course syllabus - SFU Library

advertisement
SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION
CMNS 362-6
Daniel Ahadi & Sherry Yu
Email: [email protected]; [email protected]
Office: K8657
Spring 2013
SFU Burnaby Day
Office Hour: TBA
EVALUATION METHODS FOR APPLIED COMMUNICATION RESEARCH
Prerequisites: at least 60 credit hours, including two of CMNS 253, 260 or 261.
Course Description:
This is a course in applied communication which spans theory and methods of communication research.
Although methods introduced in this course can be appropriately used to pursue research questions in a
number of areas, the use of these methods to investigate mass mediated communication and
communication infrastructures will be the focus of class discussion, and is expected to be the focus of
student research. Lectures will introduce a variety of theoretical issues, as well as pragmatic concerns that
arise in utilizing the methods introduced in the course. Students will be introduced to a variety of research
methods which may include: interview techniques, textual discourse and content analysis, documentary
research, survey research, and focus groups.
Students will design, develop and implement an original pilot study using at least two methods introduced
in class. There are a number of themes in 362: subcultures; independent media; ethnic media; politics of
representation, gender and race; globalization, community and Canadian identity; ethics and regulation of
offensive content; and new information technology. Based on these, or any other relevant themes,
students will choose and define a research problem, review relevant literature and propose researchable
questions (subject to approval from course instructors).
Grade Assignments:
1. Participation & Peer Evaluation (Individual)
2. Project Proposal (Team)
3. Project Report (Team)
4. Project Presentation (Team)
5. Final Take-home Exam (Individual)
10%
10%
35%
15 %
30%
Due Friday February 8, Noon, CMNS Office
Due Tuesday April 2, Beginning of Lecture
Due Tuesday April 2
Due Friday April 12, Noon, CMNS Office
Texts:
•
David Deacon, Michael Pickering, Peter Golding and Graham Murdock (2007, 2nded). Researching
Communication: A practical guide to methods in media and cultural analysis. London: Arnold.
ISBN 978-0340926994
The School expects that the grades awarded in this course will bear some reasonable relation to established
university-wide practices with respect to both levels and distribution of grades. In addition, the School will follow
Policy T10.02 with respect to "Intellectual Honesty" and "Academic Discipline" (see the current Calendar, General
Regulations section).
1
CMNS 362 Weekly Topics and Readings
Week 1 (January 8) - Course Introduction & Research Proposal
Bouma, Gary D., and G. B. J. Atkinson. 1995. A handbook of social science research,
Chapter 1, 2. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
Marshall, Catherine, and Gretchen B. Rossman. 2006. Designing Qualitative Research,
4th ed. Chapter 2. Thousands Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications
Deacon, David, Michael Pickering, Peter Golding, and Graham Murdock. 2007.
Researching communications: A practical guide to methods in media and cultural
analysis. 2nd ed. Chapter 15. London: Hodder Arnold.
***No tutorials
Week 2 (January 15) - Survey
Deacon, David, Michael Pickering, Peter Golding, and Graham Murdock. 2007.
Researching communications: A practical guide to methods in media and cultural
analysis. 2nd ed. Chapter 3, 4, and 5. London: Hodder Arnold.
Week 3 (January 22) - Content Analysis
Deacon, David, Michael Pickering, Peter Golding, and Graham Murdock. 2007.
Researching communications: A practical guide to methods in media and cultural
analysis. 2nd ed. Chapter 6. London: Hodder Arnold.
Krippendorff, K. 2003. Content Analysis: An introduction to its methodology. pp.18-43.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
(Online) Murray, C. A., Yu, S., & Ahadi, D. 2007. Cultural diversity and ethnic media in
British Columbia. Centre for Policy Studies on Culture and Communication, Simon
Fraser University. Appendix 6 (pp. 170-186). Retrieve From:
http://www.bcethnicmedia.ca/Research/Appendices_Jan_17_Revised.pdf
*** During lecture, the communication liaison librarian Sylvia Roberts will present a 1
hour session on how to access material relevant to this course and your research projects.
This session is mandatory for all students. Attendance sheet will circulate.
