Developed by the National Academic Integrity Network (NAIN), The NAIN guidelines are structured, and the recommendations are classified under the following four headings: • What everyone needs to know • What lecturers and educators need to know and do • What programme managers and institutional leads need to know and do • What students need to know and do

"This seminar focused on developing feedback literacy in both staff and students and redesigning assessment to build on this new-found understanding. It drew on student and staff expertise across two main strands. Strand 2 looked at disentangling assessment and feedback and explored the various forms of feedback used in assessment and in the absence of assessment. Assessment design was highlighted so that opportunities to provide feedback to inform future work are intentionally embedded at the development phase."

Defending Assessment Security in a Digital World explores the phenomenon of e-cheating and identifies ways to bolster assessment to ensure that it is secured against threats posed by technology. Taking a multi-disciplinary approach, the book develops the concept of assessment security through research from cybersecurity, game studies, artificial intelligence and surveillance studies. Throughout, there is a rigorous examination of the ways people cheat in different contexts, and the effectiveness of different approaches at stopping cheating. This evidence informs the development of standards and metrics for assessment security, and ways that assessment design can help address e-cheating. Its new concept of assessment security both complements and challenges traditional notions of academic integrity. By focusing on proactive, principles-based approaches, the book equips educators, technologists and policymakers to address both current e-cheating as well as future threats.

"This seminar focused on developing feedback literacy in both staff and students and redesigning assessment to build on this new-found understanding. It drew on student and staff expertise across two main strands. Strand 1 took a ‘deep dive’ to explore what learner-focused feedback means and how staff and students can enable impacts from different feedback approaches. Particular emphasis was placed on feedback literacy: the capacities of teachers and students to make the most of feedback opportunities. What capabilities do teachers and students need in order to take up their complementary roles in feedback processes? Strand 2 looked at disentangling assessment and feedback and explored the various forms of feedback used in assessment and in the absence of assessment. Assessment design was highlighted so that opportunities to provide feedback to inform future work are intentionally embedded at the development phase."

This seminar focused on developing feedback literacy in both staff and students and redesigning assessment to build on this new-found understanding. It drew on student and staff expertise across two main strands. Strand 1 took a ‘deep dive’ to explore what learner-focused feedback means and how staff and students can enable impacts from different feedback approaches. Particular emphasis was placed on feedback literacy: the capacities of teachers and students to make the most of feedback opportunities. What capabilities do teachers and students need in order to take up their complementary roles in feedback processes? Strand 2 looked at disentangling assessment and feedback and explored the various forms of feedback used in assessment and in the absence of assessment. Assessment design was highlighted so that opportunities to provide feedback to inform future work are intentionally embedded at the development phase.

"The assessment design decisions framework consists of six categories: • Purposes of assessment • Context of assessment • Learner outcomes • Tasks • Feedback processes • Interactions Each category in the framework is explored in this guide, with a series of assessment considerations. • Explanatory text • Key questions for educators to consider • Links to online and print resources • Links to other relevant parts of the guide • Short vignettes of educator experiences. Educator experiences have been drawn from both interview data and our own experiences. Direct quotes have been edited to enhance clarity of meaning and ease of reading"

This Framework helps university teachers make good decisions about assessment design. The six categories draw from existing evidence on good assessment, and data from a study of Australian university assessment practices. The Framework identifies the key considerations in assessment design, including the effects of assessment on learning

"This seminar explored concerns around academic integrity in Higher Education and how assessment redesign can eliminate many of these concerns. The seminar was divided into two elements. The first session explored why, how and when students cheat in Higher Education. It opened up discussion and debate on academic integrity, plagiarism, collusion and contract cheating and the role we play in it as educators. The second part of the seminar focused on re-thinking how we assess and redesigning assessment approaches. The presenter discussed strategies that include encouraging students to see assessment, both, as an opportunity to learn and an opportunity to demonstrate their excellence and skills. Redesigning and rethinking the tasks we ask our students to complete in order to demonstrate attainment of the desired life-long skills in tandem with module and programme learning outcomes can effectively eliminate both the desire and the opportunity to ‘cheat’. Across the two sessions participants were asked to self-reflect, to consider their values and establish why they assess as they do. Traditions and assumptions were challenged & participants were supported in the redesigning of assessment approaches."

This seminar explored concerns around academic integrity in Higher Education and how assessment redesign can eliminate many of these concerns. The seminar was divided into two elements. The first session explored why, how and when students cheat in Higher Education. It opened up discussion and debate on academic integrity, plagiarism, collusion and contract cheating and the role we play in it as educators. The second part of the seminar focused on re-thinking how we assess and redesigning assessment approaches. The presenter discussed strategies that include encouraging students to see assessment, both, as an opportunity to learn and an opportunity to demonstrate their excellence and skills. Redesigning and rethinking the tasks we ask our students to complete in order to demonstrate attainment of the desired life-long skills in tandem with module and programme learning outcomes can effectively eliminate both the desire and the opportunity to ‘cheat’. Across the two sessions participants were asked to self-reflect, to consider their values and establish why they assess as they do. Traditions and assumptions were challenged & participants were supported in the redesigning of assessment approaches.

"This seminar explored concerns around academic integrity in Higher Education and how assessment redesign can eliminate many of these concerns. The seminar was divided into two elements. The first session explored why, how and when students cheat in Higher Education. It opened up discussion and debate on academic integrity, plagiarism, collusion and contract cheating and the role we play in it as educators. The second part of the seminar focused on re-thinking how we assess and redesigning assessment approaches. The presenter discussed strategies that include encouraging students to see assessment, both, as an opportunity to learn and an opportunity to demonstrate their excellence and skills. Redesigning and rethinking the tasks we ask our students to complete in order to demonstrate attainment of the desired life-long skills in tandem with module and programme learning outcomes can effectively eliminate both the desire and the opportunity to ‘cheat’. Across the two sessions participants were asked to self-reflect, to consider their values and establish why they assess as they do. Traditions and assumptions were challenged & participants were supported in the redesigning of assessment approaches."