Academic Integrity

Multitasking has been demonstrated to negatively impact performance across a wide range of tasks, including in the classroom, yet students continue to multitask. This study examined the relationship between college students' perceptions and performance of technology-based multitasking. Technology-based multitasking and self-efficacy data were collected and analyzed from 265 undergraduate students. Students engaged in a technology-based multitasking perceptions survey, a video + survey multitasking task or a video-only non-multitasking task, and a technology-based self-efficacy survey. An analysis of student perceptions indicated that students understood that different tasks required different levels of mental effort to complete successfully and that multitasking across high-mental effort tasks required greater effort than multitasking across low-mental effort tasks. In addition, students in the video + survey multitasking group significantly underperformed students in the video-only non-multitasking group. Finally, the relationship between technology-based multitasking and self-efficacy was addressed in a correlational analysis between student technology-based multitasking scores and technology-based self-efficacy scores, yielding no significant relationship. The study findings indicate that most students have an understanding and awareness of multitasking, but ultimately, whether they believed they could multitask or not, multitasking significantly impeded performance.

Academic dishonesty undermines the integrity of educational processes and remains a widespread concern in higher education institutions, including those offering distance learning. In this context, identifying the factors that influence students' academic dishonesty behaviors is crucial. This study aims to explore the relationship of academic dishonesty with academic procrastination behaviors, time management skills among distance education students. For this purpose, the study employed a correlational survey model, which is a quantitative research method. The research sample comprised 220 students enrolled in an associate degree program via distance education at a public university, selected using the convenience sampling method. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, independent sample t-tests, Pearson correlation analysis, and stepwise regression analysis. The findings indicate that academic dishonesty behaviors among distance education students are low, while their academic procrastination behaviors and time management skills are at a medium level. The analysis of demographic characteristics revealed varying trends in their effects on academic dishonesty, academic procrastination, and time management skills among the participants. The study found no significant effect of demographic characteristics, such as gender, age, marital status, and employment status, on academic dishonesty. A positive relationship was found between academic procrastination behavior and academic dishonesty behavior; while a negative relationship was observed between time management skills and academic dishonesty. The analyses revealed that academic procrastination behavior and time management skills together predict academic dishonesty behaviors, with the developed model explaining approximately 26 % of the total variance in these behaviors. This study aims to address a critical gap in the literature and contribute to the development of academic integrity strategies by examining the relationships between academic dishonesty behaviors, academic procrastination behaviors, and time management skills in distance education.

Background: Academic integrity (AI) is of increasing importance in higher education. At the same time, students are becoming more consumer-oriented and more inclined to appeal against, or complain about, a penalty imposed for a breach of AI. This combination of factors places pressure on institutions of higher education to handle alleged breaches of AI in a way acceptable to students that motivates them to continue to engage with their studies. Method: Students (n = 8) were interviewed to discover their perceptions of the process for dealing with breaches of AI. All students were based in one university in a very diverse area of London which has many first-generation students from non-traditional academic backgrounds. Results: Students reported strong emotional reactions featuring high levels of anxiety and stress. Some found the process to be threatening and demotivating and questioned continuation on their course of study, while others used more adaptive coping strategies. Students also went to great pains to make it clear that their own, and their friends', breaches of AI were unintentional, while expressing the view that other people were deliberately cheating and should be penalised. Key recommendations include: support for students to re-engage after the intervention; support for students to develop effective self-regulatory learning strategies and time management; provision of specific examples to clarify what is, and is not, acceptable academic practice; recognition of the strong emotions likely to be invoked, especially if accompanied by declarations of unintentionality.

This review article explores the use of ChatGPT in academic writing and provides insights on how to utilize it judiciously. With the increasing popularity of AI-powered language models, ChatGPT has emerged as a potential tool for assisting writers in the research and writing process. We have provided a list of potential uses of ChatGPT by a novice researcher for getting help during research proposal preparation and manuscript writing. However, there are concerns regarding its reliability and potential risks associated with its use. The review highlights the importance of maintaining human judgment in the writing process and using ChatGPT as a complementary tool rather than a replacement for human effort. The article concludes with recommendations for researchers and writers to ensure responsible and effective use of ChatGPT in academic writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The emergence of AI-driven writing tools has assisted students in writing academic papers. Although the positive benefits of these tools have been acknowledged, concerns regarding ethics emerge. This research is a qualitative study aiming to explore university students' perspectives on the use of AI tools for academic writing. This study sought to answer the following research questions: What are the reasons for using AI tools in academic writing?; What are some ethical concerns related to using AI in academic writing? In what instances is AI reliable to use for academic writing? This study involved ten university students, and each participant was interviewed. The data obtained were analyzed using thematic analysis. The results revealed that the main reasons for using AI tools were to speed up the writing process, overcome writer's block, and enhance writing quality. Some ethical concerns about using these AI tools covered issues related to plagiarism, information accuracy, maintaining originality, and balancing AI's role in writing. The participants found these AI tools reliable for generating ideas, outlining, editing, and proofreading. However, writers should navigate reputable journals for accurate information, as these tools mostly do not have access to credible resources. This study concluded that despite the assistance of AI tools, writers should maintain control, uphold ethical standards and ensure the credibility of the information they incorporate in their scholarly work. [For the complete proceedings, see ED672804.]