Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism: Case Studies from Universities around the World 9781793619945, 9781793619952

Citation preview

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism Case Studies from Universities around the World

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Edited by Bernard Montoneri

LEXINGTON BOOKS

Lanham • Boulder • New York • London

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Published by Lexington Books An imprint of The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc. 4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706 www.rowman.com 6 Tinworth Street, London SE11 5AL, United Kingdom

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2020 The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without written permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote passages in a review. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Available ISBN 978-1-7936-1994-5 (cloth : alk. paper) ISBN 978-1-7936-1995-2 (electronic) The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Contents

List of Tables and Figures

vii

Preface ix Introduction xi  1  E  xamining Undergraduates’ Understanding of Academic Dishonesty Denise E. De Souza and Brenda E. L. Lee

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

 2  L  2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions on the Influence of Academic Honesty on their Teaching and Teaching Philosophies Andrew Leichsenring  3  E  xamining Perceptions of Both University Lecturers and Undergraduate Students Toward Plagiarism Yoshihiko Yamamoto  4  I nternationalizing Higher Education in Japan: Dealing with Plagiarism and Academic Integrity: A Case Study of Human Sciences Undergraduates in Japan Paola Cavaliere  5  B  uilding Awareness of Academic Integrity with Badges: Canadian University Context Alice Schmidt Hanbidge, Tony Tin, Georgina Zaharuk, and Herbert Tsang

v

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

1

23

47

65

89

vi

Contents

 6  S  tudent Plagiarism in Higher Education: A Typology and Remedial Framework for a Globalized Era Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

109

 7  U  nderstanding the Academic Integrity Discourse and its Latent Associations with English Language Proficiency Beena Giridharan

135

 8  U  ndermining Education: An Account of Selected Experiences of Persons who live in the Rural Areas of Australia Jillian Marchant

145

 9  F  ake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light: Critical Reflection and Literature Review Bernard Montoneri

167

10  Impact of Turnitin on Deterring Plagiarism: A Follow-Up Study Najwa Saba ‘Ayon

199

11  P  lagiarism in Higher Education: Experiences from Asia and the United States Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

217

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

12  F  ailure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students as a Problem of Academic Ethics: Interdisciplinary and Intercultural Approach Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

245

13  “ ‘Plager-’ what?!” Asian Perspectives on Plagiarism Daniel Velasco

279

Appendix A: Further Reading for Chapter 13

289

Index 291 About the Editor

293

About the Contributors

295

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

List of Tables and Figures

Table 1.1 Undergraduates’ (n = 47) Perceptions of their Experiences using Turnitin 9 Table 1.2 Multiple Selection Survey Responses on Plagiarism and Collusion 10 Table 1.3 Undergraduates’ Responses to Scenarios 1, 2, and 3 11 Table 1.4 Undergraduates’ Responses to Scenarios 4, 5, and 6 15 Table 2.1 Emergent Subthemes from Teachers’ General Perceptions about Preventative Measures against Academic Dishonesty (Not in Order of Significance) 37 Table 2.2 Emergent Themes and Subthemes from Teachers’ Perceptions about Preventative Measures against Academic Dishonesty in Relation to the Four Basic Language Learning Skills and Homework (in Order of Significance) 38 Table 3.1 The Results of Q1 and Q2 51 Table 3.2 The Results of Q3, Q4, Q5, and Q6 52 Figure 5.1 CanCred Factory Reporting System 94 Figure 5.2 Operation of CanCred Factory and CanCred Passport 95 Figure 5.3 Learners Claim and Store Badges at CanCred Passport Site 96 Figure 5.4 Academic IntegrityMatters Digital Badge 97 Figure 5.5 IntegrityMatters Home Page, Module Page, Case Scenario 98 vii

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

viii

List of Tables and Figures

Table 6.1 Plagiarism Descriptors and Definitions by Universities 113 Table 6.2 Plagiarism Constitutes and Descriptions 117 Figure 6.1 Types of knowledge 124 Table 6.3 Remedial Framework of Plagiarism 125 Figure 7.1 English Skills Assist in Paraphrasing 141 Figure 7.2 Paraphrasing Skills Integral to Improving Academic Writing 142 Table 9.1 Advice and Solutions to Fight Fake News and Fake Research 184 Table 10.1 Comparison between Participants’ in the First and Second Study 206 Table 10.2 Kruskal-Wallis (KW) Test 207 Figure 12.1 Classification of Textual Borrowings in Students’ Assignments 250 Figure 12.2 Classification of Basic Errors of Borrowing Other Texts and Citing Sources in Students’ Academic Writings 253 Figure 12.3 Example of Misinterpreting of Borrowed Text and Incorrect Formatting of Reference 263 Figure 12.4 Example of Misrepresentation of Borrowed Text and Copyright Infringement 265 Figure 12.5 Example of Excessive Quotation and Violated Uniformity Principle 266 Table 13.1 Participant Information—Saitama (n = 91) 282 Table 13.2 Participant Information—Tokyo (n = 196) 282 Figure 13.1 Results for Question 1 from Saitama participants 283 Figure 13.2 Results for Question 1 from Tokyo participants 284

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Preface

Dear Readers, It is our great pleasure and my personal honor as editor to introduce this book entitled Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism: Case Studies from Universities around the World. It is a selection of thirteen chapters on academic malpractice, with a special focus on students’ and teachers’ perception of academic misconduct and their definition and understanding of plagiarism. I have been a university professor for almost twenty-five years. As of February 2020, I am an independent researcher. This is how this book came to be: My friend and colleague Dr. Suja R. Nair, Educe Micro Research, India, invited me to write a chapter on plagiarism more than three years ago. I accepted because, despite having published nothing on ethics before, I had already been a reviewer and an editor for years and I wished to learn more about various issues related to academic misconduct. The book was released in September 2018 (Handbook of Research on Ethics, Entrepreneurship, and Governance in Higher Education, Suja R. Nair and José Manuel SaizÁlvarez). My chapter was titled “Plagiarism and Ethical Issues: A Literature Review on Academic Misconduct.” I found the topic fascinating and I was longing for another opportunity to learn more about some new threats, such as computer-generated papers, contract cheating, fake news, various new forms of plagiarism, and the interesting case of academic hoaxes. The same year, Ms. Holly Buchanan, assistant acquisitions editor at Lexington Books, emailed me with a request that I write a book. Lexington Books was the publisher of the book coedited by Professor Patricia Haseltine and Professor Sheng-mei Ma entitled Doing English in Asia: Global Literature and Culture (2016) in which I wrote a chapter titled “Modern Renaissance Education in Taiwan’s Departments of Foreign Languages.” ix

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

x

Preface

In the chapter I discuss the notions of truth and virtue according to various cultures and traditions. I was then teaching European literature, including The Republic, by Plato. In October 2018, I participated in a panel with Dr. Yvonne Masters (“Thriving in Publication: Ethical Guiding Principles for Academic Publication”) and I made an oral presentation (“Fake Research in a Fake World, From the Cave to the Light”) at the IAFOR Conference on Education, ACE2018, held in Tokyo, Japan. And finally, in November 2019, I gave a virtual presentation (“Fake News: Origins, Consequences for Students, Scholars and Teachers, and Recommended Solutions”) at the second IAFOR Conference for Higher Education Research, CHER-2019, Lingnan University, Hong Kong. None of these presentations have been published yet. This book is, therefore, the opportunity for me to organize my thoughts on the notion of truth, on Plato, on fake news, and on academic malpractice and to publish them in the form of a chapter. I would like to thank Dr. Suja R. Nair, Ms. Holly Buchanan, Dr. Yvonne Masters, as well as Ms. Megan Conley, Holly’s assistant in acquisitions at Lexington Books. I would also like to thank my friends and colleagues who accepted an opportunity to write a chapter in this book and who trusted me with their valuable work. There are a total of twenty researchers who contributed to the writing of this book and I am grateful to every one of them. I have met many of them personally, one of the highlights of participating to conferences abroad: making friends, sharing ideas, and working together.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Best regards, Dr. Bernard Montoneri, independent researcher, Taiwan

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Introduction

Reports of scandals at university level involving cheating, plagiarism, and various acts of academic malpractice are alarming. For example, around fifty thousand students cheated from 2013 to 2016 at British universities (129 UK universities). The Times notes that most students who plagiarized were foreign students (Mostrous and Kenber, 2016). Non-EU students are more likely to cheat and plagiarize their essays. Queen Mary University of London reported that 75 percent of postgraduates got caught plagiarizing. The University of Kent caught 1,947 cheats (Press Association, 2016). Even in Swedish universities, the number of students found guilty of cheating increased markedly in recent times (“a fairly sharp increase”; The Local, 2017). Generally speaking, cheaters tend to blame other people and refuse to acknowledge any responsibility. They use various types of excuses to justify their behavior, including not being aware they were doing something wrong, or “copying a little here and there will most likely go undetected” (Rothschild, 2011). But students who cheat or plagiarize obtain an unfair advantage on assignments; they show little respect for their classmates who worked very hard to write their own paper. According to David Rettinger, associate professor of psychology at the University of Mary Washington, Fredricksburg, Virginia, “when students look to politics, they look to business, and . . . they see dishonesty being rewarded, it’s very difficult for those of us in higher education to make the argument that they should do things the right way” (Musto, 2017). But, the problem with cheating is that students who don’t have the mastery of the content might be hired to perform a job they are not qualified to do. Sooner or later, it will show. If they become teachers after cheating to graduate, how will they behave when faced with the “publish or perish” pressure? What will they be ready to do in order to get a promotion or even keep their job? To be xi

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

xii

Introduction

fair, in some countries, education focuses too much on results rather than intellectual development and too many schools are run like businesses (Lodhia, 2018). Pressure to succeed is notably fueled by the fast growing cost of learning (Burns, 2016). Nowadays, students are highly stressed and need to get a well paying job after graduating in order to pay off their debt. This book discusses the issue of academic misconduct and publication ethics in general and plagiarism in particular, with a focus on case studies in various universities around the world (notably in Japan, Singapore, Australia, the United States, and Canada). This book is a selection of thirteen chapters written by instructors and academics from many countries. Chapter 1 examines undergraduates’ understanding of academic dishonesty at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University; that includes students from the Sports Science and Management program, and the biological sciences faculty. All these students attended a compulsory science communication academic literacy course and were asked about their understanding of the terms “plagiarism” and “collusion” as well as their experiences using Turnitin. The study shows that most students had positive experiences using Turnitin; while students seem to be aware of plagiarism, they are not so familiar with other types of misconduct, such as collusion and contract cheating. Chapter 2 presents the views on academic honesty from four instructors teaching undergraduate learners of L2 English at a Japanese university. They believe that their perceptions have changed since they were students and consider that writing assessment is the skill that requires the most attention in order to prevent cheating. In the end, students need to learn to think for themselves when writing rather than copying from the internet or asking other people to write on their behalf. The four instructors offer preventative measures for essay writing assessment, such as the provision of structural examples of writing, the modeling of those writing structures so that students could effectively write their own essays, and the provision of essay topics that are difficult to copy online. Chapter 3 presents a study of twelve university lecturers of English and seven undergraduate students at a university in Japan utilizing questionnaires for the Japanese lecturers and interviews for the Japanese undergraduate students. The results of questionnaires from the EFL lecturers show that Japanese EFL learners are not familiar with academic writing in English and that plagiarism might be a result of cultural differences. Some undergraduate students did not seem to be familiar with techniques for avoiding plagiarism in their written assignments. The goal of English classes in high school is to succeed at university entrance exams. Therefore, undergraduates have little knowledge and experience of academic writing. In this chapter, the author provides advice to help students improve their skills and avoid plagiarism.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Introduction xiii

Chapter 4 examines attitudes toward academic integrity and plagiarism of Japanese undergraduate students of human sciences at Osaka University in Japan. It appears that students, despite receiving limited institutional help and training, show increasing awareness toward academic integrity. So far, they struggle to cite or paraphrase, and their instructors do not offer enough guidance. Japanese undergraduates learn very little of intellectual property and felt highly pressured to succeed as the system is very competitive. Japanese students’ interaction with international students and faculty help them have a more harmonized understanding of the meaning of academic misconduct. Chapter 5 presents a project involving undergraduate students from the University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. A group of learners who successfully completed all IntegrityMatters modules were awarded a digital badge. The badge validated their competency in academic integrity knowledge. The mobile academic IntegrityMatters project implemented an open badges strategy with CanCred Factory and CanCred Passport, with the support of eCampusOntario. Badge earners learned basic academic integrity knowledge and were able to identify the six fundamental values of academic integrity: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage. The study shows that in general, users were satisfied with the platform and found it easy to use; most of them shared their badge on different social media platforms. Chapter 6 first presents a detailed definition of various forms of plagiarism, from most to least severe, that is, from purchasing a paper (contract cheating) to plagiarism-by-faulty-documentation (lack of citation and research skills). Even if students do not mean to cheat, their phrasing often drifts too close to the original source for comfort. This chapter then provides a remedial framework for plagiarism (framed within the broader context of institutional borrowing and best practices), which might notably help administrators and curriculum designers committed to improving the quality of their online plagiarism resources. Chapter 7 summarizes findings from a research project to advance student awareness and understanding of integrating source use. This chapter is adapted from a paper presented at the European Conference on Education in the United Kingdom in 2017, and focusses on a teaching excellence project emphasizing development programs for both staff and students. A survey answered by 202 students enrolled at Curtin University, Malaysia, was conducted in a first-year undergraduate program to examine students’ definition and awareness of plagiarism; a series of dedicated workshops and seminars were also provided to students to develop their knowledge of referencing and citing from external sources accurately. Notably 60 percent of the respondents agreed that the better their English language skills, the less likely they were to plagiarize.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

xiv

Introduction

Chapter 8 concentrates on the experiences of four persons who live in rural areas in Australia that detracted from the provision of their tertiary education and includes practices that undermine learning and assessment in courses. The four were interviewed and generously shared their understandings of their tertiary education experiences. In this chapter, the author shares some findings chosen from a PhD study, by conducting an interpretative phenomenological analysis that presents an account of the meanings of each person’s experiences. The study shows that each contributor found shortcut practices to credentials that were abhorrent for their purposes and combatted them accordingly. Unintentional academic malpractice may happen for people in rural areas who are unwittingly credentialed and are unfamiliar with the rigors of tertiary education. This chapter shows the potential to engage with intentional academic misconduct online and outlines the experiences that may lead to academic malpractice. Chapter 9 is a critical reflection and a literature review related to the recent flood of fake news, fake papers (notably those that are computer-generated), and academic hoaxes. The chapter meditates on the notion of truth, on the allegory of the cave (Plato, The Republic) and on how to fight the growing number of misleading information and error-filled publications that are released every day without losing our right to privacy and our freedom of speech. One major problem is that lies spread fast and continue to be shared for years; the same is true for retracted papers, which continue to be cited years after proof of deceit and false results. Another major problem is that some measures taken to fight lies are sometimes ironically used to silence alternative voices and censor the opposition. Chapter 10 investigates the impact of Turnitin on students’ plagiarism from the perspectives of the students and the instructors. The detection software helped reduce plagiarism among half of the students but could not eliminate it. The author recommends that Turnitin and plagiarism policy be mandated and implemented consistently by all instructors in all colleges at a smallsized private English-speaking university. A follow-up study is made after the plagiarism policy and Turnitin have been mandated at the university for two years. The two studies share the same methodology and data-collection methods and are compared. It appears that more students and more instructors are familiar with Turnitin and have positive attitudes toward it. Laziness and concerns to achieve higher grades are reported by both students and instructors as major factors in plagiarism. Chapter 11 is a discussion and presentation of the experiences with student’s plagiarism from three instructors teaching at different institutions in Asia and the United States. More often than not, plagiarism is the result of laziness and a lack of ethics. Sometimes, plagiarism is also caused by lax

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Introduction xv

attitudes through the lack of administrative standards to punish small, isolated cases, such as in Japan. In other cases, economically disadvantaged students in Southeast Asia may accept the risks of getting caught for cheating because, otherwise, they will not be able to recoup the costs they have paid to attend courses. Many agents for language schools and overseas visa programs push unprepared students to sit for exams in pursuit of their own financial profit. For example, many for-profit agents lure young Indonesians to study in Germany without proper preparation. Chapter 12 argues that many students show academic negligence and dishonesty, and are often unaware of the rules and norms of borrowing other authors’ texts and citation practices. This chapter analyzes the most common cases of illiterate and wrongful borrowings of sources committed in students’ work. In Russia, uniform state standards have been issued for citation formats in academic areas, while in the United States, there are various styles and norms for quoting and formatting bibliographies (mostly MLA, APA, and Chicago). The authors present various cases of errors made by students in the Graduate School of Education at Touro College and University System, such as misplacement of the quotation marks, quoting/paraphrasing issues, and excessive and semantically inadequate citations; the authors also provide examples from Lomonosov Moscow State University, such as carelessness in compiling the bibliographic description, lack of knowledge of citation rules, misrepresentation of the borrowed text’s meaning and copyright infringement, and unnecessary and excessive quotation. Chapter 13 presents the results of a survey involving 287 university students from Japan, China, South Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Vietnam, and Russia attending two universities located in Saitama and Tokyo, Japan. Results show that most students do not even understand what plagiarism is; they consider that copying someone’s work is not cheating, and that plagiarism does not apply in Eastern cultural norms. For example, 86 percent of students from Saitama stated they did not know the meaning of plagiarism (but only 37 percent for students of Tokyo). Of the Saitama participants 81 percent said that plagiarism was not at all important, but for the Tokyo participants 41 percent considered plagiarism extremely important. It seems that in Tokyo, students were more aware of academic misconduct due to the extremely high standards in academic programs. We hope this book will be of interest to undergraduates, graduate students as well as teachers and scholars who feel concerned by the issues of academic malpractice in general and plagiarism in particular. As there is obviously a growing concern around the world over the increase of all forms of cheating and unethical behavior, administrators and ministries of education are also welcomed to read this research. Some countries have decided to make all

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

xvi

Introduction

students follow required courses on publication ethics and plagiarism. For example, all Romanian university students began to attend compulsory courses on ethics and academic integrity, starting with the academic year 2018-2019: “Universities from Romania are required to include ethics and academic integrity courses in their curricula for all university education programs in the national education system” (European Students’ Union, 2018). Because of the flood of fake information, fake data, and misleading or wrong results, students and teachers need to improve various skills to spot them, such as media literacy, critical thinking, logic, and moral ethics (MindEdge, 2017).

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Burns, J. (August 1, 2016). Student debts wipe out most graduate pay premiums— report. BBC. Retrieved February 2, 2020 from https://www.bbc.com/news/ education-36916009. European Students’ Union (ESU) (February 26, 2018). Romanian students will attend compulsory courses on ethics and academic integrity. Retrieved February 02, 2020 from https://www.esu-online.org/?news=anosr-romanian-students-ethics -plagiarism. Lodhia, D. (May 1, 2018). More university students are cheating—but it’s not because they’re lazy. The Guardian. Retrieved February 2, 2020 from https://www .theguardian.com/education/2018/may/01/university-students-cheating-tuition -fees-jobs-exams. MindEdge (2017). Dig Deeper: Critical Thinking in the Digital Age. MindEdge Online Survey of Critical Thinking Skills. Retrieved January 31, 2020 from https:// www2.mindedge.com/page/dig-deeper. Mostrous, A., and Kenber, B. (January 2, 2016). Universities face student cheating crisis. The Times. Retrieved February 7, 2020 from https://www.thetimes.co.uk/ article/universities-face-student-cheating-crisis-9jt6ncd9vz7. Musto, P. (December 1, 2017). How Many College Students Admit to Cheating? Voice of America (VOA). Retrieved February 7, 2020 from https://www.voanews .com/student-union/how-many-college-students-admit-cheating. Press Association (January 2, 2016). Universities catch almost 50,000 student cheats. The Guardian. Retrieved February 7, 2020 from https://www.theguardian.com/ education/2016/jan/02/universities-catch-almost-50000-student-cheats. Rothschild, D. (March 30, 2011). 5 Common Excuses for Plagiarism. Turnitin, LLC. Retrieved February 7, 2020 from http://www.ithenticate.com/plagiarism-detection -blog/bid/52928/5-Common-Excuses-for-Plagiarism. The Local (June 6, 2017). Record number of Swedish university students caught cheating. Retrieved February 7, 2020 from https://www.thelocal.se/20170606/ record-number-of-swedish-university-students-caught-cheating.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter One

Examining Undergraduates’ Understanding of Academic Dishonesty

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Denise E. De Souza and Brenda E. L. Lee

In October 2018, the fifth U.S. News Best Global Universities Rankings 2019 ranked Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University (NTU) as one of the top fifty universities in the world and second in Asia. As an internationally recognised higher education institution, NTU is well-known for its materials science, chemistry, and computer science degree programs and its research output (NTU, 2019). The institution endeavours to sustain its international standing through various means, one of which is mentoring undergraduate and postgraduate students to ensure that they demonstrate responsible and honest academic and research conduct. The practice of academic integrity is highly important as any potential breach can compromise the reputation of a university and the perceived quality and value of the degrees it offers. In addition, training students to uphold academic integrity is an essential part of socializing them into the culture of the academic community, and is a practice that is “consistent with all major universities in the world” (NTU, 2017, p. 4). According to NTU’s Honour Code, all enrolled students are expected to pledge that they conduct [them]selves at all times in a manner that is worthy of the good name of the University, promote and help others to adhere to the values of truth, justice and trust enshrined in the Honour Code, be honest in [their] academic work, and to respect the University’s rules and regulations, the rule of law, and the rights of others. (Academic Integrity Handbook or AIH, 2017, p. 5)

Apart from providing an online and downloadable information handbook on the importance of upholding academic integrity, NTU supports students’ 1

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

2

Denise E. De Souza and Brenda E. L. Lee

enactment of its honor code through an academic literacies course, which is compulsory for all matriculated undergraduates—from the College of Engineering, College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, and the College of Science—to undertake. This course introduces them to academic writing and oral presentation, audience awareness, academic integrity, and referencing. Academic dishonesty or academic misconduct may take on a variety of forms across academic institutions and fields. NTU’s academic integrity policy (AIH, 2017) however, specifies and classifies indications of the phenomenon as being plagiarism, collusion, cheating, data falsification, false citation, and contract cheating. NTU also monitors the possible commitment of academic dishonesty through the use of electronic text-matching software like Turnitin, by getting students to make declarations that their assignment submissions are original, and through the appointment of academic integrity officers (NTU Singapore, 2012). While NTU’s academic integrity encompasses a broad range of actions, this study focuses on students’ understanding of plagiarism and collusion. In addressing these, the authors believe that an educative and preventive approach—explicitly teaching undergraduates what plagiarism and collusion constitute—is needed to avoid inadvertent acts of academic dishonesty, and is more likely to be more effective than punitive measures. In a study by Park (2003), one of the reasons cited for unintentional plagiarism was students’ lack of understanding of referencing and the academic culture. This was reiterated in Devlin and Gray’s (2007) study that plagiarism occurs as it is not always well-understood by students. Dawson and Overfield’s (2006) study concluded that students should have access to plagiarism guidelines earlier in their course as they are often unclear about plagiarism. What findings from these studies indicate collectively is that undergraduate knowledge, understanding, and familiarity about what might count as academic dishonesty and plagiarism should not be assumed or left to develop in an incidental manner, through the course of their academic studies. Rather, the findings suggest that there is value in deliberately engaging students in reflecting and thinking about issues pertaining to academic integrity and how to monitor, acknowledge, and integrate an appropriate use of ideas from different academic sources. The aims of this action research therefore, are threefold; firstly, to examine NTU’s undergraduates’ understanding of academic dishonesty; secondly, through participants’ responses, to identify areas of uncertainties (if any) surrounding students’ understanding of using Turnitin; and thirdly, to gain insights on participants’ understanding of the terms “plagiarism” and “collusion.” The notion of collusion is deemed important to investigate, along with plagiarism, because of the group and activity-based learning

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Undergraduates’ Understanding of Academic Dishonesty 3

strategies that the university has been encouraging academic staff to adopt. In response to this, the scientific communication courses have been designed and conducted using these approaches. As researchers and tutors, we anticipate that the findings will help us to improve our teaching and better guide students on using Turnitin to help detect possible areas of plagiarism and improve their writing. The two research questions this study investigates are: (i) What are undergraduates’ perceptions of their experiences using Turnitin? (ii) Based on their survey responses and analysis of six case studies, what do undergraduates understand about the terms plagiarism and collusion? This next section begins with an overview of existing perspectives on academic dishonesty, in particular, plagiarism and collusion. A brief review of studies on students’ perception of Turnitin is also provided. This is followed by an outline of the research methodology adopted, and a report on the findings from the administered survey. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the findings and some strategies for teachers to help students better understand plagiarism and collusion and the use of Turnitin.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Definitions of Plagiarism and Collusion Plagiarism often refers to the act of using another author’s words and ideas and assuming them as one’s own, without acknowledging the source or the original author appropriately (Park, 2003; Montoneri, 2018; NTU academic integrity policy, p. 7). The term plagiarism is also considered as the “literary theft . . . of words or ideas, beyond what would normally be regarded as general knowledge” (Park, 2003, p. 472). However, Meuschke and Gipp (2013) argue that plagiarism may not necessarily be theft if it is not intentional, if it is self-plagiarism, or if the student did not cite correctly despite having consent from the original source or author. Maurer, Kappe, and Zaka (2006) further state that while accidental plagiarism occurs when students do not know what is plagiarism or are unclear about the correct ways of referencing, intentional plagiarism is the “deliberate act to copy someone else’s work without proper citations” and to “deceive” (Mahmood, 2009). These variations in the definition of plagiarism indicate that while the basic meaning of the term is straightforward, plagiarism constitutes a wide “spectrum” of behaviors and types of work that are challenging to distinguish and are not widely or mutually recognized by all (Yeo, 2007; Barrett and Cox, 2005; Park, 2003).

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

4

Denise E. De Souza and Brenda E. L. Lee

While plagiarism is “about individual behavior” (Barrertt and Cox, 2005), collusion refers to work that is produced collaboratively between students when they are expected to produce it independently (Meuschke and Gipp, 2013). NTU defines collusion as “copying the work of another student, having another person write one’s assignments, or allowing another student to borrow one’s work” (NTU academic integrity policy, p. 2). Mahmood (2009) further defines collusion as two or more people who intentionally present work as if it was based on individual effort when, in fact, they have gained an advantage from collaborative work. However, students’ understandings of collusion have suggested that they consider it as a form of collaborative learning and not an act of cheating (Barnett and Cox, 2005). Reasons for Committing Acts of Plagiarism and Collusion Many reasons have been cited for plagiarism and collusion, among them, time efficiency, poor time management, students’ values and attitudes, and the “lack of deterrence” (Park, 2003; Yeo, 2007). In a number of studies, students’ lack of clear understanding of the terms plagiarism or/and collusion, in particular, not fully understanding the various behaviors and types of work that constitute plagiarism, is a common reason for cheating (Yeo, 2007; Dawson and Overfield, 2006; Thompsett and Ahluwalia, 2010; Barrett and Cox, 2005; Gullifer and Tyson, 2014). Plagiarism and Collusion: Findings on Undergraduates’ Understandings

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

The evidence from several UK and Australian research studies (Yeo, 2007; Dawson and Overfield, 2006; Gullifer and Tyson, 2010, 2014; Thompsett and Ahluwalia, 2010; Barrett and Cox, 2005) reveal that: • while most students were able to define plagiarism adequately, they showed varied responses in their understanding of the precise range of actions that constitute plagiarism (e.g., they were certain about using someone else’s words but were less certain about using someone else’s ideas and results as their own); • although many participants were able to define and identify obvious cases of plagiarism, they were however, confused about the paraphrasing of text and giving credit to sources of ideas; • regardless of whether students have read their institution’s academic integrity policy or not, they were confused about plagiarism, collusion, and “supplementary referencing” (Gullifer and Tyson, 2014);

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Undergraduates’ Understanding of Academic Dishonesty 5

• some students felt that not referencing graphs and figures were not serious acts of plagiarism; • what constitutes as collusion was also confusing as students were often encouraged to learn from one another and in their joint effort to learn, could have arrived at the same answers; • some students were not aware that it was considered collusion if they had lent a completed assignment to a friend who then copied it; • some students thought that it was wrong to plagiarize as they might be caught or penalized in their marks, and not because plagiarism is unethical. As the findings from various studies reveal that students experience problems in distinguishing the degrees of plagiarism and collusion and identifying them correctly, it is necessary for lecturers and tutors to inform students of the precise actions and activities that constitute plagiarism and collusion in the context of their assignments and assessments (Dawson and Overfield, 2006).

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Studies Done on Students’ Perceptions of Using Turnitin A study by Dahl (2007) in the United Kingdom showed that students who knew how to avoid plagiarism and how to cite correctly were highly supportive of the use of Turnitin for online assignment submission and they also saw it as a preventive method of reducing plagiarism. Students who were less confident of referencing and their knowledge of plagiarism tend to be less positive about the use of Turnitin. As no formal training on the use of Turnitin was provided to students in the study, around 40 percent of them expressed that they were less confident about their understanding of an originality report. In Thompsett and Ahluwalia’s study (2010, p. 10) of bioscience students, 59 percent of them expressed that Turnitin was “not easy to use.” 53 percent of the students did not think that Turnitin was “a useful learning tool” while 77 percent of the students strongly agreed that Turnitin does not tell students “how to avoid plagiarism.” In both Dahl’s (2007) and Thompsett and Ahluwalia’s (2010) studies, there is a higher percentage of negativity toward Turnitin possibly because no explicit instruction was given on the use of the electronic system and how to understand the originality report. It is highly possible that once students are given instructions, they will be more confident and proficient in using the system to help them identify and reduce the similarity matches between their own writing and other texts. Having reviewed related literature on the topic of our research interest, we then proceeded to undertake an action research study to understand our students’ responses to issues relating to using Turnitin, and on plagiarism

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Denise E. De Souza and Brenda E. L. Lee

6

and collusion. The next section elaborates the research design and method undertaken for data collection.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHOD Context of Study The Language and Communication Centre (LCC) in the School of Humanities at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, provides academic literacies (or communications courses as they are identified as in Singapore) to undergraduate and postgraduate students from the College of Engineering, College of Science, and the College of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences within the university. The undergraduate courses comprise levels 1 and 2 communication courses, which are compulsory academic units for students during the course of their undergraduate study. This action research was undertaken by a lecturer facilitating the scientific communication levels 1 and 2 courses for undergraduates from two different schools within the College of Science in the university. Participants The survey participants comprised undergraduate students from the School of Biological Sciences (n = 18; Year 1 = 11, Year 2 = 7) undertaking the level 1 HW0128 course that semester, and those doing the Sports Science and Management Program (n = 29 in Year 3) doing the level 2 HW0228 course.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Recruitment Process A lecturer, assigned to facilitate the course for the different groups, asked for student participants to complete the survey prior to the information literacy session in the course schedule. Before starting on the survey, the undergraduates were informed that their survey responses would be anonymized and that they could withdraw from the survey at any point in time. Students were then asked to give their informed consent online, prior to starting and completing the survey. Study Design The design of this study was informed by studies done in action research within the field of higher education. It followed the dialectic action research

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Undergraduates’ Understanding of Academic Dishonesty 7

spiral proposed by Mills (2007), which incorporates four stages in the action research process, namely: (1) the identification of the area of focus, (2) the collection of data, (3) the analysis and interpretation of data, followed by (4) the development of an action plan to address the area of focus identified and examined. Each stage as it was applied in action research practice is elaborated below. Area of Focus In the first stage of this study, undergraduates’ knowledge and familiarity with plagiarism, collusion, and Turnitin was the selected area of focus. The area was of interest because it pertained to issues of academic integrity and honesty, and because of the high penalty and consequences that undergraduates would have to face if they were found to have plagiarized or colluded during the course of their undergraduate study. This would be over and above the reputational consequences for the higher education institution, and the training and degrees it offers, mentioned earlier. The intent of the focus area was therefore to foster awareness and knowledge about academic integrity that would serve as preventive measures against acts of academic dishonesty which undergraduates may unintentionally or inadvertently commit.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Data Collection In the second stage, a survey questionnaire was adapted from survey instruments designed and administered by Dawson and Overfield (2006), and Thompsett and Ahluwalia (2010). The composite survey instrument used in the present study comprised three parts. The first section elicited responses about students’ experience using Turnitin while the second section surveyed students’ understanding of the terms “plagiarism” and “collusion.” In the third section, students were instructed to analyze six case studies and to assess the extent to which, or if, plagiarism or collusion had been committed. The survey was created and administered using Google Survey, and undergraduates’ individual responses to the questionnaire and case studies were collated and analyzed to identify areas of uncertainties surrounding their understanding of using Turnitin, and the terms “plagiarism” and “collusion.” Data Analysis and Interpretation In the data analysis and interpretation phase of the study, the survey responses were analysed for their frequency and central tendency. The case study responses and the explanations of the responses were analysed focusing

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

8

Denise E. De Souza and Brenda E. L. Lee

on themes. The analytical process began by the two authors familiarizing themselves with the collected responses. The approach was primarily analystdriven with the coding of themes, in the open-ended items which elicited explanations for responses, carried out to answer the two research questions specified earlier, rather than to evolve a research question for exploration (Braun and Clarke, 2006). Three steps were followed in the analysis of the open-ended items. In the first step, the surface meanings of the written responses were drawn from the collated data. In the second step, interesting or representative quotations that enabled inferences to be made about the patterns of findings, or their broader meaning or implications, were identified. Finally, the two authors worked together to resolve any disagreements by discussing discrepancies and conflicting interpretations. The following section reports on the results of the survey. RESULTS As previously stated, this study investigated two research questions: (i) What are undergraduates’ perceptions of their experiences using Turnitin? (ii) Based on their survey responses and analysis of six case studies, what do undergraduates understand about the terms plagiarism and collusion? The results for each question are presented in sequence.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Undergraduates’ Perceptions of their Experiences Using Turnitin Section 1 of the survey queried undergraduates’ experiences using Turnitin (Q1-3) and their confidence in their knowledge about aspects of Turnitin (Q46). The overall findings are summarized in Table 1.1. The results pertaining to their experiences indicated that, in general, the majority of students had positive experiences using Turnitin, agreeing that it is easy to use. The responses also showed that the practice of opening Turnitin earlier to allow students to upload an assignment draft before the final submission deadline—a practice consistently carried out for all courses conducted by LCC—is helpful, and that undergraduates perceived that submission of assignments to Turnitin tended to discourage acts of plagiarism. In comparison to their experiences using Turnitin, there were more neutral and disagree responses to items 4 to 6, which were measures of undergraduates’ confidence about their knowledge of aspects of Turnitin. Nevertheless, the majority of students still expressed a good degree of confidence about their knowledge.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Undergraduates’ Understanding of Academic Dishonesty 9

Table 1.1.  Undergraduates’ (n = 47) Perceptions of their Experiences Using Turnitin

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

1. Turnitin is easy to use.

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

14 (29.8%)

24 (51.1%)

9 (19.1%)

2. Being able to upload an assignment into Turnitin multiple times helps me to avoid plagiarism. 3. Submission of assignments into Turnitin deters plagiarism. 4. I know how to use Turnitin to avoid plagiarism. 5. I know what a percentage similarity or match overview score in Turnitin is. 6. I know what a percentage similarity or match overview score in Turnitin indicates.

