Table 3 Characteristics of articles describing blended learning approaches to promote academic integrity
From: Effectiveness of tutorials for promoting educational integrity: a synthesis paper
Reference | Student Characteristics | Institution/Course Characteristics | Educational Content | Teaching Methods, Strategies, or Activities | Quality Assessmenta | Level of Evaluationb and Evidence for Effectiveness |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
*Bendriss et al. (2015) | 18 students (12 women; 6 men; ages 17–19 years); First-year premedical program; First language was Arabic | Private U.S. institution, Gulf State of Qatar; English for Academic Purposes course | Academic integrity; effective literature searches, constructing in-text citations and reference lists; referencing tools | 4–8 online modules, including readings, videos tutorials, assignments, and quizzes completed before weekly classes with hands-on activities to practice skills | 6.0 | Level 1: 7 students rated sessions as “Excellent,” 10 rated them as “Good”. 17 students reported that sessions helped them to improve their research skills. (self-assessment) |
*Chertok et al. (2013) | 355 students (Intervention group = 194; Control group = 161) | US; University health sciences centre; hybrid courses (online and face-to-face modes of content delivery) | Academic integrity statement and policies; definitions and examples of academic dishonesty | Face-to-face syllabi review; eLearning tutorial (duration details unclear) | 12.5 | Levels 1 & 2: Group differences in attitudes/ knowledge about academic integrity; knowledge/attitudes improved; correlations between academic integrity statement read in class and student attitudes/knowledge about academic integrity. (self-assessment, objective measurement) |
*Smedley et al. (2015) | 150 first year students (post-intervention response rate = 46.6%; 14 males, 56 females) | Australia; Private college; Nursing program | Writing, paraphrasing, plagiarism, referencing | Small group sessions, online tutorial followed by a quiz (duration details unclear) | 14.0 | Levels 1 & 2: Students’ confidence, and knowledge and understanding of plagiarism increased. (self-assessment, objective measurement) |