ÃÛÌÒapp

Recent events, such as COVID-19 and the rise of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), have certainly introduced new challenges for instructors, sometimes to the point that it feels we’re spending more time dealing with academic integrity issues than actually teaching!

While it may not be possible to eliminate academic misconduct entirely from your course, there are strategies you can employ to help reduce it. Below I discuss some of the strategies I employ in a large first-year chemistry course that uses Mastering Chemistry, but many of the approaches and considerations can be used in other disciplines and course formats.Ìý

Start by identifying why students cheat

Consider some of the pressures that lead students to cheat – and design your assessments to reduce these pressures. The following are some of the main reasons students commit misconduct and strategies to consider when designing your assessments.

REASON: Poor time management and workload. The transition to first year is tough, and students often don’t have the time management and organizational skills to cope with the increased workload paired with time impacts such as work and commuting. Instructors can contribute to the problem by not considering what is going on in their other courses and focusing only on our own course components.

CONSIDER: The length and number of your assessments and their late penalties. Reducing the number helps with overall workload, and providing an estimated completion time along with the assessment helps the student with planning. To generate an estimated completion time, do the assessment yourself, then triple the time for the student. (Depending on the nature and level of the assessment this factor can range from 2 – 4x).Ìý

Mastering Chemistry generates average times for each question based on data from thousands of students, which I then use to design assessments of about 1 to 1.5 hours long. The estimated time is provided to the student.

REASON: Harsh late penalties. If students feel they don’t have the time to work on an assessment, harsh late penalties can lead them to cheat.

CONSIDER: The purpose of late penalties and how rigid they need to be. Deadlines do have purpose – they encourage students to keep up with course material while also helping instructors manage grading and course feedback. However, if there is room for flexibility or reduced penalties, you may want to consider it.

Mastering Chemistry has very flexible options for lateness that include deductions by hour or day as well as maximum deductions. In the past, my policy has been a deduction of 10% per day up to a maximum of 50%. This year, I’m trying 5% per day to a maximum of 25%. Ultimately, I’m trying to encourage students to do the assignment and learn, even if it is late because they decided to prioritize other work.

REASON: Fear of failure, desire to get good grades and high stakes assessments. Students need good grades for different reasons and not getting those grades can have serious consequences with regards to their futures. Whether they need to pass the course to remain in their program or get into medical school, the pressure can push students towards academic misconduct. High-stakes assessments can magnify this pressure – the more the assessment is worth, the more students will consider other options for getting good grades.

CONSIDER: The purpose, format, and weighting of your assessments. If the purpose of your assessment is for student learning and practice, find ways to encourage them to do the assessment without cheating – an approach that will ultimately reward them with better performance in other course components. One strategy is to allow repeated attempts – if you can reduce the pressure to get it right the first time, the more inclined students will be to engage with the assessment.Ìý Reducing the weight of the assessment can have a similar effect, but achieving this by increasing the number of assessments must be balanced with other considerations such as workload.

I primarily use Mastering Chemistry for its tutorial questions, which include hints in addition to guided feedback. I find the many options regarding multiple attempts, as well as the ability to adjust deductions for errors and give bonuses for things like hint usage, allow me to design assessments that encourage students to attempt the questions while removing the fear of losing marks for incorrect answers.

What This Means for Instructors

By understanding the underlying reasons why students cheat, instructors can design assessments that not only reduce the likelihood of misconduct but also support deeper learning. Simple changes—like offering flexible deadlines, clearly communicating estimated completion times, and reducing the pressure of high-stakes evaluations—can go a long way in creating a more supportive and integrity-focused learning environment. Ultimately, thoughtful assessment design empowers students to engage honestly and confidently with the material, which benefits everyone involved.