1 (2.1%)

1 (2.1%)

6 (12.8%)

24 (51.1%)

15 (31.9%)

0 (0%)

1 (2.1%)

5 (10.6%)

26 (55.3%)

15 (31.9%)

2 (4.3%)

2 (4.3%)

15 (31.9%)

20 (42.6%)

8 (17%)

2 (4.3%)

4 (8.5%)

9 (19.1%)

20 (42.6%)

12 (25.5%)

2 (4.3%)

6 (12.8%)

8 (17%)

22 (46.8%)

9 (19.1%)

Section 2 of the survey examined what “plagiarism” and “collusion” constitute to the undergraduate survey participants. For these items, students were allowed to select more than one option, selecting any number of responses they felt were relevant. Item 1 in Table 1.2 highlights that majority of undergraduates would agree with the definition of plagiarism as passing off someone else’s words, results, and ideas as one’s own. A minority associated plagiarism with getting information from a textbook, and sharing and pooling work and ideas for a team-based assignment. Item 2, in the second section of the survey, queried students’ understandings about why the act of plagiarizing is morally wrong. Students’ responses to the options suggest that most participants felt that the behavior is morally wrong because of its potential violation of other people’s ideas and, to a lesser degree, because it produced negative effects for the learner. Undergraduates’ responses to item 3 indicate that nearly all survey participants showed awareness that allowing friends to copy their work constitutes collusion between the person who copies and the person who facilitates the act. While the majority of the participants also selected “pass off someone else’s

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

10

Denise E. De Souza and Brenda E. L. Lee

Table 1.2.  Multiple Selection Survey Responses on Plagiarism and Collusion ITEM 1 - Plagiarism is using someone else’s words as if they were your own using someone else’s ideas as if they were your own using someone else’s results as if they were your own getting your ideas from a textbook sharing work with someone else and pooling ideas for a group project ITEM 2 - Plagiarism is morally wrong because it steals other people’s ideas it is dishonest assignments that are plagiarized fail to demonstrate your knowledge of the work you don’t learn anything by copying someone else’s work ITEM 3 - You may be accused of collusion if you

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

lend a completed assignment to a friend, who then copies any part of it copy a completed assignment that your friend has shared with you pass off someone else’s work as your own, for your own benefit submit an assignment produced as a joint effort, under you name only work in a group as instructed to produce a poster as a joint effort

  47 43 43 7 5   46 44 37 28   42 38 36 31 1

work as your own, for your own benefit” and “submit an assignment produced as a joint effort, under your name only” as collusion, these would constitute collusion only if the other person knowingly supports the dishonest acts. Section 3 of the survey asked the participants to ascertain if plagiarism and/or collusion had been committed in six hypothetical scenarios, and to give reasons to support their judgments. The six case scenarios pertained to (1) using information from a journal article, (2) paraphrasing from a journal article, (3) copying from the internet, (4) lending work to another student, (5) referencing figures, and (6) preparing assignment and answers with another student. Scenario 1: Using Information from a Journal Article This item tested students’ knowledge about the correct way to paraphrase and quote. From Table 1.3, Scenario 1 and in relation to Student A’s responses, 4 students were not aware that paraphrasing, or citing the idea from a source using your own words, required the inclusion of a citation. Of the 43 who assessed that Student A had plagiarized (one student gave no reason), 13 gave the reason that A had not cited, 10 attributed their decision to A not paraphrasing successfully, and only 19 of the 47 respondents assessed correctly that A

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Undergraduates’ Understanding of Academic Dishonesty 11 Table 1.3.  Undergraduates’ Responses to Scenarios 1, 2, and 3 SCENARIO 1

Yes

No

Does Student A’s work constitute plagiarism? Does Student B’s work constitute plagiarism? Does Student C’s work constitute plagiarism?

43 38 12

4 9 35

 2 36 37

46 12 10

43 39  4

4 8 43

SCENARIO 2  Does Student D’s work constitute plagiarism? Does Student E’s work constitute plagiarism? Does Student F’s work constitute plagiarism? SCENARIO 3 

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Does Student G’s work constitute plagiarism? Does Student H’s work constitute plagiarism? Does Student I’s work constitute plagiarism?

had plagiarized because the paraphrasing was unsuccessful and because no citation had been included when restating the idea from the source. In assessing Student B, who had quoted directly from the text but neither used quotation marks, nor included the page number with the added citation, nine respondents judged that Student B did not plagiarize because the student had added a citation. Of the 38 who had noted that student B was guilty of plagiarism, the majority (29) said that it was because B copied directly from the text or did not paraphrase. Fewer students (8) gave the reason that Student B quoted but did not use quotation marks, and the remaining student (only 1) noted that Student B’s in-text citation was problematic because it did not include quotation marks and the page number, which would be the accurate way to cite a quote that is drawn from a source. Using quotation marks and citing the page number are important because it would signal to readers that the writer is not only borrowing an idea from a source, but that the writer is also borrowing the manner in which the idea is being expressed. In scenario 1, although Student C was the option showing the target source being correctly quoted and cited, 12 (25.5 percent) of the respondents judged that Student C had plagiarized. Nine of the respondents supported their decision by highlighting that Student C had not paraphrased. One student stated, “Although Student C did quote the parts that s/he copied word-for-word, one should still paraphrase, and not copy the original passage excessively.” The remaining two students were of the view that a lead-in phrase was needed with one reasoning, “It is an exact copy . . . except Student C has expressed it as a quotation. However, the quote should be introduced properly with [a] lead in phrase.” The other said “Student C cited the source and quoted the

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

12

Denise E. De Souza and Brenda E. L. Lee

original text, but the quote was not introduced.” The majority of undergraduates, correcly identified that Student C did not plagiarize. In justifying their decision 34 students suggested that quotation marks and a citation were included. Only one student of the 35 noted that Student C had correctly included a page number. In sum, undergraduates’ responses to scenario 1 indicate that the undergraduates, in general, showed greatest uncertainty about the use of quotations, their appropriateness in academic writing in the sciences, and the correct way of including an in-text citation for a quote. However, their reasons and answers identified that paraphrasing a source in the sciences was preferred over quoting extensively. Lessons addressing this aspect of academic writing need to provide students with clear information on (a) the appropriate use of quotations in the sciences, (b) the appropriate way to cite a quotation, and (c) how quoting correctly and appropriately will not constitute plagiarizing.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Scenario 2: Paraphrasing from a Journal Article This item tested undergraduates’ knowledge about what counts as an appropriate paraphrase. The respondents were asked to assess the work of Students D, E, and F. Student D successfully expressed ideas from the source by using his/her own words and changing the structure of the original sentences. Student E retained the original sentences but shifted their order, while Student F retained a number of phrases from the original but reordered them within the paragraph. From Table 1.3, Scenario 2 and in relation to Student D’s work, only 1 of the 46 respondents (one answer was discarded for answering both Yes and No without giving any reason) said that Student D’s paraphrasing attempt constituted plagiarism because “some information used from article was not cited.” This was not accurate as a citation had been included in the extract. Of the remaining 45 respondents who identified that D’s work did not constitute plagiarism, 9 did not provide a reason to support their judgment. The remaining 36 gave the reasons that Student D paraphrased (11); that D paraphrased and retained the original meaning of the sentence (3); that D cited (3); that D paraphrased and cited (17); that D changed the original structure of sentences which expressed the idea from the original source (1); or that D paraphrased, cited, and changed the order of information (1). In relation to whether the paraphrase student E produced constituted plagiarism, 2 students responded Yes and No, with one reasoning that the source was stated and the other commenting, “Just rearranging (not superbad plagiarism, but not that good).” A small number of respondents (11) also stated that E did not plagiarize. Of the 11, 5 gave no reasons, 3 said it was because

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Undergraduates’ Understanding of Academic Dishonesty 13

a citation was included, and 2 viewed rearranging sentences indicated an attempt to paraphrase. For this item, one participant’s “No” response was discarded because the reason supporting the judgment referred to Student D instead of Student E. Most respondents (36) however, identified the paraphrase as plagiarized with a typical response being, “Just rearrange the sentences, [is] still considered as copying even with [a] citation.” For student F, a smaller number of respondents (10) judged that F did not plagiarize because the student paraphrased (4). The remaining 6 respondents who said “No” gave no reason. A large majority (37) of undergraduates considered F’s work to be plagiarized either because there was no citation of the source from which the idea came (15), or there were only minimal changes made to the way in which the idea was expressed (10) when compared with the original. A few respondents (8) noted both flaws stating that F did not cite and mainly reordered the phrases. The last handful of respondents (4) gave no reasons to support their judgment. Overall, undergraduates’ responses to scenario 2 highlight that a majority demonstrated a considerable amount of understanding about what constitutes paraphrasing and what does not, and were clear about the neccessity of including a citation when paraphrasing a source. To supplement the commonly mentioned idea that the order of information may be changed when paraphrasing, lessons might broaden the repertoire of strategies that students have to help them paraphrase ideas from sources more successfully.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Scenario 3: Copying from the Internet This scenario presented students with three possible incidences of plagiarism in the use of internet sources. Student G referenced a number of sources but left out the one from which the work was plagiarized. Student H referenced the sources that were copied in entirety in H’s work and Student I’s work demonstrated appropriate referencing of sources. The undergraduates’ responses for each student in scenario 3 are summarized in Table 1.3, Scenario 3. A majority of the respondents (43) correctly identified that Student G had plagiarized from the internet source because the source was not referenced (7), it was copied (8), it was not G’s own work (3) because fake references were used (3), or stated a combination of reasons: G had copied and not cited (8), G had copied and not contributed his/her own ideas (5) and had neither referenced nor paraphased the original source. The remaining respondents who said “Yes” gave no reason. Of the four respondents who said that no plagiarism occurred, two mistakenly interpreted that Student G had paraphrased the entire text or included “Referencing of actual source” while the other two provided no reasons.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

14

Denise E. De Souza and Brenda E. L. Lee

The work of student H was correctly identified as plagiarized by 39 respondents. Most who considered it so gave the reasons that the work was copied (19), that there was no original contribution from H (9), and that H had not paraphrased (4). The remainder of the repondents provided no reasons. The undergraduates who felt that H did not plagiarize (9) suggested that H had cited the sources used (3). The others (6) gave no reasons. Student I’s work was judged as plagiarized by 3 respondents with one of the 3 reasoning that, “Student I only used the internet sources.” The other 2 provided no justifications for their decisions. One student answered both “Yes” and “No” for the item stating that proper referencing was done. The majority (43) however, correctly identified that Student I did not plagiarize, reasoning that I had included citations (19), had cited and added original information (7), had paraphrased multiple sources (2), with 15 respondents suggesting no reason. Respondents were also asked to explain what “used appropriately” meant in the following description of Student I’s work: “Electronic detection of plagiarism revealed that the Internet sources listed had been used appropriately.” Out of 47 respondents, 7 did not answer (5) or stated “not sure” (2). Of the remaining 40 respondents, most stated that ‘“used appropriately” meant the source was paraphrased, cited, and referenced (12). Others stated that it denoted that the sources had been either paraphrased (7) or cited (7) or referenced (3) or not copied (5). Three respondents felt that it meant the sources were used to supplement and support Student I’s views and opinions stating for example that “he did not merely copy the sources into his essay but had given his own opinions for his essay.” The final 3 respondents said that it meant that the sources used were the same sources being referenced. In general, respondents’ knowledge about what constitutes plagiarizing and copying from the internet was mostly sound. The majority of the undergraduates were also aware that reordering information without changing the way the idea is phrased was not good paraphrasing, and that citations needed to accompany paraphrases because an idea is borrowed from the source even though it has been stated in the writer’s own words. Scenario 4: Lending Work to Another Student Scenario 4 assessed participants’ understandings of plagiarism and collusion. Respondents were asked to assess a scenario where a student lent his partner a report that included the results that they had worked on together, as partners, during a practical class. However, unknown to him, his partner had copied the report so that their individual work was now identical. Respondents were asked to select among five sentences the one that was most correct.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Undergraduates’ Understanding of Academic Dishonesty 15

Interestingly, Table 1.4, Scenario 4, indicates that while the majority of students identified that the friend had plagiarized, only 4 out of 41 respondents said that he would be subjected to a disciplinary procedure. This finding may indicate that despite the students’ course guides stating explicitly that those found plagiarizing will have to face a dicsiplinary measure, this warning may not be fully ingrained in undergraduates’ understanding of academic dishonesty, or undergraduates may not be clear about when disciplinary procedures for plagiarism are applied, or alternatively, may not be taking the warning seriously. This point therefore, needs to be reinforced more clearly when the courses run. Scenario 5: Referencing Figures The fifth scenario assessed undergraduates’ knowledge about citing and referencing figures that have been borrowed from another source. Of the four Table 1.4.  Undergraduates’ Responses to Scenarios 4, 5, and 6 SCENARIO 4 – The most correct statement is …

No. of responses

Copying the work was reasonable, since you had both worked together in class. You are guilty of collusion. You will be subjected to a disciplinary procedure for collusion. Your friend will be subjected to a disciplinary procedure for plagiarism. Your friend is guilty of plagiarism.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

SCENARIO 5 – The student is guilty of plagiarism because

 1  2  3  4 37 No. of responses

he has cited the web reference in the reference list at the end of the essay. he has cited the web reference in both places and has rewritten the legend. he has cited the web reference on the figure itself and the reference list. he has made no reference to where he obtained the figure. SCENARIO 6 – Collusion is committed when they

 0  1  2 44 No. of responses

share the results of their research. decide to work together. memorize the essay. write the essay in class. write the essay together.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

 3  6 10 14 14

16

Denise E. De Souza and Brenda E. L. Lee

possible choices, respondents were asked to highlight the case where the student would be guilty of plagiarism. As shown in Table 1.4, Scenario 5, the majority correctly highlighted that plagiarism is committed when the student fails to include a reference identifying the source from where the figure was obtained. Scenario 6: Preparing Assignment Answers with Another Student Scenario 6 examined respondents’ understanding about collusion. In the scenario, a class of students were instructed to do individual research for an assignment but two students decided, instead, to work on different parts of the assigned topic, which they then combined and wrote an essay to memorize in order to respond to the task requirement. Undergraduate respondents were asked to judge at which point collusion was committed. Table 1.4, Scenario 6 indicates that only six undergraduate respondents correctly identified that collusion was committed at the point when the students flouted the instruction to work on the assignment independently. In general, the findings for this item highlights the need to provide undergraduates with more examples that will help them develop a clearer understanding about what constitutes collusion.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Summary of Overall Findings In the earlier part of the chapter, two research questions were posed: (RQ1) What are undergraduates’ perceptions of their experiences using Turnitin? (RQ2) Based on their survey responses and analysis of six case studies, what do undergraduates understand about the terms “plagiarism” and “collusion?” Findings pertaining to RQ1 showed that Turnitin has not only been a useful tool for institutions to monitor the originality of students’ submitted work, it was also helpful as a preventative measure that discouraged participants in this study from committing acts of plagiarism. In general, undergraduates in this study also showed a good level of confidence about their knowledge of what a percentage similarity or match overview score in Turnitin is, and what the measure indicates. The findings relating to the second question showed that respondents tended to associate the avoidance of plagiarism with adequately paraphrasing, citing, and referencing sources, a number showed lack of certainty about the status of using quotes in scientific communication. Additionally, while the majority of respondents were knowledgeable about identifying acts of plagiarism, many did not seem to associate the commitment of the act with disciplinary action. Undergraduate responses also showed a lack of clarity about what collusion constitutes.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Undergraduates’ Understanding of Academic Dishonesty 17

RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS In this section recommendations that draw on readily available resources— which teachers or tutors may adopt to help students have a stronger grasp of the use of Turnitin, as well as the concepts of academic dishonesty, plagiarism, collusion, and their consequences—are highlighted. They are meant to be regarded as a preliminary compilation of supplementary resources about plagiarism and collusion. The content, at present, covers two broad areas that (a) promote awareness about academic dishonesty and (b) suggest strategies to minimize inadvertent acts of academic dishonesty. Promoting Awareness about Academic Dishonesty While student awareness about plagiarism may be fairly well-established, the findings from this study highlight that their ideas about collusion and other possible areas of academic dishonesty may be less so. Strategies to promote awareness about academic dishonesty could therefore include making explicit to students (i) the different acts of academic dishonesty, (ii) types of plagiarism, and (iii) categories of plagiarism.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Making Explicit the Different Acts of Academic Dishonesty Tutors may begin by broadly highlighting the different acts of academic dishonesty that may occur in the higher education setting and by providing undergraduates with examples, or encouraging them to come up with examples, of the acts that are relevant to their disciplines (Yeo, 2007). The consequences resulting from committing such acts, based on the specific institution’s practices, ought to be adequately emphasised to convey a strong message about its seriousness in academia. Additionally, providing academic integrity information and scenarios to students to analyze and critique before they undertake any assignment can help to prevent misunderstanding or ambiguity about plagiarism (Park, 2003). Some of the different acts of academic dishonesty that may be discussed are contract cheating, plagiarism, and collusion. While contract cheating is not a commonly researched topic in Singapore and was an area not addressed in this study, in Australia there has been increasing concern about contract cheating in higher education (Harper et al., 2018). Contract cheating has been defined as occurring when an assignment, completed by a paid or unpaid third party, is handed in by a student as his/ her own assignment submission. This act, and similar acts of outsourcing assigned work and projects to third parties, compromise academic integrity

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

18

Denise E. De Souza and Brenda E. L. Lee

and devalues the qualifications of an institution. As such, students ought to be made aware that serious consequences follow if such breaches to academic integrity are committed. Making Explicit the Different Types of Plagiarism Tutors and students in higher education should also be made aware of the different types of plagiarism that a variety of sources have identified. A few online sources (Hayward, 2018; Bowdoin College, n.d.) have identified the four most common types of plagiarism: “deliberate plagiarism,” “accidental or unwitting plagiarism,” “self-plagiarism,” and “mosaic plagiarism.” Turnitin, in comparison, has made common the notion of “The Plagiarism Spectrum” and identified ten types of plagiarism, with each given a digital moniker for easy recall. These are “clone,” “ctrl-c,” “find-replace,” “remix,” “recycle,” “hybrid,” “mashup,” “404 error,” “RSS feed,” and “re-tweet” (Turnitin.com Editors, 2017).

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Promoting Awareness about Four Categories of Plagiarism As opposed to identifying types of plagiarism, Jones (2011) categorizes plagiarism (and collusion) in terms of the following four attributes which are described as “Unauthorized and/or unacknowledged collaborative work” (7), “attempting to pass off, as your own work, a whole work or any part of a work belonging to another person, group or institution” (7), “The use of ANY AMOUNT of text that has been IMPROPERLY PARAPHRASED constitutes plagiarism” (10, original emphasis), and “The use of any amount of text, that is properly paraphrased—but which is either not cited or which is improperly cited—constitutes plagiarism” (14). The condition highlighted by the fourth category, which considers inappropriate citations and attributions as plagiarism, may not be one that is universally agreed upon. Nevertheless, it emphasizes the need for tutors to reinforce the importance of including accurate and properly formed citations. Strategies to Minimise Inadvertent Acts of Academic Dishonesty While the above strategies promote awareness about academic dishonesty, this section highlights ways to help students avoid inadvertent acts of academic dishonesty. This may be done through suggesting (i) preventive measures to avoid collusion and (ii) encouraging undergraduates to practice and use different paraphrasing strategies.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Undergraduates’ Understanding of Academic Dishonesty 19

Measures to Foster Desirable Peer Cooperation while Minimising Collusion Confusion and the lack of clarity about collusion in the results of this study echo the findings reported by Sutton and Taylor (2011, p. 838) who stated, with regards to collusion, that student participants in their study were “looking for clear guidance on best practices rather than warnings not to do things and examples of what not to do.” At the same time, the authors noted that this kind of guidance is challenging to extend because “what is acceptable in cooperative endeavor with others in individual assessed coursework does not appear to exist” (Sutton and Taylor, 2011, p. 838). Nevertheless, Sutton and Taylor’s (2011, p. 837) qualitative findings on how student participants managed their sharing of information with peers provided six helpful insights: (1) conduct face-to-face conferencing rather than email interactions to communicate ideas, (2) collaborate with peers in problem solving but prohibit the copying of work, (3) if sharing of assignment is done, selectively share some parts but not others, (4) collaborate with trusted peers, (5) collaborate with peers who have put effort in their work, and (6) draw on a strong stand against plagiarism to justify not sharing work with others. These useful strategies may be used as guidelines to support collaborative work, maintain individual and original input in an assignment, and avoid situations of collusion.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Strategies for Paraphrasing A useful resource on paraphrasing, worth sharing with students and tutors, is Alexander College Writing and Learning Centre’s (n.d.) Writing Guide: 7 Ways to Paraphrase. This guide takes students through a variety of ways to paraphrase using similar words, by substituting definitions, by reordering clauses, by shifting between active and passive voices, by using nominalizations, by combining sentences, and altering the manner by which dates, times, and numbers are expressed. These strategies provide students with a number of different ways, which they can adopt, to express the ideas of others using their own words. CONCLUSION This chapter reported on a small-scale action research conducted to examine undergraduates’ understanding of academic dishonesty in higher education, with the aim of informing practice. In particular, undergraduates’ (n = 47) understandings of plagiarism and collusion were investigated using a survey

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

20

Denise E. De Souza and Brenda E. L. Lee

that comprised three parts. In general, students showed a good understanding about plagiarism but their responses showed a lack of clarity about collusion. Some recommendations have been made to raise student awareness and improve practice in the area of academic integrity. Future studies might investigate issues relating to collusion and contract cheating in higher education settings.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Academic Integrity Handbook (AIH)—Nanyang Technological University (May 30, 2017). Retrieved on December 11, 2019 from https://ntulearn.ntu.edu.sg/bbcsweb dav/courses/AI0001-Master/handbook/academic-integrity-handbook.pdf. Alexander College Writing and Learning Centre (n.d.). Writing Guide: 7 Ways to Paraphrase. Retrieved on December 11, 2019 from https://alexandercollege.ca/ beta/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/J.-Writing-Guide-7-Ways-to-Paraphrase2.docx. Barrett, R., and Cox, A. L. (2005). At least they’re learning something: the hazy line between collaboration and collusion. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(2), 107–22. DOI: 10.1080/0260293042000264226. Bowdoin College (n.d.). The common types of plagiarism. Retrieved on December 11, 2019 from https://www.bowdoin.edu/dean-of-students/judicial-board/academic -honesty-and-plagiarism/common-types-of-plagiarism.html. Braun, V., and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101. Dahl, S. (2007). Turnitin: The student perspective on using plagiarism detection software. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8(2), 173–91. DOI: 10.1177/ 1469787407074110. Dawson, M. M., and Overfield, J. A. (2006). Plagiarism: Do students know what it is? Bioscience Education, 8(1), 1–15. DOI: 10.3108/beej.8.1. Devlin, M., and Gray, K. (2007). In their own words: a qualitative study of the reasons Australian university students plagiarize. High Education Research & Development, 26(2), 181-198. DOI: 10.1080/07294360701310805. Gullifer, J., and Tyson, G. A. (2010). Exploring university students’ perceptions of plagiarism: a focus group study. Studies in Higher Education, 35(4), 463–81. DOI:10.1080/03075070903096508. ———. (2014). Who has read the policy on plagiarism? Unpacking students’ understanding of plagiarism. Studies in Higher Education, 39(7), 1202–18. DOI:10.108 0/03075079.2013.777412. Harper, R., Bretag, T., Ellis, C., Newton, P., Saddiqui, S., Rozenberg, P., and van Haeringen, K. (2018). Contract cheating: A survey of Australian university staff. Studies in Higher Education. DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2018.1462789. Hayward, A. (2018, Sep 17). Plagiarism in research. Retrieved on December 5, 2019 from https://www.editage.com/insights/4-common-types-of-plagiarism-in -academic-publishing.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Examining Undergraduates’ Understanding of Academic Dishonesty 21

Jones, L. R. (2011). Academic integrity and academic dishonesty: A handbook about cheating and Plagiarism. Revised and Expanded Edition. Melbourne, FL: Florida Institute of Technology. Retrieved on December 11, 2019 from https:// repository.lib.fit.edu/bitstream/handle/11141/2601/JonesAcademicIntegrity.pdf ?sequence=1. Mahmood, Z. (2009). Students’ understanding of plagiarism and collusion and recommendations for academics. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Applications, 8(6), 1349–58. Maurer, H. A., Kappe, F., and Zaka, B. (2006). Plagiarism—a survey. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 12(8), 1050–84. Meuschke, N., and Gipp, B. (2013). State-of-the-art in detecting academic plagiarism. International Journal of Educational Integrity, 9(1), 50–71. Mills, G. E. (2007). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (Third ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Montoneri, B. (2018). Plagiarism and Ethical Issues: A Literature Review on Academic Misconduct. In S. R. Nair and J. M. Saiz-Alvarez (Eds.), Ethics, Entrepreneurship, and Governance in Higher Education (Chapter 1, pp. 1–25). USA: IGI Global. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-5837-8.ch001. Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (2012). Academic integrity. Retrieved on December 11, 2019 from http://www.ntu.edu.sg/ai/Pages/academic-integrity -policy.aspx. ———. (2019). NTU rankings and ratings. Retrieved on December 11, 2019 from http://www.ntu.edu.sg/AboutNTU/CorporateInfo/pages/universityrankings.aspx. Park, C. (2003). In other (people’s) words: plagiarism by university students— literature and lessons. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(5), 471–88. DOI: 10.1080/02602930301677. Sutton, A., and Taylor, D. (2011). Confusion about collusion: working together and academic integrity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(7), 831–41. Thompsett, A., and Ahluwalia, J. (2010). Students turned off by Turnitin? Perception of plagiarism and collusion by undergraduate Bioscience students. Bioscience Education, 16(1), 1-15. DOI: 10.3108/beej.16.3. Turnitin.com Editors (December 14, 2017). White paper—The plagiarism spectrum: Instructor insights into the 10 types of plagiarism. Retrieved on December 11, 2019 from https://www.turnitin.com/infographics/the-plagiarism-spectrum. Yeo, S. (2007). First-year university science and engineering students’ understanding of plagiarism. High Education Research & Development, 26(2), 199-216. DOI: 10.1080/07294360701310813.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter Two

L2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions on the Influence of Academic Honesty on their Teaching and Teaching Philosophies

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Andrew Leichsenring

Prior to conducting this research, I used Google Scholar to perform a primary search that revealed a plentiful quantity of available studies by education researchers on university students’ perceptions of academic honesty (i.e., one hundred-plus studies over a twenty-year period). I thought that the quantity provided enough evidence that students’ perceptions in relation to academic honesty had been widely explored by researchers and educators. Then, I used Google Scholar to perform a primary search for available studies on university teachers’ perceptions of academic honesty and found an equally sizeable quantity of research conducted in this area of research (i.e., one hundredplus studies over a twenty-year period). Yet I was unable to locate available research on L2 English university teachers’ perceptions of the influence of academic honesty on their own L2 teaching practices and their teaching philosophies. When referring to teachers’ L2 teaching practices, I specifically mean their teaching of the four basic language learning skills, that is, Speaking, Listening, Reading, and Writing. For these reasons, I wrote this chapter for providing its readers with an exploration of teachers’ perceptions of the influence of academic honesty on their development as teachers and their teaching practices. I selected the following working definition of academic honesty for the purpose of providing the reader with a point of reference for the research that follows in this chapter. I used Yale University’s First Year Student Handbook 2019–2020 to provide a working definition of both academic honesty and academic dishonesty. Academic honesty refers to the following definition:

23

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

24

Andrew Leichsenring

[the] creation, preservation, and dissemination of knowledge. For this reason, it is important for students to learn how to acknowledge the contributions of others in their own work and to document properly their reliance on others’ thinking. Discovering how to use others’ work to advance one’s own is a key part of learning. Very few scholars ever have completely original ideas, and even the greatest scholars build on their predecessors’ achievements. Understanding how to incorporate others’ points into one’s own arguments, and how to acknowledge those points properly, is one sign of maturing scholarship. (Yale University’s First Year Student Handbook 2019–2020)

Academic dishonesty refers to the following definition: [the] failure to know or follow the conventions of documentation and citation— even when inadvertent—is considered a grave breach of academic integrity. The concept of academic dishonesty or cheating . . . includes any misrepresentation of others’ work as one’s own, such as unacknowledged paraphrasing or quoting, use of another student’s material, incomplete acknowledgment of sources (including Internet sources), or submission of the same work to complete the requirements of more than one course. (Yale University’s First Year Student Handbook 2019–2020)

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

PARTICIPANTS AND DATA COLLECTION Several teachers volunteered to participate in this research, and the main selection criteria for participant inclusion was that participants had a minimum of five years of L2 English teaching experience at the same university. I thought that this length of teaching experience would provide this research with a widened scope of teachers’ self-perceptions to reflect upon and explore similarities and differences in their professional opinions. A snapshot of participants’ background information follows with categorization of each participant’s pseudonym, the number of years they had been teaching L2 English at the tertiary level, and the countries in which they had taught L2 English. The four participants were: Bradley, seventeen years, Australia and Japan; Jennifer, seven years, Japan; Maria, thirteen years, Japan; and Peter, ten years, Japan and South Korea. This research utilized a mini case study design that allowed for analytical insights of the research issue both in its completeness and by viewing the issue, as explored through the research questions below, from many angles (Stake, 2005; Thomas, 2014). I conducted semistructured individual interviews once for each participant for a period of less than one hour. I selected interviews as the only data collection instrument to be used for the purpose of documenting the teachers’ individual perspectives on

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



L2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions 25

academic honesty to allow for the research question responses to be probed (Patton, 1990) further and to provide for a change in direction to pursue emerging issues. I used thematic analysis to explore the interview responses for themes and subthemes. Mogashoa (2014) defined thematic analysis as the exploration of themes that are clusters of linked categories and which convey similar meanings and usually emerge through the inductive analytic process. RESEARCH QUESTIONS I developed four research questions (RQs) that I asked participants in the semistructured individual interviews: RQ1: Is your perception of academic honesty as a teacher any different to the perception that you had when you were an undergraduate student and/or a graduate student? RQ2: Has academic honesty influenced your teaching philosophy? 2a): If yes, how has academic honesty shaped your teaching philosophy over time? 2b): If no, why not? RQ3: Is academic honesty an important consideration for all types of assessment that you presently use (teach)? Why or why not? RQ4: Are there preventative measures that you use in your teaching practice in order to try to reduce the occurrence of students engaging in academic dishonesty?

