Learning in Community versus Collusion: Where’s the line?

Here at Moore, we value learning in community for developing our character and learning. But we also require academic integrity. So the question arises, When are we helpfully learning in community, and when are we in danger of sliding into academic misconduct?

This paper is to help you make that distinction. We will cover:

• Two definitions

• Wisdom for grey areas

• Examples

• A hard case

• Takeaways

Two definitions:

Learning in Community = Helping each other learn at College, while maintaining academic integrity. Moore College strongly encourages this.

Examples:

• Helping a fellow student to better understand an assessment, a doctrine, or a biblical languages issue.

• Working with a fellow student to find resources for an assessment; sharing suitable resources for assessments.

• Working with students doing separate essay questions.

Collusion = jointly developing answers when you are expected to submit individual work. This is not acceptable and violates academic integrity. 

Examples:

• Translating a text together and merely changing a few words or swapping a few clauses.

• Using a friend’s argument or detailed outline, their citations (in the same or a different order), or other detailed aspects of their answer.

(And there is Collaboration (“group work”) = working together on an assignment as a group as explicitly permitted or required by your lecturer. Our in-class “teams-based learning” is similar. This is acceptable, of course, but we will not consider that here.)

Wisdom for the Grey Areas

Definitions are helpful, but wisdom and judgement are still required. At Moore College, we want you to learn in community while upholding the letter and spirit of our Academic Integrity Policy.

When you are unsure if something is allowable learning in community, then you can:

1. Ask yourself:

If the answer to both is yes, then you are learning in community and maintaining academic integrity.

2. Don’t violate your conscience (Rom 14:14, 1 Cor 8:7). But remember that we want you to learn in community.

3. If in doubt, ask – it may be perfectly allowable, so you can do it with a clear conscience. Ask your lecturer, tutor, or the Academic Support Coordinator.

Examples:

Examples of legitimate learning in community:

• Helping a fellow student to better understand an assessment, a doctrine, or a biblical languages issue.

• Working with a fellow student to find resources for an assessment or sharing resources for assessments.

• Sharing a couple good points from sources.

• Working with students doing separate essay questions. Because you are doing different questions, you may share ideas, theses (your big answer in a sentence), and overall outlines (approaches to the question). You may feed back to each other and push each other to pursue alternative approaches or ideas.

• Brainstorming possible answers or general, broad outlines for a shared essay question.

• Reviewing prior exams and giving feedback on each other’s practice answers.

• Revising class lectures, readings, concepts, or issues.

• Meeting to read and translate biblical languages.

• Meeting to discuss exegetical passages, possible translations, and significant issues for translation and interpretation, syntax diagrams, and textual variants.

• Suggesting to someone what to include in their assessment (eg, acknowledgement of the New Perspective, contributions by a particular scholar, alternative interpretations of a biblical passage or a doctrine).

• Helping a student improve their writing by highlighting unclear portions for rewriting, and possibly giving a sample correction for a recurring issue.

• Giving feedback on a draft essay or other assessment, such as:

  • Clarity of writing – “I think you should rewrite this sentence/paragraph.”

  • Structure – “This paragraph has too many ideas/could be broken in two.”

  • Misunderstanding of sources – “I’m not sure that’s what Luther meant.”

  • Quality of argument – “You haven’t convinced me here. What is another way to argue it?... Have you thought about arguing it this way/including this…?”

  • Suggesting major points or contributors overlooked (“Have your considered…?”, or “X is also a major contributor to this debate.”)

  • Grammar and readability – “You should run this through Grammarly.”

• Giving positive feedback:

  • “I really like your argument/point/evidence here.”

  • “You’ve got a lovely and clear style. This is easy to follow.”

  • “This is a simple but profound argument. You’ve nailed the issues here.”

Examples of illegitimate collusion:

• Copying a friend’s paper, outline, argument, use of sources, or other aspects of their answer.

• Working out a common translation to submit for a passage.

• Translating a text together and merely changing a few words or swapping a few clauses.

• Breaking up an individual assessment so that various members contribute limited sections of it: ie, for an exegetical, one does textual variants, one presents a syntax diagram and structure, one presents context, etc.

• Copying a friend’s answers for a quiz or telling a friend the answers.

• Telling someone what to include in their assessment (eg, points of a doctrine, aspects of a debate, a specific perspective to take), unless you are pointing them to the assessment instructions.

• Giving feedback on a draft essay or other assessment, such as:

  • Rewriting a sentence, paragraph, or section for them (except as an example for a recurring mistake).

  • Working out or sharing a detailed structure, a detailed argument, or many fine details.

• Knowingly using identical sources, and especially if for similar points.

• Using the same citations, in the same or a different order.

• Sharing your assessment with a friend and they misuse it, with or without your knowledge.

Answer: It depends on what you do.

It can be legitimate if you:

• The final work is your explanation and your thinking, in your voice.

• Your group work helped you better understand the task and question.

• Your group work helped you think about it better and develop your own answer.

• Your final submission is original to you, even if fostered and developed by your sources and your discussions with fellow students.

It will be illegitimate if:

• You use a common detailed outline or argument.

• You use identical sources.

• You use the same citations, in the same or a different order.

• You share research notes.

• You use points from a fellow student that you don’t understand or are not entirely persuaded by. You need to own and understand your arguments.

So can your final essays share a broad general approach? Yes!

Use multiple common sources? Yes!

Share some citations? Yes!

Have some points in common? Yes!

And this is all right if you have followed these guidelines.

The takeaways:

A quick guide to the learning in community vs illegitimate collusion:

• Broad brushstrokes vs fine details

• A few fine details vs many fine details

• General approaches vs specific answers

• An overall approach vs a detailed outline or argument

• Suggesting vs Directing

• The final submission is your answer, in your voice, from your understanding

Note: Have suggestions or questions? Please send feedback to mailto:academicsupport@moore.edu.au.