António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications 1 ACADEMIC PLAGIARISM - A CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY OF INTERNET INFLUENCES AND PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS António Bota * * - Licenciado em Literatura Inglesa; Mestre em Ensinar Inglês como Lingua Segunda, INUAF, [email protected]ABSTRACT The problem of cheating is not a new issue in the academic context. However, the recent growth and popularity of the Internet, which has increased over 300% during the last decade, brought into the academic setting new opportunities for those who plagiarize to achieve their goals. This study, in order to perceive different cultural views on “traditional” and “digital” forms of academic dishonesty, explored and compared students in the U.S. and students in Portugal. It was found that forms of traditional plagiarism are equally known in both settings and students do indeed plagiarize from traditional sources. Furthermore, results suggest that the frequency with which students use the Internet is not associated to a higher plagiarism propensity. There was found, however, a higher propensity to take others’ ideas from online sources when students from the U.S setting used the Internet for school purposes, whereas students in Portugal showed similar propensity for taking papers from the Internet. This propensity was correlated to the easiness of access and download available information. Moreover, this work presents the opinions of topic-expert teachers on pedagogical strategies that could help reducing plagiarism amongst students. RESUMO (Portuguese) O problema do plágio não é uma questão nova no contexto acadêmico. No entanto, o recente crescimento e popularidade da Internet, que aumentou mais de 300% durante a última década, trouxe para o ambiente acadêmico novas oportunidades para aqueles que plagiam para atingir os seus objectivos. O presente estudo, a fim de perceber diferentes pontos de vista culturais em relação ás formas "tradicionais" e "digitais" de desonestidade acadêmica, explorou e comparou alunos dos E.U. com alunos em Portugal. Apurou-se que as formas tradicionais de plágio são conhecidas e practicadas em ambos os contextos e que os alunos de facto plagiam atravês de formas tradicionais. Além disso, os resultados sugerem que a frequência com que os alunos
25
Embed
Plagiarism-A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
1
ACADEMIC PLAGIARISM - A CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY OF INTERNET
INFLUENCES AND PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS
António Bota *
* - Licenciado em Literatura Inglesa; Mestre em Ensinar Inglês como Lingua Segunda, INUAF, [email protected]
ABSTRACT
The problem of cheating is not a new issue in the academic context. However, the
recent growth and popularity of the Internet, which has increased over 300% during the
last decade, brought into the academic setting new opportunities for those who
plagiarize to achieve their goals. This study, in order to perceive different cultural views
on “traditional” and “digital” forms of academic dishonesty, explored and compared
students in the U.S. and students in Portugal. It was found that forms of traditional
plagiarism are equally known in both settings and students do indeed plagiarize from
traditional sources. Furthermore, results suggest that the frequency with which students
use the Internet is not associated to a higher plagiarism propensity. There was found,
however, a higher propensity to take others’ ideas from online sources when students
from the U.S setting used the Internet for school purposes, whereas students in Portugal
showed similar propensity for taking papers from the Internet. This propensity was
correlated to the easiness of access and download available information. Moreover, this
work presents the opinions of topic-expert teachers on pedagogical strategies that could
help reducing plagiarism amongst students.
RESUMO (Portuguese)
O problema do plágio não é uma questão nova no contexto acadêmico. No entanto, o
recente crescimento e popularidade da Internet, que aumentou mais de 300% durante a
última década, trouxe para o ambiente acadêmico novas oportunidades para aqueles
que plagiam para atingir os seus objectivos. O presente estudo, a fim de perceber
diferentes pontos de vista culturais em relação ás formas "tradicionais" e "digitais" de
desonestidade acadêmica, explorou e comparou alunos dos E.U. com alunos em
Portugal. Apurou-se que as formas tradicionais de plágio são conhecidas e practicadas
em ambos os contextos e que os alunos de facto plagiam atravês de formas
tradicionais. Além disso, os resultados sugerem que a frequência com que os alunos
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
2
usam a Internet não está associada a uma maior propensão para o plágio. Verificou-se,
entretanto, uma maior propensão para plagiar idéias dos outros a partir de fontes online
quando os estudantes nos E.U. utilizam a Internet para fins escolares enquanto que os
alunos em Portugal mostram semelhante propensão mas para plagiar trabalhos
existentes na Internet. Existe uma correlacão entre esta propensão e a facilidade de
acesso e de “download” das informações disponiveis. Este trablaho apresenta ainda as
opiniões de professores especializados no assunto de plagio académico numa
perspectiva de encontrar estratégias pedagógicas que possam contribuir para a redução
de plágio entre os estudantes.
