Abstract
Having a more holistic understanding of accessibility in relation to academic integrity that goes beyond a discussion of learning disabilities and accommodation forms is necessary for higher education to be inclusive of disabled learners and critically explore the purpose of academic integrity equitably. This chapter first defines ableism and how it can manifest itself on campus and in online courses to then briefly frame the ableist nature of remote proctoring software and how assessment design is often itself ableist in necessitating proctoring software. The chapter will expand on the problematic nature of competition in high-stakes assessments that is necessarily at odds with accessibility and builds pedagogical barriers to reinforce how signature pedagogies in some disciplines can continue to support inequitable and ableist assessments. The chapter highlights the need to review assessment design and pedagogy to be accessible. It ends by emphasizing how trust needs to be built in educational spaces and that it is a lack of trust and opaque procedures that guides many of the inequitable and ableist academic integrity practices and policies in higher education institutions. It suggests four strategies to support assessment design that keep accessibility in mind and that in turn support a necessary conversation that centers citational ethics instead of surveillance that can harm disabled learners.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, G. (2020). Accessibility suffers during the pandemic. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/04/06/remote-learning-shift-leaves-students-disabilities-behind
AODA Alliance. (2017). Hangout steps [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oe4xiKknt0
Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new Jim code. Wiley.
Bertram Galant, T. (2007). The complexity of integrity culture exchange: A case study of a liberal arts college. The Review of Higher Education, 30(4), 391–411.
Bozikovic, A. (2022). When it comes to accessibility, architects must hold themselves to a higher standard. The Globe and Mail. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/art-and-architecture/article-when-it-comes-to-accessibility-architects-must-hold-themselves-to-a/
Bridges, J. (Director). (1973). The Paper Chase [Film]. 20th Century Fox.
Brown, L. X. Z. (2020). How automated test proctoring software discriminates against disabled students. Centre for Democracy & Technology. https://cdt.org/insights/how-automated-test-proctoring-software-discriminates-against-disabled-students/
Costa, K. (2020). Trauma-aware teaching checklist. 100 Faculty. https://docs.google.com/document/d/13yiEXjdErGoaOEh1M2hZtaq2tyfL8woY3tfYI3s30ng/edit
Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic ableism: Disability and higher education. University of Michigan Press.
Hussain, W. (2020). Pitting people against each other. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 48(1), 79–113.
International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI). (2021). The fundamental values of academic integrity (3rd ed.). ICAI. https://www.academicintegrity.org/fundamental-values/
Jackson, L., Haagaard, A., & Williams, R. (2021). Disability dongle. Platypus: The CASTAC Blog. https://blog.castac.org/2022/04/disability-dongle/
Jacobs, D. L. (2011). The case against law school. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/deborahljacobs/2011/10/11/the-case-against-law-school/?sh=2a1cf5f75f99
Macfarlane, K. (2021). Disability without documentation. Fordham Law Review, 90, 59–102.
Maynard, R., & Betasamosake Simpson, L. (2022). Rehearsals for living. Penguin.
Mozorov, E. (2013). To save everything, Click Here: The Follow of Technological Solutionism. Public Affairs.
Noble, S. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. NYU Press.
Ontario Human Rights Commission. (2016). Policy on ableism and discrimination based on disability. https://www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/Policy%20on%20ableism%20and%20discrimination%20based%20on%20disability_accessible_2016.pdf
Pagaling, R., Eaton, S. E., & McDermott, B. (2022). Academic integrity: Considerations for accessibility, equity, and inclusion. University of Calgary.
Panther, C., & Eaton, S. E. (2021). Issues and problems in educational surveillance and proctoring technologies. Canadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity, 4, 2. https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/ai/article/view/74157
Pardy, B. (2016). Head starts and extra time: Academic accommodation on post-secondary exams and assignments for students with cognitive and mental disabilities. Education & Law Journal, 25(2), 191–208.
Price, M. (2011). Mad at school: Rhetorics mental disability and academic life. University of Michigan Press.
Seeber, K. P. (2016). The failed pedagogy of punishment: Moving discussions of plagiarism beyond detection and discipline. In N. Pagowsky & K. McElroy (Eds.), Critical library pedagogy handbook (pp. 131–138). ACRL Press.
Serviss, T. (2016). Creating faculty development programming to prevent plagiarism: Three approaches. In T. Bretag (Ed.), The handbook of academic integrity. Springer.
Silverman, S. (2022). Why are academic accommodations positions as “situationally sanctioned cheating”? https://sarahemilysilverman.com/2022/01/05/why-are-academic-accommodations-positioned-as-situationally-sanctioned-cheating/
Sotiriadou, P., Logan, D., Daly, A., & Guest, R. (2020). The role of authentic assessment to preserve academic integrity and prompt skill development and employability. Studies in Higher Education, 45(11), 2132–2148.
Swauger, S. (2020). Our bodies encoded: Algorithmic test proctoring in higher education. Hybrid Pedagogy. https://hybridpedagogy.org/our-bodies-encoded-algorithmic-test-proctoring-in-higher-education/
University of British Columbia. (2021). Update to the community on remote proctoring software, including Proctorio. https://academic.ubc.ca/academic-community/news-announcements/news/update-remote-proctoring-software-including-proctorio
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this entry
Cite this entry
Gagné, A. (2023). Academic Integrity, Ableist Assessment Design, and Pedagogies of Disclosure. In: Eaton, S.E. (eds) Handbook of Academic Integrity. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_134-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_134-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-287-079-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-287-079-7
eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education