DQ 2: Academic integrity
Imagine the following scenario: You are taking the evidence-based practice course and one of
your classmates share an EBP project draft with you. You notice that some of the research has not been cited correctly or even at all. When you approach your classmate, the response is that
no one will notice, and it is not a big deal anyway. What are your next steps in speaking with
your classmate? Consider how this could reflect on the credibility and integrity of the individuals
involved, the university, and the profession.
In a letter from the GCU President, he states, “Academic integrity is also at the heart of our values.
We help our students develop practices that support and embrace integrity as a personal, lifelong
commitment; Make a lasting commitment to professional ethics and achieving honest, well-
deserved success.” (GCU, 2022).
I feel that constructive criticism is the best approach. What I mean by constructive criticism is to
provide clear, direct and honest feedback by suggesting actionable positive changes. Providing
alternative approaches to make positive improvements can help create a sense of genuineness
that can otherwise, in this situation, be misinterpreted as an attack. It is easy for people to get
defensive when presented with a difference of opinion, especially in this case, where ethics and
integrity are involved. Addressing the behavior, and bringing to light the possible problems it may
cause can help the classmate to realize the possibility of future problems. Sharing your own work
as an example can show the classmate that you are experienced and reputable enough to give the
feedback in the first place. Also, offering to help the classmate with resources related to research
and citing can prove you are being supportive and looking out for their best interest (Fong, 2018).
Grand Canyon University. (2022) Academic
Fong, C.J., & Schallert, D.L., & Williams, K.M., & Williamson, Z.H., Warner, J.R., Shengjie, L. &
Kim, Y.W. (2018). When feedback signals failure but offers hope for improvement: A process
model of constructive criticism. 30(42-53). Thinking Skills and
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS
Discussion Questions (DQ)
Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality
Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes
I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.
Grading Rubric Guidelines
Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions.
|Application of Course Knowledge –
Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations
Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days.
(5 points possible per graded thread)
Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week.
|Minus 1 Point||Minus 2 Point||Minus 3 Point||Minus 4 Point||Minus 5 Point|
|Grammar, Syntax, APA
Note: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted.
Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing.
The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition
|0 points lost||-5 points lost|
|Total Participation Requirements
per discussion thread
|The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day.||The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days|
|Early Participation Requirement
per discussion thread
|The student must provide a substantive answer to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course instructor (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week.||The student does not meet the requirement of a substantive response to the stated question or topic by Wednesday at 11:59 pm MT.|