Keywords:
Academic dishonesty; Academic plagiarism; Cheating; Internet and Plagiarism; process
oriented assessment; Plagiarism in Portugal; Plagiarism in the U.S.
INTRODUCTION
The Internet is one of the biggest innovations of the last decade and it is influencing the
lives of many around the world. It is very trendy at the moment, and in the last decade,
according to the World Internet Statistics (http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm), it
has expanded over 380% across the globe. In the US alone, its growth reached 138%
while in Portugal, since the year 2000, the Internet reached 175% of growth. Both in
Portugal and in the U.S., nowadays, almost every school has Internet available for its
students and, it is becoming rare to find one household without an Internet connection.
Thus, the possibilities for academic dishonesty in schools, if a reality before the Internet
era, seem now to have increased substantially due to the facility with which any one can
access online sources. For example, students have free access to study guides, quick
notes, and critical analyzes for almost any academic topic and to any class assignment,
from sites such as www.pinkmonkey.com, http://www.ukessays.co.uk,
www.sparknotes.com, including theses or even dissertations on demand and with
guaranteed of confidentiality and originality.
Even though academic dishonesty has always been around, recent researches seem to
indicate that it is growing dramatically amongst college students. Some researchers
have suggested that the Internet has contributed to this epidemic problem (e.g.,
Rumbought, 2001; Scanlon & Neumann, 2002). The Internet offers resources such as
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
3
encyclopedias and a plethora of available works from which students can “copy and
paste” or perform complete downloads about multiple school subjects. There is a large
volume of research examining academic plagiarism in the U.S., but, in sharp contrast,
there is scant work to rely on when it comes to learn about this issue in Portuguese
schools. The present study, far from being exhaustive on plagiarism issues, aims to
explore cross cultural views of Internet influence on academic plagiarism amongst
students in the U.S. and students in Portugal, thus, contributing to the existent data.
Additionally, it examines the opinion of field experienced teachers with regard to
pedagogical strategies to reduce plagiarism.
Research Questions
To gain a better cross-cultural understanding of how students perceive plagiarism and of
their motivations, if any, for plagiarizing in English writing classes, especially from online
sources, the researcher developed and administered a survey to student participants
aiming to explore six research questions, as follows: (1) How does learner knowledge
about plagiarism differ among students in colleges in Portugal versus students in English
as a Second Language (ESL) writing courses in colleges in the U.S.? (2) How does
learner awareness of a school honour code and teacher lectures about plagiarism differ
among students in colleges in Portugal versus students in English as a Second
Language (ESL) writing courses in colleges in the U.S.? (3) How does learner
awareness of other students’ plagiarism differ among students in colleges in Portugal
versus students in English as a Second Language (ESL) writing courses in colleges in
the U.S.? (4) How does learner usage of the Internet differ among students in colleges in
Portugal versus students in English as a Second Language (ESL) writing courses in
colleges in the U.S.? (5) How do learner reports of committing plagiarism differ among
students in colleges in Portugal versus students in English as a Second Language (ESL)
writing courses in colleges in the U.S.? (6) To what extent are learners’ reported
plagiarism practices associated with learner knowledge about plagiarism, perceptions of
other students’ plagiarism, perceptions of teacher and school attitudes about plagiarism,
and usage of the Internet among students in colleges in Portugal versus students in
English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing courses in colleges in the U.S.? This last
research question generated 8 hypotheses that are discussed in the “findings” section.
With the purpose to gather reports of teachers regarding their experience with
pedagogical models of process-oriented assessment and whether such pedagogical
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
4
models help reduce the amount of plagiarism, a 5 open-ended questionnaire was
designed and answered by experienced teachers in the field of ESL/EFL and across
curriculum. The reports of teachers aim to clarify the last research question: (7) Do
teachers believe that a pedagogical model of process-oriented assessment of writing
lessens the amount of plagiarism in colleges Portugal and in the U.S.?
LITERATURE REVIEW
Academic plagiarism is a big concern in schools and University campuses worldwide. It
might vary amongst different cultures but there is common agreement about what
academic dishonesty means. Kibler (1993) defines academic dishonesty as forms of
“cheating and plagiarism that involve students giving or receiving unauthorized
assistance in an academic exercise or receiving credit for work that is not their own.”
James et al. (2002, p.5), argues that “plagiarism varies in both intent and extent, ranging
from deliberate fraud, to negligent or accidental failure to acknowledge sources of
paraphrased material and misunderstandings about the conventions of authorship.”
