Ethical guidelines for teaching and studying

The University of Eastern Finland is committed to following the guidelines of the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity (TENK) on responsible conduct of research. All teachers and students at the university are expected to be familiar with these guidelines published by TENK (RCR).

Universities have a duty to organise their activities in such a way that scientific research, artistic activities, education and teaching follow honesty and responsible conduct of research. The university community values of the University of Eastern Finland include

• freedom of science, teaching and learning
• openness and courage
• responsibility
• impact. (2 § / Universities Act.)

According to the TENK, the key characteristics of responsible conduct of research include

• Integrity.
• General carefulness and exactitude in conducting research.
• Presenting and evaluating information using ethically sustainable methods.
• Researching and evaluating information suitable for the field of research in question and ensuring transparency in publishing.
• Appropriately acknowledging the work and achievements of other researchers.
• Conducting and reporting in accordance to the requirements set for scientific knowledge.

Commitment to good scientific practices promotes the high quality of research, teaching and studies and the reliability of the university activities. It is in the interest of the entire university community that the principles of good scientific practice are respected. Commitment to good scientific practice must be reflected in all activities.

Teachers must follow the principles of good scientific practice in teaching. Teachers acknowledge that they are role models for students and partners who build a good working atmosphere for colleagues. In order to achieve these goals, teachers work professionally in their relations with students and support the honest, critical, creative, open and community approach of the scientific community through their own actions.

• They maintain their own expertise.
• They treat students equally and fairly.
• They do not, fraudulently or without the permission of the persons concerned, use students’ works or study performances in their own activities.
• In accordance with the UEF ethical guidelines, they intervene in fraudulent acts such as plagiarism or fraud in an exam.
• They are responsible for ensuring that students are adequately informed about the principles of responsible conduct of research and their application in their own discipline.
• Teachers supervising the thesis take responsibility for the student’s familiarity with the instructions on responsible conduct of research published by TENK.
• If the teacher acts unethically towards the student, the student can take the matter to the teacher’s supervisor.

The supervisor must take steps to investigate the matter.

• In teaching, teachers’ main goal is to promote students’ learning and achieve their goals and learning outcomes.
• Teachers give positive and constructive critical feedback to students during their studies.
• They respect students’ views and the constructive feedback they receive from the students.
• They guide students to change the way they work if they recognise features that weaken the students’ learning outcomes or interfere with the activities of other students.

• Students’ main goal in studying is to learn and achieve their learning goals.
• Their credits are based on genuine competence.
• They are responsible for following the principles of responsible conduct of research in studies, such as the preparation of papers, writing essays, answering exams and other study performances.
• They are aware of their role as a responsible actor in the scientific community.
• They acknowledge the value of the work done by others and act honestly in all situations.
• Through their own actions, they support the ethical, critical, creative, transparent and communal approach of the scientific community.
• They make sure that all their study works and final projects (thesis) reveal clearly, where the information, original ideas and methods come from, and that their origin is properly referred to.
• Students respect the teaching and research work of the teachers.
• In teaching situations, they maintain a positive atmosphere by being active with knowledge of their responsibilities.
• They provide constructive feedback on teaching.
• If necessary or in doubt, they ask for more information on the correct procedures, using their own initiative.
• During teaching and exams, they work without disturbing the others’ chance to work in peace.
• They carry out independently their own learning assignments and theses, unless cooperation is expressly permitted.

Prohibited activities

For more information and examples see TENKs pages.

Cheating in an exam
Notes and aids cannot be used in an exam unless this is expressly permitted.

Example of a prohibited activity: in a classroom exam, the student searched for information on the mobile phone. The student had forbidden notes with her/him in the exam.

Example of a prohibited activity: assistive devices were forbidden in the Moodle exam. However, during the exam, the student had used the learning material of the course, her/his own notes, textbooks as well as internet pages.

Example of a prohibited activity: the student had used an online translator in a Swedish essay, even though the learning task had to be done using her/his own language skills only.

Prohibited cooperation
Cooperation or the use of external help is forbidden unless this is expressly permitted.

Example of a prohibited activity: students completed learning assignments together, although it was an individual performance.

Example of a prohibited activity: students created a Whatsapp group for a remote exam so that they could ask each other for advice during the exam.