2
Week 4 (January 29) - In-depth Interview
Mishler, E. G. 1986. Standard practice. In Researching interviewing: Context and
narrative, 9-34. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Creswell, J. W. 2007. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches. Chapter 7. London; New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Week 5 (February 5) - Focus Group Discussion
Krueger, Richard et al. 2008. Focus group: A Practical guide for applied research.
Chapter 3. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Morgan, D. L. 1997. Focus groups as qualitative research. Chapter 5 (pp. 45-65).
London: Sage.
*** Recommended Reading (Library Reserve):
Morgan, D. L. 1997. Focus groups as qualitative research. Chapter 1-4. London: Sage.
*** PROPOSALS DUE: Friday, February 8 - CMNS general office by noon
Week 6 (February 12) - SFU Reading Break - Classes Cancelled
Week 7 (February 19) - Workshop 1: Protocol Design
You will get back your proposals this week. We will discuss designing your research
protocols (i.e. surveys questions, interview questions, etc.) and you have a chance to
work on your protocols under the supervision of the instructors.
Week 8 (February 26) - Workshop 2: Introduction to SPSS
Deacon, David, Michael Pickering, Peter Golding, and Graham Murdock. 2007.
Researching communications: A practical guide to methods in media and cultural
analysis. 2nd ed. Chapter 14. London: Hodder Arnold.
Room: Computer Lab AQ3148.1
*** No tutorials
3
Week 9 (March 5) - Workshop 3: “Do it yourself” SPSS
Room: Computer Lab AQ3148.1
*** No tutorials
Week 10 (March 12) - Workshop 4: Data Analysis/Presenting Findings/Report Writing
In this workshop you will be presented a number of techniques you can use to analyse
and present your quantitative and qualitative data. You will have the opportunity to
explore these techniques with your group members.
Week 11 (March 19) - Critical Approaches to Research
Glazer, Nathan. 2005. American diversity and the 2000 census. In Ethnicity, social
mobility and public policy: Comparing the USA and UK, eds. Glenn C. Loury, Tariq
Modood, and Steven M. Teles, 50-66. New York: Cambridge University Press.
James, Carl and Lloyed, Bethan. 2006. Differentiating the ‘Other’/Disaggregating
‘Black’: on the diversity of African Canadian Communities. In D. Zinga (ed.)
Navigating Multiculturalism, pp. 10-32. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
*** Recommended reading (Online):
(Online) Ang, Ien, Jeff Brand, Greg Nobel, and Derek Wilding. 2002. Living diversity:
Australia’s multicultural future. Artarmon: Special Broadcasting Service Corporation.
Available on-line at:
http://epublications.bond.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1019&context=hss_pubs
Week 12 (March 26): Advanced Methods / Meta-Methodological Approaches
Sinclair, John, Audrey Yue, Gay Hawkins, Kee Pookong, and Josephine Fox. 2001.
Chinese cosmopolitanism and media use. In Floating lives: The media and Asian
diaspora. Stuart Cunningham and John Sinclair (eds.), 78-90. Lanham, Md.: Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers.
Schrøder, Kim, Kirsten Drotner, Stephen Kline, and Catherine Murray. 2003.
Researching audiences, Chapter 2, 3, 17. London: Arnold.
4
Week 13 (April 2): *** In-Class Group Presentations *** REPPORT DUE
Conference-style panel presentation of your research projects. Attendance is mandatory
for all students.
Time: 1.30-5.30 pm
Room: TBA
***No tutorials
*** REPORTS DUE: Submit to the instructors at the beginning of lecture
Week 14 (Friday April 13): *** Take-home Final Exam Due ***
Submit to the CMNS general office by noon
5
Code of Ethics
This course involves three different forms of communication with human subjects: interviews, focus
groups and surveys. These forms are interventionist. Researchers will inform their subjects of the purpose
of the study and ensure that all participation is voluntary, and all identities are kept secret. You will
identify the School of Communication and the Course Directors to all subjects. No interviewer speaks to a
subject well known to them, although network or peer recruitment is acceptable. Most importantly, all
tapes or observation devices will not fully identify any subject. Your proposal must state your ethical
guidelines. See Chapter 15 in Deacon et al.