Moreover, Burke (1997) defines that plagiarism is “intentionally using or attempting to
use unauthorized materials, information, or study aids in any academic exercise.” In
terms of types of plagiarism, many have been mentioned, including when students hand
in someone else's work as their own, copy words or ideas from someone else without
giving credit, use someone else´s words without quotation marks, give incorrect
information about the source of a quotation, copy full paragraphs and change the word
order without giving credit, copy ideas that make up the majority of the work and do not
mention authorship, and copy-and-paste or simply purchase works from online paper-
mills (McCabe and Trevino, 1996; McCabe et al., 2003; McCabe, 2005; Rumbought,
2001; Cabe, 2003; Rocha & Teixeira, 2005, 2006).
Although plagiarism is not a new issue in academia, there has been a proliferation of
published work, in recent years, which might indicate that this issue is on the rise.
Hawley (1984) surveyed 425 students with regards to their behaviors at school and
reported that over 12% admitted asking someone to write a paper for them, and about
25% of these students agreed that plagiarism was common and acceptable. Collinson
(1990, cited in Lawson, 2004) found that 37% of the surveyed students reported acts of
cheating on their high school exams. Moreover, Bunn et al. (1992) researched two
undergraduate courses in the U.S. and found that almost half of the students surveyed
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
5
admitted to having cheated with 80% considering cheating to be normal and known
amongst them. Additionally, Davis et al. (1992) surveyed more than 6000 students
where about 75% of the respondents admitted cheating in high school and college. To
complete this brief scenario, there are researchers who claim that academic dishonesty
is increasing and, progressively, influencing more followers (e.g., Haines et al., 1987;
Davis et al., 1992; Burke, 1997; McCabe & Trevino, 1997; McCabe, 2005).
A vast majority of the empirical studies exploring plagiarism issues focus on factors that
influence plagiarism in the American context. For instance, “motivation and seeking for
high marks” have been pointed as influencing factors (e.g., Whitley, 1998; Kerkvliet &
Sigmund, 1999; Sheard et al., 2003;). Another factor extensively explored is the
existence of an “honour code” at school (e.g., Kerkvliet & Sigmund, 1999; McCabe et al.,
2003). And, amongst many different factors, the cheating environment or peer influence
in the classroom was also object of research (Bunn et al., 1992; Genereux & McLeod,
1995; McCabe & Trevino, 1997; Rocha & Teixeira, 2005, 2006). In the Portuguese
context, even though scant, plagiarism and its motivations have been studied specially
through the work of Rocha & Teixeira (2005, 2006).
Rocha and Teixeira (2005) surveyed 2675 undergraduate students from main
Portuguese public universities and found that the phenomenon exists and its propensity
increases with the expectation of benefits and varies according to the area of the
country, with a conclusion that an outstanding 92 % of Portuguese students have
embraced cheating at least once. Moreover, undertaking one of the most exhaustive
comparative researches on the topic, Rocha & Teixeira (2006) surveyed a total of 7213
students from 21 different countries, being 2805 subjects from 11 Universities across
Portugal. The Portuguese students, from Economics and Business courses, were found
to have values of cheating around 62%. The only country with higher number of
incidences was Romania where dishonest students reached 94.0% of the inquired.
Until recently, most studies explored traditional contexts where the Internet was not
considered with a role on plagiarism. Some educators and researchers, however, claim
that the rise on plagiarism is related to the spread of the Internet, since everyone relies
on online sources to find information. Rumbought (2001) conducted a 55 item survey
with 985 American college students and found that, amongst many different purposes,
17 % used the Internet to cheat on school assignments, being 19 % identified as
students who “copy and paste” from the Internet without giving credit. McLenann (2003)
reports that Scheidermair, a professor and the head of the German Universities
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
6
Association, admits that one third of all essays submitted “to German Universities are
plagiarized via the Internet.” Moreover, Scheidermair is quoted to say that “students are
paying to [get] content for their essays from help sites.” Moreover, in the UK, and due to
the rise of academic cheating on different campuses, the author reports that more than
70 Universities have already signed up for software that detects Internet illegal copying.
Lester (2002), however, surveyed four hundred fifty-three students and found that over
80 % had cheated using traditional methods and only about 12% had used the Internet
to plagiarize. Scanlon & Neumann (2002) administered a survey to 698 college students
from nine universities across America and reported that a minority of the surveyed
students were found to have used the Internet to “copy and paste” text into their own
papers without giving credit to sources they used in their writings, which declines the
idea that the Internet is the major reason for the recent rise on academic plagiarism,
taking into consideration these students were considered frequent users (at least 3 or 4
times a week) of the Internet.