Acting on behalf of another person

Example of a prohibited activity: the student's mother took the remote exam on behalf of the student.

Example of a prohibited activity: the student bought her/his thesis from a ghostwriter.

Plagiarism
It is forbidden to use another person's text in one's own studies without indicating where the information, original ideas and methods come from. Examples of plagiarism: inappropriately quoting a text or part of it, a pictorial expression or translation obtained from another student, the Internet or elsewhere. Students must clearly indicate the sources they use.

Example of a prohibited activity: the student had not marked all the sources used in the thesis.

Example of a prohibited activity: While working on a thesis, the student found a completed master's thesis on the Internet that partly dealt with the same topic as her/his own thesis. The student copied the text of the master's thesis and referred to the sources used in the master's thesis in her/his thesis; the student failed to refer to the thesis s/he had found.

Example of a prohibited activity: while working on the thesis, the student found a Finnish language source on the Internet that had originally been translated into Finnish from an English language source. The student referred to the English language research through the translation of a Finnish language source s/he found, without proper reference to the source.

Example of a prohibited activity: the student found a published text, the idea of which was presented in her/his own text in her/his own words, without reference to the original text.

Example of a prohibited activity: the student completed a learning task by cutting and copy pasting various pieces of published texts s/he found on the Internet and in literature, without proper references.

Passing on your own pieces of work to another student
It is forbidden to hand over completed assignments/pieces of work to another student for fraudulent use.

Example of a prohibited activity: the student had completed the course with an essay. S/he gave the essay to another student, who returned it to another teacher as her/his own piece
of work.

Self-plagiarism
It is forbidden to reuse your own previous performances or to use parts of your previous pieces of work as a basis for new ones without proper reference to the source.

Example of a prohibited activity: the student returned a learning assignment that s/he
had already used on another course.

Example of a prohibited activity: the student's thesis included a section from essays s/he had previously prepared and used, without references to the essays in question (self-plagiarism).

Not doing your part in pair and group work

Students must follow good academic practice in all their studies. Academic fraud is a dishonest act or measure done or taken deliberately, out of negligence or with the intent to deceive in order to give a false impression of the one’s own or another person’s competence.

It is the responsibility of a teacher to address a student’s conduct immediately and appropriately if they suspect the student of misconduct related to teaching or research. The teacher must investigate the nature and extent of the fraud verbally or in writing,  depending on the circumstances.

After the investigation, the teacher must take one of the following measures:

1. transfer processing of the detected fraud to the Dean or Director of independent institute or service centre (Language Centre, Library, Centre for Lifelong Learning, Student and Learning Services) by submitting a written report
2. guide and advise the student to take the appropriate corrective measures if, in the teacher’s assessment, the misconduct is minor or due to the student’s ignorance, or
3. conclude that based on the investigation, there is no reason to suspect the student of academic fraud and inform the student verbally or in writing that the case is dropped.

The Dean of the faculty or the Director of the independent institute or service centre investigates the suspected fraud and decides on the use of appropriate investigation measures. The student must be informed in writing about which offence they are suspected of and reserved the right for a hearing on the matter. The primary means of hearing the student is by a written reply. If necessary, an oral hearing is held. The request for a reply or invitation to a hearing is sent to the student accompanied with an acknowledgement of receipt or by some other verifiable means. Other involved parties may also be heard on the suspected misconduct. If an oral hearing is held, it must be documented by means of a signed minutes of the meeting. The student may invite a support person to the hearing.

After the hearing, the Dean or the Director of the independent institute or service centre decides whether misconduct has taken place (if not, the case is dropped) and whether it is minor or severe and on possible follow-up measures. A violation may be considered minor when, for example, it is non-recurring and due to negligence or ignorance and has caused only minor damage. The Dean issues a written complaint for minor violations. If necessary, the Dean may also recommend that the teacher assign a failing or lowered grade for the study attainment in question. The person in charge of the course assigns the failing or lowered grade for the study attainment. The disciplinary action issued by the Dean or the Director of the independent institute or service centre is communicated to the student, teacher and head of department of the degree programme for information purposes and possible follow-up measures.

The teacher’s decision to assign a failing or lowered grade constitutes a decision related to the grading of a course which the student may appeal to the university’s Board of Appeal.