Grade Assignments
This course is built on teamwork, which will account for 60 percent of your final grade. Teamwork in this
case enables larger sample sizes for research than one could feasibly conduct alone, and therefore assists
in enhancing the validity and reliability of exploratory media and audience research. Much complex
social science research is done in teams.
1. Participation & Peer Evaluation (Individual)
2. Project Proposal (Team)
3. Project Report (Team)
4. Project Presentation (Team)
5. Final Take-home Exam (Individual)
10%
10%
35%
15 %
30%
Research Topics
This course is dedicated to researching diversity in off-line and on-line communication infrastructure and
strategies. A number of sample topics from previous semesters will be introduced to you in the first week
of class. Your group is responsible to conduct original research on one topic, with a set of research
questions. Below is sample of past research areas in CMNS 362:





Gender/Sexuality and Media/Technology (e.g. use or representation)
Race/Ethnicity and Media/Technology (e.g. use or representation)
Political Communication (e.g. election coverage, coverage of issues)
Alternative Media/Online Media/Community Media
Popular Culture (e.g. music, film, television, online / representation or use)
Description of Assignments
Research Proposal (10%) - Team - *** Due Friday, February 8, by Noon, at the CMNS General
Office***
The research proposal should be 1500-2000 words. In it, your team establishes the following (not
necessarily in this order):


Your overall (umbrella) research question;
A rationale why this question is important;
6




Definitions of key terms;
A discussion of the background research in the field (include 8-10 sources), including a summary
of hypotheses or findings from previous studies;
Research design:
- Your selected TWO methods and rationale for choosing these methods;
- Your sub-questions (for each method);
- Your target population (for each method) and how you will select them;
- Preliminary protocols (for each method): e.g., survey questionnaire, interview guideline;
- Your audio-visual equipment and how you propose to use them
Research ethics: Forms 1, 2, 5 and 7
The research project is considered exploratory research. All research is original (primary research) and it
is unlikely that anyone will have conducted a study like yours before.
Each team’s research project will involve a search of secondary literature, a quantitative phase which
will include content analysis or survey, and a qualitative phase which will include in-depth interviews or
focus groups. Surveys and interviews may be administered in person (face-to-face) or online
Submit ONE copy of the proposal to the TA. All team members should keep their own copies in print and
electronic format.
Research Report (35%) - Team - *** Due Monday, April 2, Beginning of Lecture***
Your team should cover ONE method from the quantitative section of the course (either survey or content
analysis) and ONE method from the qualitative section of the course (either interview or focus group).
You will receive more direction in lecture and tutorials on how to design questionnaires for surveys,
protocols for content analysis and questions for interviews and focus group discussions.
Quantitative
The quantitative phase is comprised of a survey (face-to-face, over telephone or the internet) OR
content analysis.
Surveys are typically categorized as a quantitative research methodology. It is a useful methodology to
map people’s behaviours, attitudes and habits in society. Questions in most survey questionnaires are
formatted as multiple choices, but could also be open-ended (requiring a more qualitative and explanatory
approach). In this course you are required to conduct a survey of a population of 80 people (minimum).
Your questions could address people’s response or attitudes toward the topic or issue your group is
researching. Each survey should be about 10 minutes in length, with no more than 25 questions
(mostly closed ended questions with pre-assigned answer codes). It is recommended, as far as possible,
that samples of the population be randomly obtained. The survey participants should be unknown to the
interviewer.
Content analysis is the study of the manifest content of a text. It is a quantitative method, as it only looks
at for example frequencies of occurrences of certain words in a given text. The quantitative content
analysis considers the explicit content of the text: things that are apparent and are so to speak ‘on the
surface.’ The aim is to grasp an overall picture of how events or people are covered in news media. If you
choose to do content analysis, you are required to apply a questionnaire of no more than 20
7
questions to your content analysis text corpus. You will be choosing a corpus (minimum of 100
media items: articles, clips, segments, etc.) and subjecting it to a content analysis by first generating a set
of questions, then designing a coding protocol and applying it to several units.
