these are worthwhile concerns.
1
2
3
4
For a description of the teaching roles at King’s College, see University of King’s
College Teachers’ Association v. University of King’s College, 2011 NSLB 61
[King’s].
See Corey Davison, “King’s FYP students guilty of plagiarism”, online: unews.ca
http://unews.ca/story/item/kings-students-guilty-of-plagiarism/. While Davison puts the
number of students at fourteen, conversations with various members of the King’s
community put the initial number at around twenty. Every flagged paper discussed
Dante’s Inferno.
Geoffrey Bird, “Essays for Sale” The Chronicle Herald (6 February 2011); also anecdotal evidence from conversations with King’s tutors.
Todd Pettigrew, “Should Plagiarism Be Illegal?” MacLeans (11 February 2011) online:
MacLeans.ca <http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2011/02/07/should-plagiarismbe-illegal/>; Cf. Richard Posner, The Little Book of Plagiarism (New York: Pantheon
Books, 2007) at 38 where he categorically denies that plagiarism should be a recognized crime or tort.