Focusing on ReadingTask 11.G2. E3. C4. F5. A6. D7.J8. B9.L10.H 11. N 12. M 13. Q 14.K 15. I 16.R 17.O 18.PTask 21)The reasons are as follows”Firstly, students sometimes view academic dishonesty as a normal incidence and something ordinary. There are many reasons that they use to justify their cheating.Secondly, new techniques of cheating have been developed, including the use of high-tech tools, although the old ones are still dominant on campus, which makes it even more difficult for the faculty to identify.Thirdly, it is a common view to equate grades with the value of the student. Furthermore, grades are used to predict one’s future success. So some students tend to practice academic dishonesty with the aim of getting higher grades.Fourthly, little is known about the degree of academic dishonesty and no methods are devised to combat the problem. Besides, there are no strategies for deterring academic dishonesty for the faculty.Fifthly, honor codes are essential to reducing the level of cheating in colleges and should be established. However, their importance has been neglected.Last but not least, academic dishonesty is no longer a task of classroom management that can well be remedied by a single faulty with teaching responsibility. Administrators and professional organizations are expected to work together to maintain a healthy learning environment with a high level of trust between the faculty and the administration.2)Old techniques include bringing notes to class and having information written on water bottles,pens and gum wrappers. New techniques of cheating include using cell phones to get the information, communicate with others outside the exam room to obtain answers and searching answers on the web during an exam.Other forms include copying test responses from a classmate, taking exams for other people, failure to cite other people’s work, and purchasing research papers and presenting them as his/her work. Also actions such as breaking into the office or teachers files to access the test or answer key, sabotaging peers ongoing work or gaining illegal access to school computers to change official grades are all forms of academic dishonesty. (B)3)There are many reasons that students use to justify cheating: lack of time, poverty, uncaringinstructors, laziness, peer pressure, poor rile models, fear of failure and technology that has allowed cheating to be done easily. (C)Besides, research shows that a common view equates grades with the value of the student.Secondly, grades are used to predict one’s future success. This may cause the students to practice academic dishonesty.4)Studies show that honor codes were essential to reducing the level of cheating in colleges.Honor codes would be more successful when they were combined with a climate that emphasized the importance of academic integrity and an honor system that allowed for strong student involvement in the enforcement of academic integrity initiatives. Therefore, the administration should strive in the creation of the campus environment, seek the full support of all the college constituents, and ensure the implementation of the honor codes at theinstitution. (N)5)Academic fraternity means “all the people who work in academia.”It can stress integrity as a core institutional value that will shape the students’academic success.Task 31. a2. j3. W4. m5. k6. o7. v8. x9.n 10.b 11. u 12.y 13.d14. i 15. f 16. z 17. t 18.p 19. S 20. q 21. e 22. g 23. c 24. h 25. l 26. rTask 51)Another kind of academic dishonesty happens sometimes among researchers when they yieldto the temptation of making a series of great discoveries. So they invent false information to deceive others, and then publish them.2)Bouville(2010) held that the major reason for the students to avoid academic dishonesty wasto obey the rules and escape punishment. Cheaters may get high grades which they do not deserve, and this unfair advantage will tempt them to continue with this fraudulent behaviour.3)Third, in each department there should be experienced faculty members, acting as academicintegrity chairmen, who are responsible for contacting and offering help to their fellow colleagues. Lastly, for faculty members who have tackled the cases of academic dishonesty well, public thanks and admiration should be given to them for what they have done.Task 6Main idea: Students developed new techniques of cheating, while the old ones are still dominant on campus.Task 7In the area of education, academic dishonesty is a chronic problem. Students have developed new techniques of cheating, while the old ones are still dominant on campus. Cheaters follow dishonest practices because of many reasons. Prevention of academic dishonesty demands joint efforts from students, teachers and administrators, of which the students’ contribution is vital for they are the ones to be subjected to the penalties. For the teachers, they can adopt four strategies to maintain academic integrity and meanwhile make efforts to motivate the students. For the administrators, they should strive in the creation of a healthy academic