If, after hearing the student, the Dean or the Director of the independent institute or service centre finds the student guilty of severe misconduct, they must inform the Rector in writing and submit all documentation on the case to the Rector. When assessing the severity of the misconduct, factors to be taken into consideration are the repeated nature and extent of the fraud.

The Rector may issue a written warning to the student, propose to the Board that the student be suspended temporarily or decide that no misconduct has taken place.

The decision by the Rector or Board is communicated to the student, teacher and Dean or Director of the independent institute or service centre and Student and Learning Services for information purposes and possible follow-up measures.

Decisions on severe violations may be appealed to the Administrative Court of Eastern Finland. The decision must include appeal instructions. A decision of the Administrative Court that concerns a disciplinary action against a student referred to in Section 45 of the Universities Act may not be appealed.

Cases of suspected fraud that concern a thesis included in advanced studies and are detected before evaluation are processed in accordance with this university policy. If a suspected violation of good scientific practice is detected in a thesis included in an upper university degree after the thesis has been accepted, the case is processed in accordance with the guidelines of the Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity. Notice of suspicion of violation of good scientific practice to the university’s Rector.

University of Eastern Finland procedure in cases of suspected fraud, diagram (Appendix)

According to Section 45 of the Universities Act, a student may be issued a written warning if the student:

1. disrupts teaching
2. behaves in a threatening or violent manner
3. acts fraudulently or otherwise violates the university’s regulations
4. refuses to submit a drug test certificate, as referred to in Section 43 d, or
5. has used narcotics, based on the statement referred to in Section 43 d, for purposes other than medical treatment in a way which undermines his or her functional capacity.

If the act or omission is severe or if the student continues the disruptive behaviour referred to in subsection 1 above despite a written warning, the student may be suspended from the university temporarily for a period of up to one year.

According to Section 45 a 2 of the Universities Act, the decision to issue a written warning or temporary suspension of the student is made by the university’s Rector and Board, respectively. Before deciding on the case, the act or omission warranting the disciplinary action must be specified, the necessary evidence must be obtained, and the student must be reserved the right for a hearing on the matter.

Section 45 of the Study Regulations of the University of Eastern Finland states the following on the procedure in cases of academic fraud and disruptive behaviour.

 “A study attainment may be rejected if a student is guilty of study-related or research-related misconduct, while completing the study attainment in question.  The exam’s supervisor shall have the right immediately to remove from the exam any student who is suspected of cheating or otherwise disturbs the exam.  The study attainment shall also be failed in cases where cheating is only discovered after the exam.

If cheating is suspected when an electronic exam system (e.g. EXAM) is used, the suspected cheating shall be evaluated by reviewing the video recording of the exam. If the exam supervisor has interrupted a student’s exam due to disturbance or suspected cheating, the supervisor shall enter the reason for the interruption into the student’s exam papers, and also whether the student admits or denies making the disturbance or cheating.

In a case where a student is suspected of cheating or disturbing an exam, they must be offered the opportunity to be heard.  If proven, the student’s misconduct shall be reported in writing to the Dean or the Director of the academic unit concerned, who shall decide whether any further measures need to be taken. The Dean or the Director of the academic unit may, at their discretion, report the cheating to the Rector, who may take the disciplinary measure(s) referred to in Section 45 of the Universities Act.”

According to the Academic Rector's decision (22 December 2015) confirming the process description for the electronic plagiarism detector:

“Based on his or her expertise, the supervisor decides whether citations and quotations are in line with good scientific practices and thus acceptable. The decision must be made within two (2) weeks of returning the thesis (electronic form). If they are in order, the student is informed that the originality of the thesis has been confirmed and the process ends. After this, the student is free to submit the thesis to examiners. If the citations and quotations are not in order, the supervisor rules on the severity of the detected plagiarisms.

• Minor: The supervisor gives feedback to the student for correcting or finalising the thesis. The student corrects the thesis in accordance with the feedback. The student resubmits the corrected thesis for a Turnitin report. A corrected thesis may be resubmitted once for pre-examination and plagiarism detection.
• Severe: The supervisor initiates a process to investigate the suspected study-related or research-related misconduct.

The guidelines apply to video and/or microphone supervision of exams taken outside the campus and other interactive learning evaluation situations held over the Internet. Where applicable, the guidelines can also be used in other similar situations.

