This is the (not authored by me) advice I give people in the US:

1. On the record vs. Off the record vs "On Background".

"On the record": This should be established at the very beginning of your discussion, full stop. Reporters at this level are operating on the presumption, absent an explicit agreement beforehand, that anything you say to them freely is basically public: They can quote you verbatim in the paper and associate that quote with your name. It is not rude for you as a source to ask this bluntly. It is also ok to say something like, "I'm potentially interested in talking on the record later in this conversation, but first, I'd like to talk off the record to understand your direction. Is that alright?" If the reporter says anything but "yes, that's alright" then the issue needs to be resolved before any kind of interview proceeds.

It is ok to ask: "I'd like to know what kind of questions you want to ask me, and to answer them, but I'd like to do so off the record first. Is that ok?"

"Off the record": If you are off the record, the expectation is that the information you tell the reporter exists in something like a "black box." The reporter gets to know what you're saying, and, if you're ok with it, take notes or record it so they can focus on listening to you and understanding the situation. The information should not exist in the reporter's published works in any way. You are not an anonymous source, you are not "a person familiar with the matter." You are off the record.

"On background": This one is a little murkier, and worth asking the reporter to define if they offer. "On background" means that a reporter may reference/use the information you gave them, but without identifying a source of that information in any way that might allow for identification. This is not "According to a professor," or "a faculty member said," unless you give your explicit consent for that wording. "On background" must be discussed with a reporter to clarify how your information will be used or presented.

Other questions:

2. What role are your quotes/information going to play in this story?

Will the reporter tell you how many other faculty sources are involved, and if so, if they are being named or staying anonymous?

The reporter may not be ethically able to give you a detailed answer, but you may learn important details. Things to consider:

Are your claims going to be the central evidence of the story, or one of a dozen or so sources describing the same issue? If you are an anonymous source, would you be joining your voice to many other anonymous sources? Being part of a critical mass of reporting/sources, even when anonymous, is both strong reporting *and* works to provide you safety and cover if a third party attempts to ID you.

3 It is ok to ask, "I'd like to know what kind of questions you want to ask me, but I'd like to do so off the record first."