climate and ensure the implementation of the honor codes.Task 8(omitted)Task 9(omitted)Task 10Academic DishonestyAcademic dishonesty occurs when a student uses or attempts to use unauthorized information in the taking of an exam; or submits as his or her own work themes, reports, drawings, laboratory notes, or other products prepared by another person; or knowingly assists another student in such acts or plagiarism. Such behavior is abhorrent to the university, and students found responsible for academic dishonesty face expulsion, suspension, conduct probation, or reprimand. Instances of academic dishonesty ultimately affect all students and the entire university community by degrading the value of diplomas when some are obtained dishonestly, and by lowering the grades of students working honestly.Examples of specific acts of academic dishonesty include but are not limited to:a) Obtaining unauthorized information. Information is obtained dishonestly, for example, bycopying graded homework assignments from another student, by working with another student on a take-home test or homework when not specifically permitted to do so by the instructor, or by looking at your notes or other written work during an examination when not specifically permitted to do so.b) Tendering of information. Students may not give or sell their work to another person who plans to submit it as his or her own. This includes giving their work to another student to be copied, giving someone answers to exam questions during the exam, taking an exam and discussing its contents with students who will be taking the same exam, or giving or selling a term paper to another student.c) Misrepresentation. Students misrepresent their work by handing in the work of someone else. The following are examples: purchasing a paper from a term paper service; reproducing another person’s paper (even with modifications) and submitting it as their own; having another studentdo their computer program or having someone else take their exam.d) Bribery. Offering money or any item or service to a faculty member or any other person to gain academic advantage for yourself or another is dishonest.e) Plagiarism. Unacknowledged use of the information, ideas, or phrasing of other writers is an offense comparable with theft and fraud, and it is so recognized by the copyright and patent laws. Literary offenses of this kind are known as plagiarism.One is responsible for plagiarism when: the exact words of another writer are used without using quotation marks and indicating the source of the words; the words of another are summarized or paraphrased without giving the credit that is due; the ideas from another writer are borrowed without properly documenting their source.Acknowledging the sources of borrowed material is a simple, straightforward procedure that will strengthen the paper and assure the integrity of the wri ter. The Student’s Guide to English 104 —105, provides guidelines to aid students in documenting material borrowed from other sources, as does almost every handbook on writing style.Academic dishonesty is considered to be a violation of the behavior expected of a student in an academic setting as well as a student conduct violation. A student found responsible for academic dishonesty or academic misconduct is therefore subject to the appropriate academic penalty; to be determined by the instructor of the course, as well as sanctions under the university Student Disciplinary Regulations.If an instructor believes that a student has behaved dishonestly in a course, the following steps are to be followed:1. The instructor should confront the student with the charge of dishonesty and arrange a meetingwith the student to discuss the charge and to hear the student’s explanation.2. If the student admits responsibility for academic misconduct, the instructor shall inform the student (a) of the grade on the work in which the dishonesty occurred, and (b) how this incident will affect subsequent evaluation and the final grade. Because academic dishonesty is also a student conduct violation under Section 4.2.1 of the Student Disciplinary Regulations, the instructor must report the incident in writing to the Dean of Students.After investigating the incident and discussing it with the instructor, the Dean of Students, or his/her designee, will meet with the student and depending on the severity of the offense as well as on the student’s past conduct record, may handle the matter through an administrative hearing or schedule a hearing before the All University Judiciary (AUJ).This hearing, conducted according to the procedures outlined in the Student Disciplinary Regulations, is to determine the disciplinary action to be taken. In any case, the student’s academic adviser will be informed of the incident but may not insert any record of it in the student’s academic file.3. If the student claims to be not responsible for the alleged violation of academic misconduct, the instructor may not assign the student a grade for the work in question until the question of responsibility