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In this section I have included extracts from the teachers’ interview responses to the four questions. I selected the following extracts because they illustrate evidence of the themes and subthemes that emerged through my analysis of the data collected. Teachers’ Perceptions of Academic Honesty: As a University Student and as a Teacher Question 1: Is your perception of academic honesty as a teacher any different to the perception that you had when you were an undergraduate student and/ or a graduate student?

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

26

Andrew Leichsenring

For Question 1 the emergent themes were: fairness and self-responsibility for Bradley; common sense and self-awareness for Maria; original thinking and creativity for Jennifer; and morality and social expectations for Peter. Bradley: Fairness and Self-Responsibility Bradley discussed how, as a graduate student, the expectations of his teachers shaped his early awareness of academic honesty. They gave to him (and other students) a sense of understanding about the boundaries of what constitutes academic honesty. Stephens (2015) noted the need for teachers and students to become informed about what behavior is acceptable within the limits of academic honesty and Bradley talked about this perspective, too, in connection with his life experience as a student: I feel very responsible in my role and I have more attention on academic honesty now than in my student days. But I remember that at university it was always made clear what we could do or could not do. Yet as a student, or as a teacher, if you don’t have a lot of experience about it [academic honesty] then of course you’re given a base but you need to pursue it and learn about it for yourself. I think that there would’ve been some students who were ignorant about things such as paraphrasing and what is acceptable and what is not. (Bradley)

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Fairness (and honesty) are traditional values that for most teachers are important to uphold (Stephens, 2015). Bradley talked about how his sense of responsibility as a teacher led him to want to be fair to students. He wanted to be clear in his expectations of academic honesty about work produced by students: As a teacher, I am aware that if I allow students to be academically dishonest and am not careful about it, then once or twice that might be OK. But if you’re not careful then eventually you might have to explain yourself. That concept of fairness and being conscious about being fair to students is very important to me. As I said, students can be ignorant about what defines academic honesty or dishonesty and I have a responsibility to be clear about that and be aware of how I am teaching these things too. (Bradley)

Maria: Common Sense and Self-Awareness Maria talked about her recollection of being an undergraduate student and the expectations that academic staff had about producing work that was not plagiariztic. She discussed the notion of common sense as a guiding influence on students for instructing them on what is right or wrong (Brown, Isbel, Logan, and Etherington, 2019) when producing academic work:

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



L2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions 27

When I was an undergraduate student, I’m sure teachers were talking about, “Oh, don’t copy from the book, and if you do copy then cite it.” But they didn’t emphasize that much because they thought it was common sense and we [students] did too. I never broke the rule because we knew what we shouldn’t do. (Maria)

Maria stated that as she progressed through her graduate studies, she could not recall any clear instance of her teachers talking about academic honesty: When I was a graduate student, I don’t remember hearing about academic honesty. I never heard about a student cheating. So, I never had any chance to face academic honesty in my student life. (Maria)

Some studies have found that in the case of students’ professional development, a lack of academic integrity in higher education is associated with a lack of professional integrity in the workplace (Ferro and Martins, 2016; Javeed, 2018). In her role as a teacher, Maria felt responsible for giving her students a clear sense of awareness about the significance of academic honesty in their student lives. In Maria’s case, this feeling seems to have derived, at least in part, from her experience of seeing a student act in an academically dishonest way: As a teacher now, I’m thinking about some students who have actually done it [academic dishonesty] and I had that big cheating experience with the student copying an essay. My experiences and also from learning from academic sources, I think about my teaching and how to teach my students more effectively and how important this is. So, when I do a lecture, I need to make sure that they do understand the importance of academic honesty. (Maria)

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Jennifer: Original Thinking and Creativity Jennifer reflected on her life as an undergraduate university student and recalled how she strived to provide content for her essay-based assessment that was unique and creative. She wanted her teachers to be able to distinguish her work from that of other students. She seemed to think that this would help her to attain good grades: I went to a university as an undergraduate with small class groups of no more than twenty students. So, obviously with a smaller class, you can’t cheat. We didn’t have the internet. So, we used to read encyclopaedias, etc. and really try to understand and find the best information because you really wanted to stand out from other students. As a student, I had friends at other universities who copied other students’ answers on tests or assignments from the year before. But I never did that. (Jennifer)

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

28

Andrew Leichsenring

Jennifer continued to develop her sense of creativity and originality in the work that she produced at graduate school and this continuing development has strongly affected her perception of academic honesty: At graduate school, every assessment was based on students showing originality. So, I tried to create materials that haven’t been done before. So, [for me] academic honesty comes from challenging students to think on their own. Original thinking and academic honesty can’t be separated. (Jennifer)

Van Zyl and Thomas (2015) argued for the development of assessment that demands individual thought and reflection and can be used to structure assessment in such a way as to reduce the possibility of cheating. Since Jennifer has become a teacher, her passion for creativity and originality in academic study has developed further to become an important element of her teaching practice. She feels that by demanding her students’ work be creative, original, and derived from individual thought, she is seeking for her students to complete academic assessment that is essentially honest in its production: I became a teacher and then I think that as a student, if you have ownership of anything that you’ve created, you’re honest obviously because it comes from you. As when I was a student, as a teacher I would want my students to feel passionate about what they produce [and] that the teacher would feel passionate about what the students produce. I think that language learning is not just the language. It’s the whole process of turning that language and making it into something that you understand and something that you can take away. (Jennifer)

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Peter: Morality and Social Expectations Peter talked about his experience of being an undergraduate university student and suspecting that fellow students were colluding on various assessment items and that a fellow student received a higher grade than he did. In a philosophical way, Peter explained how he thought that cheating might shape one’s character and possibly even future patterns of behavior: I knew a student at university who I thought was cheating and I’ve also heard of instances from friends of submitting the same papers and getting different grades. But I thought and strongly suspected that two students in my university class were exchanging work and calling it their own. And one of them got a better grade than me and I thought, “Well, that’s not right.” Have you ever heard this expression, “Sow a thought, reap an action. Sow an action, reap a habit. Sow, a habit, reap a character”? So there it goes into the wider context that it had a short-term benefit. And even if they [cheating students] don’t know about it, possibly an impact on their character. (Peter)

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



L2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions 29

Peter reflected on being a university student and seeing other students cheat. He related that experience to his perception of academic honesty as a teacher and explained how it had evolved over time. Peter shared his thoughts on how academic dishonesty relates to moral character and social expectations in the sense of what people might generally consider to be either dishonest or acceptable (Ferro and Martins, 2016): I think now that I can see the wider context of academic honesty more clearly, about character and that moral dimension. Then, thinking about myself as a teacher, I think that a classroom is a microcosm of society. We have rules in society and if you didn’t work by the rules, the students would be making complaints against you. So, my thinking about academic honesty is strongly influenced by that social expectation. And, I always try to be explicit with my students about the criteria that I am using to assess their work and that includes academic honesty. (Peter)

The Influence of Academic Honesty on the Shaping of Teachers’ Teaching Philosophies Question 2: Has academic honesty influenced your teaching philosophy? 2a): If yes, how has academic honesty shaped your teaching philosophy over time? 2b): If no, why not? All four teachers stated that academic honesty had shaped their individual teaching philosophies. For Question 2 the emergent themes about teachers’ perceptions of academic dishonesty shaping their teaching philosophies were fairness in the classroom and with assessment, for Bradley; teaching students academic skills for their better future, for Maria; creativity, the transfer of original thoughts, and honesty, for Jennifer; integrity in the classroom and with grading, for Peter.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Bradley: Fairness in the Classroom and with Assessment Bradley referred to the philosophical ideal of fairness and expressed how it has shaped his teaching philosophy: I think part of my [teaching] philosophy, whether it’s conscious or not, and maybe it’s a big part actually, is a concept of fairness. When I think of fairness, this is related to everything I do in class. And, I’m not happy with having any situation in the class where I don’t feel it’s fair to the others [students]. (Bradley)

Bradley revealed that fairness is an important element of his teaching philosophy, and his awareness of its significance has grown over time. He also mentioned that fairness is not an easy concept to maintain but it is a focus of his role as a teacher.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

30

Andrew Leichsenring

I think as I’ve progressed as a teacher that concept of fairness has grown. I think as a teacher, you have to be on your guard about academic honesty because it can be a tricky thing to spot. It’s sometimes very hard to catch early on in your career because as a teacher you’ve got so many things going on in class. (Bradley)

Bradley also felt that academic honesty, in respect to plagiarism, is something that both he and other experienced teachers have a strong awareness of, even if it is included implicitly rather than explicitly in their teaching practice: I think when you think of academic honesty, it has that really big image for me as something to do with writing and plagiarism. You kind of associate it with a particular something or a particular time and place. But, even without knowing it, you’re probably on top of it and addressing it far more often than you actually think you might be. (Bradley)

Maria: Teaching Students Academic Skills for Their Better Future

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Maria talked about the importance of academic honesty in her teaching practice concerning its importance to students for their future work or research pursuits. Yet she felt that academic honesty had not strongly shaped her teaching philosophy. She perceived her role as a teacher to be someone who helps students to develop a better future for themselves and part of that development includes learning academic skills that can be beneficial to students in their future lives: Academic honesty is very important but I want to give them [students] the message that I’m trying to help you to create a better future for yourself. That’s my focus. But I want them to learn academic skills because they can be helpful for any future job they might do. But I need to give them grades and I need to explain to them about rules in the academic field, such as what they can do and can’t do. It’s just a rule for me but it isn’t my priority for teaching. That’s why I wouldn’t say academic honesty has any influence on my teaching philosophy. It’s an important field to teach in the curriculum but I wouldn’t call academic honesty as influencing my teaching philosophy. (Maria)

Jennifer: Creativity, the Transfer of Original Thoughts, and Honesty Jennifer talked about her concentrated focus of academic honesty on both assessment and learning activities. She explained that she wanted her students to be original thinkers who identify with a strong sense of self-ownership about their own learning: All of my activities are thinking-based. Every project that I do, every assignment that I do is based on thinking. . . . So, everything is about transferring knowledge

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



L2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions 31

that you’ve learned or understood and transferring that back to someone else. So, with that process, academic honesty would come into play because if you’re thinking, it’s coming from you, it’s not coming from sources, it’s not coming from the internet or coming from someone else. It’s coming from inside you and that’s the most honest way of creating an answer. So, my whole teaching philosophy is of project-based learning, that’s why I teach business topics about an issue and ask students to come up with a brand new solution. I try to put them into groups to help them to feed off each other and get more ideas because one person’s idea and another person’s idea and blending them together makes a better idea sometimes. (Jennifer)

Peter: Integrity in the Classroom and with Grading Peter discussed the ideal of integrity as being important to his teaching philosophy. He presented an example of a student who cheated on an assessment item and how it could adversely affect a classroom atmosphere, at least for the teacher if not also for the students: It [academic honesty] certainly has shaped my teaching philosophy. Let me tell you about reading assessment that I do, M-reader. I taught one student who was a respected sportsperson and his GPA was important to him. I found that he had colluded on an M-reader quiz. Just that one quiz was the difference between this student getting either a B or a C. Integrity is important enough to make a distinction in this case. Students expect a standard of behavior from the teacher. So, if a classroom is not based upon integrity, it really undermines what a classroom should be, in my opinion. (Peter)

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Peter expressed an interesting dilemma when discussing his view on the reality of teaching. He explained that even his need to maintain integrity in the classroom has its limits due to teachers having other work to do beyond the classroom and then not having enough time to spend on tracking down and proving cases of academic dishonesty among students: I’ve become a little less concerned about tracing every incidence of what I believe could have been collusion or academic honesty or misrepresentation. But, after catching a student cheating, for example, the student cheating with an M-reader quiz, I learned that it was important for me to pursue it [academic dishonesty] if somebody was doing these things and check up on them to see if they were doing something dishonest or not. In that case, it literally took me days to find that the student was cheating. I don’t think that I can have enough time to do that anymore. So, I have come to feel that I’m not going to be concerned about it. I think that I have become better at knowing who might be cheating and when. I think that cheating is something possible at any time and we can’t afford to be overly concerned about it. I mean I make my checks but if I can’t

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

32

Andrew Leichsenring

prove cheating then I’m not going to waste time trying to prove it or allege that a student has cheated because that is going to make the problem worse. (Peter)

Academic Honesty for Assessment relating to the Four Basic Language Skills [Speaking, Listening, Reading, and Writing] and Homework Question 3: Is academic honesty an important consideration for all types of assessment that you presently use (teach)? Why or why not? To varying degrees, each of the four teachers perceived academic honesty as an important consideration for some types of assessment that they taught. For Question 3 the identified subthemes of the four language-learning skills and homework are in order of their perceived level of importance to the teachers. Writing

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Among all four teachers, writing was the most significantly linked language learning skill to academic honesty. Each teacher was teaching the same syllabus and the writing assessment consisted of a Process Writing activity, with three stages, that is, a plan, a first draft, and a final draft. On the use of technology as a form of student learning support, the teachers unanimously noted both the value of students using technologies to support their language learning and the dilemma that technologies such as language translation software and the internet may hold for the development of students’ writing skills. Peter shared a favorable view about students’ use of technology to understand what language text means: There is a good argument for allowing language learners to use different types of language learning technologies to legitimately understand what language means. When allowing them to do that and when their writing is being assessed then it [assessment] should be consistent for all students and reflected in their learning. The learning that they had done. (Peter)

Maria questioned the value of students using technology such as translation software when their motivation is to find an easier way to write or when they lack motivation to complete a writing task with the language skills that they possess: If a student tries to use translation apps in a specific writing assignment because he/she just gave up writing and then decided to use Japanese, or tries to use translation, such as Google translation software or the LINE app then that is copying by using technology and I don’t agree with that. (Maria)

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

L2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions 33



Developing student awareness of academic honesty early in a course was important to Bradley. His experience with students being academically dishonest in their production of assessed writing activities shaped his perception that he needed to frontload a level of awareness in students’ minds about the expectations he had of them doing their own writing when he teaches writing: When I think of academic honesty, I instantly make the connection with writing assessment and that’s because of the experiences I have had with students not being academically honest with that type of assessment . . . for a period of a course within a semester where I need to bring it to the foreground. That’s really about giving students awareness to the importance of not copying information but actually doing the writing themselves. (Bradley)

Jennifer’s interest in helping students to think for themselves when they write was an important influence on her teaching practice. Ferro and Martins (2016) suggest that in order for teachers to deter plagiarism they should design assignments that require students to explore a subject in depth. Jennifer discussed a strategy for implementing boundaries so that students were encouraged to think for themselves. She attempted to give her students essay topics that did not present them with a straightforward approach to completing their assessment simply by copying content from the internet: For essay writing, I try to give them [students] a topic that they cannot Google. For example, doing a paired essay where each student needs to compare and contrast things, such as two companies in the same industry. While students can still get facts from the internet, they still need to analyse information and then write. So, I want to give my students the qualities of ownership and searching on their own and thinking on their own. (Jennifer)

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

The inclusion of a paired writing activity for essay writing tasks helped Jennifer to position her students to take ownership of their research, analytical, and writing skills. Homework Homework is another area of assessment that teachers perceived to be of significance in relation to academic honesty. Copying, sharing, or not doing homework properly was an aspect of homework practices that concerned Peter. He noted his concern about giving homework to students because he felt that it is difficult to accurately assess which students are (or not) doing their own work: “I’ve been reluctant to set homework because students would not think about their answers and just show you marks on their page or collude or just copy” (Peter).

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

34

Andrew Leichsenring

Bradley discussed an issue about students sharing homework answers when doing their homework for a future lesson: At times, I need to bring up academic honesty and use my authority with homework. Students do homework at the start of class or look at another student’s book [for homework answers]. It’s a regular and ongoing thing. (Bradley)

Maria shared her approach to managing the issue of students either not doing their own homework by copying answers or simply marking answers without properly doing their homework. She implemented a strategy of observing students during lessons while doing textbook related homework and randomly asking them to say their answers in front of the whole class group: Once you get to know each student, you pretty much know if they’re doing homework or not. But I always walk around the room and make sure if they’re doing their homework or not. For example, if they copy somebody’s answers from their reading textbooks, then if they keep doing that, at some point I notice because that student is not learning anything. Or I ask them, “Can you give me the answer for Question 3,” and if he couldn’t answer, even if the answer is written there, it’s clear he wrote something without thinking. So, if I pay attention to that, then I know who is doing their homework, and who is not, or who is just copying their homework. So, when I think about homework and classroom participation, then obviously I’ll deduct the points. (Maria)

She expressed a self-belief that at some point during a course she could confidently judge which of her students were regularly doing their homework properly, possibly either copying homework, or simply marking textbook answers without giving much thought to their homework.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Reading Several teachers discussed reading assessment in relation to academic honesty. However, the extent to which each teacher was concerned about it varied. Two types of reading assessment emerged from interviews with the four teachers: firstly, reading tests from textbooks and secondly, book reports. Peter discussed his views about reading textbook tests and the potential problem of students sharing answers. He raised the issue of students passing on answers to their friends either in the same class group or with students from other class groups when they are required to take the same textbook style tests at the same class level: “Reading tests concern me because students could be sharing answers. Even from day to day, even from the next class” (Peter). Yet Maria offered a very different perception. She did not seem to find any reason to be concerned about academic dishonesty occurring in relation to

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



L2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions 35

textbook related reading tests: “Reading tests, there is nothing that they can do to copy. I usually don’t let them bring a dictionary. I don’t really think about academic honesty in terms of reading tests” (Maria). For Jennifer, there was no reason for concern about the possibility of students being academically dishonest in textbook reading test settings: “I don’t know how you could put academic honesty into reading textbook assessment because they’re actually just reading” (Jennifer). Jennifer talked about book reports and the potential problem of students copying or sharing answers. She shared her thoughts about the ease with which students can find answers for book report questions online and then she shared her strategy for dealing with this problem. In consideration of the ease with which her students presented their book reports (and their written answers) without doing their work independently of other sources, she had this to say: For book reports, you can google things and find lots of materials and just copy and paste. And I’ve seen so many of those when I have taught in different places. And, you think they’re good writers and then when there in a discussion, they can’t remember the name of the book they read. (Jennifer)

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Jennifer employed a strategy to deal with the potential issue of students copying and pasting book report answers from the internet. She changed the way that students were to do their Graded Reader book report assessment. That is, instead of having her students write answers to specific questions, she had them make poster presentations for their book reports and answer questions that she felt would not be easy to replicate from online sources. This strategy aligns with Ferro and Martins (2016) suggestion that teachers should design assessment that encourages students to explore a subject in depth in order to deter plagiarism: So, I decided to ask them [students] questions that they can’t google. For example, “If you met the author, what would you like to ask them?” (from a Japanese perspective). Or if you are going to make a movie from the book’s story, who would you choose to be the Japanese actors for the characters. So, questions they cannot find or google the answer. Then, I will try to challenge them to write it and then not count their grammar or errors. So, just let them write as much as they can. (Jennifer)

With book reports, and specifically graded reader book reports, Peter talked about monitoring incidences of academic dishonesty. His experiences with cases of academic dishonesty led him to develop a profile of the type of student whom he felt was likely to cheat in Extensive reading activities in

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

36

Andrew Leichsenring

courses he taught. He referred to an online quiz site that his students use and the quizzes that gauge the level of comprehension that students have about a novel that they have read in one of his courses: With book reports, and I’m thinking about M-reader and Extensive Reading, students think they won’t be detected. It is often the nicest students and the ones who are the best performing academically who cheat. They were the ones I had identified to be worthy of respect for their integrity and even for the way they did their work and the way they related to other people. (Peter)

Speaking Two teachers shared their views about speaking assessment outcomes and academic dishonesty. Peter made the distinction between collusion and collaboration. He stated his feeling that if students received support from other students, then this could be considered as acceptable, so, too, could the act of memorization for speaking assessment: It’s possible but probably a little difficult to collude. Or in fact, any collusion before any speaking test would be more like collaboration. And so it’s immediate and less prone to academic dishonesty. For Speaking [assessment], in the sense that unless you’re assessing dialogically, students tend to memorize. And that’s not a bad thing in an immediate sense. I suppose that depends on the ideological context. Memorization can be helpful. (Peter)

Copying Content for Imitation as a Legitimate Learning Technique

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

With a locally contextualized view in mind, Maria raised the argument that Japanese students, whom she taught daily, had limited exposure to English speaking opportunities. She felt a need to allow them to imitate (or copy) people who could act as their speech models: About speaking [assessment], actually I believe especially Japanese students, they don’t have enough chances to speak English outside of the classroom or in society. All they could do in junior high and high school is read textbooks, take the test, and memorize vocabulary. So, I believe imitating somebody’s speech is really important for Japanese speakers [of English] because they don’t have any chance [to speak English]. (Maria)

Maria also talked about how she felt that it is not a case of academic dishonesty if her students copy someone’s spoken words or a speech for speaking assessment. She explained that this is because this approach might be a valuable way for language learners to learn. She specifically noted this to be the case for Japanese tertiary students. Interestingly, she is Japanese and

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

L2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions 37



reflected upon the needs of her students based upon her experience of having been an L2 English student in Japan: So, I wouldn’t say its academic dishonesty [because] they need to imitate and copy what other people are saying in English as their first step to improving their English speaking ability. For example, if they take something from Wikipedia, and they try to read it from here and there and try to explain about something then this type of practice encourages them to speak more. (Maria)

Listening No concerns with plagiarism were voiced by any of the teachers in respect to listening assessment. Only one teacher talked about listening assessment for this question. Maria felt that there was no real concern for her about students being academically dishonest when doing listening test-based assessment. She said, “With listening tests, you can’t really plagiarize anything.” She referred to the act of plagiarism here but did not state in her interview any further information as to why she did not broaden her scope of meaning more broadly in the context of academic (dis)honesty and the possibility of students colluding or cheating in another way. No other teacher referred to listening assessment in relation to this interview question.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Preventative Measures Used by Teachers to Reduce the Occurrence of Students Engaging in Academic Dishonesty Question 4: Are there preventative measures that you use in your teaching practice in order to try to reduce the occurrence of students engaging in academic dishonesty? For Question 4, two themes emerged: general perceptions about preventative measures against academic dishonesty (see Table 2.1 for the subthemes) and perceptions about preventative measures against academic dishonesty regarding the four basic language learning skills and homework (see Table 2.2 for the subthemes). For the latter theme, I have discussed the language learning skills and homework in order of significance, as per the teachers’ interview responses. Table 2.1.  Emergent Subthemes from Teachers’ General Perceptions about Preventative Measures against Academic Dishonesty (Not in Order of Significance) Themes

Emergent Subthemes from Interview Responses

Teachers’ general perceptions

Not a priority in day-to-day teaching Teacher’s influence role in prevention Desire to address academic dishonesty versus constraints on time communication with students Monitoring students and modelling examples for them to follow

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

38

Andrew Leichsenring

Table 2.2.  Emergent Themes and Subthemes from Teachers’ Perceptions about Preventative Measures against Academic Dishonesty in Relation to the Four Basic Language Leaning Skills and Homework (in Order of Significance) Themes

Emergent Subthemes from Interview Responses

Writing

Making assessment difficult to “google” and copy Recognizing students’ intentions to disguise cheating Providing structural examples to follow Modelling structural examples of essay writing and language use Hinting indirectly to a class group that someone has cheated Directly questioning students in cases of suspected cheating Regular class time writing for students Student to student reading of written work

Reading

Different versions of the same test

Homework

Random selection of students for homework answers in class time

Teachers’ offered some general views about their practical application of preventative measures for managing academic dishonesty in classroom teaching and learning, as well as for assessment. For Bradley, academic honesty is not a priority in day-to-day teaching. Reflecting on how much thought about academic honesty he placed in classroom teaching and learning on a daily basis, Bradley wrote:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Sitting here and thinking about it now, it [academic honesty] is an important thing to consider. But to be honest, I don’t think I give it that much thought in my everyday level of teaching. (Bradley)

In connection with the teacher’s role in prevention, Bradley viewed both himself and other teachers as needing to be the primary influencer of prevention against academic dishonesty. His view aligns with DiVall and Schlesselmans’ (2016) assertion that the burden is on the shoulders of teachers to ensure that students act ethically: The first responsibility is with the teacher. I think you can save yourself a lot of potential hardship and hardship for the students if there is something that is rock solid. Make them aware of the seriousness of it. (Bradley)

Desire to address academic dishonesty versus constraints on time. Bradley talked about his perception that for both himself and other teachers there are a various aspects of teaching which need to be considered and academic honesty is only one of them: “I think that with the job of teaching, whether it’s academic honesty or planning a lesson, I am aware that there’s a lot more that I could do. But, teachers are so busy and our time is limited.”

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



L2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions 39

In relation to communication with students, several teachers noted their experiences of observing students using a variety of ways to produce their classwork or assessable work and seeing them claim it as their own when there was a possibility that they might have done so dishonestly. Bradley was one teacher who felt that these experiences influenced his perception of the significance of taking preventative measures to manage issues with students doing academically dishonest work: Like in life, in this job, when you experience something and it really has an impact, the wheels really start turning and you learn from that experience because I think you can still do your teaching without going this far forward with it. You can’t cover all your bases but one thing you can do is communicate with your students and make them aware of the seriousness of academic honesty. (Bradley)

Through starting early, building collaborations, and supporting self-awareness (Javeed, 2018), teachers can support students’ understanding of the significance of academic integrity in tertiary education. Maria talked about new students such as first-year students or students who are taking a type of course for the first time who may require particular attention to minimize the possibility of potential issues of academic dishonesty from occurring. She felt that it is important that students become aware of course and university requirements for completing their assessment ethically:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

I emphasize [the issue of] academic honesty in the beginning of the semester because it’s a new start, especially for the freshmen. They need to understand what the university requires and what they need to do. For example, this is what I mean by plagiarism and that books and articles on the internet have copyright. And, I’ll give some examples. (Maria)

Throughout the duration of a course that she teaches, Maria informs all of her students that she is watching their performance with classwork and assessment and that she is likely to recognize any cases of academic dishonesty among them: Plagiarism is not only copying something from the internet. Even if you ask your friend, it’s plagiarism. And I tell them, “I know if you do that because it’s happened in the past. And I teach you four times a week, and if you try to cheat on assessment, I’ll know.” I’m always telling them that. (Maria)

Monitoring students and modelling examples for them to follow. Peter felt that the best way to minimize the occurrence of academic dishonesty is to monitor students and the production of their work. He also thought that it

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

40

Andrew Leichsenring

is necessary to present examples of learning content for them to see so that they understand what he expects from them. In particular, he was referring to writing-based assessment: “Yes, the one that comes to mind is monitoring students’ work often. But, that’s always been after giving them an example.” Mallia (2017) notes the importance of providing clear writing structures to students studying L2 English as some students might have fairly limited writing experience even in their own mother tongue and particularly for longer writing assignments. Maria shared her view that monitoring students can involve a teacher observing their students’ participation in activities in the classroom during teaching and learning activities: “Classroom observation is the best method. Get them to do tasks in class and check everything in class as it is being done.” Preventative Measures for Teaching the Four Basic Language Learning Skills and Homework Teachers conveyed their thinking about preventative measures for reducing occurrences of academic dishonesty in assessment of reading, writing, and homework. Writing

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Making assessment difficult to google and copy. For essay writing related assessment, a major concern for each of the teachers was the possibility that students would copy information from the internet and claim it as their own work. There was another concern about students writing content that does not appear to match their proficiency level. Bradley referred to a case where he became aware of a student who seemed to write above his natural skill level. Furthermore, Bradley was unable to locate the student’s written content on the internet: For writing, a preventative measure is giving them [students] a topic that is nongoogleable. It’s fine to say that but to be realistic, if you say to write about a vacation that you have had (then) you don’t know if the content comes from the Internet. There’s probably a lot out there for that and there’s no way for me to call their parents and ask, “Did you really go to Singapore with your child when he was 7 years old?” (Bradley)

Bradley talked about how he tries to prevent this from happening at the beginning of essay writing and throughout its progression: “I try to do [the initial stage of writing] the outline in class. Just be there as much of that process as is possible. And, seeing the progression through the drafts.”

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



L2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions 41

Bradley also discussed the value of a teacher being able to recognize a students’ intention to disguise cheating. He shared his concern about the extent to which students might go to in order to disguise work that they have copied by simplifying their writing style and bringing a copied advanced level of composition down to a level more in line with their lower proficiency level. He explained that a possible reason for students doing this is that they might think it will be less likely for a teacher to detect that writing which has been copied from, or produced by, someone else: Obviously, you can see the first draft will be, mechanically speaking, all over there, incoherent. They [students] would have to be very cunning, for example, take a piece of their work and think that you’re going to take this native speaker English, or almost native English, and mess it up and make it look like my level. They could potentially take it that far. So, students can probably punch holes in that net but you can make it tighter. (Bradley)

Bradley illustrated a preventative measure to ameliorate the possibility of such an incident occurring. He talked about changing his essay writing assessment from summative assessment to formative assessment as a potential preventative measure:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

I’ve had an experience, a student didn’t give me their outline or first draft and just before the end of the course. I received a completed paper. I know some other teachers (who) use summative assessment and (others who) use formative assessment. So, you can give a draft for the first assessment, and another improved draft for the second assessment. I don’t do it that way but it’s something that I might consider doing just for that reason to avoid something like that. (Bradley)

Providing structural examples to follow was voiced by several teachers as a specific way to support students in their writing so that they might focus on producing their own writing rather than look for other sources of support such as other people to write their essays, or content from the internet. Jennifer talked about highly structured approaches such as paragraph-by-paragraph modelling. Research suggests that the provision of teaching academic literacy is imperative to students’ academic success in a tertiary environment (Song and Cadman, 2013; Thompson, Bagby, Sulak, Sheets, and Trepinski, 2017): For writing, I do have a template that I show on Blackboard, as well as I do show in class. I do a hamburger writing which is the five paragraphs and they have to fill in the parts after the first sentence. . . . So, I’ll show them the five sentences in red and then they [students] know they’re only allowed to copy those five sentences. The rest has to come from their own, I hope. (Jennifer)

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

42

Andrew Leichsenring

Due to Peter having experienced cases of students claiming work that they did not do as being their own, he stated his insistence on the need to provide clear examples of how to write an essay in order to combat this problem: “I wouldn’t give them a writing assessment anymore without giving them an example. And, I monitor it very often and the three drafts would be given consideration when the final score was given.” Modelling essay writing was an important preventative measure that the teachers referred to in relation to teaching students how to structure their compositions. Yet beyond modelling essay structures, Peter noted his interest in giving students learning support on the type of language to be used in essay writing: “I’ve been thinking about originality and even modelling some approaches. Not only to the structure that is being insisted on by the teacher but to the language that’s being used.” Hinting indirectly to a class group that someone has cheated is another preventative measure that a teacher can use. During a writing assessment activity, an act of plagiarism that has occurred can be identified to the class group (Ferro and Martins, 2016) while not directly naming the person who has done it. Maria explained:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

If I realize something during checking students’ essays then I’ll say something, even if it’s only one student who is plagiarizing. But, I’ll tell the whole class rather than tell the student’s name. I will just say, “You know, one essay in our class was copied from someone else or from the internet.” And, I’ll emphasize again. It depends on the semester, sometimes I might have to emphasize more than two times. I really emphasize what they should do and shouldn’t do. (Maria)

Maria talked about the importance of directly questioning students in cases of suspected cheating. As a result of not being able to detect the source(s) from which a student obtains their written content, Maria found how difficult it can be for a teacher to know the truth without a student confessing that written work is not their own. In such cases, it can be difficult for a teacher to prove an act of academic dishonesty: I had one student, her English wasn’t very good and the whole class was really motivated and it was an English related department. I wouldn’t say that she wasn’t motivated. She wasn’t really sure if this is what she really wants to do. She wasn’t really doing her homework; she wasn’t really trying. Then, one day she gave me a perfect essay. And, I couldn’t find any mistakes other than one or two articles missing. Even I make those mistakes and these are difficult things for Japanese to do. I wondered, “Did she copy this?” I tried really hard to find the source but it was based on her experience, so I couldn’t. So, I called her out and she was honest. She told me that her brother wrote her essay. He had been

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

L2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions 43



living in Canada for a few years and his English was pretty good. I couldn’t find the source and then I couldn’t really call that plagiarism. I think if that happens again, the best way is to talk with the student. (Maria)

Regular class time writing for students and regular monitoring of their work is an approach that teachers can use to get students to take responsibility for their work. Having students write frequently in class time (Mallia, 2017) is an approach that Peter discussed. He felt that it encourages students to do their own writing and students can see other students doing their own work: Another preventative measure comes from writing in class every day, unless there is something else like a test. I ask the students who want their writing checked to write their name on the whiteboard at the front of the classroom. And the others, I can see if they’re doing their writing if I walk around the classroom. (Peter)

Student-to-student reading of written work is another approach that Peter uses in class time. He has students read to their partner the writing that they have completed so far and lets other students gauge the originality of the written work from what they hear: “Another good writing activity that I like to do is for students to read their writing to a partner. It becomes fairly obvious to the partner whether the things that’s being read is actually from the person sitting next to them.” This approach provides a level of support for students’ academic writing that can help to reduce the risk of a student wanting to start cheating (Ahmed, 2018).