If results differ and reasons are various, most researchers agree that to curb down
plagiarism, teachers must take preventive measures. A plethora of published papers is
available with advice to reduce plagiarism ranging from limiting the opportunities for
prospective plagiarizers on exams and assignments to take different approaches on
assessing students writing outcomes. Tribble (1996) refers to a “process-oriented
assessment” when assessing and giving feedback to students' writing skills as the
student progresses through a series of drafts instead of just one moment of evaluation.
Zamel (1987) shares the same opinion and reaffirms that teaching English language
through writing should be teaching the language by using the creativity of the individual
writer and not teaching with existent writing models. There are other authors who also
prefer this type of methodologies and assessment, adding that a series of comments on
different drafts, until the final product is achieved with expected quality, reduces the
motivation students might have to plagiarize (Diffley & Lapp, 1998; Ferris, 2003; Ferris &
Hedgcock, 2005). Then, the opinions of experienced teachers who deal with plagiarism
issues in class should not be left aside and are also included in this paper.
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
7
METHODOLOGY
Procedures
This study was conducted between the winter and summer 2009. It has two types of
participants: student participants and teacher participants. Students were required to
have at least high school level of English, being enrolled in an English writing class, and
be at least 18 years old. They participated voluntarily and after being explained (by the
researcher) the purposes of the survey, and upon individual permission, they filled in the
surveys keeping anonymity. After surveys were collected, they were marked with a
demographic code for each school, and all survey items were entered into cross-
tabulations with chi-squares that examined differences between students from the U.S.
academic setting and from the Portuguese. Scales were created to better classify the
items. A scale for awareness of plagiarism included items 3 (recoded 0 = not aware, 1 =
aware), 4 (recoded 0 = not aware, 1 = aware), 5a, b, and c; and 18 (recoded 0 = not
aware, 1 = aware). It had an acceptable level of internal reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha
above .50 for students in the U.S. (alpha = .58) and students in Portugal (alpha = .54). A
scale for knowing peers who plagiarize from the “Internet” (question 13) or from “printed
sources” (question 14) was also constructed; alpha was .81 for students in Portugal and
.67 for students in the U.S. Additionally two scales were constructed for plagiarism
practices. One had to do with using ideas from others’ work as one’s own, and included
items 11a, b, c and d. Cronbach’s alpha was .62 for students in Portugal and .74 for
students in the U.S. Another scale had to do with copying others’ work as one’s own,
and included items 6, 9, 10, 11, 15 and 16 (use same items). Cronbach’s alpha was .58
for students in Portugal and .79 for students in the U.S.
Teachers participants were randomly invited via e-mail as they listed their e-mail
addresses on their published works. Their reply, as explained, meant their consent to
participate.
Student Participants
Initially, 47 responses from City College of San Francisco (CCSF), 21 from San
Francisco State University (SFSU), 16 from the Universidade de Evora (UE) [University
of Evora, Portugal], and 14 from the Universidade Nova de Lisboa (UNL) [New
University of Lisbon, Portugal], were collected. Participants were informed about the
details of their participation before they anonymously answered the survey. This study,
after eliminating those surveys that were incomplete or whose anonymity was not
completely secure, had a final count of 58 participants attending colleges in the U.S. and
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
8
28 participants attending colleges in Portugal. There were two subcultures (2 Latino
students and 6 Asian students) in the group of students from the U.S. but since
statistical analysis did not reveal any differences amongst them or comparing them with
the other subjects, all are considered part of the same culture for this purpose. Picture 1
depicts the final participation for analysis.
Teachers Participants
To avoid any type of conflict between teachers and their students, teachers who were
teaching classes from which students participated were not invited or allowed to respond
the 5 open-ended questions survey.
Instruments
There are four methods of collecting data on academic plagiarism (Kerkvliet and
Sigmund, 1999). The method of "inspection via direct questions and answers" was used
in this study. The decision was based on the fact that several studies of academic
dishonesty use this same procedure (e.g., Bunn et al., 1992; Sheard et al., 2003; Rocha
& Teixeira, 2005, 2006).
The student questionnaire was comprised of a 20-item survey questionnaire. There were
several categories of questions such as awareness of plagiarism, social context of
plagiarism (know students who plagiarize, teacher spoke about plagiarism, honour code
at school), frequency and type of Internet usage, motivations for plagiarizing, and types
of plagiarizing behaviors students have performed. Some questions were presented as
binary (yes-no) items, others in a five-point Likert-scale items and some others were
presented in a multiple choice from where participants could choose a single answer or
as many as applied. Due to the sensitivity of the topic, some questions were asked more
than once to verify its accurateness, or were asked in different sections of the survey.