is resolved, unless circumstances require that an interim grade be assigned. The instructor shall consult with his or her department chair and report the incident in writing to the Dean of Students.The Dean of Students will refer the case to the Office of Judicial Affairs for investigation. After reviewing the report and completing an investigation, the Office of Judicial Affairs will file aformal complaint against the student if it is determined that there is cause to believe academic misconduct occurred. The case may be adjudicated through an administrative hearing or referred to a hearing before the All University Judiciary (AUJ) depending on the nature and severity of the violation as set forth in the Student Disciplinary Regulations.If the case is referred to the AUJ both the student and instructor will be invited to attend an AUJ hearing and present pertinent information. If the Administrative Hearing Off icer (in a minor case) or the AUJ (in a major case) finds the student responsible for the charge of academic misconduct, the instructor will inform the student (a) of the grade on the work in which the dishonesty occurred, and (b) how this incident will affect subsequent evaluation and the final grade. The Administrative Hearing Officer or AUJ will determine the appropriate disciplinary action with respect to the nature of the violation.If the Administrative Hearing Officer or AUJ finds the student “not responsible” for academic misconduct, the instructor will grade the student accordingly on the work in question and the student’s grade in the course will not be adversely affected. If th e student is found responsible the student’s adviser will be informed of the decision but shall not insert any record of the action in the student’s academic file.4. If a student either admits dishonest behavior or is found responsible for academic misconduct by the AUJ, the Off ice of Judicial Affairs (OJA) or AUJ may impose any of the following sanctions:a) Disciplinary Reprimand: An official written notice to the student that his/her conduct is in violation of university rules and regulations.b) Conduct Probation: A more severe sanction than a disciplinary reprimand, to include a period of review and observation during which the student must demonstrate the ability to comply with university rules, regulations, and other requirements stipulated for the probation period.c) Suspension/Deferred Suspension: The suspension is deferred subject to a definite or indefinite period of observation and review. If a student is found responsible for a further violation of the university Student Disciplinary Regulations or an order of a judiciary body, suspension will take place immediately.Def i niteThe student is dropped from the university for a specific length of time. This suspension cannot be for less than one semester or more than two years.Indef i nite:The Student is dropped from the university indefinitely. Reinstatement may be contingent upon meeting the written requirements of the AUJ specified at the time the sanction was imposed. Normally, a student who is suspended indefinitely may not be reinstated for a minimum of two years.d) Expulsion: The student is permanently deprived of the opportunity to continue at the university in any status.5. A student accused of academic misconduct has the option to stay in the class or to drop the class if the drop is made within the approved time periods and according to the regulations established by the university. If the student chooses to drop the class, the student will be required to sign a statement of understanding that if the student is later found responsible for academic misconduct, then the student will receive an F for the course.6. Procedures for appeal of either the All University Judi ciary’s conduct decision or theinstructor’s grade are outlined in the Student Information Handbook.7. In instances in which the student admits responsibility or is judged to be responsible by OJA or the AUJ, a staff member of the Dean of Students Off ice will counsel the student in an effort to deter any further such incidents.8. Student records concerning academic dishonesty are maintained in the Dean of Students Office for a period of seven years, after which the file records are purged. These student records are confidential; nothing from them appears on a student’s academic transcript.9. In the event that an instructor is uncertain how to handle an incident of suspected academic dishonesty, the Dean of Students is available at any time to provide advice and assistance to the instructor in deciding a proper course of action to be taken.10. Students enrolled in the College of Veterinary Medicine are bound by an honor code. A chargeof academic dishonesty may be made by a student or instructor to the Interclass Honor Board chairperson according to the procedures outlined in the Honor Code, or the instructor may follow procedures outlined above. The Interclass Honor Board functions as the judiciary of the College of Veterinary Medicine for the allegations presented to it.Other violations related to academic misconduct may include subsection 4.1.11 Misuse of Computers and subsection 4.2.20 Unauthorized Sale of Others’Intellectual Works.These subsections are located in the Iowa State University Student Disciplinary Regulations under section 4 of the Conduct Code.