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Reading Different versions of the same test is an interesting strategy that Jennifer uses to prevent students from cheating during textbook reading tests. She presents them with different versions of the same test. In other words, she rearranges the question order but still uses the same content. Jennifer explained how modifying or customizing assessment (McHaney, Cronan, and Douglas, 2016) could help reduce academic cheating: For reading tests, I sometimes give them [students] two versions because I’ve seen students trying to eye other students’ tests. So, I give them the same questions and I just change the order around. That’s the first, and when we check the answers I say that there were two tests and they are surprised. Then, the second time I give them the same test and they don’t look at other students’ answers anymore. The desks are so close and I don’t think it’s their fault that the answers are there so close for them to see. But, I haven’t seen anyone cheating other than looking around. (Jennifer)

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

44

Andrew Leichsenring

Homework Random selection of students for homework answers in class time is a preventative measure that Maria uses for managing academic dishonesty in homework activities. She uses a particular strategy in class to communicate the importance of students needing to do their own work. She will randomly challenge them to prove to her that they are doing their own work and not just discreetly copying from other students: With homework, sometimes they [students] just copy other students’ answers and they proudly show their homework as if they did their homework. So, then sometimes, I’ll give them a question from the textbook to answer in class and see how fast they can do that task. And, that really gives me a hint. “Oh, that student is always writing answers on the textbook before coming in but clearly, maybe he was copying from someone else.” [And I say that] because in class when I give them a chance to do it in class, he or she can’t do it at all. I do that in class once in a while to randomly see who is doing honestly. I think then I’ve been successful in judging the students fairly in that way. (Maria)

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION This chapter explored the perceptions of four experienced L2 English university teachers in respect to academic (dis)honesty. A specific characteristic of the participants in this research is that they are teachers who have all worked for at least seven years at one university in Japan. During this time, they have taught L2 English courses focused on the learning of the Four Basic Language Learning skills (speaking, listening, reading, and writing). From a quantitative perspective, perceptions offered by the small number of participants in this research might be limited in scope. Yet from a qualitative viewpoint, the participating teachers were able to share a wide range of ideas and experiences in relation to issues covered through responses given to the four research questions. In summary, I will review the main findings of this research concerning the teachers’ perceptions shared in their interview responses to the four research questions (RQs). RQ1 was “Is your perception of academic honesty as a teacher any different to the perception that you had when you were an undergraduate student and/or a graduate student?” The following key themes emerged from teachers’ perceptions: fairness, self-responsibility, common sense, self-awareness, original thinking, creativity, morality, and an understanding of social expectations about the boundaries of acceptable behavior. RQ2 was “Has academic honesty influenced your teaching philosophy? If

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



L2 English University Teachers’ Perceptions 45

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

yes, how has academic honesty shaped your teaching philosophy over time? If no, why not?” Significant factors referred to by the teachers included creativity and the transfer of original thought in an honest way to other individuals, the learning of academic skills for students’ future working lives, and a sense of fairness and integrity in the classroom and with assessment and grading. RQ3 was “Is academic honesty an important consideration for all types of assessment that you presently use [teach]? Why or why not?” The main concern was about writing assessment. The following concerns arose: the use of technology such as language translation software; the need to make students aware about being academically honest in the production of their writing; and the need for students to think for themselves when writing rather than being dependent on copying from the internet or asking other people to write on their behalf. RQ4 was “Are there preventative measures that you use in your teaching practice in order to try to reduce the occurrence of students engaging in academic dishonesty?” Teachers referred to reading and homework but most significantly discussed essay writing assessment. Important themes that emerged about preventative measures for essay writing assessment included the provision of structural examples of writing, the modelling of those writing structures so that students could effectively write their own essays, and the provision of essay topics that are not easy to copy from the internet. This chapter has provided readers with numerous examples of teachers’ perceptions that I hope will stimulate both teachers and students alike to develop a greater sense of awareness about the importance that academic honesty can have in the formulation and implementation of teaching and learning practices and how it may shape one’s teaching philosophy over time. Academic honesty and dishonesty can influence not only assessment-based outcomes but also teaching and learning outcomes.

REFERENCES Ahmed, K. (2018). Student perceptions of academic dishonesty in a private Middle Eastern university. Higher Learning Research Communications, 8(1). DOI: 10.18870/hlrc.v8i1.400. Brown, T., Isbel, S., Logan, A., & Etherington, J. (2019). Predictors of academic honesty and success in domestic and international occupational therapy students. Irish Journal of Occupational Therapy, 47(1), 18-41. DOI: 10.1108/IJOT-12-2018-0022. DiVall, M. V., & Schlesselman, L. S. (2016). Academic dishonesty: Whose fault is it anyway? American Journal of Pharmaceutical Medicine, 80(3), Article 35. DOI: 10.5688/ajpe80335.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

46

Andrew Leichsenring

Ferro, M. J., & Martins, H. F. (2016). Academic plagiarism: Yielding to temptation. British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science, 13(1), 1-11. DOI: 10.9734/bjesbs/2016/20535. Javeed, S. (2018). Academic advisors as valuable partners for supporting academic integrity. Canadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity, 1(1), 22-26. DOI: 10.11575/cpai.v1i1. Mallia, J. (2017). Strategies for Developing English Academic Writing Skills. Arab World English Journal, 8(2). 3-15. DOI: 10.24093/awej/vol8no2.1. McHaney, R., Cronan, T. P., & Douglas, D. E. (2016). Academic integrity: Information systems education perspective. Journal of Information Systems Education, 27(3), 153-159. Mogashoa, T. (2014). Understanding critical discourse analysis in qualitative research. International Journal of Humanities, Social Sciences, and Education, 1(7), 103-114. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Song, X., & Cadman, K. (2013). Education with(out) distinction: Beyond graduate attributes for Chinese international students. Higher Education Research & Development, 32, 258-271. DOI: 1080/07294360.2012.673573. Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 443-466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stephens, J. M. (2015). Creating cultures of integrity: A multi-level intervention model for promoting academic honesty. In T. Bretag (Ed.), Handbook of academic integrity (pp. 995-1007). Singapore: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-287-0797_13-1. Thomas, G. (2014). How to do your case study: A guide for students and researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Thompson. L. W., Bagby. J. H., Sulak, T. N., Sheets, J. & Trepinski, T. M. (2017). The cultural elements of academic honesty. Journal of International Students, 7(1), 136-153. van Zyl, A., & Thomas, A. (2015). Academic honesty: Perceptions of millennial university students and the role of moderating variables. Koers, 80(1), 1-15. DOI: 10.4102/koers.v80i1.2210. Yale University (2019). First Year Student Handbook 2019–2020. Academic Honesty. Retrieved December, 15, 2019 from http://catalog.yale.edu/first-year-student -handbook/academic-information/introduction-undergraduate-education/academic -honesty.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter Three

Examining Perceptions of Both University Lecturers and Undergraduate Students Towards Plagiarism

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Yoshihiko Yamamoto

Although there are many past studies about plagiarism, a study by Howard (1993) is the most widely cited and Rebecca Moore Howard gives a definition of “patchwriting” or a failed attempt at paraphrasing as “copying from a source text and then deleting some words, altering grammatical structures, or plugging in one-for-one synonym-substitutes” (Howard, 1993, p. 233). The author of this study teaches English as a Foreign Language (EFL) for first and second year university students in Japan and often gives his students English writing assignments. Despite instructing his students to avoid “patchwriting,” he sometimes finds it in his students’ written drafts. Conversely, in the same class, there are also students who seem to be familiar with writing assessments and their written drafts include the elements to avoid plagiarism such as citations, quotation, and references. Thus, the aim of this study is to explore the respective perceptions of lecturers and undergraduate university students attending English classes at universities in Japan towards plagiarism. This study used questionnaires for EFL teachers who teach English as a compulsory subject and interviews from some students taught by one author of this study who avoid plagiarizing their written assignments. LITERATURE REVIEW There are many past studies of plagiarism that highlight two popular reasons for its occurrence, such as a lack of experience on academic writing and in

47

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

48

Yoshihiko Yamamoto

particular because of cultural differences among students. The author of this study speculates that these two reasons are considered as relevant for the participants in this study.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Lack of Experiences in Academic Writing To begin with, EFL students lack of experience with learning academic writing is discussed. Abasi, Akbari, and Graves (2006) in their study in Canada illustrate that different educational backgrounds influence students’ awareness of plagiarism. Before the students who had less experience with academic writing in English came to Canada, their education focused on reproducing what they learnt through their textbooks or the knowledge in their lectures. Their assessments were exams and mini essay type tests and did not involve paying attention to plagiarism. However, in both Canadian and American universities, students were expected to write academic essays for their assignments and were expected to learn how to avoid plagiarism. Similarly, Li and Casanave (2012) studied university students in Hong Kong and they demonstrate that their students were aware of plagiarism polices of their university but that they continued to plagiarize in their writing assignments. Although the students did their best to follow the instructions for their writing assignment, due to their lack of knowledge of the writing topic and their lack of academic writing skills, plagiarism was evident in their writing assignments (Li and Casanave, 2012). Kobayashi and Rinnert (2002) also studied the extent that both Japanese and American high school students spent time on writing activities on their L1. They found that Japanese high school students spent much less time in their writing activities than American high school students. They also found that the goals of writing classes between Japanese high schools and American high schools in their study were different. In Japanese high school L1 writing classes, skills of both evaluating their reading contents and expressing their own ideas based on their reading materials were not considered as their important goals to be learnt. As opposed to Japanese L1 classes, in American high school L1 classes, American students considered such skills as important learning goals. Hu and Lei (2006) studied plagiarism in China through questionnaires for both EFL teachers and students. Their questionnaire results illustrated that identifying plagiarism on the writing tasks depends on both students and lecturers’ exposure and experiences to academic writing in English. For instance, the more an EFL teacher trained overseas, the greater their recognition of plagiarism in the writing tasks. Less than half of the students recognized plagiarism in comparison to the overseas trained EFL teachers

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Perceptions Towards Plagiarism 49

in Hu and Lei’s (2006) study. Hu and Lei (2006) also found that while the overseas trained EFL teachers used the term plagiarism in Chinese, none of the EFL teachers who trained domestically in China introduced the term plagiarism in their English classes in China. Wilkinson (2009) also examined plagiarism by L1 university students. He analyzed plagiarism by Australian students studying nursing degrees and found that a lack of understanding of rules in referencing is one of the common reasons why the students plagiarized in their writing assignments.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Cultural Differences Towards Plagiarism There are past studies explaining that plagiarism occurs because of students’ different culture backgrounds. For instance, Abasi and Graves (2008) found that perceptions towards plagiarism differ among the people in different countries. For instance, in Japan, plagiarism in academic writing is not viewed as strictly as it was in Canada, although Japan has both intellectual property and strict copyright laws which were very similar to those in Canada. Hu and Lei (2006) found that some of their Chinese students considered that copying sources without acknowledgment in their writing task was a positive aspect to learn a language. Bloch (2007) explains this phenomenon through culture differences about views of plagiarism between China and Western countries. The major difference towards plagiarism is that although in many Western countries, people learn writing based on logical thinking, the Chinese learn writing based on memorizing characters and imitating writing models. As an example, Enrich et al.’s (2016) study examined attitudes towards plagiarism of both Australian domestic university students and Chinese domestic university students. They found although both Australian and Chinese students had negative attitudes towards plagiarism in general, the Australian students had more strongly negative attitudes towards plagiarism than the Chinese students had in their study. This supports a view of cultural difference in attitudes towards plagiarism. Wheeler (2009) studied plagiarism used by Japanese learners of English in one Japanese university. In his paper, he criticizes Dryden’s (1999) study questioning the conclusion that plagiarism was not considered a serious problem in Japan. Wheeler (2009) found that Japanese university students have little experiences of how to properly cite sources which were used in their writing products, suggesting that plagiarism goes unrecognized by students and lecturers. Wheeler (2009) points out that he found little evidence in his questionnaire survey which plagiarism resulted in cultural differences between Japanese students and the others.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

50

Yoshihiko Yamamoto

METHODOLOGY

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Data Collection In this study, to further knowledge about attitudes towards plagiarism there were 12 university lecturers who cooperated to answer the questionnaires and 7 undergraduate students who consented to attend an interview session. The university lecturers who participated in this study mainly taught undergraduate students English as a foreign language in their universities and assign writing tasks in their classes. However, one lecturer answered that they did not teach anything about citations, quotes, and references in class because other lecturers were responsible for teaching students how to avoid plagiarism. A total of 11 responses from lecturers were analyzed in this study. The undergraduate students were second, third, and fouth year students and were previously taught by the author of this study. They experienced completing written reports in their classes not only in English but also in another language in their other classes. The questionnaires given to lecturers who participated in this study were conducted over a long period of time because it was difficult to make time for the interviews. The questionnaires were therefore the best tools for data collection that suited both parties. There were seven questions about the lecturers’ views on students’ plagiarism and some questions about the lecturers’ background information. All the questions were asked and answered in Japanese and then translated into English by the author of this study. All lecturers who participated in this study teach between 15 and 30 students per class and some lecturers have teaching assistants (TAs) in their class. They teach between 4 and 10 English classes per semester. Those who work as full time lecturers tend to teach fewer classes, for example 4 classes per semester, since they are in charge of other duties for their universities such as administration, staff meeting, and so forth. Those who are working on part time basis tend to have more classes, for instance teaching 10 classes per semester. Interviews with undergraduate students were conducted because the authors of this study suspected that the undergraduate students were not familiar with some words such as “citation” or “plagiarism.” Therefore, the author of this study thought the interviews were the best tools for the undergraduate students. All interviews were conducted in Japanese and then the answers were translated into Japanese by the author of this study. Each interview was completed in times ranging from 20 and 25 minutes. The questions for the questionnaires and interviews are contained in the appendix.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Examining Perceptions Towards Plagiarism 51



RESULTS The results of the questionnaires completed by lecturers are summarized in both Table 3.1 and Table 3.2 below. Overall, the lecturers who answered the questionnaires taught their students how to avoid plagiarism in their lessons Table 3.1.  The Results of Q1 and Q2 Q: Could you please explain how you taught “Citations,” “Quotes,” and “References” in your classes? Numbers of Responses 6 4 3 3 1 1

Responses Showing examples of citations, quotes, and references to the students in class. Explaining citations, quotes, and references to the students in class. Checking my students’ citations, quotes, and references in class (including peer learning). Trying to check and fix students’ citations, quotes, and references in class. I give my students homework to make citations, quotes, and references and check their homework. I don’t teach how to make citations, quotes, and references since my students learn them in the other classes.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Q2: Have you found any plagiarism on your students’ report? If you found any of it, then could you please describe how your students did it on their reports?)

Numbers of Responses

Have you found any plagiarism in your students’ report?

10 1

Yes No

Numbers of Responses 7 4 3 2

1 1

1

If you found any of it, then could you please describe how your students did it in their reports? There are no in-text citations A copy of online sources A copy of Wikipedia Since both font and format of the writing were different, it was a copy of someone’s products A complete copy of an academic journal without any quotes It was a student’s original idea but it was faked as if the student used a source for the writing assignment I guess the student used Japanese articles and translated Japanese into English without citations.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Table 3.2.  The Results of Q3, Q4, Q5, and Q6 Q3: Did you realize things about “Citations,” “Quotes,” and “References” on your students’ writing? Numbers of Responses 2 2 2 1

1 1

1 1

1

1 1

Responses Students tended to forget to make citations, quotes, and references in their writing. Students who were highly motivated to study tended to pay more attention to avoid plagiarism. Students did not tend to have much experience in making citations, quotes, and references in their writing. Although students often made a reference list at the end, they tended to forget to make both citations and quotes within the paragraphs in their writing. Because teachers use different teaching styles with referencing, it can make students confused. The first year students tend not to distinguish their own ideas from others while the third or fourth year students tend to be familiar with making citations, quotes, and references and thus they knew the rules of how to write papers better than the first year students. Students did not tend to try to find the original resource. They tended to use a second resource as their original resource. Although students who were familiar with citations, quotes, and references, they didn’t understand between in-text citation and references. Students whose English level was advanced tended to use citations, quotes, and references well, while the students whose English level was low tended to do plagiarism. Students did not tend to understand why they needed to use citations. Students sometimes did plagiarism without realizing.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Q4: Do you have any strategy for your students not to do plagiarism in their writing assignments? Numbers of Responses 6 3 3 2 2

Responses Use a software to check it. Keep explaining not to do plagiarism throughout the semester. Tell students if they do plagiarism in their writing, then they will fail the course. Ask students to submit their drafts before their final submission and check citations, quotes, and references in their drafts. Show students some examples of plagiarism and teach them not to do it.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Q5: Have you had any trouble about students’ plagiarism? Numbers of Responses 2

1 1

1 1 1 1

Responses Before my students submitted their final report, I found some problems on citations, quotes, and references. However, each lesson was 90 minutes and it was difficult to check all students’ reports in 90 minutes. Also outside of the lesson, it was often difficult to find time to see my students since there were a lot of duties which I had to deal with. Students tend not to pay attention to online sources. They should check them to see if they were reliable or not before they used them. I sometimes felt bad for the students when I found plagiarism after the semester is over. If I realized it within the semester, I would let students fix it and resubmit their reports before I fail them. When the students used Japanese articles and they translated them on their own, it was very difficult to find plagiarism. I kept telling my students not to do plagiarism but there were still some who do it. I sometimes find students copy a part of the resources for their reports and it is difficult to decide whether it is plagiarism or not. A student did the report for the other student.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Q6: Please make any comments or suggestions about plagiarism if you have? 1. I believe it is important to teach students the importance to avoid plagiarism. 2. I think Japanese students do not tend to be aware of plagiarism compared to either European or American students. 3. When I was an undergraduate student in Japan, I didn’t think my lecturers were aware of plagiarism. However, lecturers today are more aware of plagiarism. Some undergraduate students might have learned how to make citations, quotes, and references at their high school. 4. I guess lecturers need to be patient in order to make students avoid plagiarism. 5. Japanese media online does not tend to make a link to the original source although they use the source. Thus I encourage my students to find the original source in my classes but the students find it difficult to find the original source. 6. This is not only a matter of English classes but also other classes. Perhaps, lectures need to cooperate together in order to reduce students’ plagiarism. 7. I believe using online software could be effective to reduce students’ plagiarism. 8. I think students do not tend to understand the importance of avoiding plagiarism thus lecturers need to teach students how to avoid plagiarism. Also it is perhaps needed to state something like “those who do plagiarism will not get credits from the class” or “those who do plagiarism will be withdrawn from the course immediately.” 9. If there is an academic support center on campus, it would help students to avoid plagiarism.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

54

Yoshihiko Yamamoto

and many of them check their students’ writing drafts before they submitted their final writing assignments to determined that the include the elements of in-text references, quotations, and references. However, the results of this study show that there were still some cases of plagiarism in their students’ writing assignments. The most popular answer of Q1 was “showing their students examples of how to avoid plagiarism” and “explain how their students can avoid plagiarism.” Three lecturers adopted peer-learning activity in class to check if their writing drafts included the elements such as in-text references, quotation, and references. Within the results of Q2, seven lectures pointed out that their students’ forgot to make in-text references in their writing drafts. The next popular answer was that they found copies of online resources including Wikipedia. Clearly, in-text citations were cited by lecturers as the most common form of plagiarism, pointing to neglect of referencing as opposed to 12 remarks that indicate more deliberate or obvious attempts at plagiarism. The results of Q3 show some interesting points by lecturers in this study. Two lectures realized that students who were highly motivated to learn tended to pay attention to plagiarism. Two lectures realized that their students did not have much experience in making citations, quotes, and references. One lecturer also pointed out fourth year students tended to be more familiar with making citations, quote and references while first year students were not familiar with them. In the results of Q4, the most popular answer was using software to check if their students plagiarize or not. Three lectures warned students if they plagiarize on their final drafts, then they will give them a fail. In the results of Q5, overall, students tend to forget making some of the citations, quotations or references in their writing drafts. However, whether it was intentionally made by the students or not is unclear based on the results of this question. Also some teachers found it difficult to decide whether their students plagiarized or not. While all of the students’ activities represent plagiarism it appears that there is delineation between ignorance on behalf of the students about academic referencing conventions and outright academic dishonesty (such as one student completing the report of another). In the results of Q6, there are some illuminating comments from the EFL lecturers in this study. Some of their comments show a similarity of what the past studies found. For instance, the comments such as “I think Japanese students do not tend to be aware of plagiarism compared to either European or American students.” and “When I was an undergraduate student in Japan, I didn’t think my lecturers were aware of plagiarism. However, lecturers today are more aware of plagiarism” reflect on a different culture as some past

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Perceptions Towards Plagiarism 55

studies such as Hu and Lei (2006). This supports the proposition that there are cultural differences in attitudes towards plagiarism.

DISCUSSIONS The results of questionnaires from the EFL lecturers illustrate some compelling answers and the authors of this study would like to make three discussion points based on the results of the questionnaires involving some who were also interviewed for this study. The first discussion point is that Japanese EFL learners are not familiar with academic writing in English. The second point is that plagiarism might be a result of a cultural aspect of both EFL lecturers and students. The third point is that due to a heavy workload on both EFL lecturers and students, there is not enough time to check their writing drafts before the learners submit their final drafts by the due date. The first discussion point is that Japanese EFL learners do not tend to be familiar with academic writing in English. Some lecturers in Q3 commented that their students were not familiar with including in-text references, quotations and references in their written drafts. This result is similar to one of the findings by Rinnert and Kobayashi (2002) in that it is a lack of experience with academic writing by Japanese students. They explained that many Japanese university students have not been exposed to academic writing in English. This is mainly because they needed to prepare for the entrance exam for their university which was focused more heavily on reading rather than writing skills. Some learners in this study commented about their lack of writing skills during their interview. For example,

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Interview 1 [recorded in April, 2018] A: The author of this study S: a student A: In your high school, which did you do more of writing a report or doing tests? S: Oh well, when I was a high school student, my teacher focused on teaching writing for university entrance exams. I practiced answering questions. For example, the first question was like “If you have a time machine to use, then where do you want to go, to the future or the past?” and the second question was like “Please write your first choice for a university and a reason why you want to go there.” A: Do you remember how many words you had to write for those questions? S: Well, I guess about 600 words.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

56

Yoshihiko Yamamoto

A: Okay, then could you tell me how you wrote those reports? For example, when you needed to write “If you have a time machine to use, then where do you want to go, to the future or the past?” could please describe how you wrote it a little bit more? S: Sure, well first of all, I decided whether I wanted to go to the future or the past. Then I explained the first reason, the second reason and the third reason. Then I wrote a conclusion. A: Okay. When you wrote it, did your teacher ask you to read something or check the internet or whatever to support your opinions? S: No. We were just told to express our opinions in English. A: Oh okay. S: I guess my teacher asked us to do this writing task as a preparation for the university entrance exam. In the exam, my teacher would not be with us and so he wanted us to write on my own without his help. A: Alright.

In the interview data, the student did mention that her high school teacher taught her writing skills, but it was aimed for the university entrance exams. As a result, her teacher did not seem to teach how to avoid plagiarism in writing. Also the student explained that the writing activity was focused on learning how to express students’ own ideas without using any sources to support ideas. Therefore, the student missed an opportunity to learn how to avoid plagiarism. The interview below was conducted with two students and showed a similar theme to the first interview.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Interview 2 [recorded in April, 2018] A: The author of this study S1: 4th year student S2: 4th year student A: How much did you write essays in English in your high school? S1: Well, my high school had a field trip program to Australia. And before I went to Australia, I wrote an essay in English to introduce myself to an Australian family whom I stayed with. A: Did you say, you wrote it before you went to Australia and did you really go to Australia? S1: Yes, I went to Australia for two weeks as a field trip and stayed with an Australian family. The trip was for the students to learn a different culture and the English report was given to us as a part of some homework in the English class. The aim of writing the essay was for my host family to know about me.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Examining Perceptions Towards Plagiarism 57



A: Oh, I see. S1: Yes, that’s all I had to explain about writing in English in my high school. A: Okay, then when you wrote it, did you explain about yourself only? I mean did you use some reading materials on that writing report? Also did you introduce about Japan or whatever for your host family? S1: No, I only wrote whatever I had in my head about myself. A: Alright. A: What about S2? S2: Well, my teacher used a textbook in my writing class. A: Yes. S2: There were questions about writing in the textbook and we had to answer the questions as homework. Then in class, my teacher gave us the answers to the questions and she explained a little bit more on the sample answers. A: So didn’t you actually make a paragraph on your own? S2: In the textbook that I used, the questions were designed to make a paragraph. Then I had to fill in the blanks in the model paragraph. I mean I only made some sentences to fill the model paragraph in the questions of the textbook. So it was like making sentences rather than writing. A: Oh, I see. S2: I guess the answer for this kind of question, I mean answering the question by making sentences can vary so my teacher explained some different formats of sentences in class.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

A: Oh okay, so you didn’t learn how to make a paragraph or essay but instead you learnt how to make each sentence in your writing class. S2: Yes, exactly. But in each class, as I explained, we learnt how to make sentences. Then I guess after we had 5 lessons of this writing class with this textbook, there was another topic for us to write sentences. My teacher asked us to use sentences which we have made before and joined these sentences together to make one paragraph. A: Okay, how many words did you write for it? S2: Well, I guess it was about 200 or 300 words.

In this second interview, one of the students explains that the teacher tended to focus on the university entrance exam in the writing class. The other student in the interview experienced a different kind of writing class but it did not involve making citations, any quote and references. The students similarly mention that their high school English teachers tended to teach writing

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

58

Yoshihiko Yamamoto

in English as a preparation to the university entrance exam. In short, there is a big gap between English writing taught in the high school and required at university level for first year undergraduate written assignments. The EFL lecturers in this study explained in class how to avoid plagiarism but they still found some cases of it. On the other hand, the EFL learners did not experience much of it and perhaps they tended to be confused and avoided it. This evidence suggests that academic referencing skills are onerous and unfamiliar for first year students and they engaged in practices that avoided coming to terms with the skills required. The second discussion point is that plagiarism could result from cultural differences in both students as well as their EFL lecturers. There are some comments that illuminate cultural differences by the EFL lecturers on the results of Q6 “Please make any comments or suggestions about plagiarism if you have” such as:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

• “Japanese media online does not tend to make a link to the original source although they use the source. Thus I encourage my students to find the original source in my classes but the students I guess find it difficult to find the original source.” • “When I was an undergraduate student in Japan, I didn’t think my lecturers were aware of plagiarism. However, lecturers today are more aware of plagiarism.” • “I think students do not tend to understand the importance of avoiding plagiarism thus lecturers need to teach students how to avoid plagiarism.” In particular, the comment “When I was an undergraduate student in Japan, I didn’t think my lecturers were aware of plagiarism. However, lecturers today are more aware of plagiarism” is a similar to the finding in Hu and Lei (2006) study. They explained overseas trained EFL teachers tended to explain plagiarism while Chinese domestically trained EFL teachers did not. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan or MEXT (2016) shows Japanese high school English teachers’ experience of study abroad with 48.7 percent (11,396 people) of Japanese high school English teachers having never experienced study abroad while only 10.5 percent (2,446 people) have more than one years experience studying abroad. This data does not explain whether the EFL teachers who studied abroad for more than one year have a university degree from overseas or not. Therefore, it is unknown is those EFL teachers that have studied abroad are familiar with academic writing or not. However, as the data shows, nearly half of EFL high school teachers never trained as EFL teachers overseas. This evidence

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Perceptions Towards Plagiarism 59

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

suggests that there is a possibility that those domestically trained Japanese EFL teachers may not be familiar with teaching plagiarism as the comment by the participants of this study “When I was an undergraduate student in Japan, I didn’t think my lecturers were aware of plagiarism. However, lecturers today are more aware of plagiarism.” The third discussion point is that a heavy workload for both EFL teachers and students means that there is not enough time to check plagiarism. One of the EFL lecturers in this study commented as such, “Ask students to submit their drafts before their final versions and check citations, quotes, and references on their drafts.” This strategy is very helpful for students to check whether their writing drafts are safe or not before they submit their final versions. However, it causes too much workload for teachers to check every student writing drafts. Some of the EFL lectures in this study taught around 30 students per class and taught 10 English classes per semester. To implement this practice, they would need to check 300 students’ writing drafts in the semester as well as assess 300 final writing assignments at the end of the semester. The amount of the EFL lecturers’ workload for checking their students’ writing assignments would be untenable. Yamamoto and Nagao (2016) studied university students’ strategies to improve their writing assessments before they submit their final writing drafts. They found that their students tended to show their drafts before they submit their final drafts to their friends more than their teachers although they wanted to have their writing drafts checked by their teachers. It suggests that EFL learners in Japan find it difficult to get their teachers to check their writing drafts because their teachers tend to be very busy. This study finds that EFL lecturers in this study find it difficult to make time to check students written assignments. Students may also feel more comfortable exchanging their drafts with peers rather than lecturers. Is an EFL Student Attending a Japanese University Usually Very Busy With Their Studies? The student participants in this study are required to take 124 credit points to complete their degrees. They get one or two credit points for each subject while they are in both the first year and second year grades. Thus they normally take between eight and ten subjects per semester. Moreover, those who are aiming to get a teaching license/diploma for either an elementary, junior high school or senior high school need to complete an extra 59 credit points. These extra credit points are required by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan (MEXT), in addition to

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

60

Yoshihiko Yamamoto

the 124 credit points to attain a degree (MEXT, 2009). At the end of each semester, the students need to prepare for their final reports and/or exams of all subjects they have enrolled in. In addition, many students either participate in a club activity or have part-time jobs in addition to their study commitments. All these activities together make student university life extremely busy, which would cause less time to check their writing drafts before they submit their final versions. It may also mean that students take “short cuts” with their learning preferring expediency over accuracy in their written assignments.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

IMPLICATIONS Based on the results of this study and discussions, the author of this study proposes two implications for reducing plagiarism by EFL learners. Firstly, Antiplagiarism software can be effective for students to avoid plagiarism in their writing. Some of the EFL lecturers in this study mentioned that they used antiplagiarism software when they assessed their students writing assignments. Also there was a comment by an EFL lecture on the results of Q6 that “I guess using online software could be effective to reduce students’ plagiarism.” Stapleton (2012) supports this idea. He explains the effectiveness of using antiplagiarism software in his study. He found the university students’ group, which was told that their writing assignments were screened through the software, paid more attention to avoiding plagiarism in their writing assignments more than the other group that was not told that the software would be used for their writing assignments. In both EFL lecturers’ comments in this study and Stapleton’s study (2012), antiplagiarism software was used to warn their students not to plagiarize. However, the authors of this study believe that if the students also are able to use antiplagiarism software on their own before they submit their final drafts, they will also learn how to avoid plagiarism by themselves. In addition, when EFL lecturers try to use it, they will also be more familiar with incidents of plagiarism. In particular, the EFL teachers who have not experienced much in the way of academic English writing, it will be a good opportunity for them to know how to avoid plagiarism for themselves. The second implication is providing a consistent policy toward plagiarism for students. Most of the EFL lecturer participants in this study taught how to avoid plagiarism and warned their students not to plagiarize for their writing assignments. Their strategies work for some students but they do not work for others. There are two different opinions by two undergraduate students in the interviews below.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Examining Perceptions Towards Plagiarism 61



Interview 3 [Recorded in April, 2018] A: one author of this study S: a student A: What is the most important thing for you when you do your writing assignments at university? Format of your writing assignments, the length of your writing assignments, avoid plagiarism, or English? S: Avoid plagiarism. A: Why is it? S: Well, after I started my university degree, most of my lecturers taught me not to do plagiarism, and some of them were very strict about it. They keep repeating not to do it so I have a strong concept that plagiarism is a very bad thing to do. Interview 4 [Recorded in April, 2018] A: the author of this study S: a student A: To what degree do you think avoiding plagiarism in your writing is important? S: I guess it would be four or five out of ten points. Perhaps I should say four instead of five. A: Why is it? S: Well, I feel bad to say this but I guess some of my teachers put a higher value on the formatting of writing assignments. I mean some of my classmates got higher marks in their writing assignments although they didn’t use any reading materials to support their opinions. A: Oh okay. Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

S: So some of my teachers do not tend to consider much about plagiarism. A: Alright.

