The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.
Academic Integrity, Ableist Assessment Design, and Pedagogies of Disclosure
Open accessOverview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
AI systems are often trained on datasets with limited representations of race and gender and exclude bodies that do not fit a 'normal' standard, including disabled bodies.
“AI systems are often trained on datasets with limited representations of race and gender and exclude bodies that do not fit a”
From Evolving intersections: AI, disability, and academic integrity in higher education (2025) · cites this paper as Gagné, 2023
In “What We Know: eProctoring Is Ableist” (page unavailable), Gagné says proctoring software is rarely tested on disabled learners and that its coding of bodies as “normal” or suspicious creates inequities for disabled students. The section also describes racial bias, but it does not say that AI systems generally are trained on datasets with limited race and gender representation. That training-data explanation and the extension beyond proctoring software are not supported by the copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredGagné (2023) advocated moving away from competitive, isolationist learning environments and instead educating students about the importance of academic integrity as a relational process between themselves and those they are learning alongside.
“To uphold a culture of integrity in classrooms, Gagné (2023) advocated moving away from competitive, isolationist learning environments and instead educating students about the importance of academic integrity as a relational process between themselves and those they are learning alongside.”
From Evolving intersections: AI, disability, and academic integrity in higher education (2025) · cites this paper as Gagné (2023)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 15 · Cited by 3
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new Jim code. Wiley.
- Bertram Galant, T. (2007). The complexity of integrity culture exchange: A case study of a liberal arts college. The Review of Higher Education, 30(4), 391–411. · DOI
- Hussain, W. (2020). Pitting people against each other. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 48(1), 79–113. · DOI
- International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI). (2021). The fundamental values of academic integrity (3rd ed.). ICAI. https://www.academicintegrity.org/fundamental-values/
- Macfarlane, K. (2021). Disability without documentation. Fordham Law Review, 90, 59–102.
- Maynard, R., & Betasamosake Simpson, L. (2022). Rehearsals for living. Penguin.
- Mozorov, E. (2013). To save everything, Click Here: The Follow of Technological Solutionism. Public Affairs.
- Noble, S. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. NYU Press. · DOI · Paper page
- Pagaling, R., Eaton, S. E., & McDermott, B. (2022). Academic integrity: Considerations for accessibility, equity, and inclusion. University of Calgary.
- Pardy, B. (2016). Head starts and extra time: Academic accommodation on post-secondary exams and assignments for students with cognitive and mental disabilities. Education & Law Journal, 25(2), 191–208.
- Seeber, K. P. (2016). The failed pedagogy of punishment: Moving discussions of plagiarism beyond detection and discipline. In N. Pagowsky & K. McElroy (Eds.), Critical library pedagogy handbook (pp. 131–138). ACRL Press.
- Serviss, T. (2016). Creating faculty development programming to prevent plagiarism: Three approaches. In T. Bretag (Ed.), The handbook of academic integrity. Springer.
Metadata
- Authors
- Gagné, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Gagné, Ann
- ORCID
- Gagné, Ann
- Venue
- Handbook of Academic Integrity
- Publisher
- Springer Nature Singapore
- Published
- 2023
- Pages
- 1-16
- OpenAlex
- W4380479927
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 15
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 3.72
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Springer eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disability Rights and Representation
- Social Sciences › Education › Disability Education and Employment
- Keywords
- academic integrity, ableism, assessment design, students with disabilities, accessibility, high-stakes testing, signature pedagogy, surveillance, inclusive higher education, online courses
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