</~catalog/2005-07/geninfo/dishonesty.html>Short reportAcademic dishonesty occurs when a student uses or attempts to use unauthorized information in the taking of an exam; or submits as his or her own work themes, reports, drawings, laboratory notes, or other products prepared by another person; or knowingly assists another student in such acts or plagiarism. Such behavior is abhorrent to the university, and students found responsible for academic dishonesty face expulsion, suspension, conduct probation, or reprimand. Instances of academic dishonesty ultimately affect all students and the entire university community by degrading the value of diplomas when some are obtained dishonestly, and by lowering the grades of students working honestly.Examples of specific acts of academic dishonesty include obtaining unauthorized information, tendering of information, misrepresentation, bribery, plagiarism, etc. Academic dishonesty is considered to be a violation of the behavior expected of a student in an academic setting as well as a student conduct violation.In Iowa State University, a student found responsible for academic dishonesty or academic misconduct is therefore subject to appropriate academic penalty or to be determined by the instructor of the course, as well as sanctions under the university Student Disciplinary Regulations. If an instructor believes that a student has behaved dishonestly in a course, ten steps are to be followed to handle the problem. The case of Iowa State UniversityResearch Paper WritingTask 1Background part:The introductionObjective:To give an overview of various forms of academic dishonesty, student responses to academic dishonesty when it occurs and the measures taken by the faculty and institutional administrator to prevent its occurrence in their institutions.Synthesis of different views on a particular field: For example, in the section “Forms of Academic Dishonesty,” in Para. B, there are opinions of both Jonson and Martin (2005) and Petress (2003), which are organized by transitional words, such as “Petress noted of other forms of academic dishonesty ...”Similarities or differences of outside sources:For example, in the section “Faculty and Academic Dishonesty”, when it comes to what the faculty should do to reduce academic dishonesty, there are various opinions from Para J to L. Perress (2003) holds that they should set role models for the students and implement the measures that will help prevent academic dishonesty. Whitley and Keith-Spiegel believe that they should be encouraged to form a statement concerning academic integrity in their syllabi and to discuss integrity concerns in their classrooms. Kibler notes four strategies to help the faculty to implement academic integrity. Cole and Kiss suggest that more efforts should be made to motivate the students by the teachers.Task 2a. The forms of cheating.Text 3 deals with students’ new and old techniques of cheating, together with researchers’ practices of academic dishonesty.Reading 1 focuses on academic dishonesty in online courses.Reading 1 gives more updated and reliable information.b. The reasons that students offer for their cheating.In Text 3 the reasons the students use to justify their cheating include: lack of time, poverty, uncaring instructors, laziness, peer pressure, poor role models, fear of failure and technology that has allowed cheating to be done easily. (Para. C)In Reading 1, the reasons are multifold because opinions vary. Some of the reasons are based on a student’s individual characteristics (Gerdeman 2001), some are relevant to peer inf luence or peers’acceptability of cheating (Stephens, 2007), while others have something to do with the existence of an honor code (McCabe, 2002). Meanwhile, there are other common reasons by Chiesl and Bunn, of which seeing other students cheat and the perception of the percentage of students who cheat are the most significant. (Para. I,J,K)Reading 1 gives more updated and reliable information.c. The definition of academic dishonesty.In Text 3, there is no specific definition of academic dishonesty.In Reading 1, the author believes that definitions of academic dishonesty across studies tend to be about the same. Using the scale of Don McCabe (2002), the author defines academic dishonesty from eight aspects. Other studies differentiate planned and panic cheating, e.g., Bunn, Caudill and Gropper (1992). In a comparative study of online versus on-ground academic dishonesty, Stuber- McEwen, Wisely, and Hoggat (2009) believe that there are seven forms. Stephens, Young, and Calabrese (2007) examined various forms of conventional and digital cheating. With regard toe-learning, Underwood (2003) and Rogers (2000) def ine the term respectively, while Howell et al (2009) reviews various forms of