1. Consider the following before deciding on the use of remote supervision
   • Check what is stated in the curriculum on the evaluation method for the course. The exam format must be specified in the course description. If remote supervision of exams is not mentioned in the course description, the use of remote supervision requires changing the curriculum. The Dean or, if so decided, the Vice Dean of the faculty has the authority to change a curriculum during the academic year.
   • Think about whether remote supervision of the exam is necessary. Can the achievement of learning objectives and competence be verified or evaluated by other means without real-time remote supervision, such as with an open-book exam that requires the ability to apply skills and knowledge? It may also be helpful to discuss the evaluation method with students.
     For more advice, contact servicedesk@uef.fi
     You can also write to the address in questions related to remote exams.
   • If you decide to use remote supervision, please note that it must be implemented using every means to protect students’ privacy and collect as little personal data as possible. The teacher in charge of the course assesses on a case-by-case basis which implementation method is suitable in the situation while acknowledging the above. For help in making the assessment, contact servicedesk@uef.fi.
2. Use the digital services of the University of Eastern Finland for remote supervision: Zoom (Funet Meet) or UEF O365 Teams.
   • The maximum number of participants in a remotely supervised exam is 100 students. To ensure the privacy of personal data, however, the recommended number of participants is significantly lower than this.
3. Students cannot be required to attend a remotely supervised exam from their home or another private location chosen by the student. At the student’s request, an alternative method for taking the exam that does not involve remote supervision and treats students equally must be offered. Plan the alternative method for taking the exam ahead of time. Whenever permitted by COVID-19 restrictions, students should be given the option to take the remotely supervised exam on the university’s premises. Another option is to consider organising the exam using other electronic exam systems.
   Any alternative method must also treat students equally. In other words, all students must be given a chance to take the exam within roughly the same period of time, such as by the end of the period.
   Note that students belonging to an at-risk group must be able to take the exam in a way that does not require attendance in person on the campus.
4. Give students clear information well ahead of time on how the course will be evaluated. Inform them of at least the following:
   • Students have the right to request an alternative method for evaluating the course.
   • Students also have the right to discontinue remote supervision for unexpected personal reasons, for example. In such cases, the student can turn off the webcam, for example. If this happens, the exam may be failed.
   • Inform students ahead of time as clearly as possible and in writing whether the remote supervision will involve a video or audio connection, phone call, supervision through the use of activity or log data or something else.
   • Inform students of the type of Internet connection, device and environment required for the exam.
   • Advise students to choose a place for taking the exam that contains as few personal details as possible.
   • Clearly inform the students if they are required to share their camera with other students due to the way the exam is organised (such as a group exam).
   • Tell students which devices, applications, materials or other aids they are allowed to use during the exam.
   • Inform students about who will supervise the exam.
   • Protect the supervised exam with a password. The password is sent to students’ UEF email address.
   • Inform the students that if they want, they can use a virtual background offered by the electronic service.
5. The exam supervisors must be assigned in advance and their names shared with the students. Access to the exam must be restricted by a password, for example. In Zoom, this can also be done by granting permissions to join the meeting when creating the meeting.
6. Supervisors are permitted to check students’ proof of identity in a remote exam. The need for proof of identity and the verification method are assessed on a case by case basis. As a rule, information related to identity verification is not stored.
   • If it necessary to verify students’ identity, this can be done by any of the following means, using a secure connection and after ensuring that access to the information is restricted:
     • require students to login to the remotely supervised exam with their personal username and password
     • use some other means of identification other than a personal identity code (such as student number or student card)
     • make a phone call during the video call to verify the student’s identity
     • require that students show proof of ID to the camera during the meeting. In this case, you must use the breakout rooms command or some other method that allows students to identify themselves privately
   • Students’ identity may not be verified by any means necessary. For example, don’t ask students to email you a copy of their passport. Treat students equally when verifying their identity.
   • In situations where a face mask is used, assess the method for verifying identity on a case by case basis.
7. Implementing remote exam supervision
   • If remote supervision is necessary, this should be done in a way that ensures the smallest threat to privacy and collects the least amount of personal data. For example, consider whether it is necessary to monitor students via webcam or if it is sufficient to use screen sharing. Requiring students to present their face, voice and home environment collects more personal data than simply sharing the student’s desktop during the exam without audio. On the other hand, screen sharing may expose students’ personal information.
   • The general principle is that students cannot see each other’s video feeds.
   • Do not save students’ video or audio feeds.
   • Exam answers are confidential information , and students may not be allowed to see each other’s answers during the exam.
8.  Suspicions of cheating and other abnormalities during a remote exam are handled according to the standard procedure for academic fraud.
   • Apply the university’s guidelines on cases of academic fraud and abnormalities
   • If it is necessary to review log data or otherwise investigate the suspected fraud after the exam using data collected by remote supervision, this must be done in accordance with the university’s guidelines and principles of good governance.
   • In the event of an abnormality during a remotely supervised exam (such as a general connection failure, disruption in the supervisor’s connection or electronic system, outsiders joining the supervised exam), the exam supervisor decides whether the remotely supervised exam can be continued after the situation has been resolved as in a normal exam. User activity data and log data may be processed to investigate the abnormality in accordance with UEF’s log policy.
   • In the event of suspected cheating during the exam, the supervisor may take a screenshot of the incident for later investigation.
   • Students have the right to discontinue supervision (by turning off their webcam, for example), but doing this may result in failing the exam.