As the students’ comments in both interviews showed, both students gave opposite answers. In Interview 3, the student was taught by a lecturer who seemed to have a very strict policy on plagiarism. As a result, the student was aware of avoiding plagiarism. As opposed to the students’ experience in Interview 3, in Interview 4, a different student had a lecturer who was not aware of plagiarism. Thus, the student did not consider that avoiding plagiarism was a priority for the writing assignment. The results of these interviews reflect on Power’s (2009) suggestion. That policy toward plagiarism to students needs

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

62

Yoshihiko Yamamoto

to be consistent. He found that students in his study tended to be confused about plagiarism since the policy toward plagiarism was different by different teachers. For instance, some teachers asked their students to use strict policy on plagiarism but the others were not. Also Hu and Lei (2006) explained a different policy between oversea trained and domestically EFL teachers toward plagiarism. As the results of Q4 (“Do you have any strategy for your students not to do plagiarism in their writing assignments?”) showed, strategies toward plagiarism in their students’ writing vary by the teachers. There was a comment by a teacher in this study who said: “This is not only a matter of English classes, but also other classes. In short, a different policy towards plagiarism could make students confused. Therefore, perhaps, lectures need to cooperate together for making the same policy towards plagiarism in order to reduce students’ plagiarism.” But it should be noted that there are laws about plagiarism that drive institutional (university) policies with regard to plagiarism. Every university has policies and practices with regard to plagiarism and each employee (lecturer) is required to follow the policies of their university.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION This study explored the reasons why EFL students tend to plagiarize and both their perceptions and that of their lecturers at universities in Japan. The results of the questionnaires completed by EFL lecturers revealed that although they taught their students how to avoid plagiarism when writing assignments in their classes, they located plagiarism within students writing assignments. Interviews with EFL students revealed that they learnt how to avoid plagiarism after they started their undergraduate degrees. Previously, student’s high school teachers tended to focus on teaching writing in English to pass the university entrance exams, rather than academic skills. Based on the results of the questionnaires, and some students’ interviews for the purposes, there were three discussion points. First, Japanese EFL learners were not familiar with the conventions of academic writing in English. Second, plagiarism may be a component of cultural differences in both EFL teachers and their students, respectively. Last, heavy workload on both EFL teachers and learners mean they do not have enough time to check individual drafts of written assignments. In order to reduce learners’ plagiarism, the author of this study proposed two recommendations: First, encouraging both EFL teachers and learners to use antiplagiarism software. Secondly, a consistent policy on plagiarism by all lectures for the students was important. This study was limited to

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Examining Perceptions Towards Plagiarism 63

examining both questionnaires by the EFL lecturers and some interviews of learners. Although the author of this study believes that this study makes some contributions to the teaching of English as an additional language field in particular, this study could be expanded in the future. The next research step could be, perhaps, to understand students’ interactions with plagiarism software. Is such software accessible, efficient and useful for students to learn more about plagiarism?

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Abasi, A. R., Akbari, N., & Graves, B. (2006). Discourse appropriation, construction of identities, and the complex issue of plagiarism: ESL students writing in graduate school. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), 102-117. DOI: 10.1016/ j.jslw.2006.05.001. Abasi, A. R., & Graves, B. (2008). Academic literacy and plagiarism: Conversations with international graduate students and disciplinary professors. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(4), 221-233. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeap.2008.10.010. Bloch, J. (2007). Plagiarism across cultures: Is there a difference? Indonesian JELT, 3(2), 1-13. Retrieved December 18, 2019 from http://ojs.atmajaya.ac.id/index.php/ ijelt/article/view/133/90. Dryden, L. M. (1999). A distant mirror or through the looking glass? Plagiarism and intellectual property in Japanese education. Perspectives on plagiarism and intellectual property in a postmodern world, 75-85. Ehrich, J., Howard, S. J., Mu, C., & Bokosmaty, S. (2016). A comparison of Chinese and Australian university students’ attitudes towards plagiarism. Studies in Higher Education, 41(2), 231-246. DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2014.927850. Howard, R. M. (1993). A plagiarism pentimento. Journal of Teaching Writing, 11(2), 233-246 Retrieved December, 15 2019 from https://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/ teachingwriting/article/view/1116/1088. Hu, G., & Lei, J. (2016). Plagiarism in English academic writing: A comparison of Chinese university teachers’ and students’ understandings and stances. System, 56, 107-118. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2015.12.003. Kobayashi, H., & Rinnert, C. (2002). High school student perceptions of first language literacy instruction: Implications for second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11(2), 91-116. DOI: 10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00067-X. Li, Y., & Casanave, C. P. (2012). Two first-year students’ strategies for writing from sources: Patchwriting or plagiarism? Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(2), 165-180. DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.03.002. MEXT (2009). Kyoin menkyojyo syutoku ni hitsuyou na kamoku no tannisu • uchiwake [Contents of subject/credit point requirements for teaching diploma courses by MEXT]. Retrieved December 15, 2019 from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/ shingi/chukyo/chukyo0/toushin/attach/1337063.htm.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

64

Yoshihiko Yamamoto

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

MEXT (2016) Heisei 28 nenndo eigo kyouiku jixtushi jyoukyo cyousa (koutou gaxtukou) no kextuka [Results of present situation (as of 2016) of English education research among Japanese high schools]. Retrieved December 15, 2019 from http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education/detail/__icsFiles/afield file/2017/04/07/1384236_02_1.pdf#search=%27日本の高校英語教員留学経験 割合%27. Power, L. G. (2009). University students’ perceptions of plagiarism. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(6), 643-662. Retrieved December 15, 2019 from https:// www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/27750755.pdf. Stapleton, P. (2012). Gauging the effectiveness of anti-plagiarism software: An empirical study of second language graduate writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(2), 125-133. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeap.2011.10.003. Wheeler, G. (2009). Plagiarism in the Japanese universities: Truly a cultural matter? Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 17-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw .2008.09.004. Wilkinson, J. (2009). Staff and student perceptions of plagiarism and cheating. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20(2), 98-105. Retrieved December 15, 2019 from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ864328.pdf. Yamamoto, Y., & Nagao, A. (2016). Exploring EFL learners’ strategies of how they improve the process of their writing assignments. The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2016, Official Proceedings, 69-85. The International Academic Forum. Retrieved December 15, 2019 from http://papers.iafor.org/wp-content/ uploads/conference-proceedings/ACLL/ACLL2016_proceedings.pdf.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter Four

Internationalizing Higher Education in Japan: Dealing with Plagiarism and Academic Integrity A Case Study of a Human Sciences Undergraduates in Japan Paola Cavaliere

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION In the age of the globalized knowledge economy (Nian Cai et al., 2016), fostering innovation and creativity has become a priority for education. In this context, educational institutions around the world have been confronted with a creativity race (Florida et al., 2015) where “in place of the natural resources and large-scale industries that powered the growth of industrial capitalism, the growth of creative capitalism turns on knowledge, innovation, and talent” (Florida et al. 2015, p. 68). Most countries, including Japan, have been advocating such creative human capital as a way to boost scientific and economic growth (Yonezawa, 2013; Hasan and Tucci, 2010). While knowledge societies of developed countries have largely embraced this view (OECD, 2013; 2015), fostering creativity to compete in the global world poses great challenges to educators and policymakers as it requires refined as well as a globally harmonized understanding of academic integrity. It also demands from both educators and learners a high level of mastery of techniques that allow borrowing and using the intellectual creations of others. In this context, academic integrity and plagiarism, which may be considered a form of theft when “using the work of others as if it were one’s own” (Rosamond, 2002, p. 169), have become global concerns at schools and universities. As it happens, in the pursuit of such world-class status, Japan has been promoting a series of government-funded programmes for research and internationalization aiming at a comprehensive transformation of university governance in a global context. This pressure to improve its global competitiveness has brought about more attention on academic integrity, along with more information 65

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

66

Paola Cavaliere

on academic malpractice and plagiarism. How are Japanese undergraduate students responding to such changing academic culture? This chapter documents my own case as a foreign professor teaching at a Japanese university. Drawing upon direct experience with Japanese undergraduate students at Osaka University, this study articulates two arguments. Firstly, it claims that students exhibit an increasing awareness regarding the importance of maintaining academic integrity. However, the topic is not a forefront issue at the institutional level and the university still offers scanty official guidelines and practical training. As a consequence, undergraduate students receive very little information and formal preparation on how to avoid plagiarism, which is the main reason related to their plagiarizing. Under such circumstances, one might wonder how awareness of academic integrity is developed and cultivated among undergraduates. This study suggests that this is undoubtedly related to the measures taken to respond to the multiple scandals around research misconduct that have affected Japanese academia over the past decade. However, given the limited institutional help and training undergraduates still receive, it cannot be pointed out as the main reason. This leads to the second argument articulated in this study. It is argued here that the growing exposure that Japanese undergraduates have to international students and faculty may be a source of their familiarity with academic integrity, despite not being formally taught about it. This study suggests that the process of internationalization of higher education that Japan has embarked upon over the past two decades has become crucial and an important stimulus for greater knowledge and practices of academic integrity. The inbound and outbound movement of students and faculty, along with the drive of becoming internationally competitive through a series of government-funded programmes for research and internationalization, have increased Japanese students’ exposure to different academic standards and requirements, thus familiarizing them with what academic integrity means in a global context. This is not unrelated to the perceived importance and pressure that higher education institutions see in engaging students in internationalization, where students should “cultivate interculturally competent, internationally minded individuals with both cognitive and non-cognitive skills” (Kuroda et al., 2018, p. 25). This work utilizes a contextualized case of Japanese undergraduate students of human sciences at Osaka University as a source of qualitative data to get a more thorough understanding of students’ perception of academic integrity and practices of plagiarism. I am aware that more varied qualitative data would help to obtain factual information that may be more representative of the general population. However, in this particular inquiry I have depended on “theoretical sampling” (Reid, 1991, p. 123) drawing upon a pool of

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Internationalizing Higher Education in Japan 67

examples of human sciences undergraduates as a way to collect indications of a general attitude toward academic misconduct and its interrelationship with practice. This allows me to explore the reasons behind their lack of the necessary skills to understand what academic misconduct means in practice. How and where do Japanese undergraduates learn about plagiarism? How do they approach essay and report writing assignments? Why do they have little experience to incorporate the ideas of others into their own papers and projects? This chapter will articulate those research questions also discussing what institutional responses have been made to respond to pressure to comply with international academic integrity standards. The first section will delineate the construction of the plagiarism discourse in the aftermath of the several scandals that have occurred in Japanese academia over the past few years. The second section offers qualitative data from human sciences Japanese undergraduates. It will discuss their understanding of plagiarism by also considering the argument of cultural influences that past literature has indicated as a crucial source of tolerance toward plagiarism among Asian students. The last two sections critically discuss the case of the School of Human Sciences at Osaka University by looking at what measures have been enacted. In the conclusion I will advance some suggestions on what can be done to improve the overall standards of academic integrity so that Japanese universities develop the necessary globalized outfit to compete in a world-class knowledge economy.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

PLAGIARISM MADE IN JAPAN In its definitions of academic misconduct, the Kagakugijutsu Gakujitsu Shingikai Kenkyū Katsudō no Fusei Kōi ni Kansuru Tokubetsuīnkai (Special Committee on Academic Research Misconduct of the Commission of Inquiry on Science and Technology) articulates plagiarism as “the appropriation of another researcher’s ideas, analysis, analytical process, data research, results, articles/terminology without the researcher’s prior consent and/or proper acknowledgment” (MEXT, 2006, p. 12). Whereas the definition provides specific and concrete terms to delimit the problem, there is no one word that translates plagiarism into Japanese. Several technical expressions are used interchangeably, such as hyōsetsu (剽窃), tōyō (盗用), or tōsaku (盗 作), all denoting the act of stealing a piece of work or robbing someone of their work. All these fall under the umbrella category of fusei kōi (不正行為, “malpractice” or “misconduct”). The Guidelines for Responding to Misconduct in Research published in 2014 by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) articulate academic malpractice in

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

68

Paola Cavaliere

terms of tetsuzō (捏造, fabrication), kaizan (改ざん, falsification), and tōyō (plagiarism) (MEXT, 2014b, p. 10). These are normally referred to by using the acronym FFP (fabrication, falsification, plagiarism) or, more commonly, as fusei kōi (malpractice) (MEXT, 2014b, p. 10). Except for fusei kōi that can be found in undergraduate guidebooks and research-training related publications, other rather technical terms that carry extremely negative associations are rarely used and are usually not understood by students or university faculty alike (Wheeler, 2016, p. 109). Although the word purajarizumu―a transliteration of the English “plagiarism” through the katakana syllabary used to transcribe foreign words into Japanese―is becoming popular, Japanese undergraduates are usually neither familiar with purajarizumu, nor with tōyō and the such (Wheeler, 2016, p. 109). Even with the popularity of detection programmes such as Turnitin and iThenticate at university campuses around Japan over the past few years, the concept of plagiarism remains unclear among undergraduates, particularly about where the line is drawn between the students’ own ideas and others’ ideas. Whether unintentional or intended, plagiarism is still very common among the Japanese undergraduate students I have met. To different degrees, many of them have engaged in some form of misconduct while completing their assignments, despite knowing that such behaviour is unacceptable, as well as ethically wrong. What is clear from both the Japanese terminology around “academic malpractice” and students’ attitude toward plagiarism is that both institutions and students are aware of its overall meaning and the effect of such malpractice, but they are uncertain about how to prevent it (or reluctant to take serious measures against it). Undoubtedly, the number of scandals that have shaken the academic communities in Japan and beyond over the past few years (Matsuzawa, 2013) have exposed the overall low level of academic integrity standards of Japanese higher education institutions. It has also revealed a culture of accepted malpractice in the Japanese academia (Enoki, 2018), which has been considered a critical obstacle to Japan’s pursue of a world-class status in a globalized knowledge economy. Back in 2014, however, when the fabricated and plagiarized work of a Japanese stem-cell biologist team headed by Dr. Haruko Obokata at the Riken Center for Developmental Biology flooded the Japanese media―and shook scientific communities worldwide―such ideas of malpractice were yet to be taken seriously. In early 2014, Obokata, who reported the discovery of a new type of pluri-potent stem cell that can repair human tissue, published two papers in the world-class scientific journal Nature. Within a few weeks of being published, questions were raised about the veracity of Obokata’s papers. Although her findings were initially acclaimed as a remarkable breakthrough, when other scientists found they could not replicate the results

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Internationalizing Higher Education in Japan 69

she had produced, an investigation into her research commenced. On April 1, 2014, the Japanese government-affiliated research institute Riken Center for Developmental Biology announced that it had found Obokata guilty of scientific misconduct in the form of data manipulation and plagiarism (Ishii et al., 2014). The search also led to the discovery that large sections of her doctoral dissertation from the prestigious private Waseda University included information copied from documents available on the U.S. National Institute of Health website. As a consequence, she retracted her papers from Nature and immediately quit her job at the Riken Center. Waseda University, however, decided that retracting her doctorate was unnecessary because her intent had not been to deceive (Wheeler, 2016; Kimura et al., 2014). The decision raised strong criticism in that it revealed to the public a culture of acceptance of malpractice, which resulted in Waseda reversing its position and informing Obokata that her doctorate would be revoked unless she made the necessary corrections to the dissertation. Since the Obokata incident in 2014 and complying with the above-mentioned subsequent stricter regulations enacted by MEXT, universities and research institutes nationwide have established guidelines and regulations concerning academic integrity. MEXT now requires that all graduate students and researchers participate in ethics training at their respective universities (MEXT, 2014b, p. 7). Universities not complying with these training requirements risk having their research budgets reduced (MEXT, 2015). Therefore, graduate students, researchers, and faculty are now provided with more information on how to develop effective academic research while avoiding malpractice and plagiarism. However, guidelines and trainings focus primarily on research activities and are directed almost entirely toward the science, technical, and medical fields, with little mention of the humanities and social sciences. Still, faculty members of any field, including the humanities and social sciences, who are recipients of public research money funded by national or local governments such as Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (kakenhi) sponsored by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), which is funded by the MEXT, must go through training so that they recognize the importance of their responsibility and raise their awareness in order to prevent misconduct. Due to numerous public incidents of academic fraud that have occurred in Japanese academia even after the Obokata incident (Enoki, 2018), universities have begun to provide clearer guidelines to raise awareness on how to conduct research in an ethical manner (Wheeler, 2016, p. 108). At Osaka University this takes the form of an online multiple-choice test called “Compliance Education” that focuses primarily on how to handle public funds. The website says that the questionnaire “check[s] your understanding of public research funds. All staff members, including Research Fellowship

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

70

Paola Cavaliere

for Young Scientists (JSPS), who are handling public research funds are requested to complete the quiz [once a year]” (Osaka University Administration Bureau, 2020a). The questionnaire survey of Osaka University staff on compliance awareness is “designed to gauge the degree of understanding and awareness of compliance issues among Osaka University staff and shed light on the university’s actual work environment.” (Osaka University Administration Bureau, 2020b). The results from the survey are then used for developing and implementing compliance promotion measures and other compliancerelated policies. While Osaka University staff seem to be regularly reminded of the importance of such academic integrity, with few exceptions in STEM education, official administrative guidelines for undergraduate students concerning academic integrity are not in place, especially in the humanities and social sciences. This happens despite the fact that undergraduate students of such disciplines are as well to be considered researchers as they are required to collect empirical data and conduct research for their undergraduate theses. Past research has attributed Japanese tolerance toward plagiarism to cultural factors, although there is a general agreement that “generalizations about cultural background and its influence do need to be taken seriously, but we must beware of them degenerating into stereotypes” (Sowden, 2005, p. 52). According to the cultural argument, Japan seems to be denoted by a culture of tolerance that sees plagiarism in Japan regarded not as negatively as it is in countries such as the United States (Rinnert and Kanbayashi, 2005, p. 36). As it happens, for the most part, the discussion about plagiarism in the Asian context has been dominated by an essentialist rhetoric that sees plagiarism as a culture in that there is little concept of word ownership (Fallon, 2008; Leki, 1992; Pennycook, 1996; Pickering and Hornby, 2005). Researchers have often emphasized the fact that the educational environment of students from various Asian countries stresses memorization of passages of text and encourages borrowing directly from the writing of others. In his study of multilingual student in higher education, Sowden (2005) claims that it can be inappropriate to expect Asian students to write in their own words because of the low tolerance for ambiguity and emphasis on master-apprentice style education of such cultures: “there is little tolerance of uncertainty [. . .] there being a correct answer to every question, which it is the teacher’s duty to provide and the student’s duty to learn” (p. 227). This creates a situation where plagiarism can be seen as a virtue: speculating with ideas comes to be viewed as pretentious as it hampers group consensus since it aims at demonstrating one’s own understanding and abilities. Building on this argument, studies on students in Japanese higher education claim that they tend to have a more forgiving approach to plagiarism than those in Western universities

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Internationalizing Higher Education in Japan 71

(Day, 2001; Dryden, 1999; Rinnert and Kobayashi, 2005). This essentialist argument complies with the nihonjinron discourse in the English as a Second Language or as a foreign language context. As Kubota (1999) claims, nihonjinron rhetoric frames Japan as a unique, group-oriented, homogenous society, which encourages a vicious circle of “othering,” while informing educators to disregard the subjective voices of students, which in turn allows for the continued appropriation of this “unique” Japanese culture (p. 27). Recent trends in the study of academic misconduct on international students in Asian countries have moved beyond the cultural argument claiming that rather than culture norms dictating students’ inability to write with proper citations and paraphrases, plagiarism is likely to occur because students have still not developed their full writing capabilities (Pecorari, 2003; Wheeler, 2009; Bretag et al., 2013). Drawing upon findings on Japanese university students’ reactions to copied and paraphrased texts, Wheeler (2009; 2014) addressed the common belief that copying is acceptable in Japanese culture. He found that Japanese university students do have negative attitudes toward copying and thus he argued against the view that plagiarism is a cultural matter (Wheeler, 2014). In a similar light, Liu (2005) maintains that plagiarism among Asian L2 students (non-native English writers) is often times language-specific, frequently stemming from “a lack of adequate language proficiency, lack of task-specific writing skills, and, of course, the urge to cheat” (p. 239). The ability of writing in the writer’s own words is the foundation of paraphrasing, which is the basic practice for a plagiarism-free paper. However, paraphrasing is especially difficult for students because it involves sophisticated language processing skills, such as rewording, sentence rearrangement, and grammatical manipulation. When writing in English, very often Japanese students may be reluctant to paraphrase because they want to avoid the risk of making grammatical mistakes (Yoshimura and Adams, 2018) or distorting the original meaning of the source text (Roig, 2001). This has been the most common incidence of plagiarism in my classes too. From my conversations with Japanese undergraduates at Osaka University I have found that one explanation is that Japanese high school students receive too few opportunities to write essays that require source citation and critical thinking. This is primarily due to the dominant focus on university entrance examination training at the expense of writing and critical thinking skills, which require proper preparation in paraphrasing, summarizing, and quoting. Under such circumstances, rather than culture, then, it is the lack of writing instruction and training that may play a role in plagiarism and misuse of texts by Japanese undergraduates. Japanese elementary and junior high school’s textbooks provide explicit instruction to students on how to reference sources

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

72

Paola Cavaliere

of their writing, although junior high school textbooks lack the scaffolding that allows students to become accustomed to citation and paraphrasing (Sadoshima, 2008). Moreover, since students are not required to write references in their essays for university entrance examinations, education on paraphrasing and citing sources is largely neglected (Sadoshima, 2014). Students who have attended high schools or universities that rely solely on testing as an assessment tool may plagiarize because of lack of experience in proper essay writing (Hayes and Introna, 2005). In terms of enforcing policies on plagiarism and academic integrity, these facts draw attention to other factors, such as proper pedagogical practices before and after entering university.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

JAPANESE UNDERGRADUATES’ PERCEPTION OF PLAGIARISM For the purposes of this chapter, I conducted a simple qualitative survey amongst Japanese undergraduate students attending my courses at the School of Human Sciences, Osaka University. These courses, which are taught in English as part of the Human Sciences International Undergraduate Degree Program, cover a range of topics related to Japanese society, along with three academic skills-related courses (Academic Writing, Presentation Skills, Critical Thinking) that are required for all first-year students of the English-taught program. Data were collected between 2015 and 2019, covering 26 students (the majority of students in these classes are international students). Respondents were Japanese nationals who attended Japanese public high school and were admitted to Osaka University based on Japan’s university entrance examination known as the Daigaku nyūshi sentā (National Center Test for University Admissions; NCUEE, 2015). Admittedly, the survey for this study is modest in scale, but the results are nevertheless significant. In my personal experience, cases of plagiarism have been restricted to a few Japanese students enrolled in my Academic Writing course who were required to submit several short essays as part of the course portfolio. These plagiarized short essays were often copied from the internet, especially from student websites such as sparknotes.com. Since recognizing and acknowledging plagiarism was part of the learning goals of the course, they were not disciplined but trained and required to make needed corrections and changes, and resubmit their assignments. By their own admission, plagiarism was deliberately considered due to pressure to achieve good grades, but it was also unintentional, due to poor writing skills, poor time management, poor research and citation skills, and a lack of understanding of what plagiarism is.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Internationalizing Higher Education in Japan 73

In my survey I checked students’ familiarity with plagiarism by asking them the following questions: “Do you know what plagiarism is?”; “Have you ever taken an academic writing course?”; “What do you initially do when assigned a written report”; “Have you ever copied from all or part of an assignment from others?”; “Have you ever copied from the internet?” Nearly all respondents were aware of plagiarism, although they were unsure about citation style and had very little training in summarizing and paraphrasing. According to Yoshimura and Adams (2018), who conducted an empirical research on Japanese university students’ task representations of summarizing and reviewed the standard course of study in elementary, middle, and high schools, Japanese students are not always asked to write summaries in their own words in Japanese language classes, nor are they disciplined for borrowing expressions from the source in writing a summary in their own language (Yoshimura and Adams, 2018, p. 60). The scholars’ report discusses how Japanese students learn summarizing skills in Japanese language classes from elementary to high school as a reading aid, but not as a writing skill. Students are taught how to identify main ideas and include them in their summary, although they are not required to learn how to paraphrase and use one own words. This situation is rarely improved even after they enter university because summary skills are not explicitly defined or taught in Japanese universities (Yoshimura, 2018, p. 6). This contrasts to situations in English-speaking countries or where English is taught as second language, where writing in one’s own words seems to be an important element of a summary definition, and students are explicitly warned against copying (Howard, 2010; Roig, 2015). One out of four respondents in my survey declared they had attended a writing course after starting university, primarily because they were advised to do so by their advisor. Their discipline-related course instructors or cohort advisor never offered guidelines or guidance on how to write a report or an essay, although these being part of class assignments. The courses offered to Japanese students at Osaka University are called akademikku raitingu― the transliteration of “academic writing” from English, using the Japanese katakana syllabary―and organized by the university library, not by their department. According to my respondents, akademikku raitingu instructors spend quite some time in contextualizing the need of such academic writing skills: this is articulated as a necessary training that all students need to achieve in order to become globally attractive and competitive. From the institutional perspective, with Osaka University being one of the top research universities in Japan, proper writing skills are deemed indispensable in order to catch up with global standards in academia as well as comply with international academic integrity criteria. Students are told that since they will be

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

74

Paola Cavaliere

required, sooner or later, to write for or present in front of an international audience, they must become aware of such basic academic writing skills and notions that are part of the common practice in most higher education institutions around the world. However, since such academic writing courses are open to students of any department, they are very general and do not offer much practice. They cover an overview of how an essay should be organized and the main characteristics of each section. However, the examples offered in class are primarily from scientific journals, which have rather different structure and organization from papers in the humanities and social sciences. Students are also introduced to paraphrasing, which they found to be the most difficult task, mainly because they mistakenly intended it as a form of patchwork writing. Paraphrasing, that is, learning how to write in one’s own words, was something new to them, both as a concept and as a skill, which they had hardly ever heard or used. To illustrate how to paraphrase, the course offered some practice in writing summaries. They found summarizing a very difficult task, whether it was in their native Japanese or in English, because it involved mastering sophisticated language processing skills that they lack. Students were also taught how to use referencing software and different citation styles. Regarding information-seeking behavior, when asked about what sources students use the initially when assigned a written report, nearly all of them said they use internet. Only three of them said they use journals. Interestingly, none of them said they would ask or have asked their instructor, not even when I encouraged to do so. Many indicated the fact that they initially check the internet to see what is available about the topic, the structure of existing essays, with no intention of copying or using them for their own writing. They were not interested in what sources those existing pieces of writing listed because they would use class readings or literature listed in the syllabus by the instructor instead. One out of five of my respondents claimed they copied from all or part of an assignment from others. Respondents who copied from others said they did it because of having multiple assignments, or simply because they were very late for submission. Interestingly, those who let their work be copied by a friend admitted they did not consider it a form of plagiarism: getting a report written in a previous year for the same course from a senpai (a senior student), an older friend or club member, and passing it as one’s own work is a fairly common practice among undergraduates. What is clear from my students’ responses is that the increased growth of technology in what is referred to as the digital age has rendered the internet the main source of information. However, the use of the internet and access to a mass of knowledge and countless publications have created an environment where thoughts, words, and concepts can be easily copied and reproduced as another individual’s work (Christodoulou, 2008). In this context,

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Internationalizing Higher Education in Japan 75

copying from the web is widely used in every-day undergraduate students’ practice, which implies that students might have had previous experience of copying internet materials in non-academic settings, something that may also influence their attitude toward digital plagiarism in academic settings. However, it might also imply that they have actually learned and cultivated such web-copying skills within the academic setting in the pursuit of higher performance, which poses an important question on the pedagogical and ethical role of higher education institutions.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Academic Integrity in the Humanities and Social Sciences in Japan: So Close Yet So Far Since 2015, when a controversial statement by the education minister announced an impending demise of the humanities and social sciences in Japan’s national universities, such faculties and departments have been under pressure to catch up with their STEM fields (sciences, technology, engineering, mathematics) counterparts to enhance the universities’ global rankings and status. Writing on the 2015 MEXT controversial statement and its consequences, professor Shunya Yoshimi, a leading cultural sociologist in Japan and author of the 2016 book Bunkei gakubu haishi no shogeki (The Abolition of the Humanities Shock), states that in comparison to the sciences, the humanities suffer from a lack of high impact academic journals, do not generate high citation rates, and do not attract the level of research funding that would enable them (p. 250). As it happens, Japanese humanities and social sciences scholarship is negligible when it is compared to Englishlanguage production because most Japanese scholars seldom publish their research in international English-language journals or with English-language academic book presses, and they only occasionally present their research at international conferences. Following the domestic and international backlash of the 2015 MEXT statement, national universities have started incentivizing publication in English-language through grants and funds, and free translations of Japanese-language papers published in the faculty-based kiyō (bulletin) that most humanities and social sciences scholars have used so far to report their achievements. The School of Human Sciences at Osaka University has been publishing the Ningen kagaku kenkyūka kiyō since 1975, with all numbers and contents available online in digital format (Bulletin of Graduate School of Human Sciences Osaka University). In the aftermath of the 2015 MEXT statement and related measures, the school started publishing the Osaka Human Sciences, in which faculty of the School of Human Sciences can republish their English translation of a paper previously published in Japanese in the Ningen kagaku kenkyūka kiyō or another journal,

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

76

Paola Cavaliere

as long as they obtained permission. The Japanese-English translation fee is covered by the school and the service is provided by an external professional translation agency contracted by it. This is not unrelated to the government goal of elevating Japanese academia to global standards by cutting funding for publication of Japanese-language academic journals, while making available special funding for scholarly associations to retrofit existing journals and academic forums for English-language scholarship and international research collaboration. When looking at the academic integrity in the publication guidelines for authors for both the Ningen kagaku kenkyūka kiyō and the Osaka Human Sciences, the instructions are very simple, primarily covering style and editing instructions, with no reference to authorial ownership of words and ideas or academic integrity. In the case of the Osaka Human Sciences, since it contains English translations of papers published previously in the kiyō, it simply requires the author to confirm the authorship and authorization for the translation. In the same vein, when it comes to essay or report writing, Japanese undergraduate students at the School of Human Sciences receive very little information or instructions on practices in relation to their assignments and current citation practices. The school conducts frequent surveys administered to students to assess teaching quality, but no survey question is aimed at determining the level of undergraduates’ understanding of plagiarism or whether they are offered practical advice on that. The only academic writing training that includes plagiarism that my students have been able to attend is a seminar held occasionally by Osaka University’s library. There students are primarily provided with online resources to improve understanding of plagiarism and avoid being a plagiarizt, as well as instructions on how to use reference management software such as EndNote, which is available for free for students and staff of Osaka University. Since students prioritize courses that can count into their GPA, they are reluctant to spend time in such seminars that are optional and not graded. As a consequence, only a very few undergraduate students attend them and when it happens, it is primarily because they were told to do so by their advisor or course instructor. The university also provides faculty with a free account to the plagiarism detection service iThenticate, although this is not available to students. Academic communities in the majority of English-speaking countries have discussed student plagiarism mainly as an act resulting from students’ lack of ethics in that it is considered an “intellectual theft” (MLA, 2009, p. 52) and therefore it has been shaped by repugnance towards such moral offense: it is a crime “worse than theft” (Maddox, 1995). As it happens, though, such intellectual theft is often simply due to students’ (and their advisors’) lack of training in citation rules and paraphrasing skills (Pecorari, 2003;

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Internationalizing Higher Education in Japan 77

Campbell, 1990; Davis, 2013). The Undergraduate Student Guide (Binran) of the School of Human Sciences at Osaka University gives an idea of what meaning of academic misconduct is conveyed to student: the guidebook uses expressions such as “use of unauthorized material,” “cunning,” and “cheating” with no further information or reference to resources or practical training to learn how to avoid it (guide available in Japanese: https://www.hus .osaka-u.ac.jp/sites/default/files/2019gakuseibinran_gakubu.pdf). This means that once students enter university, course instructors and professors take for granted that freshmen are aware about plagiarism and possess the needed skills to avoid it. In contrast, the survey on undergraduates conducted by the Center for Education in Liberal Arts and Science (CELAS) of Osaka University shows that students, especially freshmen, find academic writing difficult because of their lack of training about it (Hori and Sakajiri, 2016, p. 5). Some of the most common answers were: “I had no chance to write a report prior entering university, so I couldn’t understand how to organize a paper in the first place”; “During my first semester, when I was asked to submit a long essay or report, I didn’t know how to write it, it was very hard”; “I don’t know how to write a report because I am not given feedback on style and organization of papers I submitted”; “The professor does not give me instructions on how to write a report, and many people submit it without knowing how to write it.” (Hori and Sakajiri, 2016, p. 5). Results of this survey questionnaire are consistent with the arguments of recent literature discussed above, which contends that lack of task-specific writing skills and training should be indicated as the main reason for students’ plagiarism. It also shows that students (especially freshmen) are aware of their limitations and ask for more guidance, a request that is not answered through structured courses but is passed down to course instructors in the form of recommendation. Although Osaka University Japanese undergraduates do not seem to know how to avoid plagiarism, they are very clear that cheating or direct copying, especially on a test, is unacceptable. Most of the guidance Human Sciences undergraduates receive at Osaka University revolves around proper testtaking etiquette, usually in the form of simple written instructions listed in the Binran distributed during the entrance orientation (guide available at: https:// www.hus.osaka-u.ac.jp/sites/default/files/2019gakuseibinran_gakubu.pdf). Mid-term exams―often in the form of a multiple choice quiz or questionbased test―and final exams―in the form of a short essay or report―along with the strict attendance rule that requires Japanese students to attend at least the two-third of classes, are the basic requirements for undergraduates to receive a passing grade. In this context, academic integrity is mentioned only in relation to examinations that are of extreme importance in the fouryear undergraduate program in that students’ grades are determined largely