Your collected data (surveys or content analysis) are entered in SPSS. Crosstabulations are generated to
look for basic patterns and comparisons across groups. This course focuses on descriptive statistics only.
Keep all your media material and collected surveys.
Qualitative
The qualitative phase is comprised of interviews OR focus group discussions.
For interviews each team will conduct a minimum of 4 interviews, with people who “have something
interesting to say” about the chosen research topic. They can be experts of some sort or members of the
general public. The interview participants should be unknown to the interviewer. You should prepare a
set of questions (8-12) for the 1 hour long interview. After conducting the interviews you should make
sure you have time free to write up both your interview notes and your reflections on conducting the
interviews. You should hand in your interview questions, the interview texts, and your notes.
If you choose focus group discussion, you are required to lead a minimum of 2 focus group discussions
(with 6-8 participants in each focus group). You will be required first to identify who will be asked to
participate in your focus groups, and why you have chosen to delimit the population in the way that you
have. You should also indicate what you would like to find out in holding a focus group, and submit a list
of questions that have been designed to illicit answers to the questions you are posing. You should
indicate where you would hold your focus group and why you have chosen that location, whether or not
you would use audio and/or video tape and why you made the decision you did, what problems might
arise and what you feel are the strengths and weaknesses of this approach. Your sessions should be
between 90-120 minutes, and should include 6-8 people. Make sure to over-recruit by 2-3 members in
case of no-show. One team member should moderate and one team member should observe. Note that not
all team members need to be present. Hold the group in a well-known and trusted public area--a library, a
seminar room on the hill or HC campus, other public areas. Plan on offering mild incentives: donuts,
pizza, or something equivalent. You should hand in all written material this exercise generates.
For your group report you need to hand in the following:









Title page: Title of your project and the name of all group members
Executive summary of the key findings (1-2 pages)
Introduction: Research topic, theory, hypothesis, research question & sub-questions,
significance of research, a summary of literature review (3-4 pages)
Methodology: The rationale of choosing the two methodologies. Explain why the chosen
methods are more adequate than the others (1-2 pages)
Main findings: A detailed description of the findings of sub-questions and how they answer the
original research question (12-15 pages).
Conclusion: Conclusions, suggestions and recommendations (1-2 pages)
Critical assessment of the methodology and the research process: e.g. sampling methods, data
gathering, group composition, group size, interview questions, recruiting method, moderation,
site selection, recording, etc. State limitations and suggest how to improve (2-3 pages)
Bibliography
Technical Appendix:
8
1. Division of labour within your group: Precisely outline what each person has done for
each phase of the project and have all group members to sign the document before
submitting the report
2. For quantitative:
 A final unfilled version of protocol/survey questionnaire
 Graphs, crosstabs, etc.
3. For qualitative:
 A profile of how you recruited, who attended and when and where group
observations were conducted
 A final version of in-depth interview/focus group guidelines
 Your field notes: Completed interview notes for in-depth interviews and
transcriptions* for focus groups
 Your ethics forms: Study Information Document and Consent Forms signed by
your participants
*What is transcription? “The conversion of spoken words into written language.” Listen to your audio
files from the interviews/focus groups and type out the conversation.
Submit ONE copy of the written team report, FULLY BOUND to the course TA. All team members
should keep their own copies in print and electronic format.
Power Point Presentation (15%) - Team - ***Friday, April 2, 1.30 – 5.30 p.m.*** Room: TBA
The power point presentation will be no longer than 12 minutes (plus 3 minutes for set-up time),
assuming 12-15 slides, followed by a 10 minutes Q&A session. The presentation may include very short
videos or other material. This presentation allows you to review the research question, why you selected
it, the main findings from the qualitative and quantitative studies and the overall recommendations (for
policy and/or future research). You will be evaluated based on the following criteria: (1) Content of the
presentation; (2) style of the presentation (group dynamic, effort); (3) layout of the slides; and (4) how
you handle the Q&A session.
