ACADEMIC INTEGRITY

By Mickey Skidmore, AMHSW, ACSW, FAASW

From time to time, when I reflect on my 40 year professional adventure, I sometimes feel like the TV character, Kwai Chang Caine — roaming the wild west or California — wishing only to honour his training and share his capacity to be helpful. Yet, time and again he was confronted by arrogance, greed, injustice, inequality, racism, cruelty, intolerance and more seemingly everywhere he ventured. Likewise, try as I might, controversy and ethical challenges seem to find me no matter the area of practice I find myself.

I often tell my Social Work students that if you simply do the fundamental thing that we train you to do (advocate for social justice on behalf of your clients), that you may not be well liked by your colleagues — because, in effect you are “stirring the pot” or shining a light on the “elephant in the room” or the “emperor having no clothes.” Think about what that statement says about the Social Work profession and how it is both recognised and perceived. 

While I do not claim to be trained as a formal academic, teaching has been a component of my professional practice for more than 30 years, and has become increasingly prominent in the later years of my career. I currently hold casual academic positions with more than one University teaching primarily in their Social Work departments. So what this editorial features are actually some of my reflections regarding academic integrity in preparing Social Work students for practice.

Recently, I received an email from a Unit Coordinator of a course I’m teaching after an initial assignment was nearing the conclusion of the marking effort. “I’m hesitant to award failing grades unless absolutely necessary for several reasons …” While they technically offered themself some wiggle room, the message was clear — essentially advising educators to not fail students. This same UC from my perspective has also significantly relaxed (contradicted) the instructions further by making every possible excuse regarding placements, etc to justify her instructions that there will be no penalties applied for late submissions.

For whatever it’s worth, this is the seventh consecutive time I was invited to teach this particular course (the better part of a decade). And unfortunately, this is not the first time I’ve received such a message over the years. I have clashed and had more than one heated conversation about this with several Unit Coordinators prior to this one. Keep in mind, I do not determine the marking criteria for these assignment courses. And I am not aware that there is a separate marking criteria for students where English is not their native/first language. While I acknowledge this is a challenge for international students, we are evaluating a students’ ability to practice Social Work in Australia (even if they do opt to return to a different country). As I see it, my job is to use the marking criteria as aids to guide the students in their efforts, and transparently advise that this is the framework of how their efforts will be evaluated. Removing the failing criteria undermines the entire marking process and reduces the remaining marking criteria to be essentially arbitrary.

While some Social Work programs employ a moderation marking process, this Social Work program seems to be in a long-standing vacuum of inconsistency and contradiction within its own program — perhaps clinging to outdated research — and seems to have fallen prey largely to coddling students regardless of their performance. (In light of extraordinary international tuition fees, they seem quite uncomfortable with the prospect of providing feedback when students perform badly or well below their own established performance parameters). They seem to have lost sight of the fundamental principle that students are responsible for their learning; as well as their responsibility to hold students accountable to the established criteria of the course. When the basic covenant between student and educator are unbalanced it often results in one-sided or counter-balancing responses. 

One such example, the validity of employing the academic statistical bell curve has been found to be limited and increasingly challenged given it assumes a “normal” distribution that does not accurately reflect most educational goals. While bell curves may be statistically useful, the application in grading can be unfair, and may mask poor teaching. Can you imagine the outcry if students knew that their grades were being influenced and shaped by a statistical ideology within the university rather than the merits of their effort? To me, this sounds more like academia’s dirty little secret rather than academic integrity.

If my teaching approaches were the issue, one would like to think that the Social Work program would not see fit to repeatedly invite me to teach this unit. To also be clear, I do not view myself as some form of mean-spirited marking zealot. In fact, I genuinely wish and hope that all my students do well with their assignments and walk away from the class with useful and helpful learning that prepares them for Social Work practice. Yet, beyond the established marking criteria, I do however hold a “north star” that underpins my overall evaluation process. Simply put, I am being asked to sign off on a students readiness to begin Social Work practice. And if I do not feel comfortable or confident in them working with someone in my family — then I cannot in good consciousness pass them. I make no apologies for this. And I am clear that this is a rubicon I will not cross.

The unit in question is the final course in an MSW Qualifying program. The assignments are in service of a capstone unit designed to be a platform for the student to showcase all of their knowledge, skills and creativity from the entire two year program in developing a project separate and apart from their field placement where they specifically demonstrate the integration of theory, research and practice. At the heart of these objectives is the opportunity to demonstrate the culmination of critical thinking skills and reflective abilities of the student. Moreover, as educators, we have be asked to stress that regardless of whatever challenges they face with their field placement, this will not be an acceptable excuse to not complete this project within the timeframe of the term.

When students wait until the second of four workshops (with 4-6 weeks in between the first and second workshop) to tease out and confirm the criteria of these effort, we already have the makings of potential concern (procrastination). When after four hours (in the second workshop) of repeatedly outlining and explaining in multiple ways — including break out group collaboration with their peers the instructions for this assignment — yet significant numbers of the students voice “confusion,” we see evidence of further concerns. Despite all efforts to cultivate critical thinking they are conflating “confusion” with wanting to be told what to think (how to design their project), rather than how to think. 

The fact that more than half of the total students taking this class applied for extensions (some granted 7-10 extra days to complete the assignment) I also take as evidence of a problem (let alone question if this is fair to the other students). When nearly half of my two class (approx 50 students) have not followed the basic instructions — and are writing about projects that they are already engaged in with their field placement — with no demonstration of any efforts of integration — this concerns me on several levels about their readiness to begin professional practice. Yet, I have received a message to not fail any students — (apparently) regardless of their performance.