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
9
Table 1 shows the strategy in which different questions from different groups were
analyzed together.
Table 1 -Research Questions and Most Important Corresponding Questions ______________________________________________________________________Research questions Questions ______________________________________________________________________ 1. Learner knowledge about plagiarism 3, 4, 5a-d, 18 2. Awareness of other students’ plagiarism 13, 14 3. Awareness of school honour code 19, 20 and frequency of teacher lectures on plagiarism 4. Learner use of Internet
For school-related information and chat rooms 7, 8b, d, 10a For English classes 8e, 10b Use ideas found with search engines 12b Use ideas found from on-line resources 8a, c All other items 11, 12c, d
5. Learner reports of committing plagiarism Copy from others, use hidden notes 6b
6. All other items Other questions ______________________________________________________________________ The teachers’ questionnaire was comprised of a five open-ended questions. It aimed to
collect diverse answers from experienced teachers or researchers in the field of English
composition and ESL/EFL. The criterion for formulating the questionnaire was developed
upon concerns regarding teaching practices to lessen students’ plagiarism.
The data collected from the instrument used for students was entered into cross-
tabulations with chi-squares and t-tests to examine differences between cultures and
subcultures (e.g., Asian and Hispanic students in the U.S.). all data was correlated with
items about awareness of plagiarism, social context of plagiarism, Internet usage, and
motivation to plagiarize; Spearman’s one-tailed correlations were used.
The analysis of the data received via teachers responses was done similarly to what
McCabe et al. (1999) previously did. To identify trends, notable insights, and
pedagogically useful opinions, answers were read holistically to find any recurring
trends. Then, those trends were extracted and grouped into topics and sub-topics. Tests
were also performed for significance of frequency of trends and other significant
comments.
PART I – FINDINGS of the STUDENT SURVEY
The results of this study are presented in two parts. The first reports the results of the
survey administered to students attending colleges in the U.S. (hereafter called Group
U) and in Portugal (hereafter called Group P) and links the results with the first six
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
10
research questions. The second part reports the opinions collected from the open-ended
teacher questionnaire and addresses the seventh research question. To address the first
six research questions of this study, the two sets of data were collected and then
analyzed and compared: one from Group U and one from Group P.
Despite that there are 22 questions in the survey this paper will depict only those
questions which are significant for the cross cultural understanding of Internet influences
on academic plagiarism or to understand the dimension of this academic concern.
Research Question 1 (Survey questions 3, 4, 5 and 18) asked how learner
knowledge about plagiarism differs among students in both settings.
Question 3 asked participants to agree or disagree with the statement that “to plagiarize
is to take and turn in another’s person ideas, writing, or inventions as one’s own.” From
observing the results, it is clear that the majority of students self-reported being aware of
the definition of plagiarism stated in the dictionary. There is a marginally significant
difference between students in Group U and in Group P, with students in Portugal being
slightly more aware of the definition.
Question 4 asked whether participants agreed or disagreed that plagiarism also includes
cheating from “hidden notes” and the use of other’s works as one’s own. Results from a
cross-tabulation with chi-squares indicate that most students understand that cheating
from hidden notes is also a form of plagiarism, with no difference between the two
groups.
Question 5 asked participants whether they confirm being considered plagiarists if
engaging in different forms of plagiarism. This question showed that most students are
aware what is considered plagiarism. It is also clear that there was no significant
difference in plagiarism awareness between students in the two settings.
Question 18 asked students if they believed that they could copy works from the Internet
without citation because that work is in the public domain. Cross-tabulations with chi
squares, depicted in table 2, indicate that about 60% of all participants understood that it
was wrong to copy from the Internet without citation. Overall, about 20% each of
participants were not sure or agreed that copying from the Internet without citing was
acceptable because the work is in the public domain.
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
11
Table 2 - Copy from Internet without citation because work is in public domain: Cross-tabulations with chi squares ______________________________________________________________________ ________Setting_________ Total _U.S._ Portugal N % N % N % X2 df p ______________________________________________________________________ Copy from Internet without citation because work is in public domain
Research Question 2 (survey question 19 and 20) asked how does learner
awareness of a school honour code and teacher lectures about plagiarism differs
among students in both settings.
Question 19 asked if the college the student was attending had a code of honour,
meaning the school had rules regarding consequences for acts of plagiarism. Answers
showed that few students reported that they knew the school had an honour code
regarding plagiarism, and the majority didn’t know or said “no.” Students from Group P
were significantly more likely not to know than students in Group U.
