Reflection: GCU Code of Conduct

Assessment Traits

Requires Lopeswrite

Assessment Description

Review the Code of Conduct and Academic Standards in the university policy handbook.

Go to https://www.gcu.edu/academics/academic-policies.php#h-university-policy-handbook and click on the University Policy Handbook link.

Find the Code of Conduct and Academic Standards section.

Part 1: In your own words, explain one academic integrity violation and one code of conduct violation. Give a specific example of what the two identified violations could be.

Part 2: Respond to the following questions in 200-250 words:

The academic integrity section discusses academic dishonesty. One area of dishonesty is plagiarism. Define plagiarism in your own words.

Why do you think students plagiarize?

Describe how students can avoid academic dishonesty, in group work or as an individual?

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are not required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite.

Rubric Criteria

Academic Integrity Violation

9 points

Criteria Description

Academic Integrity Violation

5. Target

9 points

Explanation and example of one academic integrity violation is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details.

4. Acceptable

7.65 points

Explanation and example of one academic integrity violation is complete and includes relevant details.

3. Approaching

6.75 points

Explanation and example of one academic integrity violation is provided but lacks relevant detail.

2. Insufficient

5.85 points

Explanation and example of one academic integrity violation is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Explanation and example of one academic integrity violation is not provided.

Code of Conduct Violation

9 points

Criteria Description

Code of Conduct Violation

5. Target

9 points

Explanation and example of one code of conduct violation is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details.

4. Acceptable

7.65 points

Explanation and example of one code of conduct violation is complete and includes relevant details.

3. Approaching

6.75 points

Explanation and example of one code of conduct violation is provided but lacks relevant detail.

2. Insufficient

5.85 points

Explanation and example of one code of conduct violation is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Explanation and example of one code of conduct violation is not provided.

Plagiarism Definition

4.5 points

Criteria Description

Plagiarism Definition

5. Target

4.5 points

Definition of plagiarism in own words is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details.

4. Acceptable

3.82 points

Definition of plagiarism in own words is complete and includes relevant details.

3. Approaching

3.38 points

Definition of plagiarism in own words is provided but lacks relevant detail.

2. Insufficient

2.93 points

Definition of plagiarism in own words is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Definition of plagiarism in own words is not provided.

Plagiarism Rationale

9 points

Criteria Description

Plagiarism Rationale

5. Target

9 points

Reason for why students plagiarize is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details.

4. Acceptable

7.65 points

Reason for why students plagiarize is complete and includes relevant details.

3. Approaching

6.75 points

Reason for why students plagiarize is provided but lacks relevant detail.

2. Insufficient

5.85 points

Reason for why students plagiarize is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Reason for why students plagiarize is not provided.

Plagiarism Avoidance

9 points

Criteria Description

Plagiarism Avoidance

5. Target

9 points

Description of how students can avoid academic dishonesty in both group work or as an individual is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details.

4. Acceptable

7.65 points

Description of how students can avoid academic dishonesty in both group work or as an individual is complete and includes relevant details.

3. Approaching

6.75 points

Description of how students can avoid academic dishonesty in both group work or as an individual is provided but lacks relevant detail.

2. Insufficient

5.85 points

Description of how students can avoid academic dishonesty in both group work or as an individual is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Description of how students can avoid academic dishonesty in both group work or as an individual is not provided.

Mechanics of Writing

2.25 points

Criteria Description

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

5. Target

2.25 points

No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

4. Acceptable

1.91 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

3. Approaching

1.69 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

2. Insufficient

1.46 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

Format/Documentation

2.25 points

Criteria Description

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.

5. Target

2.25 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present.

4. Acceptable

1.91 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

3. Approaching

1.69 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

2. Insufficient

1.46 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

Total

45 points