Your Presentation slides should include:
 Background (1 slide)
 Research question and sub-questions (themes) (1 slide)
 Research design (e.g. sampling frame, sample size, sampling method, target respondents, group
composition, recruiting method) and the rationale behind picking such methodologies (1-2 slides)
 Main findings: Link quantitative and qualitative (3-5 slides)
 Conclusion/discussion (2-3 slides)
 Suggestions/recommendations, if applicable (e.g. what policymakers should consider/prioritize in
their decision-making) (1-2 slides)
All students are expected to attend.
TWO hard copies of the presentation slides must be handed in on the day to the course instructors.
9
Save your proposal, the report, and presentation slides on a CD or a flash drive and submit to the
instructors on the day of the presentation.
Individual Participation in Team Work and Tutorial (10%)
5%: Tutorial attendance & participation
5%: Peer evaluation. Each member will evaluate the effort of their team members on a five-point scale.
Peer evaluation scores are averaged among all team member scores.
Final Take-home Exam (30%) - Individual - *** Due Friday, April 12, by Noon, at the CMNS
General Office ***
Guideline: Use relevant course material (readings and lecture notes) to answer the exam questions.
Format: Indicate which question you are answering. Double space, size 12 font, Times New Roman. Use
paragraph/essay format. Do not use bullet form. Your essay should have an introduction and a conclusion.
Ensure that your argument is clear and well supported for your essay question (see grading criteria in your
syllabus). Ensure that you properly cite all references that you make to articles/chapters in the body of
your essay and include all references in a bibliography. Note the plagiarism regulations attached to your
course syllabus. Use APA or MLA. See SFU Library website for instructions: www.lib.sfu.ca/help/writing
Hand-in your take-home to the Communication General Office for your TA.
Submit ONE copy of your essay. Keep 1 hard copy and electronic copy as backup.
Course Administration
Handing In Papers
All indicated page numbers are double-spaced, font size 12, Times New Roman. Include a title page
with your project title and the names of the team members.
You are expected to use APA or MLA for citations wherever needed.
Late projects and final essays may be submitted to the Communication General Office. Ask the staff at
the front desk to put your essay in the TA’s mailbox. Always keep a hard copy and an electronic copy of
your assignments/papers.
Policy on Lost Papers
It is your responsibility to keep a backup copy of your assignments in hard and electronic format.
Policy on Late Papers
10
Assignments are due on the dates specified. No deferrals will be awarded except for medical reasons or
family emergency. A penalty of 2 percentage points a day including weekends or holidays will be
deducted for late papers. Any assignment later than 7 days will not be accepted.
Marking
Your TA will be responsible for marking the written assignments (except the proposal). The course
instructors will jointly evaluate your oral presentations. Appeals may be made to the person who marked
your assignment, then to the second course instructor, and then finally to the Chair of the Undergraduate
Program. Appeals may result in higher grades, grades which stay the same, or lower grades, since appeals
are marked by a different instructor.
GENERAL CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING PAPERS:
Content: Squarely addresses the topic/question posed; uses appropriate sources; integrates course themes
and content.
Argument: Makes a clear, thoughtful argument, supported by evidence, in response to the topic/question
posed; takes into account alternative positions, within the space constraints; is logically consistent;
offers independent intellectual judgment.
Organization: The paper is well-structured, with an introduction setting out the topic and key point(s)
you will make; systematic exposition of ideas, not straying from the topic; a conclusion which follows
from the body of the paper.
Style: Intelligibility of expression (grammar, spelling, etc.); proper referencing/acknowledgement of
sources (including lectures & course readings).
GRADING EXAMPLES FOR ALL ASSIGNMENTS:
D
Pass: Content knowledge indicated, but no application or integration/analysis. Assignment
is incomplete or not relevant to course. Bare minimum of relevant literature. Generally
incomprehensible argument and minimally acceptable organization and style. Excruciating to
read.
C-/C
Weak: Weakness in all four elements of research, description, analysis and
interpretation/evaluation. Assignment is complete with little relevance to course. Serious
style or grammar issues impede reader’s comprehension.