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

78

Paola Cavaliere

by their scores on mid and end-of-term exams. For this reason, the Undergraduate Student Guide of the School of Human Sciences includes a section stating that the examination will be invalidated if: 1. The student uses unauthorized material during examination; 2. cunning and cheating; 3. sitting in for someone else’s exam; 4. failing to follow the instruction of the examiner; or 5. plagiarism in the form of handing in someone else’s work, which means that part of the work is copied from someone else’s text, website, the internet, or class material (guide available at: https://www.hus.osaka-u.ac.jp/sites/ default/files/2019gakuseibinran_gakubu.pdf). During the orientation, this last part is simply commented upon by reminding students to remain honest and outlining briefly the consequences for those caught cheating on exams, which can range from failing the course to expulsion. In sum, the above research results seem to suggest that although both students and faculty consider academic integrity of crucial importance in the School of Human Sciences, the department still lacks training and practical skills to implement good academic practice. The remainder of this chapter will contextualize and interpret such findings by considering them critically within the process of internationalization of higher education, which emphasizes both internationalization at home and improved institutional recognition abroad.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

THE INTERNATIONALIZATION OF JAPANESE ACADEMIC INTEGRITY Confronted with declining numbers of domestic students and in the attempt to “improve their global competitiveness or to lead the internationalization of Japanese universities through the university reform (e.g., governance, management, structure, curriculum, and admission)” (Shimmi and Yonezawa, 2015), a growing number of Japanese universities have made concerted efforts to attract more international students. According to the governmentbased Japan Student Services Organization (JASSO), as of 2018 there were 298,980 international students studying in Japan, a steep increase from the 171,122 international students in 2014 (JASSO, 2019a, p. 1). The breakdown of numbers shows that the 93.4 percent of them are from Asia (279,250 students; JASSO, 2019a, p. 3) with students from China and Vietnam being the most (JASSO, 2019a, p. 4). The national government has played an important role in driving the internationalization of higher education (Yonezawa, 2011; Takagi, 2016; Yonezawa and Shimmi, 2016). The discourse on internationalization started around the 1980s when kokusaika (internationalization) became a buzzword in Japan’s education (Goodman, 2007) as

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Internationalizing Higher Education in Japan 79

part of Prime Minister Nakasone’s pledge in the 1980s to transform Japan into an “international country” (Horie, 2002). Building on that, the Japanese government has launched several initiatives over the last two decades to raise the number of international students and foreign nationals who study at a Japanese university, at undergraduate and graduate level, or at Japanese language schools on a “college student” visa. Among these initiatives, the 300,000 International Students Plan was implemented in 2008 with the goal of reaching such number of international students by the year 2020, also as part of a global strategy to open up Japan to the rest of the world and expand flows of people, goods, money and information between Japan and other regions (MEXT, 2008). Together with this plan, the Global 30 project was launched in 2009 as a five-year funding project for internationalizing thirty designated core universities. Although only thirteen universities were finally chosen (seven public and six private), these schools have been increasing the number of degree programs offered in English, and promotional events and public relations activities outside Japan in an effort to attract potential overseas students and faculty. The initiatives under the Global 30 project have proved to be relatively effective, as the number of international students at the core universities increases every year, growing by more than 40 percent during a five-year period (Hennings and Mintz, 2015). With the end of the Global 30 project in 2014, the government launched the Top Global University Project, a ten-year funding project for selected universities that aim to either enter the top 100 universities in world rankings or become front runners of internationalization in Japan. Universities funded by the program are required to increase lectures in English and improve the ratios of foreign faculty and students (MEXT, 2014a). Accordingly, the program is likely to contribute to the growing numbers of international students in Japan, also by achieving the government’s target of 300,000 international students by 2020. The reasonably significant ratio of 135,041 international students studying in Japan at higher education institutes in 2018 (JASSO, 2019a, p. 5), along with the 105,301 Japanese nationals studying abroad in the same year (JASSO, 2019b, p. 8) indicate a vibrant inbound and outbound movement that adds up to a promising picture. In this context, the internationalization of higher education in Japan has been understood as a “two arenas” model (Teichler, 1999), that is, the double pursuit of exporting its system to other countries and adjusting its system to the world so that gurobaruka (globalization) becomes also integral to the description of Japanese higher education. The term gurobaruka first emerged in the late 1990s, and the 2000 report “Prime Minister’s Commission on Japan’s Goals in the 21st century” (Office for the Prime Minister’s Commission, 1999) was the first policy document to use it. The term has been referred

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

80

Paola Cavaliere

to as describing the climate in which Japan has inevitably been affected by, and needs to embrace, globalization (Iwabuchi, 2005). As it happens, though, a strong national identity is widely observable in the research and education styles of Japanese universities, such as the stress on laboratory work in STEM and a tendency to develop Japanese higher education system based on the prioritization of Japanese language (Yonezawa and Shimmi, 2016, p. 106). This is evident in Osaka University designing a so-called international program on the ashes of an English-taught international undergraduate degree program established under the Global 30 project. In 2010, Osaka University established the International College to oversee two degree programs taught in English as part of the Project for Establishing Core Universities for Internationalization under the Global 30 program (https://www.osaka-u.ac.jp/en/ international/action/global30/international_college). The two English-taught undergraduate programs are the Chemistry-Biology Combined Program and the Human Sciences Undergraduate Degree program based at the School of Human Sciences. In April 2019, Osaka University replaced the English-taught Chemistry-Biology Combined Program with an International Sciences Program that requires preliminary and extensive Japanese language education for six months prior to enrolment in the new International Science Undergraduate program that will be taught entirely in Japanese starting from the second year (http://cbcmp.icou.osaka-u.ac.jp/news#post-499). While English-taught undergraduate programs in Japan follow the Western academic calendar with their entrance in October, the new International Science Program has been redesigned so that international students arrive in October and enroll as Japanese language students for six months, during which they are expected to acquire enough Japanese proficiency to conduct study and research in Japanese during their following four undergraduate years. Upon completion of their language training, they will then enter the International Science undergraduate program in April along with their Japanese peers. With the science-based program absorbed into the regular Japanese undergraduate curriculum, the Human Sciences International Undergraduate Degree Program remains the sole working English-taught undergraduate course offered by Osaka University. Indeed, as Yonezawa and Shimmi (2016) argue, the high international prestige given to the academic performance of top Japanese universities “has not been achieved by the integration of the Japanese system into global, “cosmopolitan,” or English-speaking systems, as typically seen in Singapore and Hong Kong, but rather through the strong protection of a national higher education system based on the national language and culture” (p. 106). Nonetheless, despite the strong resistance of integrating Japanese academia into a more global system, when asked about their perception about the

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Internationalizing Higher Education in Japan 81

internationalization level of the School of Human Sciences, my respondents assert that the presence of foreign teaching staff―some of them with enough Japanese proficiency to teach and interact in both English and Japanese in classes of a mix of international and Japanese students―and the rising number of international students has helped increase their access and understanding of what global human capital means, and has brought some impact on plagiarism and academic integrity practices. In a context where foreign teaching staff regularly remind in their syllabi and assessments the requirements that meet international academic integrity standards, and international peer students sharing ideas and practices during their class presentations and group work, Japanese students feel the positive pressure that the presence of international students and staff poses on them. It also produces the sort of international environment they are expected to confront with in the academia and at work thereafter. Still, it is difficult to quantify how much Japanese undergraduates benefit in terms of increased awareness in academic integrity and knowledge in paraphrasing and plagiarism. Respondents who attended my English-taught classes that are made of a mix of international and Japanese students clearly support the idea that such presence exposes them to opportunities to cultivate and train themselves in the skills needed in the globalized knowledge economy, despite the challenge of using English as a medium. However, the number of Japanese undergraduates attending English-taught classes is still very limited since they are primarily concerned with their English proficiency that may affect their course grade and, ultimately, their GPA. Very often Japanese students have good written skills, but lack the speaking and discussion skills to attend English-taught classes where knowledge and competence is constructed through a habit of conversation and teacher-student interaction. This poses a challenge on foreign teachers’ pedagogical approach and teaching style so that such a language barrier is overcome and the related assessment methods are adjusted. In sum, from my experience as a foreign university professor, I claim that while Japanese students do not receive enough training on academic writing and proper referencing style, when they are in classes made of a mix of international and Japanese students they may be taught or required to meet such international academic standards. The advantage of firsthand experience of international academic integrity standards make them informed and, as a byproduct, more aware of plagiarism and misconduct in general. In these terms, the impact of inbound international students and foreign faculty may be significant as it does create the kind of globalized environment that their presence is supposed to bring about, which has a positive impact in terms of students’ understanding of plagiarism.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

82

Paola Cavaliere

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION This study had two main objectives: examine students’ perceptions and attitudes toward plagiarism; and focus on what institutional responses have been made by looking at the case of the School of Human Sciences at Osaka University. In regards to academic integrity, results of this study show that Japanese undergraduates often do not know how to cite or paraphrase, and teachers do not give them enough guidance or point to the need of more training. While words associated with “plagiarism” are becoming more familiar among Japanese undergraduates, they do not seem to encourage more training and practice to avoid it. This also relates to the fact that plagiarism is still ill-defined and confined within research in STEM fields, thus not requiring undergraduate students of humanities and social sciences to train in the techniques and skills needed to maintain academic integrity. Respondents of this study feel their limitations as they were not explained the notions of proper academic conduct at an early stage, particularly among freshmen, nor were they offered a proper training. Upon entering university, Japanese undergraduates receive very little stimulus to develop an understanding of intellectual property as they are immediately confronted with the GPA race and peer pressure. Current practice at Osaka University is to train humanities and social sciences students about plagiarism by administering writing style manuals or advising them to attend short academic writing seminars. Respondents of this study believe they should be trained and informed about the basics at earlier stages, starting at middle and, above all, at high school. Indeed, whether or not a middle or high school student will enter university, the practice of summarizing and paraphrasing are essential to develop critical thinking skills, as it is guidance as to how and when to quote. In a pressing internationalization context, also marked by stricter top-down instruction aimed to avoid fraudulent research or plagiarism as exemplified by the Obokata incident, there are indications that Japanese universities are focusing more on the issue of academic integrity than before. While such focus has been directed primarily toward the science, technical, and medical fields, the case of the School of Human Sciences at Osaka University discussed in this chapter shows that humanities and social sciences are also adjusting to a more globalized culture of academic integrity, despite the little formal training students receive especially at undergraduate level. Although the development of academic research in the humanities and social sciences has not changed much and still happens primarily through dialogues and publications in Japanese language―which poses very limited access to nonJapanese speaking audience and readership―the results of this study show

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Internationalizing Higher Education in Japan 83

that an enriched learning environment where both international students and faculty are routinely involved in Japanese students’ academic life brings about more attention on academic integrity that complies with global standards. Respondents of this study claim that Japanese students’ interaction with international students and faculty make them more aware of what actors in a globalized knowledge economy can do and have a more harmonize understanding of what academic misconduct means. However, in relation to academic integrity, they claim that the university needs a comprehensive transformation of academic standards so that they can actually compete in a global context. As it happens, the goal of developing world-class universities is still primarily concentrated on the quantitative side of the process: in terms of financial investment; number of inbound international students and staff; number of outbound Japanese students; and number of publications in English that an institution offers. The number of publications that the School of Human Sciences issues in English has increased as an effect of government funding being redirected into translating extant Japanese papers. However, if competing at a global level is the goal of Japanese universities, then more attention on such matters as to how and when is it necessary to acknowledge authorship, or accepted to use a translation software, the different value of printed and digital sources should be taught. This should go along with an emphasis on the risks of misinformation when citing electronic sources, or when translating sources in one’s native Japanese language into other languages and vice versa. In the case of the School of Human Sciences, since the Japanese curriculum does not seem to encourage academic writing or critical skills as much as its English-taught Human Sciences International Undergraduate Degree counterpart does, then more interaction and exchange between the Japanese and the English-taught programme is deemed of high importance. Academic Writing, Presentation Skills and Critical Thinking are required subject for all freshmen in the English-taught Human Sciences International Undergraduate Degree, even if only for one semester. Maybe this should be extended to all regular Japanese students. A skillful use of internal resources may benefit both sides and develop the sort of creative global human capital that is expected to boost scientific and economic growth. Although the potential for plagiarism is ever present, it is clear that it is more likely to happen when people ignore it, either intentionally or inadvertently. In its pursue of internationalization of a wider range of education and research institutions, Japan faces demands to stimulate domestic competition in the internationalization of the education system and Japan’s society as a whole. In this context, universities around Japan can take positive measures toward preventing it by instilling a sense of intellectual integrity among their students, as well as by fostering cooperation and exchange with international

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

84

Paola Cavaliere

students and faculty who already live in Japan. However, the tension between the desire for a global or cosmopolitan profile and the emphasis on preservation of educational and examination practices from the compulsory to the higher education level are curbing the realization of such globalizing reform plan. The findings and implications of this chapter clearly call for a more reflective examination of actual higher education globalization goals and current status, as well as a valorisation of extant human global resources, including international faculty working in Japanese universities and their view on the future directions of Japanese higher education.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Abasi, A. R., Akbari, N., & Graves, B. (2006). Discourse appropriation, construction of identities, and the complex issue of plagiarism: ESL students writing in graduate school. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), 102-117. DOI: 10.1016/j .jslw.2006.05.001. Campbell, C. (1990). ‘Writing with others’ words: Using background reading text in academic compositions. In B., Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 211–230), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Christodoulou, I. (2008). The impact factor of plagiarism. International Journal of Health Science, 1(4), 113-114. Davis, M. (2013). The development of source use by international postgraduate students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12, 125–135. Day, M. (2001). A Meshing of Minds: The Future of Online Research for Print and Electronic Publication? In J. Barber, & D. Grigar (Eds.), New Worlds, New Words: Exploring Pathways for Writing about and in Electronic Environments (pp. 251277). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Dryden, L. M. (1999). A distant mirror or through the looking glass? Plagiarism and intellectual property in Japanese education. In L. Buranen, A. M. Roy, & A. Lunsford (Eds.), Perspectives on plagiarism and intellectual property in a postmodern world (pp. 75–85). Albany: State University of New York Press. Enoki, E. (2018). Nihon ni okeru kenkyū fusei no jirei to media deno toriagerarekata [Research Misconduct in Japan and How It Is Covered by the Media]. Journal of the Pharmaceutical Society of Japan, 138, 459-464. Fallon, F. (2008). Plagiarism and students from Asia studying in Australia and New Zealand, paper presented at the 2008 APAIE Conference in Japan. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from http://www.isana.org.au/files/PlagAPAIE08.pdf. Florida, R., Mellander, C., & King, K. (2015). The global creativity index. The Martin Prosperity Institute. University of Toronto. Hayes, N., & Lucas, D. I. (2005). Cultural values, plagiarism, and fairness: When plagiarism gets in the way of learning. Ethics & Behavior, 15, 213–31.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Internationalizing Higher Education in Japan 85

Ishii, S., Iwama, A., Koseki, H., Shinkai Y., Taga, T., & Watanabe, J. (2014). Report on STAP Cell Research Paper Investigation. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from http://www3.riken.jp/stap/e/f1document1.pdf. Kimura, T., F., S., & Morii, Y. (2014). Obokata’s case reveals faults of lenient Japanese academia. Asia One. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from https://www .asiaone.com/asia/faults-lenient-japanese-academia-revealed. Kuroda, K., Sugimura, M., Kitamura, Y., & Asada, S. (2018). Paper commissioned for the 2019 Global Education Monitoring Report, Migration, displacement and education: Building bridges, not walls—Internationalization of Higher Education and Student Mobility in Japan and Asia (ED/GEMR/MRT/2018/P1/38), Global Education Monitoring Report. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from https:// www.jica.go.jp/jica-ri/publication/other/l75nbg000010mg5u-att/Background _Kuroda.pdf. Leki, I. (1992). Understanding ESL writers: A guide for teachers. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook. Maddox, J. (August 31, 1995). Plagiarism is worse than mere theft. Nature, 376, 721. DOI: 10.1038/376721a. Goodman, R. (2007). The concept of kokusaika and Japanese educational reform. Globalization, Societies and Education, 5(1), 71-87. Hasan, I., & Tucci, C. (2010). The innovation-economic growth nexus: Global evidence. Res Policy 39(10), 1264-1276. Hennings, M., & Mintz, S. (2015). Japan’s measures to attract international students and the impact of student mobility on the labor market. Journal of International and Advanced Japanese Studies, 7, 243-251. Hori, K., & Sakajiri, A. (2016). Handaisei no tameno akadeikku raitingu nyumon― Raitingu shidōkyoin manyuaru [Introduction to Academic Writing for Osaka University Students―Teacher Manual], Version 3.0, Center for Education in Liberal Arts and Science (CELAS), Osaka University. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from https://ir.library.osaka-u.ac.jp/repo/ouka/all/54513/2016writingteachers manual.pdf. Horie, M. (2002). The internationalization of higher education in Japan in the 1990s: A reconsideration. Higher Education, 43(1), 65-84. Howard, R. M. (2010). Writing matters: A handbook for writing and research. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Iwabuchi, K. (2005). Multinationalizing the multicultural: commodification of ‘ordinary foreign residents’ in a Japanese TV talk show. Japanese Studies: Bulletin of the Japanese Studies Association of Australia, 25(2), 103-118. JASSO (Japan Student Services Organization) (2019a). Heisei 30 nendo gaikokujin ryūgakusei zaiseki jōkyō [Result of the Annual Survey of International Students in Japan 2018]. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from https://www.jasso.go.jp/about/ statistics/intl_student_e/2018/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2019/01/16/datah30z1.pdf. JASSO (Japan Student Services Organization) (2019b). Heisei 29 nendo kyōtei nado ni motozuku nihonjin gakusei ryūgaku jōkyō chōsa kekka [Result of the Annual Survey of Japanese Students Studying Abroad Based on Student Exchange

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

86

Paola Cavaliere

Agreements 2018]. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from https://www.jasso.go.jp/ about/statistics/intl_student_s/2018/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2019/01/16/datah30n_1 .pdf. Matsuzawa, T. (2013). Research misconduct in Japan: Micro-analysis based on open information. Joho Kanri [Information Management], 56(3), 156–165. DOI: 10.1241/johokanri.56.156. MEXT (2006). Kenkyū katsudō no fusei kōi he no taiō no gaidorain ni tsuite [Guidelines for responding to incidences of academic dishonesty in research activities]. Kagakugijutsu Gakujitsu shingikai Kenkyū Katsudō no Fusei Kōi ni Kansuru Tokubetsuīnkai (Special Committee on Academic Research Misconduct of the Commission of Inquiry on Science and Technology). Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/gijyutu/gijyutu12/houkoku/__ icsFiles/afieldfile/2013/05/07/1213547_001.pdf. MEXT (2014a). Selection for the FY 2014 Top Global University Project. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/houdou/26/09/__icsFiles/ afieldfile/2014/10/07/1352218_02.pdf. MEXT (2014b). Kenkyū katsudō ni okeru fusei kōi he no taiō nado ni kansuru gaidorain [Guidelines for responding to research misconduct]. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/houdou/26/08/__icsFiles/afield file/2014/08/26/1351568_02_1.pdf. MEXT (2015). Emergency recommendation with respect to enhancing and securing budget for Higher Education. Central Council for Education. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from http://www.mext.go.jp/en/news/topics/detail/1377846.htm. MLA (The Modern Language Association) (2009). MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers, 7th edition, New York: The Modern Language Association of America. Nian, C. L., Ying C., & Qi, W. (2016) (Eds.). Matching Visibility and Performance: A Standing Challenge for World-Class Universities. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. National Center for University Entrance Examinations (NCUEE) (2015). National Center for University Entrance Examinations, 2015 Fiscal Year. Retrieved on December 10, 2019 from https://www.dnc.ac.jp/albums/abm00006725.pdf. OECD—Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2013) OECDCCE-Singapore international workshop educating for innovation in Asia: the theory, the evidence and the practice. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from http:// www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/EDU-CERI-CD(2013)6-ENG.pdf. OECD—Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2015). The innovation imperative: contribution to productivity, growth and well-being. OECD Publishing, 268 pp. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from https://www.oecd.org/ publications/the-innovation-imperative-9789264239814-en.htm. Office for the Prime Minister’s Commission (1999). Prime Minister’s Commission on Japan’s Goals in the 21st Century. Retrieved December 20, 2019 from https:// www.kantei.go.jp/jp/21century/990716summary.html. Osaka University Administration Bureau (2020a). Handling Public Research Funds, Unpublished Internal Document. Retrieved January 9, 2020 from https://my.osaka -u.ac.jp/admin/preventing_misuse/guideline.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Internationalizing Higher Education in Japan 87

Osaka University Administration Bureau (2020b). Compliance Education on the Use of Public Research Funds, Unpublished Internal Document. Retrieved January 9, 2020 from https://my.osaka-u.ac.jp/admin/soumu/compliance/survey. Pecorari, D. (2003). Good and original: Plagiarism and patchwriting in academic second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(4), 317–345. Pennycook, A. (1996). ‘Borrowing others’ words: Text, ownership, memory, and plagiarism. TESOL Quarterly, 30(2), 201–230. Pickering, J., & Hornby, G. (2005). Plagiarism and international students: A matter of values differences? In Proceedings of the 16th ISANA International Conference, Vol. 30, Christchurch, NZ. Reid, D. (1991). New Wine: The Cultural Shaping of Japanese Christianity. Berkeley, CA: Asian Humanities Press. Rinnert, C., & Kobayashi, H. (2005). Borrowing words and ideas: Insights from Japanese L1 writers. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 15(1), 31–56. Roig, M. (2001). Plagiarism and paraphrasing criteria of college and university professors. Ethics & Behavior, 11(3), 307-323. Rosamond, B. (2002). Plagiarism, academic norms and the governance of the profession. Politics, 22, 167-174. Sadoshima, S. (June 9, 2008). Nihon no daigaku ni okeru akademikku raithing shidō [Academic writing tutoring in Japanese University]. Yomiuri Shinbun Online. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from www.yomiuri.co.jp/adv/wol/opinion/inter national_080609.html. Sadoshima, S. (2014). Academikku raitingu kyōiku to jōhō riterashī: (Jōhō wo saiteigi) shi iken wokōsakudekiru gakusei wo sodateru (Tokushū jōhō riterashī) [Information literacy and academic writing education: Helping students to process information (Information literacy)], Jōhō no Kagaku to Gijutsu [Information Science and Technology], 64(1), 22-28. Retrieved on December 23, 2019 from http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110009686623. Shibata, T. (2006) (ed.). Japan, Moving Toward a More Advanced Knowledge Economy—Volume 1: Assessment and Lessons. Washington D.C.: The World Bank. Shimauchi, S. (2014). Naze, eigo puroguramu ni ryūgaku suru no ka? Nikkan kōtō kyōiku ryūgaku ni okeru pusshu puru yōin no shitsuteki bunseki o tōshite [Why Are Students Studying Abroad at English-Medium Degree Programs in NonEnglish Speaking Countries? Kyōiku Shakaigaku, 94, 303-324. Shimmi, Y., & Yonezawa, A. (2015). Japan’s “Top Global University” Project. International Higher Education, 81, 27-28. Sowden, Colin (2005). Plagiarism and the culture of multilingual students in higher education abroad. ELT Journal, 59(3), 226-233. DOI: 10.1093/elt/cci042 Takagi, H. (2016). Transformation of Japanese Universities through the Process of Internationalization. A comparative perspective with Anglo-Saxon universities, in J.E. Côté & A. Furlong (Ed.), Routledge Handbook of the Sociology of Higher Education, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 262-272. Teichler, U. (1999). Internationalization as a challenge for higher education in Europe. Tertiary Education and Management, 5(1), 5–23.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

88

Paola Cavaliere

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Wheeler, G. (2009). Plagiarism in the Japanese universities: Truly a cultural matter? Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 17–29. Wheeler, G. (2014). Culture of minimal influence: A study of Japanese university students’ attitudes toward plagiarism. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 10(2), 44–59. Retrieved on December 3, 2019 from http://www.ojs.unisa.edu .au/index.php/IJEI/index. Wheeler, G. (2016). Perspectives from Japan, in T. Bretag, (Ed.), Handbook of Academic Integrity (pp. 107-112), Springer Science+Business Media Singapore. Yonezawa, A. (2011). The internationalization of Japanese higher education: Policy debates and realities. In S. Marginson, K. Sarjit, & S., Erlenawati (Eds.), Higher education in the Asia-Pacific: Strategic responses to globalization (pp. 329-342), London, UK: Springer. Yonezawa, A. (2013). Rankings and information on Japanese universities. In P. T. M., Marope, P. J. Wells, & E. Hazelkorn, (Eds.), Rankings and accountability in higher education (pp. 171–185). Paris: UNESCO. Yonezawa A., & Yukiko, S. (2016) Transformation of University Governance Through Internationalization: Challenges for Top Universities and Government Policies in Japan. In N. C. Liu, Y. Cheng, & Q. Wang (Eds.), Matching Visibility and Performance: A Standing Challenge for World-Class Universities (pp. 103118), Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Yoshimi, S. (2016). Bunkei gakubu haishi no shogeki [The Abolition of the Humanities Shock], Tokyo: Shueisha. Yoshimura, F. (2018). Another Possible Reason for Plagiarism: Task Representations of Summary Writing. TESL-EJ, The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language (Tohoku Gakuin University), 22(3), 1-18. Yoshimura, F., & Adams, K. (2018). Analyzing Japanese University Students’ English Summaries and Task Representations as a Possible Source of Plagiarism. Journal of Institute for Research in English Language and Literature (Tohoku Gakuin), 43, 53-78.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter Five

Building Awareness of Academic Integrity with Badges: Canadian University Context

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Alice Schmidt Hanbidge, Tony Tin, Georgina Zaharuk, and Herbert Tsang

Academic quality and credibility of institutional degrees are reflected in academic standards set out by institutions with the ability to uphold academic integrity principles. Higher education institutions are frequently challenged to ensure student’s understanding of the academic integrity (AI) core values. Recent proactive shifts in educational institutions from punitive consequences to educative value-based methods of teaching AI concepts enhance opportunities for proactive teachable moments (Bertram Gallant, 2008, 2011; Cole & Kiss, 2000). Better education is a more effective mechanism for reducing cheating, such as plagiarism and academic misconduct (Fishman, 2016, p. 15). How can learners show the world they are knowledgeable about academic integrity? How can institutions prove learners can explore and assess real life scenarios ethically through the values of honesty, trust, respect, fairness, responsibility and courage? The IntegrityMatters open access application with digital badging offers an innovative approach to address these challenges. Six fundamental values of integrity: trust, honesty, respect, responsibility, courage, and fairness (International Center for Academic Integrity, 2014) form the foundation of this award-winning mobile academic integrity training (Hanbidge, McKenzie, Scholz, & Tin, 2020). Academic integrity “refers to a set of conventions that scholars follow in their work, and which generates credibility, trust, and respect within the academic community” (http://www .yorku.ca/spark/academic_integrity). Learners can earn a digital badge when successfully completing the AI lessons in the IntegrityMatters app by scoring 75 percent or higher on all six module quizzes. Issuing digital badges provides excellent visibility and credibility to the IntegrityMatters app that aspires to improve student engagement 89

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

90

Alice Schmidt Hanbidge, Tony Tin, Georgina Zaharuk, and Herbert Tsang

with AI material. The digital badges provide an opportunity to promote the importance of AI while also exploring the use of badge credentialing to recognize completion of a learning experience, and to develop trust and credibility on social media. The badges were developed via CanCred Factory (https:// cancred.ca), a cloud-based system that can be exported to learner’s LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook and Google+ profiles. Given that many university programs include a component of work experience (e.g., co-op, field education, experiential learning) and all are preparing students for eventual employment (Billet, 2009), it is incumbent upon educational institutions to ensure their students are prepared to effectively integrate AI training and to share them visually through social media.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Digital Badging Literature Digital badges are ideally suited to support the goals of the IntegrityMatters app. The key components of engaging students and ensuring their understanding of academic integrity core values, visibly displaying skill acquisition in a portable credential, and offering seamless recognition of competency as students transition from academia to the workplace, are all positively impacted by digital badges. The lengthy history of using badges to signify achievement (Halavais, 2012) conjures images of Boy Scout uniforms (International Scouting Collectors Association, n.d.) and hierarchical designations within organizations. While the contemporary digital counterpart perpetuates the symbolism affirming accomplishment, it augments this visual credential with a multitude of additional elements. Micro credentials are short educational courses, often offered online that emphasize learner-centered interactive activities. Badges offer acknowledgment of completion of micro credentialing popular in informal learning contexts and somewhat similar to “achievements” in video and computer games. Open badges are portable digital credentials, containing metadata that provides information regarding badge issuers and the criteria used to recognize the skills, achievements, and proficiencies of badge earners while verifying evidence of learning. Since they are based on accepted standards, earners can combine multiple badges from different issuers to display their credentials. Digital badges are web-enabled forms (Gibson, Ostashewski, Flintoff, Grant & Knight, 2015; Grant, 2014) that use an electronic graphic to represent an individual’s specific abilities, granular skills, and different levels of engagement (Finkelstein, Knight, & Manning, 2013) in detail that far exceeds conventional certificates (Devedzic & Jovanovic, 2015; Elliot, Clayton &

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Building Awareness of Academic Integrity with Badges 91

Iwata 2014; Mehta, Young & Stoller, 2013). Technological advancements have made it possible to embed metadata, offering the viewer extensive information pertaining to not only who and where the badge was granted, but the criteria and evidence used in its allocation. This has created an environment of explicit trust (Casilli & Hickey, 2016) where a graphic representation of a skill or claim links to evidence that can be transparently reviewed by stakeholders (Lesser, 2016). Digital badges have the potential to become disruptive learning tools as educational institutions bring an alternative option to offer tools that facilitate affordable, accessible and personalised learning. Motivating the “reluctant” learner (Nolan, Preston & Finkelstein, 2012, p. 46) and acting as an incentive to participate in and improve academic activities (Glover, 2013) are two areas that have been explored in the badging literature recently. Although the predominant value of a digital badge may be seen as an instrument to denote accreditation (Abramovich, 2016) it is also the portability and ease of sharing recognition of achievement across digital environments, different platforms and organizations (Devedžic & Jovanovic, 2015) that offers unique opportunity. Open badges are capable of integrating into diverse compatible learning and portfolio systems (Farmer & West, 2016), allowing the collection of micro-credentials into open “backpacks” and linking the display of badges seamlessly across disciplines and settings (Finkelstein, Knight, & Manning, 2013). Individual learners are able to take agency (Devedzic & Jovanovic, 2015) in creating a holistic online profile of their abilities and learning journey (Liyanagunawardena, Scalzavara, & Williams, 2017) supported by a recognized platform and framework (Mozilla Foundation, 2016). In addition to offering a visual representation of skills to a broader community, digital badges offer learners the opportunity to document and certify competency valued by industry and potential employers (Ahn et al., 2014). Digital badging “is quickly becoming the currency of choice for professional recognition” (Malin, 2016, p. 19) as industry is challenged to identify top job candidates (Raish & Rimland, 2016) by degree transcripts that offer limited detail and insight into individual skill sets (Carey, 2012), disparate professional development programs (Malin, 2016) and crucial workplace and industry skills that are assessed outside formal educational systems (Parker, 2015; Ruddy & Ponte, 2019). The evolution of digital badging has been swift. From early associations with gamification (McIlvenny, 2015) to usefulness in engaging students (Ahn, Pellicone & Butler, 2014), motivating skill building (Abramovich, Schunn & Higashi, 2013), to the Mozilla Foundation’s Open Badges program establishment in 2011 (Grant, 2016) and the formation of additional systems,

