Emphasising academic ethics throughout the educational process is crucial for all learners. The applied research project at Tallinn Health University of Applied Sciences, titled ʻAcademic ethics as lecturer’s toolkit in the teaching process – adapting to the changing environmentʼ, explores how faculty perceive ethical values and how they communicate these values during distance learning. The study aims to describe how faculty perceive and convey academic ethics in the context of distance learning. An inductive thematic analysis was employed to analyse the data from twenty semi-structured interviews conducted with faculty members of Tallinn Health University of Applied Sciences. The analysis revealed four main categories that describe faculty perceptions regarding the nature and conveyance of academic ethics to students during distance learning. The interview data indicated that faculty primarily rely on peer support and prior experiences when navigating ethical issues. The interviews consistently reflected four key themes: academic integrity, ethical communication, peer collaboration in maintaining academic discourse, and the promotion of and adherence to established guidelines. Faculty also highlighted ethical dilemmas in distance learning, such as academic dishonesty during examinations and the challenges of monitoring student activities online. The study identified several key factors, including faculty awareness of academic ethics, the importance of colleague and institutional support, and the unique ethical challenges posed by distance learning. The findings suggest that faculty not only comprehend academic ethics but also actively promote these values, thereby enhancing studentsʼ understanding of their significance.
AbdAlgane, M. 2023. Professionalism in the classroom: how online learning influences English language instructors. Contemp. Educ. Technol., 15(4), ep476.
https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13741
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol., 3(2), 77–101.
https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Bretag, T., Harper, R., Burton, M., Ellis, C., Newton, P., van Haeringen, K. et al. 2019. Contract cheating and assessment design: exploring the connection. Assess. Eval. High. Educ., 44(5), 676–691.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1527892
Creswell, J. W. and Poth, C. N. 2018. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. 4th ed. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks.
https://pubhtml5.com/enuk/cykh/Creswell_and_Poth%2C_2018%2C_Qualitative_Inquiry_4th/
Dixon, Z., George, K. and Carr, T. 2021. Catching lightning in a bottle: surveying plagiarism futures. Online Learn., 25(3).
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v25i3.2422
Eaton, S. E. 2020. Academic integrity during COVID-19: reflections from the University of Calgary. J. Commonw. Counc. Educ. Adm. Manag., 48(1), 80–85.
Flick, U. 2018. An Introduction to Qualitative Research. 6th ed. SAGE Publications.
Kim, D. L. 2022. Plagiarism in higher education: tackling tough topics in academic integrity. Sarah Elaine Eaten, Libraries Unlimited. Public Serv. Q., 18(3), 199–200.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15228959.2022.2085422
Koskinen, M., Hilli, Y., Keskitalo, T., Talvik, M., Sandvik, A.-H., Thorkildsen, K. M. et al. 2024. Ethical dilemmas faced by healthcare teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nurs. Ethics, 31(5), 907–918.
https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330231215957
Malik, M. A., Mahroof, A. and Ashraf, M. A. 2021. Online university students’ perceptions on the awareness of, reasons for, and solutions to plagiarism in higher education: the development of the AS&P model to combat plagiarism. Appl. Sci., 11(24), 12055.
https://doi.org/10.3390/app112412055
Meccawy, Z., Meccawy, M. and Alsobhi, A. 2021. Assessment in ‘survival mode’: student and faculty perceptions of online assessment practices in HE during COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Educ. Integr., 17, 1–24.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-021-00083-9
Nowell, L., Lorenzetti, D., Jacobsen, M., Lorenzetti, L. and Paolucci, E. O. 2021. Translating caring competencies to remote working environments: a systematic review protocol. BMJ Open, 11(5), e048459.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048459
Orb, A., Eisenhauer, L. and Wynaden, D. 2001. Ethics in qualitative research. J. Nurs. Scholarsh., 33(1), 93–96.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2001.00093.x
Sachs, J. 2016. Teacher professionalism: why are we still talking about it? Teach. Teach., 22(4), 413–425.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1082732
Silverman, D. 2011. Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. SAGE Publications, London.
Sotiriadou, P., Logan, D., Daly, A. and Guest, R. 2020. The role of authentic assessment to preserve academic integrity and promote skill development and employability. Stud. High. Educ., 45(11), 2132–2148.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1582015
Tartu Ülikooli eetikakeskus. 2023. Hea teadustava (Good Scientific Practice).
https://eetika.ee/sites/default/files/2023-06/HEA%20TEADUSTAVA_2023.pdf (accessed 2025-02-09).
Walsh, J., Krienert, J., Cannon, K. and Honan, S. 2024. Professors call it cheating, students call it teamwork. J. Scholarsh. Teach. Learn., 24(2).
https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v24i 2.35191