Question 20 asked whether or not the participants had received academic instruction
regarding plagiarism practices and its consequences. Results from t-tests comparing
both groups showed that Group U was more likely to report that their teachers more
often told them about plagiarism and its academic consequences.
Research Question 3 (Survey question 13 and 14) asked how learner awareness of
other students’ plagiarism differs among students in both settings.
Question 13 asked if participants knew any other student who had copied from the
Internet and used works as his/her own, and question 14 asked if participants knew any
other students who had copied from printed sources and used the work as his/her own.
Table 3 depicts results from t-tests that show that compared to students from Group U,
students of group P were significantly more likely to know other students who had
plagiarized for classes using printed sources and were marginally more likely to know
other students who had used the Internet to plagiarize for English classes. Half of
students in Portugal knew at least one student who had plagiarized from the Internet for
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
12
an English class compared to 32% of students in the U.S. Regarding traditional sources
of plagiarism, 61% of students in Portugal knew at least one student who had plagiarized
from books for any class compared to 33% of students in the U.S.
Table 3 - Social context for plagiarism: T-tests ______________________________________________________________________ _______Setting______ Social context for plagiarism N M (S.D.) t df p ______________________________________________________________________ Know students who plagiarized from books for any class
U.S. setting 49 1.41 (.64)-2.79 44.54.008
Portugal 28 1.93 (.86)
Know students who plagiarized from Internet for English classes
Items coded 1 = Don’t know any students who plagiarized, 2 = Know one student who plagiarized, 3 = Know some or many students who plagiarized
Research Question 4 (Survey question 7, 8, 10, 11 and 12) asked how learner
usage of the Internet differs among students in both settings.
Question 7 asked students to self-report their frequency of usage of Internet resources.
Table 4 depicts their answers showing that in both groups, more than half of the
students used the Internet at least once a day, with no significant difference in frequency
of usage between the groups.
Table 4 - Students’ frequency of the Internet usage: Cross-tabulation with chi
squares
______________________________________________________________________ ________Setting_________ Total _U.S._ Portugal Frequency of Internet usage N % N % N % X2 df p ______________________________________________________________________ A few times a week or less 32 38% 19 34% 13 46% 2.43 2 .30
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
13
Question 8 asked students their main reason(s) to use the Internet. Table 5 shows that
students in both settings reported they were most likely to use the Internet to check e-
mail, followed by finding information related to their studies. Finding non-school-related
information and chatting on-line appeared to be less popular ways to use the Internet.
Compared to students in the U.S. setting, students in Portugal were more likely to report
using the Internet to find school-related information and to chat on-line, and were less
likely to report using the Internet to find information for their English classes.
Table 5 - Students’ usage of the Internet: Cross-tabulation with chi squares ______________________________________________________________________ ________Setting_________ Total _U.S._ Portugal Usage of the Internet N % N % N % X2 df p ______________________________________________________________________ Type of Internet usage
Find information for English classes 37 44% 31 55% 6 21% 8.72 1.003
Question 10 asked students for which classes they would use works from the Internet.
Table 6 shows that the majority of students self-reported not using works from the
Internet for their college classes. About one-fifth of the participants said they would use
the Internet for a variety of classes, and fewer reported using works from the Internet for
English classes or both English and other classes.
Table 6 - Use of works from the Internet for English classes and other classes: Cross-tabulations with chi squares ______________________________________________________________________ ________Setting_________ Total _U.S._ Portugal Use of works from the Internet N % N % N % X2 df p ______________________________________________________________________ Types of classes for which works are used
Question 11 asked how students have copied from Internet resources for their
schoolwork. Table 7 shows that slightly more than half of the students in Group U said
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
14
they copy ideas from the Internet and develop them as their own, compared to about
one-third of Group P students who reported doing the same. Slightly more than half of
the students in Portugal reported that they had never copied works from the Internet.
Only about 5% of students reported copying whole sentences, and only about 1%
reported copying whole paragraphs or papers.
Table 7 - How students have used the Internet for schoolwork: Cross-tabulation with chi squares ______________________________________________________________________ ________Setting_________ Total _U.S._ Portugal Usage of the Internet N % N % N % X2 df p ______________________________________________________________________ Copy ideas and develop them 41 49% 31 55% 10 36% 2.88 1 .09
Question 12 asked students which on-line sources they used when searching for articles
for their schoolwork. Table 8 shows that the most commonly reported source used on
the Internet was ideas found with search engines, followed by the use of academic on-
line resources such as Wikipedia. Overall, about one-third of students reported reading
essays on free web-sites. Very few students reported buying papers from on-line paper-
mill resources. Compared to Group U students, group P self-reported much higher
usage of the Internet for finding ideas with search engines and using on-line resources.