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

92

Alice Schmidt Hanbidge, Tony Tin, Georgina Zaharuk, and Herbert Tsang

such as Udemy and the Khan Academy (Ahn, Pellicone & Butler, 2014; Randall, Harrison & West, 2013). Some academic institutions have begun to deploy badges within courses and for-credit academic programs. Once seen as a potential disruption to the higher education sector (Ruddy & Ponte, 2019), the emergence of universities as badge issuers through independent and proprietary systems like Credly and TrueCred (Ruddy & Ponte, 2019) has seen many prominent educational institutions (Ruddy & Ponte, 2019) enhance their learning ecosystems with this mobile credentialing system, including MIT, Purdue, Yale, and Carnegie Mellon (Abramovich, Schunn, & Higashi, 2013; Ash, 2012a; Ash, 2012b; Carey, 2012; Diaz, 2013; Rutherford, Freund, & Mewburn, 2015). Large scale MOOC (Massive Open Online Courses) providers, such as Udemy and the Khan Academy (Ahn, Pellicone, & Butler, 2014; Randall, Harrison, & West, 2013), often use open automatic badge-issuing systems for recognition of accomplishments. Demonstration of specified learning outcomes is represented visually by a “badge,” a digital image displayed on a website accompanied by written information detailing the accomplishment and criteria for earning the badge. Learners indicate visual appearance of badges were of importance and that badges gained credibility with an official or institutional look and feel to them (Mewburn, Freund, & Rutherford, 2014). While digital badging is commonly seen as a visual symbol that signifies official approval (Abramovich, 2016), boundless potential is available to share across multiple digital platforms and settings (Devedžic & Jovanovic, 2015). In education, digital badges have become a recognized feature within learning management systems to demonstrate a visual representation of a learning journey. Shared across online platforms (i.e., Facebook, LinkedIn), they represent achievements and communicate success. Natural progression has seen employers recognize the efficacy of digital badging in assessing competency of specific skills (Abramovich, Schunn, & Higashi, 2013; West & Randall, 2016), while many workplace learning settings refer to micro credentials that can be displayed on professional networking sites as having the potential to promote lifelong learning (Carey & Stefaniak, 2018). The learner can curate the badges in their ePortfolio or share them anywhere online for social networking, employment, education or lifelong learning. It is clear that digital badging is gaining significant traction (Hickey, 2017) and has potential value and impact that includes a range of possibilities (Finkelstein, Knight & Manning, 2013). It has been suggested “e-credentials will transform education in the next two decades much as e-commerce has changed retailing today” (Hickey, 2017, p. B19). Despite this, limited empirical research on the usability of digital badges has been completed (Abramovich, Schunn, & Higashi, 2013; Gamrat et al., 2014; Hakulinen, Auvinen, & Korhonen, 2013; O’Connor & McQuigge, 2013; Raish & Rimland, 2016; Reid,

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Building Awareness of Academic Integrity with Badges 93

Paster, & Abramovich, 2015). Wide-reaching interest in open badging (www .badgetheworld.org) has led to recent systematic literature reviews (Gibson et al., 2015; Liyanagunawardena & Scalzavara, 2017) that can inform decisionmaking whether to adopt open badges. Further study is required to determine what makes a well-developed badge program, considerations of badge rigor are needed (Carey & Stefaniak, 2018), and guidelines must be developed to include evaluation and verification components into badge design (Catalano & Doucet, 2013; Olneck, 2012). The IntegrityMatters app, with its digital badge utilized as a learner motivator and to evidence accomplishments (Foli, Karagory, & Kirby, 2016), is ideally positioned to become an integral part of a more comprehensive approach to academic integrity skill development that could be comprised of successive levels and applications to various workplace frameworks, each represented by the awarding of digital badges. In addition, consideration could be given to combining the IntegrityMatters badge with certification in other competencies that are similarly aligned and consistent with industry specific demands.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

CanCred Factory Open Badging Structure CanCred Factory Open Badges infrastructure is one example of an online, open standard that recognizes and verifies informal and lifelong learning. Launched with protocols and an overarching framework for digital badges by the Mozilla Foundation (2011), with funding from the MacArthur Foundation, it is now led by IMS Global Learning Consortium and being adopted by an increasing number of educational institutions. CanCred Factory is a cloud-based management system that provides a centralized and simplified quality framework for open badges. It provides a comprehensive set of tools for creating, issuing and managing digital badges. CanCred Passport is the default destination for open badges issued from its companion platform, CanCred Factory. The platform was developed by Discendum, a leading educational technology company in Finland. An extensive reporting system monitors how badges are being used and shared (see figure 5.1). Some useful features that support the use of digital badges for project use include: badge applications, multilingual badges, evidence uploads to Open Badge Factory (OBF) server, user role management (administrator, creator, issuer), simple badge creation and issuing interface, integration with LMS, endorsements and open API for third-party plugins. A free online service is available where learners earn digital badges and can easily receive, store and share them at the Passport site (see figure 5.2). Criteria within each badge specifically identifies proof of achievements and skills that enable

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

94

Alice Schmidt Hanbidge, Tony Tin, Georgina Zaharuk, and Herbert Tsang

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

linkages to the issuer and relevant credentialing bodies (how and when the badge is earned) with verifying evidence (linking to a description and documents that demonstrate the completed work). The CanCred open badges infrastructure has multiple technical advantages over other badging systems. First, CanCred Factory and Passport enables and easily manages badges and sharing in an interoperable digital environment, avoiding the complexity of handling different management systems. Second, the infrastructure facilitates trusted brand recognition. The authenticity of the issuer organizations and achievement can be verified and authenticated via embedded web links and metadata. Third, the system supports evidencebased research, thus allowing user tracking and data analysis. Detailed reports can be generated, providing information for how badges have been received, used, and ranked by different target groups. Fourth, CanCred supports different open sources plug-ins and could be interoperable for easy integration with multiple Learning Management System (LMS), such as Moodle, WordPress, Mahara, Optima. Fifth, CanCred is mobile friendly and is fully functional with most smartphones and tablets for badge management and sharing. Finally, it easily engages and motivates badge earners, providing free personal

Figure 5.1.  CanCred Factory Reporting System

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Building Awareness of Academic Integrity with Badges 95

learning cloud service where badge earners can display and share their badges and use them to build their ePortfolios. CanCred facilitates community building allowing online social interaction between badge earners, organizations and communities of practice. Setting up a free a CanCred Passport account associated with the learner’s academic institution email address makes it possible to publish selected badges on learner’s profile pages via CanCred. Learners choose whether or not to claim badges earned. Additionally, learners may choose to make their badges viewable publicly. IntegrityMatters Open Badging Project

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

The vision of our digital badging evaluation project aimed to explore the best strategies, from a student user perspective, for accessing and understanding learner interest in using digital badges. The academic IntegrityMatters digital badge was awarded for successful completion of all the IntegrityMatters six modules. Our mobile academic IntegrityMatters project implemented a successful open badges strategy together with eCampusOntario, a nonprofit corporation funded by the Government of Ontario, Canada (see figure 5.3)

Figure 5.2.  Operation of CanCred Factory and CanCred Passport

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

96

Alice Schmidt Hanbidge, Tony Tin, Georgina Zaharuk, and Herbert Tsang

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Figure 5.3.  Learners Claim and Store Badges at eCampusOntario Open Badge Passport Site

and CanCred Factory (https://factory.cancred.ca). The mandate of eCampus­ Ontario is to promote excellence in online and technology-enabled learning for all publicly-funded colleges and universities in Ontario (https://ecampus ontario.ca). For our Canadian open badging project, the eCampusOntario Open Badge Passport site (https://badges.ecampusontario.ca), a dedicated instance of the same open source platform as CanCred Passport, but owned by eCampusOntario, was designed to be a recognition hub for Ontario postsecondary education and beyond. As part of an eCampus Ontario Research and Innovation Grant pilot project, the project team was provided with CanCred Factory accounts that issued badges, using the CanCred Passport Platform based on open source Salava code. Digital badges were awarded to learners for completion of the six academic integrity modules (see figure 5.4). When a badge was earned, badge earners claim the earned badge at the eCampusOntario Open Badge Passport site (https://badges.ecampusontario .ca). This research blueprint provided the project team with hands-on experience in designing and using open badges for mobile academic integrity training in higher education.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Building Awareness of Academic Integrity with Badges 97

Figure 5.4.  Academic IntegrityMatters Digital Badge

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Academic Integrity Badge Methodology Learners were given the opportunity to consider the implications of integrity in their academic life and beyond. Learners who successfully completed all IntegrityMatters modules were awarded a badge validating their competency in this functional area of academic integrity knowledge. Study participants, (undergraduate university students from the University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada) who successfully completed the academic integrity app lessons were invited via email to voluntarily participate in testing of the digital badging process. Learners are able to choose whether or not to claim badges earned. Additionally, learners make the choice to display some or all of their badges viewable publicly. Study participants were asked to claim their badge at the Cancred.ca Passport site and export it to their social media profiles on Linked­In, Twitter, Facebook, or Google+ profile. This process was completely automated and not intended to interfere with university-level implementation of the academic integrity modules. Any course-level assignment credit for module completions were completely separate from the badging process. Earning a badge did not obligate faculty to award learners points for module completions. When a badge was earned, an email was sent to learners. Setting up a free CanCred Passport account associated with one’s university email address made it possible to publish selected badges on one’s profile page via CanCred.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

98

Alice Schmidt Hanbidge, Tony Tin, Georgina Zaharuk, and Herbert Tsang

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Learners experienced academic integrity knowledge of the six values by completing interactive case scenarios through open access mobile technology. All users with mobile devices can download and install the freely available app through the link in the iTunes Store or Google Play (IOS https:// apps.apple.com/us/app/integritymatters/id1355112345 and Android https:// play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=uwai.dev.integritymatters2). Integrity­ Matters project activities, publications and earlier research are available at these webpages: https://uwaterloo.ca/academic-integrity/integrity-matters -mobile-application and http://bit.ly/integritymattersapp. Project goals aimed at developing strategies that enhance student academic integrity knowledge using interactive scenarios through open access mobile technology, culminated with the achievement of a certificate and a digital badge that recognized completion. The modules in the tutorials (see figure 5.5 IntegrityMatters home page, module page, Case Scenario) provide examples that illustrate the expectations of an academic community. Each module focuses on scenarios involving diverse aspects of student academic life (such as cultural difference and expectations, physical stress, peer pressure, and time constraints). Learners who successfully completed all of the modules were awarded a badge validating their competency in this functional area of academic integrity knowledge.

Figure 5.5.  IntegrityMatters Home Page, Module Page, Case Scenario

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Building Awareness of Academic Integrity with Badges 99

The intention was to help understand the basic values of integrity, in hopes that learners will strive to apply these values in their actions as a member of their campus community and in their everyday life. Badge earners have gained basic academic integrity knowledge, and are aware of the impact and outcomes of academic integrity in an academic setting. A Creative Commons license ensures this open access IntegrityMatters application with accompanying lessons, quizzes and videos continue to be freely accessible so institutions may transfer and customize this tutorial to meet their own needs. Badging Process Our objective was to develop strategies, culminating with the achievement of an e-certificate and a digital badge to recognize successful completion all of the modules, thus validating learner’s competency in this functional area of academic integrity knowledge. Badge earners gain basic digital academic integrity knowledge; they become aware of the impact and outcomes of academic integrity with their actions in an academic setting. Learner Digital Badge Criteria and Outcomes metadata specifies that each badge earner has:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

1.  developed a clear understanding of academic integrity, 2.  ability to identify the six fundamental values of academic integrity: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage (Fundamental Values Project, 2014), 3.  completed the online IntegrityMatters six modules in the digital application, and 4.  completed and passed each quiz in each of the six modules with 75 percent or higher. Pre-test and Post-test survey completion tested each learner’s academic integrity knowledge following completion of the academic integrity lessons, questions and quizzes. A final test assessing AI knowledge must be successfully completed to achieve a digital badge. The post-test compared learners’ academic integrity knowledge to their pre-test. In addition, study participants were invited to complete a Digital Badging Questionnaire to report on their experience. Some of the questions were scaling questions (1-5) where participants could add comments in text if they wished to expand on their answers in the rating scale. Educational Technology Experience Seventy-seven academic integrity digital badges were awarded to study participants in this research trial. Forty participants accepted the badge (52

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

100

Alice Schmidt Hanbidge, Tony Tin, Georgina Zaharuk, and Herbert Tsang

percent) and completed the pilot research testing. Generally, the pilot users were satisfied with the platform and found it very easy to use and share on different social media platforms. However, some users reported some technical glitches where they were unable to directly input their badge to their LinkedIn account without copying the license number and link from the badge site to LinkedIn. To address some of the technical challenges, the project team developed a training video to guide users to claim their badge for various social media. Users had access to technical support, as necessary, during the pilot testing phase. The project team felt it was necessary to support Unicode, especially for Asian languages, including Chinese and Japanese. This type of support could facilitate the issuing of badge to multiple language learners.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Open Badging Perceptions We developed a ten-minute online questionnaire through SurveyMonkey© for users to complete to assess their badging experience. Qualitative findings indicated helpful feedback from users for evaluation of digital badging experiences. Responses from thirty-three participants who completed the Badging Questionnaire varied. Most were pleased to be able to add the badges to their social media platforms, especially on LinkedIn. 79 percent of users responded they were satisfied with their digital badging options. Whereas some users found the badging process relatively simple to use, others were not sure their badge was placed in the correct social media platform of their choice. Some users indicated they experienced technical challenges with their mobile phones and planned to double check their laptop computers to ensure the badge transfer was completed. A number of users indicated they were new to the badging experience, while others found the process a novel alternative to a printed paper certificate. One user comment indicated that, “it allows employers to see that we are certified individuals, and the URL provides a level of authentication to the badge.” 27 percent of participants indicated they felt that badging was developing breakthrough technology while another 27 percent disagreed with this statement. Almost 71 percent of student users indicated the badging process worked for them without any bugs, delays or errors. Some commented the training video was helpful for them to follow the steps to obtain their badge. Overwhelmingly, 87.8 percent agreed with the statement that digital badging was easy to use. Comments indicated that it was “very simple and easy to follow. It’s intuitive,” while another participant stated, “the process is straightforward” and “adding it to LinkedIn was easy, especially with the YouTube

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Building Awareness of Academic Integrity with Badges 101

video.” Alternative feedback indicated that setting up an account “was a tedious process” for them. The participant responses to whether digital badging was a useful process was quite mixed, with some participants agreeing (close to 30 percent), whereas others disagreed (27 percent) and more than one-third (33.3 percent) were neutral on this question. Comments shared to help explain their positive stance included, “it allows potential employers to see my badge without having to present a physical one to them” while others were unsure about the practicality of badges and whether others would recognize them, “not sure how credible an online badge is and whether it is easy to copy them?” When asked about the value of staying connected to people important to them, 42.5 percent of respondents indicated their university connection mattered to them, “this badge is mainly for lab instructors/TAs [teaching assistants]/Profs to show that a student understands the policies surrounding plagiarism,” while almost 28 percent shared that potential employers would be interested in seeing evidence of badging “can help employers identify more competent individuals.” 16.6 percent indicated that badges wouldn’t enhance connectivity to people “doesn’t really aid in maintaining connections. [Badges] potentially aid in expressing your qualifications and achievements.” Finally, study participants were asked recommendations to enhance future digital badging processes. Suggestions ranged from “higher resolution, enhance image quality” to “remove registration” to “auto filling the field so that you do not need to copy each field of information in order to share it on social media” to “market badges better, make badging more prevalent.” Another suggestion included, “make the badge public automatically, unless you specifically want to set it as private. Kind of like how Facebook posts work.” A helpful suggestion included, “Integrate it into LEARN (learning management system) so that students starting a new course/term will need to obtain the badge before submitting assignments. This would replace integrity quizzes the profs have for each course and can be done all at once with the badge as proof of agreement, completion, etc.” Others indicated additional security for badging, such as “I would add some level of further authentication in case the badge was provided to the wrong individual.” Direct integration with social media, “having direct links to share via Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook, if possible.” Learners often felt that badging was unfamiliar to schools and employers, “It needs to become a more widespread practice in order for it to be effective for students in the job search process.” A few learners indicated they would prefer to print the badge or have a tangible representation of completion of their work while others felt the digital badging process worked well.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

102

Alice Schmidt Hanbidge, Tony Tin, Georgina Zaharuk, and Herbert Tsang

Overall, participant feedback provided a range of responses, but the answers were very helpful to the research team in determining whether to pursue continuation of the digital badging process. One learner indicated that “Badging was relatively simple to set up, it keeps up with the modern technology and is heavily used for connecting and self-marketing.” A common response was that learners wanted their badges integrated with the school’s learning management system to show their professors, teaching assistants, and other students the work they had completed. These responses encouraged us to streamline our project into our learning management system. Lessons Learned

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Key lessons from our pilot project may provide guidance to support new institutional badge system builders. Findings indicated that: 1. Strong support is necessary to secure support and endorsement from your own institution. CanCred.ca network or a similar technical organization can support institutions. Internal technical support is essential to help design detailed level of customization, branding, and integration with internal learning management system (LMS) user experience, graphic design, work flow, marketing strategy, and operable plug-ins; 2. Clear project outcomes ensure that the purpose, vision, design, clear criteria, achievements and instruction for the badge enhance the value of the reward system; and 3. Clear marketing and promotional strategies with website explanations for purpose, outcomes and instructions for your digital badge. In addition, several challenges were addressed during our digital badge development and testing process and some recommendations were identified for institutional badge producers: 1.  Badging system intuition be enhanced in integration and interoperability with other social media (i.e., LinkedIn); 2.  System support for Asian and other languages be strengthened; 3.  Annual subscription costs are steep for some smaller educational institutions. An affordable business model would sustain long-term engagement with digital badging; 4.  Increased digital badging education, marketing and promotion across institutions to enhance badging visibility. Many university students, faculty and staff were recently exposed to new knowledge about digital badging, and they developed initial understanding of the benefits of badging credentialing; 5.  Intrinsic and extrinsic motivators would be helpful to encourage undergraduate students to be lifelong learners with badging credentialing;

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Building Awareness of Academic Integrity with Badges 103

6.  Additional interactive features, such as QR or AR code features to enhance accessibility, visibility and visual appeal of digital badging processes; 7.  As badge earner’s performance is not directly observed, there could be some difficulty to ensure the badge is awarded to the correct person who completed the assignment or individuals have met the specific badging criteria; 8.  Increased research and evidence-based studies are needed to further determine the effectiveness of using open digital badges in academic settings to define the tangible positive learning outcomes it enhances.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Future Plans Overall, this pilot initiative was well received by the learners, as well as the faculty, and learners were satisfied with the digital badging system. In this project setting, as badges did not have a uniform effect on student involvements, the decision was made to continue offering learners badges for further study in the next year of the project. Well-defined badging criteria and a workflow system was established for granting digital badges upon successful completion of the lesson modules using mobile learning. Open badging was explored within the English language version, although Ifenthaler, BellinMularski, and Mah (2016) recommended further exploration of badging and micro credentialing in additional languages. IntegrityMatters modules in French and Chinese languages offer opportunities for future digital badging evaluation. Besides, we anticipate the need to have a flexible and robust Learning Management System (LMS) to host our assets for IntegrityMatters by exploring the possibility of integrating our current IntegrityMatters system with various LMS systems. This new system should provide a convenient method for the administrator to customize the lesson content and evaluation mechanisms. The systems that we are investigating will also need to integrate the multilingual modules and evaluations. Also, integration to the CanCred Factory will provide a method to issue badges in additional languages. Our American Councils for International Education partner (https://www .americancouncils.org) brings the IntegrityMatters application to its broad networks in higher, secondary, and primary institutions globally where opportunities exist for further studies. It is of global concern for higher education educators to explore effective ways to equip learners with academic integrity training and knowledge. Ideally, this type of training will nurture opportunities for student academic success while preparing for workplace employment.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

104

Alice Schmidt Hanbidge, Tony Tin, Georgina Zaharuk, and Herbert Tsang

CONCLUSION Holistic views of learning journeys where learning occurs in various connected and distributed settings, both physical and digital, are essential in higher education settings and badging can provide a bridge to make learning more visible, portable and impactful. This project provided an opportunity to share a unique approach to academic integrity training for learners in higher education while exploring portable, digital micro credentialing through a badging system. Our findings indicate that systems with badges could have a positive effect for some learner’s motivation while further study with a larger sample size would aid in this process of discovery. A standardized open badging framework (Mozilla Foundation, 2016) can aid educational institutions by providing a guide for tracking progress, achievements and skills. Opportunities to prepare learners to prevent academic misconduct is critical in academic integrity training for universities and colleges to provide the means for lifelong learning. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors wish to acknowledge research funding support from eCampusOntario. As well, we acknowledge project support from the University of Waterloo, Renison University College and Trinity Western University. The authors received no financial support for the authorship and publication of this chapter.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Abramovich, S., Schunn, C., & Higashi, R. M. (2013). Are badges useful in education? It depends upon the type of badge and expertise of learner. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(2), 217-232. DOI:10.1007/s11423 -013-9289-2. Abramovich, S. (2016). Understanding digital badges in higher education through assessment. On the Horizon, 24(1), 126-131. DOI.org/10.1108/OTH-08-2015-0044. Ahn, J., Pellicone, A., & Butler, B. S. (2014). Open badges for education: What are the implications at the intersection of open systems and badging? Research in Learning Technology, 22(1). Ash, K. (2012a). Digital badges would represent students’ skill acquisition. Education Week, 5(3), 24–25. Ash, K. (2012b). Colleges use ‘digital badges’ to replace traditional grading. Education Week, 5(3), 26–27.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Building Awareness of Academic Integrity with Badges 105

Carey, K. (2012, April 13). A Future Full of Badges. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 58(32). Retrieved December 13, 2019 from http://link.galegroup.com.proxy .queensu.ca/apps/doc/A286087522/AONE?u=queensulaw&sid=AONE&xid=92a 11f36. Carey, K., & Stefaniak, J. (2018). An exploration of the utility of digital badging in higher education settings. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(5), 1211–1229. Casilli, C., & Hickey, D. (2016). Transcending conventional credentialing and assessment paradigms with information-rich digital badges. The Information Society, 32(2), 117-129. DOI: 10.1080/01972243.2016.1130500. Catalano, F., & Doucet, K. J. (2013). Digital ‘badges’ emerge as part of credentialing’s future. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from http://www.proexam.org/images/ resources/ProExam_DigitalBadgesPaper_071713pdf. CanCred Factory. (n.d.). Retrieved December 13, 2019 from https://factory.cancred .ca. Celebrate learning! (n.d.). Retrieved December 13, 2019 from https://openbadge factory.com. Definition of Academic Integrity. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from http://www. yorku.ca/spark/academic_integrity. Devedzic, V., & Jovanovic, J. (2015). Developing open badges: a comprehensive approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63, 603–620. DOI: 10.1007/s11423-015-9388-3. Diaz, V. (2013). Digital badges for professional development. EDUCAUSE Review. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2013/7/digital -badges-for-professional-development. eCampusOntario. (2019, March 20). Ontario Open Badge Forum 2019: Welcome and Introduction [Video File]. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from https://youtu.be/ bYsrOvd_0jM?list=PLZbPHTwqAgUoB-hF8E7uvyONdLXkSU7kb. Elliot, R., Clayton, J., & Iwata, J. (2014). Exploring the use of micro-credentialing and digital badges in learning environments to encourage motivation to learn and achieve. In B. Hegarty, J. McDonald, & S. K. Loke (Eds.), Rhetoric and reality: Critical perspectives on educational technology (pp. 703–707). Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Dunedin, NZ. Farmer, T., & West, R. E. (2016). Opportunities and challenges with digital open badges. Educational Technology, 56(5), 45–48. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from http://www.academia.edu/29863552/Opportunities_and_Challenges_with_Digital _Open_Badges. Finkelstein, J., Knight, E., & Manning, S. (2013). The potential and value of using digital badges for adult learners’ final report. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research. Foli, K. J., Karagory, P., & Kirby, K. (2016). An exploratory study of undergraduate nursing students’ perceptions of digital badges. The Journal of Nursing Education, 55(11), 640–644. Gamrat, C., Zimmerman, H. T., Dudek, J., & Peck, K. (2014). Personalized workplace learning: An exploratory study on digital badging within a teacher

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

106

Alice Schmidt Hanbidge, Tony Tin, Georgina Zaharuk, and Herbert Tsang

professional development program. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(6), 1136–1148. DOI: 10.1111/bjet.12200. Gibson, D., Ostashewski, N., Flintoff, K., Grant, S., & Knight, E. (2015). Digital badges in education. Education and Information Technologies, 20(2), 403-410. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-013-9291-7. Grant, S. L. (2014). What counts as learning: Open digital badges for new opportunities. Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from http://dmlhub.net/sites/default/files/WhatCountsAsLearning_Grant .pdf. Grant, S. L. (2016). History and context of open digital badges. In L. Y. Muilenburg, & Z. L. Berge (Eds.), Digital Badges in Education: Trends, Issues, and Cases. Routledge: New York, NY. Hakulinen, L., Auvinen, T., & Korhonen, A. (2015). The Effect of Achievement Badges on Students’ Behavior: An Empirical Study in a University-Level Computer Science Course. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 10(1), 18-29. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v10i1.4221. Halavais, A. M. C. (2013). Digital badges: An annotated research bibliography. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from https://www.hastac.org/digital-badges-bibliography. Hanbidge, A. S., McKenzie, A., Scholz, K., & Tin, T. (2020). Academic Integrity in the Digital Era: Student Skills for Success using Mobile Technology. In S. Yu, M. Ally, & A. Tsinakos. (Eds.), Emerging Technologies and Pedagogies in the Curriculum. Springer Publications. Hickey, D. T. (2017, April). How open e-credentials will transform higher education. The Chronicles of Higher Education, 63(32). Retrieved December 13, 2019 from http://link.galegroup.com.proxy.queensu.ca/apps/doc/A491842709/AONE?u=que ensulaw&sid=AONE&xid=fca66fbb. Ifenthaler, D., Bellin-Mularski, N., & Mah, D. (Eds.) (2016). Foundation of Digital Badges and Micro-Credentials. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-15425-1. Institute for Credentialing Excellence (n.d.). Retrieved December 13, 2019 from http:// www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/smithbucklin/ice_digest_2016q3/index.php#/18. International Scouting Collectors Association (n.d.). Collecting Merit Badges: The ISCA Getting Started in Patch Collecting. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from http://www.scouttrader.org/collecting. Lesser, M. (2016). Why we badge: The potential for digital credentials. Education Digest, 81(5), 43–48. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from http://search.ebscohost. com.proxy.queensu.ca/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=111505473&site= ehost-live. Malin, G. (2016). Digital badging: The currency of choice. ICE Digest Institute for Credentialing Excellence, Q3, Washington, D.C. McIlvenny, L. (2015). Open badges: Glorified award stickers or valuable learning credentials? Access, 29(1), 30–40. Mehta, N. B., Hull, A. L., Young, J. B., & Stoller, J. K. (2013). Just imagine: New paradigms for medical education. Academic Medicine, 88(10), 1418–1423. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a36a07.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Building Awareness of Academic Integrity with Badges 107

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Mewburn, I., Freund, K., & Rutherford, E. (2014). Badge trouble: piloting open badge at the Australian National University. ASCILITE 2014. Dunedinn, New Zealand. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from http://ascilite.org/conferences/dunedin 2014/files/concisepapers/233-Mewburn.pdf. Mozilla Foundation (2016). About Open Badges. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from https://openbadges.org/about. O’Connor, E. A., & McQuigge, A. (2013). Exploring badging for peer review, extended learning and evaluation, and reflective/critical feedback within an online graduate course. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 42(2), 87–105. DOI: 10.2190/ET.42.2.b. Olneck, M. (2012). Insurgent credentials: A challenge to established institutions of higher education. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from HASTAC website http:// www.hastac.org/files/insurgent_credentials__michael_olneck_2012.pdf. Parker, H. (May, 2015). Digital Badges to assess Bloom’s affective domain. The National Teaching and Learning Forum, 9-11. Raish, V., & Rimland, E. (2016). Employer perceptions of critical information literacy skills and digital badges. College & Research Libraries, 77(1), 87-113. DOI: 10.5860/crl.77.1.87. Randall, D. L., Harrison, J. B., & West, R. E. (2013). Giving credit where credit is due: Designing open badges for a technology integration course. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 57(6), 88–95. Reid, A. J., Paster, D., & Abramovich, S. (2015). Digital badges in undergraduate composition courses: Effects on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Computers in Education, 2(4), 377–398. Ruddy, C., & Ponte, F. (2019). Preparing students for university studies and beyond: A micro-credential trial that delivers academic integrity awareness. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association, 68(1), 56-67. DOI: 10.1080/24750158.2018.1562520. West, R. E., & Randall, D. L. (2016). The case for rigor in open badges. In L. Y. Muilenburg, & Z. L. Berge (Eds.), Digital badges in education: Trends, issues, and cases (pp. 21–29). New York: Routledge.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter Six

Student Plagiarism in Higher Education: A Typology and Remedial Framework for a Globalized Era

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

This chapter invites the reader to go beyond their existing notions of plagiarism. The primary objective of our work is to suggest to administrators that they consider how they might further develop online resources, which in turn can empower the skill sets of increasing numbers of both international and domestic students. Developed and presented here are several instruments, which we believe will contribute by a constructive approach to improved outcomes for student learning, with fewer incidents of student plagiarism and reduced liability for the university. Universities across the globe are responding to pressures both at home and from abroad. It can be argued that a critical measure of the dynamism of an institution of higher education is its commitment to continued reforms. Universities are in the midst of a complex and globally competitive environment in which the education for all movement is a phenomenon throughout the world (Denman & Dunstan, 2011). Since the start of the millennium, the pursuit of a global education has been seen as a critical aspect of developing graduates who can prove themselves to be successful in the modern independent world (Marginson & Rhoades, 2002). The internationalization of higher education caters to both the global environment and education, and is linked to the development of institutional and societal reforms. Political, social, economic, and demographic and cultural factors affect the ways in which universities initiate reforms (de Wit, 2010). Those initiatives are conspicuous in vision statements, amended policies, new leadership, management, services, curriculum articulation, and university online resources that empower students in their study—which are the focus of this chapter. 109

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

110

Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

Our research is action research that borrows from the best to improve the rest. Action research in its essence is active learning, achieved through inquiry that is specific or limited in context, thereby challenging all of us to consider the benefits of knowledge-transfer from one location to another. Borrowing knowledge, according to Stringer (1999), should follow a two-step model. First, one must appreciate the conditions that lent to the development of that knowledge, deeming it to be suitable in nature. Second, the application of this knowledge to a different setting requires a full understanding of the borrower’s context, an appreciation of the ways these differ from the originating context in which the knowledge was constructed, and an astute awareness of the implications resulting from the application of such knowledge in the new setting. Mindful of these, it is possible to advocate for constructive social change. The concept of borrowing is not unique, novel, or without precedence. Educational comparativists have always argued that borderless education empowers a more “enlightened and human world” (Cummings, 1999, p. 416). Comparative Education is steeped in the tradition of educational borrowing, which extends back to the nineteenth century when the founding father, Jullien de Paris (1775–1848), strived to develop a science of education through a search for general principles. Jullien de Paris espoused the belief in the “deliberate and purposeful” (Phillips & Ochs, 2004, p. 774), “borrowing from one another what . . . is good and useful” and “that general educational principles could be deduced and applied to improve education in most contexts” (Fraser, 1964, pp. 36, 46, as cited in Beech, 2006, pp. 2-3). Universities themselves are frequent borrowers, mirrors—copiers, if you will—but also lenders, which can be seen through countless internationalization initiatives, some static, others dynamic and continuous. For our purposes in this chapter, internationalization in higher education (HE) is understood to be an institutional response to global economic, social, demographic, and cultural change (Fenton, 2017). It involves the borrowing and successful adoption of current intraorganizational cultural and prevailing global perspectives in a way that draws upon resources from within, but for the betterment of all stakeholders (Fenton, 2017). This we hold to be true in the general sense, but drawing on the proverb “the devil is in the details” or “God is in the detail,” we assert that borrowing, lending, and adopting should not merely be something of a transactional nature, learning by just taking it. As educators, it is incumbent on us to facilitate quality assured learning opportunities that credit those for the knowledge we are attempting to learn, but hopefully add to it through our own individual, experiential learning. Experiential learning is powerful, though it involves trial and error,

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Student Plagiarism in Higher Education 111

and valuing the quality work of others. It does not prioritize commercial gain, which is so intrinsic to globalization. Globalization can be defined as a phenomenon that affects how universities conceptualize and characterize internationalization in our current hypercompetitive educational climate (Fenton, 2017). Globalization is distinct from internationalization and refers to a host of global tensions manifested in economic, social, and cultural change (Valiulis & Valiulis, 2006), through the marketization (Teichler, 2004) and the dissemination of goods, money, technology, information, people, values, ideas, knowledge, and cultural practices across political and cultural borders (Holtman, 2005; Knight & de Wit, 1997). In the literature, these terms are understood as being interdependent, but are not the same phenomenon. It can be argued that the quality assurance movement is a response to globalization that has caused universities to grapple with the pressures of globalization in a manner that has infused quality assurance into their internationalization efforts. Internationalization engenders a rearticulating of curriculum that affects modes of delivery, choices about learning activities, teaching methods, and access to materials and resources. Curriculum reform through globalization pressures involves a shift in emphasis to higher order skills that are readily measurable, and criteria for evaluations of and within universities (Fenton, 2017). Academic malfeasance entails corruption in higher education involving ethical and moral transgressions. It is a violation of trust for material gain by an individual or group of individuals in positions of power. Corruption includes acquiescing to perpetrators of global practices that are substandard, often pervasive and dynamic, and serve as models of academic malfeasance—of which student plagiarism is an example. When applied to universities, internationalization concerns reforms that ideally lead to improvements in the quality of research and study. Striving to ensure quality should be reflected in continuous improvements in all facets across the campus, especially in the development of curriculum and learning resources made available to students to foster new ideas about learning. We aim to motivate administrators to advance the quality of their online resources on plagiarism, so as to strengthen the skill sets of increasing numbers of international students along with their domestic colearners. As we move through this chapter, the reader needs to garner a more critical sense of what plagiarism is, and how it is explained, and resourced. For that purpose, we draw from several highly ranked university websites—in short, learning from the best. For consistency, we will focus on the same institutions throughout this chapter.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

112

Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

UNIVERSITY PLAGIARISM DESCRIPTORS, DEFINITIONS, AND SEVERITIES In this section, we begin with a basic framework of descriptors and corresponding definitions synthesized from the websites of five universities from Canada, the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom, all of which are highly ranked and known the world over (University of Toronto, Stanford University, Harvard University, University of Sydney, University of Cambridge). Discussed within are the types of plagiarism and syntheses of their respective definitions. As is shown in Table 6.1 (below), all five universities offer distinctly worded definitions of what exactly constitutes plagiarism. However, in general terms, a reasonable supposition drawn from keywords in each definition, “plagiarism” is understood to mean the act of presenting, giving, or submitting work, ideas or words in any language, without providing credit or acknowledgment to the source, regardless of whether or not one intends to deceive the intended audience. Moving down to the second row in Table 6.1, we identified five differently worded types of plagiarism—direct, portioned, verbatim, copy, and quoting verbatim—all essentially referring to the same thing: transcribing entire sentences or passages from a single original work without acknowledging the source. Continuing on to the third row in which another type of plagiarism—mosaic, copied, disconnect, or using ideas—involves blending words, phrases, ideas from a single source without adequately paraphrasing or quoting directly, and again, absent due credit. On the point of paraphrasing, the fourth row includes several terms—improper, inadequate, and uncited—all of which preface the word paraphrasing itself, essentially pointing to an inadequacy in putting, restating, or submitting work as one’s own without the required acknowledgment. The fifth row brings us to the act of fabricating or inventing and then sharing the work of another or submitting your own previously submitted assignment without prior permission to do so. The work of another, evident in row six could refer to unpermitted collaboration, or collusion in individual or group work, all in a bid to recycle and resubmit work in order to gain credit that is unjustified or unmerited. For the purpose of this chapter, we recognize the importance of a working definition that is overarching and inclusive. Plagiarism is the act of presenting, giving, or submitting work, ideas, or words in any language, without providing credit or acknowledgment to the source, irrespective of one’s declared intent. Descriptions of plagiarism and definitions summarized in Table 6.1 offer an introduction to the five universities selected for this study and a synopsis of not only what constitutes plagiarism, but also how it materializes in student submissions. In this study, we elected to reform the definitions and

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

. . . Without acknowledging the source.

