Teaching Staff's Ethics in Studies

Clearly defined assessment conditions help reduce the risk of different interpretations and misunderstandings.

An ethical learning environment enables students to learn actively, ask questions, discuss and receive constructive feedback.

In the study process, teaching staff should:

• encourage students to participate actively;
• provide opportunities to ask questions and discuss;
• direct criticism at the work or argument rather than at the student personally;
• apply the same rules equally to all students;
• assess according to pre-established criteria;
• take established individual study needs into account;
• communicate changes to the study process clearly.

The learning environment should allow students to ask questions, discuss and make mistakes without humiliation or personal devaluation.

 

The prevention of academic dishonesty begins with the design of teaching and assessment.

Where consistent with the learning outcomes of the course unit, teaching staff are advised to:

• assess not only recall of facts but also their application;
• use case studies and practical situations;
• encourage students to justify their chosen solutions;
• combine several assessment methods;
• use interim and formative assessments;
• use different datasets, situations or task elements;
• provide opportunities to briefly explain the reasoning behind the completed work or chosen solution;
• clearly define the boundaries of permitted collaboration.

The assessment method must first and foremost correspond to the learning outcomes of the course unit. Prevention of academic dishonesty should be based not only on control or sanctions, but also on appropriate teaching and assessment design.

 

Before an assessment begins, teaching staff are advised to briefly remind students of:

• the duration of the assessment;
• permitted materials and tools;
• whether internet access is permitted;
• whether AI may be used;
• rules on communication with other persons;
• what a student should do if a technical or other problem arises.

It is advisable to avoid general wording where specific instructions can be provided. For example, instead of simply asking students to act honestly, clearly state whether they may use notes, the internet, AI or communicate with other persons.
 

If possible dishonest conduct is observed, the teaching staff member is advised to document the specific circumstances and follow the procedures established by the University and the unit.

It is important to describe objectively observed facts rather than make assumptions about the student’s personality or intentions.

At Vilnius University, it is not permitted to:

• publicly accuse a student in class;
• draw conclusions before checking the circumstances;
• apply informal sanctions instead of the established procedure;
• discuss a possible breach with persons who do not need this information.

The student must be given an opportunity to explain the situation.
 

Students’ study achievements must be assessed according to pre-established criteria applied equally to everyone.

Assessment should not be influenced by:

• personal likes or dislikes;
• the student’s views;
• participation in civic or other activities;
• previous disagreements;
• the student’s reputation;
• other circumstances unrelated to the study achievements being assessed.

If a conflict of interest arises or there are doubts about impartiality, these issues should be resolved before the assessment is carried out.

 

Feedback helps students understand their achievements and plan further learning.

When providing feedback, where possible, it is important to explain:

• what was done well;
• what was missing for a higher grade;
• how the student could improve.

Feedback should relate to the work completed and the established assessment criteria, rather than to the student’s personal characteristics.

 

Individual students’ study achievements and information about possible breaches should not be made public or disclosed to persons who do not need this information.

When discussing common mistakes, good examples or other study-process cases, it is advisable to use anonymised information.