technological cheating. (Para.B, C, D, E, F, G)Reading 1Task 31) Serious and formal2) Angry and bitter3) Angry and ironical4) Angry and ironical5) Ironical6) Ironical7) Angry and ironical8) Angry9) Ironical10) Tranquil and formal11) Tranquil12) Tranquil and formal13) Formal and serious14) Formal and serious15) Expressing the speaker’s surprise and attitude against this16) Tranquil17) Expressing surprise, Ironical18) Appealing to the readers’ emotions by the use of questions, Ironical19) Appealing to the readers’ emotions by the use of questions, Angry and ironical20) “You” is used in the sentence to indicate people in general to appeal to their emotions, whichshortens the distance between the speaker and the readers21) Appealing to the readers’ emotions by the use of questions22) Appealing to the readers’ emotions by the use of facts and questions. Expressing the speaker’sdisagreementTask 41) Which one is a stand-alone literature review and which one is a literature review as a partof the paper?Text 3 and Reading 1: stand-alone literature reviewReading 2: literature review as a part of the paper2) What similarities and differences characterize the three papers in terms of writing style?Similarities: All of them follow almost the same pattern, i.e., introduction, body, and conclusion.Differences: Text 3 and reading 1 synthesize other people’s research and f indings to draw the conclusion, while Reading 2 uses the author’s own research and f indings. Therefore, in Reading 2 there is the part of “Methods”, which explains in detail the participants, materials, and design and procedure. The first-person narration is used to describe the process, which makes it less formal than the other two papers.3) What are the objectives of the three papers respectively?Text 3: To give an overview of various forms of academic dishonesty, student responses to academic dishonesty when it occurs and the measures taken by the faculty and institutional administrator to prevent its occurrence in their institutions.Reading 1: Examine perceptions of academic dishonesty in online and face-to-face courses, and discuss methods to reduce academic dishonesty in online courses.Reading 2: To investigate participants’ attitudes toward cheating and the effects of academic motivation, self-eff icacy, and academic integrity on cheating behaviors.4) How many aspects or sections do the two stand-alone literature review contain respectively?What are they?ThreeIntroduction, body, and conclusion5) Is the order of those aspects in each literature review logic al? And what’s the relationship?Yes.The literature review consists of three aspects: an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. The introduction part may tell the reason one is writing a review; the signif icance of the topic; the scope of the review; the organizational pattern of the review. The body will have a clear classif ication and synthesis of one’s reviewed readings in terms of chronological order or importance order. The conclusion should have a summary of the main agreements and disagreements in the literature and then any gaps or areas for further research. At last one’s overall perspective on the topic should be dealt with.6) How do the two authors illustrate their arguments in each section? Do they use their own research and f i ndings or synthesize other people’s research and f i ndings?By synthesizing other people’s research and f indings.No.Reading 2Task 51) indicate, is, identified, tend, will be2) predicted, was, have suggested, are, showed, appeared, were, wereTask 6A chimera is an individual composed of cells with different embryonic origins. The successful isolation of f ive human embryonic stem cell (HESC) lines in 1998 increased scientists’ ability to create human/non-human chimeras and prompted extensive bioethics discussion, resulting in what has been dubbed “the other stem cell debate” (Shreeve 2005). The debate about chimeras has focused on five main arguments. The Unnaturalness Argument explores the ethics of violatingnatural species boundaries. The Moral Confusion Argument alleges that the existence of entities that cannot be definitively classified as either human or non-human will cause moral confusion that will undermine valuable social and cultural practices. The Borderline-Personhood Argument focuses on great apes and concludes that their borderline-personhood confers a high enough degree of moral status to make most, if not all, chimeric research on them impermissible. The Human Dignity Argument claims that it is an affront to human dignity to give an individual “trapped” in the body of a non-human animal the capacities associated with human dignity. Finally, the Moral Status Framework maintains that research in which a non-human animal’s moral status is enhanced to that of a normal adult human is impermissible unless reasonable assurances are in place that its new moral status will be respected, which is unlikely given the motivations for chimeric research and the oversight likely to be provided.These arguments provide different rationales for restricting chimeric research and have different implications for the range of chimeric research that will be deemed unethical.