I have experienced similar themes, concerns and issues while teaching other classes within this Social Work program as well. Me and some of my colleagues once did a brief review of another class (which I had taught for five years) only to discover, that there was essentially no clear consequence when students did not attend skills-based classes. (We had no hard data regarding their grades). More recently, an undergraduate class pressed me throughout the term about being “confused” about how to develop a group work demonstration. About half-way through the demonstrations, they picked up on my consistent feedback that demonstrations were marked more by activities rather than presentation or reading from power points on their phone. A review in the final class highlighted this question yet again where they continued to express “confusion.” So, I asked them to offer a definition of what would make matters more clear and less confusing to them. And they provided the exact same answer I had been providing them all term (literally — word for word). By conflating the socially acceptable issue of “confusion” to engage in a prolonged discussion/debate with the educator, they were opting to procrastinate, complain and otherwise distract from their own creativity and critical thinking to develop this on their own, without being told what to do.

So let’s unpack some of this. In my view, it is misguided and concerning that this Social Work program has consistently supported this side of this issue for some time now. When there is little to no consequence for student attendance or for showing up 30 minutes to hours late (despite informal evidence that students who do not attend class tend to perform more poorly than those who do); when there is minimal if any consequence when basic instructions of an assignment are ignored (especially when this is your final class as a SW student); when educators are instructed to not issue failing marks and elaborate excuses are made contradicting the fundamental instructions; when Social Work programs continually do not enforce their own academic standards — what is the message being sent to these students? The conclusion I have reached is that it sends the message that a Social Work degree is something to be purchased more than legitimately earned.

No real world circumstance would tolerate (let alone disregard) such behaviour from a professional. No professional Social Worker could repeatedly show up for work late or at all without some consequence from their boss/supervisor. An inability or refusal to adhere to basic instructions of tasks would also not be overlooked or ignored long without some form of performance review (which could be interpreted as “support”). If I’m hiring a new SW’er I do not want to be spending the bulk of my time telling them what to do all the time; (rather, I’d hope that they demonstrated some degree of critical thinking). And their supervisors are not likely to make endless excuses for poor work performance accordingly. 

Such practices (overlooking, ignoring or making excuses for sub-par academic performance) do not prepare students adequately, appropriately or realistically for professional practice. In short, this is not good for the students; it is not good for potential clients; it is not good for the profession;  and certainly not good for the Social Work program and University when they develop a reputation for poor or low quality professionals coming out of their programs. Ultimately, this will eventually lead to decreased enrolment in such a program. Embracing and maintaining such an approach is only inviting the programs downfall.

Moreover, this is fundamentally dishonest to the students. It usurps the opportunity to learn even more meaningful and useful life lessons when we fall short of our efforts and expectations. Overlooking their poor performance and either “looking the other way” or “moving them along”  or presuming that (natural) consequence is primarily a punitive endeavour evades the responsibility of the educator and the University, and contributes to young professionals being ill-prepared to cope or manage with undesirable/stressful circumstances. (The reader might also consider that this view also parallels parenting approaches with children who increasingly do not have the experiential capacity to regulate their emotions or manage anything unpleasant, thus contributing to alarming and increasing numbers of children suffering from anxiety disorders). I recognise the value of providing students with supports to ensure they are successful in their efforts. However, if such supports are not balanced with accountability, the fundamental question becomes, how does such a one-sided practices constitute academic integrity? 

Even when we are faced with the unpleasant experience of failing a student (which is a responsibility that comes with the role of both the educator and the university by the way); I believe academic integrity is demonstrated by how the program then ensures a process or pathway to provide support where the student can ultimately demonstrate adequate achievement to begin their Social Work practice. Ignoring the reality that there is a likelihood that some students will perform poorly in their efforts is not an effective strategy for the basic covenant between a student and teacher (or university program). Kwai Chang Caine often depicted the relationship between student and teacher as a sacred — and life long relationship. 

Often in SW practice we emphasise to students whether their professional goals, plans and interventions are realistic. I am unaware how many Social Work programs take into consideration if the student Visa timeframes for international students are realistic parameters to complete an MSWQ course of study. Clearly many students have indeed been successful in this regard. Yet, in my experience, the rigours of Social Work education can be daunting and overwhelming. Increasingly, it is not uncommon for students to encounter unforeseen circumstances where they may need to withdraw or postpone their education to tend to personal matters, their own well-being or proceed in a reduced load capacity rather than stick with a strict (two or three year?) schedule. In addition to the many other limitations imposed on them, international students may not have this luxury.

As I encounter these challenges, I strive to be a consistent example to guide students through these challenges with a clear and steady voice that aligns with the AASW Code of Conduct, reflecting consistent and ethical advocacy. Alas, there are powerful forces that sit behind these issues that determine the present structural framework and environment. Moreover, I also recognise that others clearly hold very different views in this regard. Despite my efforts, when there is little indication of realistic change, I can only reflect on whether being part of that system aligns with my professional and personal values. The universe has been sending me messages for some time now that it may be time for me to vote with my feet — and walk away from such energy and circumstance and move toward opportunities that are more like-minded and receptive with my values.

While it would be nice to not have to contend with such ethical challenges, I have found (especially in the last 10 years or so) that when I make decisions underscored, informed and guided with my values, that this in the long run has led me to a more balanced state of personal and professional well-being.