Table 8 - Students’ usage of Internet resources: Cross-tabulations with chi squares ______________________________________________________________________ ________Setting_________ Total _U.S._ Portugal Usage of Internet resources N % N % N % X2 df p ______________________________________________________________________ Use ideas found with search engines 50 60% 25 45% 25 89%15.44 1.0001
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
15
Research Question 5 (Survey questions 6, 9, 15, 16 and 17) asked how learner
reports of committing plagiarism differ among students in colleges in both
settings.
Question 6 asked participants to describe the type of students they see themselves as
being with regards to academic plagiarism. Table 9 shows that, overall, students from
both settings were more likely to report using the Internet for writing compositions than
turning in homework done by others or cheating with electronic devices, with no
significant differences across settings. Students in Group P were more likely to report
traditional methods of cheating, such as copying from their peers or using hidden notes
than students in Group U.
Table 9 - Reports of plagiarism practices: Cross-tabulations with chi squares ______________________________________________________________________ ________Setting_________ Total _U.S._ Portugal Reports of plagiarism practices N % N % N % X2 df p ______________________________________________________________________ Use texts from the Internet when 22 27% 17 31% 5 18% 1.62 1 .20
writing compositions
Copy from others, use hidden notes 11 13% 1 2% 10 36%18.54 1.0001
Turn in homework done by others 9 11% 6 11% 3 11% .00 1 .98
Question 9 asked students about their frequency of taking someone’s ideas from the
Internet and using them as their own. Table 10 below shows that about half of students
in both settings self-reported not taking ideas from the Internet and using them as their
own. About a quarter in each setting self-reported engaging in this practice at least once,
and the same percentages reported engaging in this practice a few times. Only two
students in the U.S. setting admitted doing so very often, which imply that there was no
significant difference between settings.
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
16
Table 10 - Frequency of taking others’ ideas from the Internet: Cross-tabulation with chi-squares ______________________________________________________________________ ________Setting_________ Total _U.S._ Portugal Frequency of taking others’ ideas N % N % N % X2 df p ______________________________________________________________________ Never 43 51% 28 50% 15 54%1.10 3 .78
Question 15 asked participants if they had bought papers from other students who had
taken the course before and turned them in as their own, and question 16 asked if
participants had bought papers from paper mill web-sites and turned them in as their
own. Table 11, depicting results from cross-tabulations with chi-squares, shows that
almost 90% of students in both settings reported that they never bought and turned in
papers from other students, and a slightly higher percentage reported that they never
bought and turned in papers from on-line paper mills.
Table 11 - Frequency of buying work from others or from the Internet: Cross-tabulation with chi-squares ______________________________________________________________________ ________Setting_________ Total _U.S._ Portugal Frequency of buying work N % N % N % X2 df p ______________________________________________________________________ Buy papers from other students who have taken the course before
2003). These strategies should prevent plagiarism to reach undesirable values that
could jeopardize the quality of the degrees awarded by institutions worldwide.
With regards to teachers’ opinions in this work, what their opinions further suggest is
that, again, prevention is the “key” and a process-oriented approach, even though time
consuming itself, may be a possible methodology to utilize in deterring academic
dishonesty and, simultaneously, help students to enhance their language skills, which
after all is the teachers’ main duty.
