To explore the knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding plagiarism in a large culturally diverse sample of researchers who participated in the AuthorAID MOOC on Research Writing. An online survey was designed and delivered through Google Forms to the participants in the AuthorAID MOOC on Research Writing during April to June 2017. A total of 765 participants completed the survey, and 746 responses were included in the analysis. Almost all participants reported knowledge of the term “plagiarism”, and 89.1% of them understand (...) the meaning of the term before joining the course. Most participants reported that their university does not provide access to plagiarism detection software, and 35% participants admitted they had been involved in plagiarism during their education. Overall attitudes toward plagiarism indicated low acceptance of plagiarism. Moreover, low scores were reported for approval attitude, disapproval attitude, and knowledge of subjective norms. The most common reason for plagiarizing was lack of time, and the most common consequence was the perception that “those who plagiarize are not respected or seen positively”. Developing country researchers appear to be familiar with the concept of plagiarism, but knowledge among the participants surveyed here was incomplete. Knowledge about plagiarism and awareness of its harmfulness must be improved, because there is an obvious relationship between attitudes toward plagiarism and knowledge, reasons and consequences. The use of plagiarism-detection software can raise awareness about plagiarism. (shrink)

Direct download(2 more)   Export citation   Bookmark   3 citations  

This paper reports on a study of crowd-sourcing ‘study aid’ web platforms. Students are sharing completed academic coursework through a growing network of ‘study aid’ web platforms like CourseHero.com. These websites facilitate the crowd-sourced exchange of coursework, and effectively support plagiarism. However, virtually no data exists concerning the scope or extent of coursework being shared through these platforms. This paper reports on two experiments to monitor the frequency of coursework from a sample university uploaded onto CourseHero.com. Ultimately, both experiments failed (...) to produce a clear or meaningful measurement of coursework upload frequency. The apparently widespread use of these crowd-sourcing ‘study aid’ websites and the failure of these experiments demonstrates the need for further investigation into how much coursework is being shared through such platforms, how frequently it is shared, and what kind of coursework is being shared. Addressing these issues is an important step into measuring the impact of these wellsprings of academically dishonest behavior. (shrink)

Direct download(3 more)   Export citation   Bookmark   2 citations  

Scholarship on faculty and student perceptions of plagiarism is plagued by a vast, scattered constellation of perspectives, context, and nuance. Cultural, disciplinary, and institutional subtitles, among others in how plagiarism is defined and perspectives about it tested obfuscate consensus about how students and faculty perceive and understand plagiarism and what can or should be done about those perspectives. However, there is clear consensus that understanding how students and faculty perceive plagiarism is foundational to mitigating and preventing plagiarism. This study takes (...) up the challenge of investigating its own institution’s student and faculty perspectives on plagiarism by testing whether students and instructors differentiate between different kinds or genres of plagiarism, and measuring differences in their perception of seriousness or severity of those genres. Using a device modified from the ‘plagiarism spectrum’ published by Turnitin®, the researchers implemented a campus-wide survey of faculty and student perceptions, and analyzed the data using two different methodologies to ensure results triangulation. This study demonstrates both students and faculty clearly differentiate between kinds of plagiarism, but not on their severity. This study demonstrates both students and faculty clearly differentiate the severity between kinds of plagiarism, but not on the specific rank or order of their severity. Further, this study’s novel methodology is demonstrated as valuable for use by other academic institutions to investigate and understand their cultures of plagiarism. (shrink)

Direct download(3 more)   Export citation   Bookmark   1 citation  

Plagiarism in higher education has become widespread among students in Vietnam. This paper aims to examine the seriousness of the problem by comparing the severity of plagiarism in two universities, one of which uses Turnitin software to check its student reports. For that purpose, 977 samples have been drawn from 1434 required graduation reports written by senior undergraduates in the economics and management field from 2013 to 2015. Turnitin’s “Similarity Index” was used to check for alleged plagiarism, which was found (...) to be more widespread at the university not using Turnitin. At that university, 91.7% of the graduation reports were defined as plagiarized, while 61.7% of the reports were plagiarized at the university using the software. The main source of this problem was the use of information from the internet without citing the original authors. (shrink)

Direct download(2 more)   Export citation   Bookmark   1 citation  

Purpose While online classes have enabled many universities to carry out their regular academic activities, they have also given rise to new and unanticipated ethical concerns. We focus on the “dark side” of online class settings and attempt to illuminate the ethical problems associated with them. The purpose of this study is to investigate the affordances stemming from the technology-user interaction that can result in negative outcomes. We also attempt to understand the context in which these deleterious affordances are actualized. (...) Design/methodology/approach We obtain the data from narratives written by students at a top private university in Bangladesh about their experiences of online classes and exams and from focus group discussions with them. We use the lens of affordance theory to identify the abilities that goal-oriented actors – primarily students – obtain from the technology-user interactions, which result in negative outcomes. We also attempt to understand the contextual actualization of those affordances through the lens of Routine Activity Theory (RAT). Findings We find three deleterious affordances and three associated deviant outcomes. Non-monitorability which results in academic dishonesty, disguiseability which results in cyber-truancy, and intrudeability which results in embarrassment and harassment. Our findings reveal a deeper underlying problem with the existing educational approach in the universities of Bangladesh and suggest that there is a need to introduce more modern teaching techniques focused on issues such as student engagement and interactive learning. Originality/value To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper that combines affordance theory with RAT to identify unethical practices observed in online class settings in the context of a least developed country like Bangladesh and to examine the environmental components that give rise to the pre-conditions for the unethical practices to surface. (shrink)

No categories

Direct download(2 more)   Export citation   Bookmark  

Academic misconduct is a prevalent issue in higher education with detrimental effects on the individual students, rigor of the program, and strength of the workplace. Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have reinvigorated concern over academic integrity and the potential use and misuse of AI. However, there is a lack of research on academic integrity in doctoral dissertations. Consequently, the purpose of this study is to explore academic misconduct in dissertations, specifically investigating the prevalence of AI use and plagiarism. Considering (...) debate over the accuracy of technology in detecting AI-generated text, dissertations were also analyzed from before widespread AI availability, as a point of comparison. A sample of 200 dissertations from 2013 and 2023 were analyzed through Turnitin to flag plagiarism and AI-generated text. Results did not support any significant differences in plagiarism. However, 6% of analyzed dissertations from 2023 were positive for AI-generated text (AI scores over 20%). This is significantly different from 2013 dissertations, which only had 0% or< 20% AI scores. The findings of this study suggest that some students may be relying on generative text or editing from AI in their dissertations. Dissertation committees and awarding institutions have an obligation to ensure the students’ educational and ethical development and promote academic integrity at every level of education. (shrink)

Direct download(2 more)   Export citation   Bookmark