C+
Competent: Acceptable grasp of course content, with adequate analysis and integration of
material. Mastery of adequate body of relevant material. Good organization and coherent
argument. Awareness of formats required, and effort shown in completing assignments
competently and completely. Some grammar and style problems. Little structure to the flow.
Cliché or boring.
11
B-/B
Good: Analytical, meets all requirements of assignment analytically, but little interpretation
or originality. Journeyman writing or expression. Primarily descriptive, little effort to blend
expressive or analytic voice. Not publishable, but mastery of research craft. Meets the test of
the assignment, shows good descriptive writing, competent research. Logic or flow problems
impede publication. Argument or conclusion weak. Minor problems with using citations
correctly, but generally accurate or close. Paper may be interesting but has some problems
that interfere with reading. Mode of reasoning is analytic. May state the well known, but does
it succinctly. Demonstrates competence but not vision in the field. No major conceptual
errors or errors of fact.
B+
Excellent: Sound expression of ideas. Interesting. Highly competent writing. Shows
substantial knowledge of information and theory plus analysis, synthesis and application.
Mastery of substantial relevant material. Clearly organized, well structured assignments.
Appropriate formatting. Competent in sentence structure, vocabulary, spelling, etc. Clear
editorial position, strong analytically, less confident evaluative judgment. Low likelihood of
publication, but shows potential for originality.
A-/A
Outstanding: Memorable title and content, clear argument and structure, excellent proofs,
smooth writing, confident authorial voice and evaluative judgment, and good claim to
originality of thought and/or expression. Both analytic and interpretive (blends first person
and third person or subjective and objective perspectives; compares across and between
evidence/data). Good likelihood of publication. Text is grammatical and conventionally
punctuated. Reading is enabled by sophisticated and appropriate vocabulary and syntax
including fluent use of transitions. References are conventionally and accurately reported.
Critical evaluation of thematic context. Mastery of wide range of relevant material.
Sophisticated and articulate argument, style, format and structure. Quoted material is properly
cited. Paper is interesting to read. Writer tackles subject confidently and with some energy.
Highly original. A leader in the field.
A+
Exceptionally original, with very strong likelihood of publication.
VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT PLAGIARISM
Please read this document very carefully - - especially section 3.0. If you do not understand anything on
these two pages, ASK YOUR PROFESSOR FOR CLAFIFICATION. If you do something prohibited by
this policy and claim that you did not know you were not supposed to do it or that you did not understand
the policy, you will still be held responsible. It is your responsibility to make sure you understand these
regulations.
SUBJECT: CODE OF ACADEMIC HONESTY
1.0 STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLE
12
All members of the University community share the responsibility for the academic standards and
reputation of the University. Academic honest is a cornerstone of the development and acquisition of
knowledge. Academic honesty is a condition of continued membership in the university community.
2.0 ACADEMIC DISHONESTY
Academic dishonesty, like other forms of dishonesty, is misrepresentation with intent to deceive or
without regard to the source or the accuracy of statements or findings. Academic dishonesty, in whatever
form, is ultimately destructive of the values of the University; it is furthermore unfair and discouraging to
the majority of students who pursue their studies honestly. Scholarly integrity is required of all members
of the University.
3.0 FORMS OF ACADEMIC DISHONESTY
The illustrations presented below are considered to e representative but not definitive nor exhaustive of
activities which could be considered to constitute academic dishonesty.
(a) Plagiarism is a form of dishonesty in which an individual submits or presents the work of another
person as his or her own. Scholarship quite properly rests upon examining and referring to the
thoughts and writings of others. However, when excerpts are used in paragraphs or essays, the
author must be acknowledged using an accepted format for the underlying discipline. Footnotes,
endnotes, references and bibliographies must be complete.
Plagiarism exists when all or part of an essay is copied from an author, or composed by another
person, and presented as original work. Plagiarism also exists when there is inadequate recognition
given to the author for phrases, sentences, or ideas of the author incorporated into an essay.
(b) Submitting the same essay, presentation, or assignment more than once whether the earlier
submission was at this or another institution, unless prior approval has been obtained.