1. The university supervises exams in order to ensure that students are treated equally. In supervising exams, the university may use live video or the login, activity and log data collected by the digital system.
2. Your identity will be verified when taking the exam.
3. If you are taking the exam in a location of your choosing, participating in remote supervision is voluntary. By participating in remote supervision, you agree to the terms of the supervision, such as that you must keep your webcam turned on. You have the right to discontinue the supervision during the exam for unexpected personal reasons, for example, but this may cause you to fail the exam.
4. If you refuse to agree to voluntary remote supervision for privacy reasons or lack of a suitable device, for example, the university will arrange for you to take the exam under remote supervision in a public space or by some other alternative means.
   Individual arrangements
   Instructions for students who are at risk of serious illness from COVID-19: course arrangements for the autumn term 2020
5. Students are responsible for the functioning of their Internet connection, applications and devices
6. Personal data are processed in accordance with the university’s data protection and security policies
   Processing of personal data (in finnish)
   Information security guidelines (sign in UEF account)
   Information security policy (sign in UEF account)
7. Your teacher will provide more information about other details of the exam.
8. For more information about remote supervision in general, contact servicedesk@uef.fi.

• Under the Universities Act, education, teaching and granting of degrees are part of a university’s statutory duties. Universities must organise their activities in a manner that ensures a high international standard in research and education in conformity with research integrity and good scientific practice. Universities Act (Sections 2, 6 and 7)
• Students’ skills and knowledge may be evaluated by means of a written or oral examination or other similar study assignment. For details, see the Study Regulations
• The lawful bases for remote exam supervision and related processing of personal data are compliance with a legal obligation and exercise of official authority (EU GDPR Article 6(1)(c) and 6(1)(e)).
• The exam supervisor is bound by professional secrecy regarding any personal circumstances of exam participants that the supervisor may learn while performing actions related to the processing of personal data (Data Protection Act 1050/2018, Section 35). Exam answers are confidential documents (Act on the Openness of Government Activities, Section 24(1), paragraph 30).

• The publicity of education does not mean that links to remote teaching are shared publicly on a website.
• Publicity should be understood as the opportunity to attend teaching.
• The publicity of teaching is supported and enforced by the public availability of the university’s curricula.
• The option to attend remote teaching must be arranged upon request.
• While publicity is the guiding principle, it can and sometimes must be restricted.
• The publicity of teaching can be restricted for a justified reason. These reasons include but are not limited to the following:
  •  The space used in teaching does not permit participation. In remote teaching, this may mean that the licence of the service being used is not sufficient to accommodate guests, for example.
  •  The nature of the content of teaching prevents participation by outsiders. Such situations include, for example
    • review of an individual study attainment
    • evaluation of a student’s work
    • feedback on learning
    • other non-public teaching events
    • the content of teaching is confidential or sensitive (such as hospital training, presentation containing business secrets used in teaching)
• The visibility and processing of students’ personal data must also be assessed separately if outsiders participate in remote teaching. Efforts must be made to minimise the amount of personal data being shared.

Opportunities to participate in remote teaching can also be organised separately. These may include, for example, various open days organised by the university that can be attended remotely.