REFERENCES
Bunn, D. N., Caudill, S. B. and Gropper, D. M., 1992, “Crime in the classroom: an economic analysis of undergraduate student cheating behavior,” in Journal of Economic Education Nº 23, pp. 197-207. Burke, J. L., 1997, “Faculty perceptions of and attitudes toward academic dishonesty at a two- year college,” Unpublished dissertation. (ED 431 486). Cabe, P., 2003, “Examples of plagiarism – a taxonomy,” in About Plagiarism (from TIPSters, Teaching in Psychological Science). in http://psych.skidmore.edu/plagiarism.htm. Davis, S. F., Grover, C. A., Becker, A. H., & McGregor, L. N., 1992, “Academic dishonesty: Prevalence, determinants techniques, and punishments,” in Teaching Psychology Nº 19,pp. 16-20. Diekhoff, G. M., LaBeff, E. E., Shinohara, K. and Yasukawa, H., 1999, “College Cheating in Japan and the United States”, in RESEARCH IN Research in Higher Education Nº 40 (3), pp.343-353. Diffley, F., and Lapp, R.,1988, “Responding to student writing: teacher feedback for extensive revision” - a workshop presented at TESOL, Chicago. Ferris, D. R., 2003, Response to student writing: Implications for second language students, Mahwah, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Ferris, D. R. and Hedgcock, J. S., 2005, Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and practice. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Genereux, R. L., & McLeod, B. A., 1995, “Circumstances surrounding cheating: A questionnaire study of college students,” in Research in Higher Education Nº 36, pp. 687-704. Harris, R.A., 2001, The plagiarism handbook: Strategies for preventing, detecting, and dealing with plagiarism, California, Pyrczak Publishing. Haines, V, LaBeff, E., Clark, R., and Diekhoff, G. M., 1987, “A factor analysis of variables related to college cheating,” in Social Sciences Perspectives Nº 1, pp. 1-29. Hawley, C. S., 1984, “The thieves of academe: Plagiarism in the university system,” in Improving College & University Teaching Nº 32(1), pp. 35-39. Howard, R.M., 1995, “Plagiarisms, authorships, and the academic death penalty,” in College English Nº 57(7), pp. 788-806. James, R., McInnes, C. & Devlin, M., 2002, “Assessing learning in Australian universities,” in http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/CSD1618.pdf Kerkvliet, J. and Sigmund, C. L., 1999, “Can We Control Cheating in the Classroom?,” in Journal of Economic Education Nº 30(4), pp. 331-351.
António Bota, Academic Plagiarism- A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet Influences and Pedagogical Implications
25
Lawson, R., 2004, “Is Classroom Cheating Related to Business Students’ Propensity to Cheat in the “Real World?,” in Journal of Business Ethics Nº 49, pp. 189–199. Lester, M. C., 2002, “A comparison of traditional and internet cheaters," in Journal of College Student Development, retrieved from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3752/is_200211/ai_n9166002/. Kibler, W., 1993, “Academic Dishonesty: A Student Development Dilemma,” in NASPA Journal Nº 30, pp. 253. McCabe, D., 2005, “Cheating among college and university students: A North American perspective,” in International Journal for Educational Integrity Nº 1(1). McCabe, D. L. and Trevino, L. K., 1993, “Honor Codes and Other Contextual Influences,” in Journal of Higher Education Nº 64, pp. 522–538. McCabe, D. L. and Trevino, L. K., 1997, “Individual and Contextual Influences on Academic Dishonesty: A Multicampus Investigation,” in Research in Higher Education Nº 38 (3), pp. 379-396. McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D. and Trevino, L. K., 2003, “Faculty and Academic Integrity: The Influence of Current Honor Codes and Past Honor Code Experiences,” in Research in Higher Education Nº 44 (3), pp. 367-385. McCabe, D.L. and Trevino, L.K., 1996, “What we know about cheating in college,” in Change, pp. 29-33. McLenann, L., 2003, “Briefing: Plagiarism at Universities,” in http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/tools_and_services/specials/article809537.ece. Rocha, M. F. and Teixeira, A. A. C., 2005, “College cheating in Portugal: results from a large scale survey,” in FEP Working Papers Nº 197. Rocha, M. F. and Teixeira, A. A. C., 2006, “A Country Evaluation of Cheating in Academia: is it related to business world ethics?,” in FEP Working Papers Nº 214. Rumbough, T.B., 2001, “Controversial Uses of the Internet by College Students,” in http://www.fluxcard.com/fake-id-info/fake-id reports/Fluxcard_Fake_ID_Documents_and_Articles_Controversial_Uses_of_the_Interne t_Timothy_B_Rumbough.pdf. Scanlon, P. and Neumann, D., 2002, “Internet Plagiarism among College Students,” in Journal of College Student Development Nº 43, pp. 374–85. Sheard, J., Markham, S. and Dick, M., 2003, “Investigating Differences in Cheating Behaviours of IT Undergraduate and Graduate Students: the maturity and motivation factors,” in Higher Education Research & Development Nº 22 (1), pp. 91-108. Tribble, C., 1996, Writing, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Whitley, B. E., 1998, “Factors associated with cheating among college students: A Review,” in Research in Higher Education Nº 39(3), pp. 235–274. Zamel, V., “Recent research in writing pedagogy,” in TESOL Quarterly Nº 21(4), pp. 697- 715.
Citing this work:
Bota, A. (2011). Academic Plagiarism - A Cross-Cultural Study of Internet
Influences and Pedagogical Implications. Studia (14), Loule.