Photo by picjumbo.com on Pexels.com
The kind of writing that students are expected to do at university is quite unlike anything most of them have done before. They have to present a coherent argument grounded in the existing literature, yet at the same time must avoid simply reporting or regurgitating what that literature says. A whole new set of academic literacy practices, namely referencing and citation, must be learned. These practices are unfamiliar to many undergraduates, especially those from countries that place less emphasis on such matters, but penalties for getting them wrong can be serious.
Academic writing is, of course, not taught or learned in a vacuum, but shaped by the material conditions in which it occurs, which includes the working conditions of staff charged with teaching and assessing writing. Precarious working conditions means that staff have less time and resources to provide appropriate feedback on writing or to guide students away from inappropriate practices. It is this intersection between precarious working conditions for teaching staff and the way students are supported with academic writing that is the focus of our new article in Teaching in Higher Education.
Changes in the structure and funding of UK higher education have led to larger class sizes, more diverse student needs, and greater reliance on casually employed staff; teaching staff with insecure or contingent contracts that are temporary or hourly-paid. The University and College Union reported in 2020 that 33% of academic staff were employed on fixed-term contracts. Research on precarity in higher education has usually focused on its impact on staff wellbeing, but less is known about the way that staff precarity might affect teaching and learning. In our article, we argue that precarity has serious implications for the support and feedback students get with their writing.
Almost all academics these days have heavy workloads and feel short of time, but those on precarious contracts are at particular risk of being short-changed in terms of time allocation for their duties. They are often given their teaching schedules at short notice, and paid minimal amounts for the numerous other duties around actual contact time such as reading formative drafts of work and holding student tutorials that can be so crucial in supporting students with writing. Providing meaningful formative feedback on writing is one of the most valuable means of helping students to develop their work and obtain higher grades, but it is time-consuming and staff on precarious contracts may be unwilling or unable to devote time to it when they are not being paid to do so.
It has also been shown that the sense of not having enough time impacts the support relationships staff can develop with their students (Leathwood and Read, 2022), yet these relationships are one of the factors with the greatest positive impact on student learning (Hattie, 2009). If students feel that their teachers hardly know them or are not invested in the relationship, it may be harder to seek help with writing and easier to succumb to malpractice.
If students do plagiarise or commit other forms of malpractice, precariously employed staff may be poorly positioned to adequately deal with it. First, such staff may not be paid or even invited to attend meetings or training sessions where information about academic integrity and plagiarism policies is shared, so they may feel unsure how to respond to such cases. Second, even if they know what they should do, they may lack the motivation or time to do it. Checking written work for plagiarism or inappropriate use of AI significantly extends the time needed for marking. Most universities have a policy for dealing with suspected malpractice that involves several emails, communications with an academic integrity team, at least one meeting, and then opportunities for the student to resubmit work.
Part of what motivated us to write this article and draw attention to these issues was the experience of watching an hourly-paid lecturer at our own institution spend hours checking academic essays for plagiarism and communicating about this to the relevant team, only to be told that she would not be paid for the many extra hours it had entailed. Such experiences make it more likely that tutors have no choice but to turn a blind eye to academic malpractice.
Our article highlights how precarious working conditions hamper teaching staff’s ability to provide high quality feedback on writing and build the kind of trusting relationships that would encourage students to seek help with writing rather than resort to malpractice. The cumulative effect of lack of time, support and training for precariously employed staff may contribute to a climate in which malpractice becomes more likely to happen and less likely to be detected.
Sharon McCulloch and Josie Leonard (both University of Central Lancashire)
Teaching in Higher Education 