</entries/chimeras/#Int>Task 71) Which sentences provide the background of the paper?Academic dishonesty is a problem that has been plaguing colleges and universities for generations. An investigation of any institution today will certainly reveal some forms of academic dishonesty.2) Which sentences form the literature review?Researchers of academic dishonesty vary in their reports of how many students cheat in college.3) What is the main limitation of the previous studies that the author mentioned?However, most research on academic dishonesty has relied primarily on self-reports of cheating behaviors.4) What’s the objective of the paper?The purpose of the study is to investigate participants’ attitudes toward cheating and the effects of academic motivation, self-efficacy, and academic integrity on cheating behaviors.5) What are the methods that the author will use?The present study includes an empirical portion in which participants are put in a situation in which cheating may be to their advantage.6) What is the author’s hypothesis?The hypothesis is that participants would be most likely to cheat when they are offered a monetary reward for success.Task 8Introduction 11) an introduction of the topic and its background2) a review about the previous studies3) the limitation of the previous studies4) a gap for the signif icance of the study5) the hypothesis of the author6) the objective of the paper7) the methodologyIntroduction 21) an introduction of the topic and its background2) a review about the previous studies and the limitation of the previous studies3) the limitation of the previous studiesTask 91) A2) B3) E4) C5) D6) FTask 10This paper details the strategies used for curbing academic dishonesty in online courses.Task 11Biologists have long known of patterns of inheritance, and eventually of inheritance mechanisms, that go beyond genetic inheritance (Jablonka & Lamb 2005; Sapp 1987). Two fundamental types of arguments led to this conclusion: arguments based on observations regarding patterns of inheritance, and arguments concerned with the localization of hereditary factors inside cells. Arguments of the first kind were based on hereditary relations and inheritance patterns that fail to conform to the rules ofMendelian inheritance (e.g., maternal inheritance). If Mendelian inheritance patterns are the result of the way the chromosomes in the eukaryotic cell nucleus behave, non-Mendelian heredity must depend on separate inheritance processes, mechanisms, or systems (Beale 1966; Sager 1966). Second, there were observations of hereditary phenomena that seemed to depend on factors residing in the cytoplasm of cells, rather than their nucleus, where the genetic material is localized. The interpretation of these observations was highly contested (Darlington 1944; Sapp 1987). Today, we know that some of these observations are related to the (maternal) inheritance of organelles residing in the cytoplasm, such as the mitochondria and chloroplasts, organelles which carry their own DNA. This however does not encompass all the mechanisms which underlie cytoplasmatic inheritance. Paradigmatic work on cytoplasmatic inheritance done by Sonneborn, Beale, Nanney, and their colleagues in the 1950s and 1960s, was concerned with patterns of inheritance in unicellular organisms, and in particular the protist genus Paramecium. It was suggested that the self-sustaining regulatory loops that maintain gene activity or inactivity in a cell would persist through cell division, provided the non-DNA components of the system (many of which reside in the cytoplasm in eukaryotic microogranisms) were shared among daughter cells. In this way, alternative regulatory phenotypic states would be inherited. Among the properties whose inheritance was studied were mating-type variations, serotype variations, and the structural or “surface inheritance” of ciliary structures. Remarkably, microsurgical changes to the ciliary structures on the surface of Paramecium cells are inherited by offspring. The stability of induced characters once the stimulus was removed (called “cellular memory”) and the number of generations characters were maintained varied widely.However, the results indicated that long-term stability and heritability need not be the result of changes to the DNA sequence (Nanney 1958).During the 1950s to 1970s a growing set of observations indicated that determined and differentiated states of cells are transmitted in cell lineages. These observations concerned studies of Drosophila imaginal discs by Ernst Hadorn; Briggs and King’s cloning experiments with amphibians; Mary Lyon’s work on X-chromosome inactivation; and work establishing the in vitro clonal stability of cultured cell lines. Eventually, the term epigenetic inheritance came to refer to hereditary variation that does not involve changes to the DNA sequence.The brief account of some of the early work on unicellular organisms given above illustrates some。
