Search

For many decades, academic cheating has been prevalent across many institutions and majors. This problem has been exacerbated by new technology that has increased opportunities for students to access and use information dishonestly. There is fear amongst faculty that dishonesty in the academic world could negatively impact professionals in their future careers. The greater prevalence of cheating may be related to students misunderstanding what constitutes cheating. To better understand students' perceptions of cheating, a group of faculty surveyed students across 11 academic programs at a college of health professions using a slightly modified version of a validated tool via an online platform. Data about cheating perceptions were collected from more than 400 students. Although most respondents agreed that cheating is wrong, some were open to explanations of innocence related to possible cheating scenarios. Also, most respondents did not agree that a person who cheats is an unethical person. These findings suggest that students believe cheating can occur unintentionally. Although the findings support that more education about academic dishonesty would be valuable, this study can inform efforts to develop more targeted education and interventions to reduce cheating behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Open Educational Resources (OER) are rising in popularity at higher education institutions to help combat high textbook costs. To date, little research has been published discussing the impact of OER in the health sciences context. This comparative case study seeks to fill this gap. Experience: The article shares OER programs and advocacy efforts at three institutions, including a brief history of OER work, barriers and failures, current successes, and future directions at each institution. Discussion: All three institutions are making efforts in OER outreach and advocacy, informed and impacted by their institutional community. Two institutions have an OER grant with increasing submissions from health sciences faculty. OER work is completed by one librarian at two of the institutions, while the third completes the work through a committee of stakeholders from across the institution. All cases include OER advocacy and outreach through library workshops and working to establish faculty partnerships. Barriers at all three institutions include a lack of time and funds to dedicate to finding or developing OER. Unique barriers include a desire to work with for-profit companies, concerns over disadvantaging students on their qualifying exams, and the sustainability of institutional efforts in OER. Takeaways: Libraries are uniquely situated to support faculty and staff as they incorporate OER into their practices. While health sciences faculty are typically slower to adopt OER, once they do take this step, they become strong advocates for open practices, the librarian, and the library. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A research project was undertaken by a university library system to develop a sustainable user experience strategy. A task force was convened to conduct a pilot project with members from both libraries in the system to assess staffing responsibilities, guidelines, processes, and data-gathering procedures. The team tested an electronic resources list common to both libraries. In describing the methods employed by the task force in their research, this article outlines the benefits and drawbacks of staffing configurations to initiate user experience practices in an academic library setting. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]