(c) Cheating on an examination or falsifying material subject to academic evaluation. This includes the
unauthorized sharing of material, e.g. two or more students using the same textbook during an “open
book” examination; or the use of course notes or any aids not approved by an instructor during a
“closed book” examination; unauthorized possession or use of an examination or assignment. This
also includes the submission of identical or virtually identical assignments by students who studied
together.
(d) Submitting as one’s original work, essays, presentations or assignments which were purchased or
otherwise acquired from another source.
(e) Using or attempting to use other students’ answers; providing answers to other students; or failing to
take reasonable measures to protect your answers from use by students in assignments, projects or
examinations.
(f) Impersonating a candidate in an examination or availing oneself of the results of such impersonation.
(g) Submitting false records or information, in writing or orally. This includes the falsification or
submission of false laboratory results, documents, transcripts or other academic credentials.
(h) Stealing or destroying the work of another student.
(i) Removing books or other library material without authorization, or mutilating or misplacing library
materials, or engaging in other actions which deprive other members of the University community of
their opportunity to have access to the academic resources of the library.
(j) Unauthorized or inappropriate use of computers, calculators and other forms of technology in course
work, assignments or examinations.
13
4.0 NOTIFICATION OF STANDARDS OF ACADEMIC HONESTY
All members of the University community have a responsibility to ensure that they themselves, and
others, be familiar with generally accepted standards and requirements of academic honesty. These shall
be published in the University Calendar and in the Registration Handbook. Ignorance of these standards
will not preclude the imposition of penalties for academic dishonesty.
Course outlines and course instructors are expected to inform students at the beginning of the semester of
any special criteria of academic honesty pertinent to the class or course. Failure of a course instructor to
provide such special information does not in any way exempt a student from penalties imposed by or on
behalf of the University under the general guidelines noted in 3.0 above.
5.0 PROCEDURES AND PENALTIES
5.1 PROCEDURES
Procedures to be followed by the University in imposing a penalty for acts of academic dishonesty or an
appeal therefrom are detailed in the policy establishing the University Board on Student Discipline and in
the policy establishing the Senate Committee on Disciplinary Appeals respectively.
5.2 TYPES OF PENALTY
Penalties imposed by the University for academic dishonesty may include one or more of the following:
a warning, a verbal or written reprimand, reassessment of work, failure on a particular assignment, failure
in a course, denial of admission or readmission to the University, forfeiture of University awards or
financial assistance, suspension or expulsion from the University.
5.3 DETERMINATION OF PENALTIES
In deciding on the appropriate sanction to be imposed for an act of academic dishonesty, consideration
may be given to the following factors:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
the extent of the dishonesty;
the inadvertent or the deliberate character of the dishonesty;
the importance of the work in question as a component of the course or program;
whether the act in question is an isolated incident or part of repeated acts of academic dishonesty; and
any other mitigating or aggravating circumstances.
It is your responsibility to make sure you understand these regulations. Please read each section very
carefully. If you do not understand any part of the regulations, ASK YOUR PROFESSOR FOR
CLARIFICATION.
In your term papers and written work, you must give proper references for your sources. If you coy
something word for word from a book or article, you must indicate that it is a quote by putting it in
quotation marks “like this”, and you must identify the source: author, date, page number. Even if you
don’t copy something word for work - - if you paraphrase it and change some the words - - you must still
identify the source: author, date, page number.
You will be guilty of plagiarism:
-
if you fail to provide proper references for your sources, including page numbers;
if you do not put quotation marks around material copied from other sources (even if it is only a part
of a sentence!);
if you do not identify the source of material that you paraphrased;
14
-
if you copy work of another student;
if you submit work that is identical to that submitted by a student you studied with.
If it is determined that you did any of these things, it is likely that you will suffer one or more of the
following
-
you may receive a failing grade in the course;
you may receive a failing grade on the assignment you may be suspended from the university for one
or more semesters you may lose any financial assistance you were receiving.
This is VERY serious business. Make sure you understand the University’s policies!
S10.01 through S10.04 (available online at
http://www.sfu.ca/policies/Students/index.html)
To be handed in to your TA in week 13
15
16
Download
Related flashcards
Create Flashcards