Collusion in Teacher Education: Ethical and Academic Implications
Introduction
Collusion in higher education refers to an unethical form of collaboration where students work together or share academic work in a way that breaches institutional rules on academic integrity (Bretag et al., 2018). In teacher education, this issue takes on added gravity because future educators are expected to model ethical behaviour and uphold academic honesty. The practice of sharing others’ assignments without the author’s consent constitutes an act of academic misconduct and violates both intellectual property rights and ethical standards of professional teaching practice.
Nature of Collusion
According to the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA, 2020), collusion occurs when a student allows their work to be copied or when two or more students collaborate on an assignment that is meant to be completed independently. Unlike legitimate collaboration, which encourages peer learning, collusion involves deceit—presenting someone else’s work as one’s own or enabling another to do so. In teacher education programmes, where reflective practice and authenticity of learning are crucial, collusion undermines the credibility of assessment outcomes and professional preparation (Harper et al., 2021).
Sharing Assignments Without Permission
The act of sharing another student’s assignment—whether through digital platforms, messaging groups, or print copies—without their prior consent raises serious ethical and legal concerns:
Violation of Author’s Rights: The original assignment is the intellectual property of its author. Unauthorized sharing constitutes a breach of copyright and confidentiality (Park, 2003).
Academic Dishonesty: It provides opportunities for plagiarism and academic fraud, eroding the reliability of assessment results.
Erosion of Trust: Such actions damage the culture of integrity and mutual respect essential in professional learning communities (Sutherland-Smith, 2010).
Negative Role Modelling: As teacher trainees, individuals engaging in collusion set a poor precedent for future ethical conduct in the classroom and among peers.
Ethical and Professional Implications
Teacher education emphasises ethical professionalism as outlined in frameworks such as The Teachers’ Standards (DfE, 2013) and the Mauritian Teacher’s Code of Conduct. Engaging in collusion contradicts the principles of honesty, fairness, and respect for others’ intellectual effort. Future teachers who participate in or condone such misconduct risk internalising unethical practices that may manifest later in their teaching careers—undermining the moral authority essential to educators (Sockett, 2012).
Preventive Measures
To mitigate collusion and unauthorized sharing, teacher education institutions should:
Promote awareness of academic integrity policies and the difference between collaboration and collusion.
Implement plagiarism detection systems and digital literacy training.
Encourage authentic assessment forms—such as reflective journals, oral defences, and contextual teaching simulations—to reduce opportunities for misconduct (Bretag, 2019).
Foster a culture of integrity through mentorship and ethical leadership among faculty.
Conclusion
Collusion, especially through sharing assignments without prior consent, is a critical challenge in teacher education. It not only compromises academic standards but also contradicts the ethical values essential for professional educators. Upholding integrity in teacher preparation is fundamental to developing educators who will, in turn, model honesty, fairness, and respect within their classrooms and communities.
References
Bretag, T. (2019). A Research Agenda for Academic Integrity. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Bretag, T., Mahmud, S., Wallace, M., Walker, R., James, C., Green, M., East, J., McGowan, U., & Partridge, L. (2018). Contract cheating and assessment design: Exploring the relationship. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(5), 652–665.
Department for Education (DfE). (2013). Teachers’ Standards. UK Government.
Harper, R., Bretag, T., & Rundle, K. (2021). Detecting contract cheating: Examining the role of assessment type. Higher Education Research & Development, 40(2), 286–299.
Park, C. (2003). In other (people’s) words: Plagiarism by university students—literature and lessons. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(5), 471–488.
Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). (2020). Contracting to Cheat in Higher Education: How to Address Contract Cheating, the Use of Third-Party Services and Essay Mills.
Sockett, H. (2012). Knowledge and Virtue in Teaching and Learning: The Primacy of Dispositions. Routledge.
Sutherland-Smith, W. (2010). Retribution, deterrence and reform: The dilemmas of plagiarism management in universities. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 32(1), 5–16.