Transcribing . . .

Definition:

(continued )

Quoting Verbatim Another person’s work Copy Ideas, phrases paragraphs, formulas, methods, evidence, programming code, diagraphs, images, artworks or musical scores

Verbatim Word for word, using that language in your paper . . .

Portioned Original source was part of available evidence . . .

Direct Entire sentences or paragraphs . . . Uncited Quotation To not provide a trail for your reader to follow back to the original document for material in quotations

Submitting as one’s own work, irrespective of intent to deceive, that which derives in part or in its entirety from the work of others without due acknowledgement.

University of Cambridge

Presenting work that is not your own without acknowledging the original source.

University of Sydney

To draw any idea or any language from someone else without adequately crediting that source in your paper.

Harvard University

Without giving reasonable and appropriate credit to or acknowledging the author or source, of another person’s original work.

Stanford University

Presenting the work, ideas, or words of another as your own, even by accident.

University of Toronto

Table 6.1.  Plagiarism Descriptors and Definitions by Universities

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Putting, inadequately restating, submitting . . .

. . . Without crediting the source.

Improper Paraphrasing . . . An author’s ideas into your own words without crediting the source

Mosaic Blending copied words, phrases or ideas in with your own writing ...

University of Toronto

Table 6.1.  (continued )

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Disconnect Mention the source in your bibliography but do not reference content properly in the main body of your work . . .

Mosaic To copy bits and pieces from a source (or several sources), changing a few words here and there without either adequately paraphrasing or quoting directly . . .

Copied Reading and writing your own paper about the same concepts, premises and ideas discussed in the source . . .

Uncited Paraphrase To not provide enough information for your reader to trace the work back to its original form

Inadequate paraphrase Not . . . The ideas in the passage in your own words

University of Sydney

Harvard University

Stanford University

Paraphrasing . . . Work by changing some of the words, or the order of the words, without due acknowledgement of the source

Using Ideas From someone else ...

University of Cambridge

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Resubmitting, sharing, making up, inventing

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Unpermitted Collaboration . . . Your answers with others in the class, as well as creating outlines together or preparing your answers in some other way once the exam has been distributed

Dual Submission of Work The resubmission of the same work with some minor changes without your professor’s approval

Another Student’s Work Even in cooperative assignments, the arguments you make should be credited to the source of those ideas

Cutting and Pasting From the internet to make a pastiche of online sources

Colluding With another person, including another candidate, other than as permitted for joint project work Submitting Someone Else’s Work As part of a candidate’s own without identifying clearly who did the work without identifying clearly who did the work

Fabricating Information Making up information for research-focused assessment tasks; inventing sources

Collusion in Individual and Group Work Engaging in illegitimate cooperation with one or more other students in the completion of assessable work Recycling Resubmitting . . . Work that has already been assessed without permission and for which you have been given feedback

116

Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

descriptions of nine types of plagiarism, and then to rank them numerically from most too least severe. Each of the nine plagiarism constituents, accompanied by a brief description, are introduced below, followed by Table 6.2, which offers a concise summary for easy reference.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

The Nine Plagiarism Constituents—Most to Least Severe 1.  Papers for purchase: Purchasing a paper, either from another student or from a paper mill, and turning it in, as one’s own is an egregious, intentional act that involves no honest effort on the part of the student. 2.  Copying verbatim: Copying one source word-for-word and turning it in as one’s own is an equally serious form of plagiarism because it involves stealing someone else’s work and is unquestionably an intentional act. 3.  Cut and paste: Cutting and pasting from several sources and turning the results in as one’s own, like the previous form of plagiarism, is predicated on a desire to deceive, but the student is, at least, trying to synthesize several different sources. 4.  Self-plagiarism: This occurs when a student turns in previously written work without getting permission from all professors involved. This type of plagiarism lies along a fuzzy axis between intentional and accidental; some students seem to know such behavior is against the rules, while others do not understand it is a serious offense. Instructors should issue a stern warning against self-plagiarism at the start of a course. 5.  Fantasy research: This occurs when a student includes sources in the reference list that they did not use in order to make it appear as if they did more research, or when a student makes up facts, statistics, or quotes. While one could argue that this type of plagiarism does not actively injure a third party, the student is guilty of trying to deceive the instructor and does not produce a sound record of research, and the act is inarguably intentional. 6.  Collusion: Collusion that is not collaboration occurs when a student receives unauthorized help on an assignment, such as from a friend or roommate, and turns it in as his or her own, or when a study group works together to produce a report, and each turns it in as their own independent work. Because students are repeatedly encouraged to listen to and learn from each other throughout university studies, collusion may owe to misunderstanding or be a conscious effort to cheat the system. 7.  Patchwork: This offense, which involves changing a few words from the original source but retaining the essential sentence structure, is where the line between intentional plagiarism and honest mistake really begins to blur, especially if the frequency of too-similar passages is minimal. Some

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Student Plagiarism in Higher Education 117

students do not understand what it means to “paraphrase” versus “plagiarize,” and instructors need to make sure this skill is taught early on in an undergraduate’s education. 8.  Nothing-new: This type of plagiarism is revealed when a student’s paper consists of a series of long quotations and no original thought. They may be guilty of this type of plagiarism even if they document the sources correctly. This is another type of plagiarism that may result not from a desire to cheat but from a lack of understanding of what it means to interact with sources. 9.  Plagiarism-by-faulty-documentation: Such plagiarism occurs when a student incorrectly cites a source, attributes a quote to the wrong author, or treats a direct quote as a paraphrase by citing it but without quotation marks. In almost all such cases, the student is acting in good faith but needs to accept their own responsibility in mastering citation and research skills. Table 6.2.  Plagiarism Constitutes and Descriptions Plagiarism Constitutes

Descriptions of plagiarism constitutes should include

Papers for purchase

Purchasing of a paper and submitting it in as one’s own, as from a paper mill Copying from one source word-for-word and turning it in as one’s own Cutting and pasting from several sources and turning it in as one’s own Submitting previously written work without getting permission from all professors involved Including unused sources in the reference list so as to lend to the appearance of one having conducted more research, or when one fabricates facts, statistics, or quotes, the reliance on fabricated sources Colluding, not collaborating by receiving unauthorized help on an assignment, such as from a friend or roommate, and turning it in as one’s own, or when a study group works together to produce a report, and each turns it in as their own independent work Changing a few words from the original source but retaining the essential sentence structure; a clear differentiation is made between “paraphrases” versus “plagiarize” Writing a series of long quotations and no original thought, students might be guilty of this type of plagiarism even if they document the sources correctly Incorrectly citing a source, attributing a quote to the wrong author, or treating a direct quote as a paraphrase by citing it but without quotation marks

Copying verbatim Cut and paste Self-plagiarism Fantasy research

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Collusion

Patchwork

Nothing-new

Faulty-documentation

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

118

Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

Provided in this section was a basic framework of descriptors and corresponding definitions synthesized from the websites of five major universities that are respected across the globe. Drawing from Table 6.1, we arrived at an overarching definition of plagiarism itself. Finally, we reformed the definitions and descriptions of the nine constituents of plagiarism, ranking them numerically from most too least severe, as summarized in Table 6.2. Moving on from here, we broaden our focus to a review of the literature on plagiarism.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

LITERATURE REVIEW International students’ conceptions and, in many cases, misconceptions of plagiarism have been well documented (Amsberry, 2009; Bamford & Sergiou, 2005; Comas-Forgas & Sureda-Negre, 2010; Hayes & Introna, 2005; Pickering & Hornby, 2005; Power, 2009). However, before attempting to particularize international students’ experience of plagiarism, it should be acknowledged that the term is becoming increasingly fraught for everyone. Haitch (2016) cautioned academics that in the open-source era, which embraces communal creativity, notions of plagiarism are inherently complicated, if not compromised; in a sense, today’s status quo is but a return to a much earlier idea of education as imitation, a paradigm that reigned until the apotheosis of ideas of originality and authorship during the eighteenth century. Sutherland-Smith (2005) confirmed that internet culture further problematizes perceptions of plagiarism; approximately 31 percent of the international, ELL students she studied at Australian universities admitted that they did not cite internet sources, and when pressed in interviews, some students clarified that they saw information on the internet as being “in the public domain” and not requiring attribution (p. 23). Thus, it is important for faculty members to emphasize to all students that although the internet has opened up a seemingly free textual space, the rules of copyright and authorship still apply within it. The assumption that native English speakers do not need to resort to plagiarism when grappling with demanding texts is also challenged by recent studies. Students whose native language was English confessed to Hayes and Introna (2005) that they felt it acceptable to copy text directly if it “was written more eloquently than they felt they were able to do themselves” (p. 218), and Eckel (2011) reported on the frequency of patch-writing in literature reviews by engineering graduate students, which indicates that susceptibility to this type of academic malpractice may be increased not only by developing English skills but also by the difficulty level of the material. In lexically

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Student Plagiarism in Higher Education 119

dense texts, even strong writers might struggle to put ideas into their own words without thoughtful guidance from their instructors. Even if students do not mean to cheat, their phrasing may drift too close to the original source for comfort. Intentionality is often elided in discussions of plagiarism because it is hard to determine. As a result, according to Park (2003), scholars fluctuate between calling it malpractice and poor practice; in his view, “Intentional plagiarism is intentional if it is pre-meditated, designed to deceive and thus a deliberate act of literary theft” (p. 476). Yet paraphrasing that too closely echoes the original is often listed as a major subcategory of plagiarism. Such lapses of academic integrity by noninternational students notwithstanding, a consistent observation by researchers is that the definition of plagiarism is likely to be more opaque and less meaningful to international students, who are working in and with a foreign language, may face undue pressure from their families, and have different ethical constructs and cultural backgrounds (Haitch, 2016). In a study of international students at a British university, Bamford and Sergiou (2005) found that while the students were all aware of what plagiarism was, they professed to be confounded by what they saw as their instructors’ “obsession” with it and were confused about the finer points of paraphrasing. Another recurring claim in the literature on plagiarism is that Asian students are more susceptible to it due to cultural conditioning about collectivism and the importance of the group. Pickering and Hornby (2005) studied a cohort of Chinese and local students at a New Zealand university and determined that the Chinese students were three times more likely than the New Zealand students to turn to a friend to write an essay for them when caught in a time crunch, and they also judged cutting and pasting an essay from the internet to be an offense of little concern or no offense at all. Interestingly, the Chinese students in this study rated “trustworthiness” as the most important value among dozens of choices, revealing that their divergent attitudes toward plagiarism were conditioned not by a lack of familiar moral codes but by a fundamental confusion over academic integrity in the Western context (Pickering & Hornby, 2005). Hayes and Introna (2005) evaluated attitudes of non-Western students studying at Western universities, including students originally from China, who pointed out that referencing was not stressed as much in their home countries because they often used only one textbook per course. Students from countries like India and China explained that success on examinations in their home countries was contingent upon memorizing as much of those textbooks as possible. However, other research studies were more equivocal. In an analysis of international students’ understanding of research best practices and plagiarism conducted at the University of Albany, Chen and Van-Ullen (2011) found no

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

120

Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

statistical significance in the pre- and post-workshop scores that tested both Asian and non-Asian students on these skill sets. While there was a very weak positive factor between the amounts of time the student had spent in America and her knowledge of plagiarism conventions, the author’s study warned against assuming that a long stay in North America correlates to an internalization of academic integrity principles (Chen & Van-Ullen, 2011). Furthermore, in research conducted at a British university, in which students submitted papers and were shown their Turnitin evaluation scores, Barrett and Malcolm (2006) observed that the likelihood to plagiarism seemed tied more directly to disciplinary focus than nationality; specifically, while the students from China, India, and Pakistan had slightly higher rates of plagiarism, the students from the computer science program, regardless of nationality, were more likely to submit unoriginal work. Even if the evidence were not so conflicting, viewing academic malpractice solely as a product of cultural factors has severe limitations. Amsberry (2009) advised that the phenomenon of international students’ plagiarism be framed simultaneously as a cultural, linguistic, and educational issue, incorporating factors such as a “collectivist view of text ownership” (p. 33) in certain countries, students’ difficulty in understanding the definitions of various types of plagiarism, disagreements over what may be considered common knowledge, lack of writing experience, different attitudes toward and increased tolerance of copying in some cultures, and insufficient English-language skills. Amsberry (2009) acknowledged that for students who are still in the process of mastering English, patchwriting, a common form of plagiarism, could be seen as an attempt to master basic language concepts and usage. When considering this issue, it is also important to distinguish between academic malpractice by international students studying abroad and nonWestern students attending universities in their home countries. Carnero et al. (2017) have asserted that native university students in developing countries may be more prone to plagiarize due to factors like a dearth of institutional policies and a cultural tolerance of corruption. Yet both research into plagiarism and instruction in identifying and avoiding it tends to be underdeveloped in such nations. The researchers noted that where university guidelines on academic integrity do exist in Peru, which was the locus of their study, they are more punitive than preventive in approach (Carnero et al., 2017). It follows that international students from developing countries who study abroad at Western universities might face additional challenges in adopting new standards and discourses of academic integrity. Haitch (2016) recommended the following interventions to minimize incidents of plagiarism from all international students:

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Student Plagiarism in Higher Education 121

1.  Clear instructions on course syllabi and discussion of them in the classroom 2.  An induction program, perhaps housed in the library, that sets forth the positive virtues of the social norm of attribution and that explains what is and is not plagiarism through concrete examples 3.  A commitment to have dialogue with international students about American expectations and ways they differ from students’ prior experience 4.  A commitment to lifelong learning on the part of faculty, given the complexity of the issues and the rapidly changing practices of popular culture (p. 271) Many authors of recent studies called for such pedagogical rather than punitive interventions to combat plagiarism. In a review of Jude Carroll’s A Handbook for Deterring Plagiarism in Higher Education, Armitage (2014) underscored its educational paradigm:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Carroll shows that teaching the skills needed to write academic work could help to avoid plagiarism and other academic offences, as initial incidents of plagiarism for students at the start of their course often occur because they do not know how to write correctly in order to avoid this. Practicing these skills without fear of the work being assessed will help the student with the rest of their course.

Park (2004) echoed this push for preventive and integrated approaches to the problem in a description of the academic integrity framework at Lancaster University, which is based on the central tenets of transparency, consistency, stakeholders’ ownership of the framework, responsibility, academic integrity as a core value, adapting the framework to the university’s academic culture, “emphasis on prevention and deterrence backed up by robust detection and sanctions” (p. 298), and appropriate support for developing students’ academic skills. However, in order to teach best practices to students, university faculty must be well versed in them, which is not always the case, particularly with those trained outside of a Western context. In a study of 112 English instructors at Chinese universities, Lei and Hu (2015) discovered “their reported knowledge of subtle plagiarism and inappropriate referencing was relatively limited, suggesting that their definitions of transgressive intertextuality, particularly of subtle plagiarism and inappropriate referencing, were considerably different from those of Anglo-American academia” (p. 560). Given these findings, Haitch’s fourth proposal of lifelong learning for faculty seems imperative.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

122

Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

Another challenge is to help students internalize the stakes of academic integrity. In a study of university students’ perceptions of plagiarism, Power (2009) remarked, “there is a peculiar sense of externalization of plagiarism from the students’ point of view. It is as if it is somebody else’s problem or regulation with which they have to comply, but one that does not have any intrinsic meaning” (p. 9). Especially in the open-source era, whose credo directly conflicts with the concept of textual ownership, encouraging students to invest in the idea of respecting authorship will require an active, consistent, and empathetic exchange between faculty and students. Other discussants have shifted the emphasis from policing students’ behavior or changing their hearts and minds to altering teaching methods in general. Howard (2001) suggested that instead of fretting over student plagiarism, faculty members should consider whether their assignments are creating enough of a dialogue between instructors and students and meeting today’s students’ needs, and she contended that institutions need to foster working conditions that enable optimal teaching. Research by Comas-Forgas and Sureda-Negre (2010) supported this idea; in their study at a Spanish university, conducted through student surveys and interviews, a common justification given for plagiarism was the perceived lack of value of the assignments and lecturer disinterest in the course being taught. Finally, Vehviläinen, Löfström, and Nevgi (2018) examined the emotional distress experienced by teachers trying to deal with plagiarism. They flagged community-building as an essential component of coping with student plagiarism and advised pedagogical support and mentorship for teachers as well as a collective framework for addressing potential incidents of plagiarism: “This is a way of redistributing the care-ethical and rule-ethical responsibilities in the collective so that a single teacher is not expected to stretch to all these roles” (Vehviläinen et al., 2018, p. 15). In summary, challenges related to international students’ misconceptions about plagiarism are well documented in the literature. Definitions, explanations, and terminology used to advance a full understanding of plagiarism do not always lead to such outcomes for domestic and international students in this era of open-source content. Current research findings challenge the notion that native English speakers do not need to engage in plagiarism when struggling with onerous texts. Breaches of academic integrity by international students can be attributed to greater ambiguity owing to different ethical constructs and cultural backgrounds as well as to struggles to build their knowledge in a foreign language while managing pressure from their families and a new environment. Many subject experts advocate for pedagogical rather than punitive interventions to counter plagiarism. The former approach emphasizes for students the value of internalizing the stakes of academic integrity.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Student Plagiarism in Higher Education 123

In keeping with that approach, we move on to introducing our remedial framework that, we believe, will lend to fostering a more fulsome design and presentation of university content on plagiarism.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

A REMEDIAL FRAMEWORK FOR PLAGIARISM The term remedial evolved from the Latin word remedium—cure, medicine— and was associated with education in the late 1920s, at the peak of a resurgence of humanism, inclusion, and an embrace of individual and collective human agency. The use of remedial expanded to include remedial reading, then remedial writing, and finally remedial arithmetic, in the 1940s (Braverman, 1947), developed for students with learning difficulties. Nowadays, with the predominance of open-source content and corporate marketing and branding, the term effective—with an emphasis on job readiness, success, and production of specified outcomes—has replaced remedial. With this framework, our intention is to bolster an approach that benefits the learner and universities, which is a departure from a model of surveillance, investigations, penalties and expulsions. Our initiative prioritizes student learning that prioritizes knowledge that is developed in a trusting and respectful environment. Learning is seen as being a lifelong process for a more diverse student population, and one that is evolving for internationalizing institutions—hence the use of the term remedial. Our Remedial Framework of Plagiarism (RFP) borrows from the expertise of Anderson, Bloom, Krathwohl, and Airasian (2000), revised taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing that developed from Bloom’s Cognitive Taxonomy (1956), and from Salmons’ Taxonomy of Collaborative E-learning (2007). Bloom’s taxonomies are well-known in the field of education for fostering critical thinking skills. The proposed framework in Table 6.3 was developed to serve as a model that university and college administrators can reference when critically evaluating and redesigning their online plagiarism content. Knowledge Dimensions set out in Bloom’s Taxonomy differentiate types of knowledge that are factual, conceptual, procedural, or metacognitive. Factual knowledge relates to the fundamentals that learners must know to be familiar with a discipline for problem solving. Conceptual knowledge applies to the interconnections among the rudiments within a larger construction and their functionality. Procedural knowledge goes to functionality: procedures for investigation, and requisites for skill acquisition. Metacognitive knowledge encompasses the greater or broader scope of cognitive acquiescence with facts, truths or principles as well as one’s epistemological stance.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

124

Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

The RFP (Table 6.3) is intended to serve as an aid for administrators and curriculum designers who are committed to improving the quality of their online plagiarism resources, designed to aid students in the course of their learning initiatives. The three-dimensional framework loosely aligns Knowledge Dimensions of Learning with the other two dimensions—Cognitive Processes and Learning Resources. Cognitive processes come from Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy (2000), but in this framework are not ordered from simple to complex. Instead, the intention here was to appropriately assign a cognitive process that relates to each item in one of the corresponding groups of learning resources on plagiarism found in the third dimension. Those five components include Content, Social Conditions, Language, Visual Aids, and Digital Resources. Content for the website should be developed by professionals who are committed to quality factual material. It must apply to a variety of subjects, suitable for university-age students and different learning styles, and include information on all nine primary types of plagiarism identified in this chapter. Social considerations should promote the concept of equality by enhancing students’ understanding of multicultural and other diverse societies, thereby motivating students to reflect on their attitudes and behaviors as well as rights, privileges, and responsibilities toward others in our global community. Language simplified vocabulary and in controlled simple sentences with contextual clues. Visual aids bolster comprehension if they include graphics that support, enhance, and reexplain main ideas. Digital Resources with an educational design that has functioning interactive features, with customized content and opportunities for feedback, constitutes the fifth key component. In the Learning Resource dimension of our framework, we selectively borrowed, synthesized, and created descriptors from various instruments (see appendixes) in the PEI Department of Education’s (2008) Evaluation and Selection of Learning Resources: A Guide.

Figure 6.1.  Types of Knowledge

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Table 6.3.  Remedial Framework of Plagiarism Cognitive Processes

Learning Resources

Apply/Understand Exemplify

Content should be— Developed by competent authors/producers; meet with high standards of quality in factual content and presentation Applicable to a range of: subjects, ages, learning styles, domestic and international graduate and undergraduates Inclusive of all nine main types and explanations of student plagiarism identified: papers for purchase, copying verbatim, cut and paste, self-plagiarism, fantasy research, collusion, patchwork, nothing-new, faulty-documentation

Execute Implement

Create/Understand/ Remember Produce Plan

Generate Recognize Explain Generate Exemplify

Understand/Create Explain Produce

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Explain

Summarize Inference

Social considerations should Promote equality by enhancing students’ understanding of multicultural and diverse societies Motivate students to examine their attitudes and behaviors, duties, responsibilities, rights, and privileges as citizens in a global community Support/promote students’ self-esteem and respect for others Recognize the integration of students with special needs as part of the student body Frame the topic of plagiarism within the broader topic of corruption in higher education Support/promote students’ self-esteem and respect for others Use language appropriate for diverse domestic and international students that exclude slang, vernaculars, or expletives that detract from meaning Language that is— Controlled and simplified vocabulary Clear sentence structure; cause and effect expressions in the simple form Logical and clear development of main ideas supported by relevant details Explanatory notations for difficult words or complex concepts Explains ideas at a literal level Well-developed paragraphs Incorporates words (ordinals) for sequence, emphasis, and comparison Contextual clues Sentences that contain only one main concept Connects thoughts using simple coordinating conjunctions (and, so, but) rather than less common connectors (nevertheless, as a consequence, etc.) and use of clear pronoun referents or antecedents Is limited in the use of conditional expressions (such as, assuming that, etc.) (continued )

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

126

Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

Table 6.3.  (continued) Remember/Understand Exemplify Interpret Classify Apply/Evaluate Execute Check Critique Generate Exemplify

Visuals aids that help comprehension by including— Graphics that support, enhance, and re-explain main ideas Illustrative materials (pictures, graphs, etc.) that is positioned next to and supports text A variety of graphics and illustrations to support concepts and thought processes Digital resources that are constructive, offering— Interactive features Opportunities for feedback Possibilities for customizing content, context, and pathways according to user needs Applicability to the majority of the target audience A general design that lends to educational use (numerous digital educational may link to external resources but lack the characteristics of a learning resource)

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

DISCUSSION A collective and time-consuming commitment to student care is certainly needed to educate international students on plagiarism. Language challenges are a particularly pernicious obstacle in the battle to teach students to paraphrase rather than plagiarize, and instructors need to be patient and persistent when addressing this issue. When looking at a text in a second or third language, the student’s struggle to parse meaning may dominate and the discernment of subtleties like prose structure and rhythm—essential aspects to take into account in a successful paraphrasing—may be limited. This can be true in instances of self-plagiarism as well. These researchers had the experience of speaking with a hard-working, committed student from India who, when writing in English, his second language, could not immediately grasp that he had self-plagiarized a paragraph in a paper. After he read his two sentences aloud, he needed to be shown that while a few words had been changed, the sentence structure and argument were identical in both. Eventually, he did see his mistake and agreed to rewrite the paragraph with a different focus and argument, but in such an instance, time, mutual respect, and patience are paramount. Just as new avenues for plagiarism of various types have proliferated as technology has advanced and education has been globalized, so, too, have new means of detecting it. Some schools, like Canada’s University of Victoria, mention plagiarism detection tools in the plagiarism sections of their websites and encourage faculty to utilize them both as an educational tool in

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Student Plagiarism in Higher Education 127

the classroom and for grading papers. The authors of the University of Victoria web page, “Plagiarism detection” (2019), also recommend that instructors add this advisory to their course syllabi, if only to discourage plagiarism through this threat: “I reserve the right to use plagiarism detection software or other platforms to assess the integrity of student work.” However, some faculty members may abjure such programs out of a feeling that they violate students’ intellectual property rights. Other instructors may feel that the use of these kinds of tools violates the implicit pact of trust between faculty and students. Especially if an educator adheres to an empathy-driven approach to faculty-student engagement, running every paper through plagiarism detection software might arouse discomfort whether or not the student knows it is being done. What might an empathy-driven approach to plagiarism by international students look like? The introduction of best practices needs to start early in an international student’s university experience, and faculty and administration need to be proactive about ensuring that students are exposed to them. Certainly, most if not all universities now include descriptions of plagiarism and other lapses in academic integrity on their official websites, but if they do not obligate students to read them, such resources are of limited effectiveness. Universities might require that students read and sign an acknowledgment of academic integrity at the start of each course as a condition of being accepted into it. Similarly, role-playing and roundtable discussions early on in the academic experience might also contribute to a reduction of plagiarism through empathy-driven practices. During orientation weeks for new cohorts of international students, faculty and administrators might run small workshops on plagiarism in which students discuss which factors or situations might encourage them (or a hypothetical student) to resort to plagiarism. Faculty and administration might then share their feelings about incidents of academic malpractice; many students may have never considered how devastating it is when an instructor realizes that someone she is teaching has misrepresented their work. In pairs, students could role-play a teacher confronting a student about suspected plagiarism and, after completing the scene, switch roles in order to appreciate the discomfiture and hurt on both sides of such an encounter. In this way, students would be alerted to the fact that the consequences are, for both parties involved, not just scholastic but emotional. In the ceaseless battle to thwart plagiarism, faculty members also need to be mindful of their own expectations about students. In a study of how teacher-affect can influence the quality of work in composition classes, McLeod (1995) argues that the instructor is “an actor rather than an observer in teacher-student interaction,” bringing her own set of biases into the assignment assessment process, and “if a student who has not been doing

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

128

Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

particularly well suddenly writes a good paper, teachers are more likely to attribute his success to luck (or to plagiarism)” (p. 372). Carroll (n.d.) underlined how instructors of international students might see their different backgrounds or linguistic challenges as limitations rather than “cultural capital” to be accessed in teaching and learning. These observations affirm that not only must faculty members be aware of their potential to mislabel a well-crafted paper as plagiarism, but they must also consider how their own perceptions of and biases toward a student might seed the ground for academic transgressions. If an instructor views a student as lackluster and withholds warmth and encouragement, she might pick up on nonverbal clues and resort to plagiarism out of frustration, vindictiveness, or feelings of inadequacy. Furthermore, communication between all faculty members is key to subverting plagiarism, particularly attempts at self-plagiarism. If colleagues consistently apprise one another of paper topics assigned in similar courses, instructors will be able to more quickly recognize when a student is trying to recycle a paper written for a previous course. However, the ongoing “adjunctification” of higher education means that, with instructors constantly coming and going through the revolving door, it is challenging to maintain open lines of communication about topics assigned and papers written in colleagues’ classrooms. Above all, those involved in delivering higher education need to recognize the stakes involved in attempting to thwart plagiarism. Nussbaum (2004) has written that “what is at stake in literacy is no mere skill but human dignity itself” (p. 335), but this could be said of the entire enterprise of university education. When students plagiarize, it is difficult to believe that they emerge from the experience with their dignity intact, which means that in addition to violating the academic integrity and ethical codes that higher education is meant to inculcate, they are accruing a sense of shame that will stymie them in their future studies, careers, and relationships. The faculty, administration, university library, and writing center all have roles to play in a concerted effort to mitigate such deleterious behavior and its effects. To help international students acclimate to new academic expectations, comprehensive definitions of academic integrity, library orientations, guidance in finding resources appropriate for a student’s language skills, and a detailed library website may be useful (Amsberry, 2009). Based on feedback from international students who participated in workshops at an American university, such students may need greater support from faculty and the university’s writing center, discipline-specific workshops, and training in using citation software (Chen & Van-Ullen, 2011). Similarly, Gunnarsson, Kulesza, and Pettersson (2014) documented a research methodology course taught to international engineering graduate students, primarily from

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Student Plagiarism in Higher Education 129

Asia, at a Swedish university, which aimed to discourage plagiarism by teaching students how to use sources and adhere to their field’s code of ethics, delivered by librarians and discipline-specific faculty working together. But interventions to facilitate academic integrity need to be ongoing and not relegated to specific courses only. In every classroom, according to Carroll (n.d.), adjustments and accommodations must be made on both sides of the faculty-international student divide with strategies that include instructors adjusting their own English-language usage, eliciting active participation, and encouraging peer-to-peer learning to prevent “ghettos” and “silos” of international students within the classroom.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION Earlier, we introduced the idea that educators need to facilitate qualityassured learning opportunities that credit those whose knowledge students build upon even as they enrich it with their individual experiences. As Smith (2012) has written in her book about decolonizing research methodologies, one way to do this is by sharing knowledge of the people one studies with those same people, treating them as partners rather than research subjects. That is, if students research an underrepresented community and produce a paper on it, a significant gesture would be for them to make a long-term commitment to that community that includes reporting back on what they wrote. Similarly, one practice that might be helpful for researchers on plagiarism is to return to those cohorts of students studied and explain what was written on and learned from their experiences. Incorporating students into this dialogue would amount to a modeling of the academic integrity that faculty members are trying to instill. Finally, institutions must consider their own responsibilities as they aggressively pitch their programs to international students, who can often be charged higher fees than the native population. This aggressive recruitment must be matched by a parallel commitment to support systems that can assist international students with the many challenges of adjusting to a new academic culture in an unfamiliar country. In addition, the very positioning of international students as consumers may establish a mood within a university that is conducive to academic malfeasance such as plagiarism. In one study at an Australian university about students’ reasons for plagiarizing, Devlin and Gray (2007) noted a consequent “consumer mentality towards getting a degree, arising from (some) students’ ability to purchase all the services they need in order to graduate” (p. 193), with survey participants frustrated over their classmates’ abilities to buy papers, extra tutoring, and even seats in the

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

130

Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

program. Such a culture might naturally give rise to increased incidence of plagiarism, among other transgressions, and it is the job of the administration and faculty to prevent this negative culture from metastasizing. In conclusion, hypercompetition in the area of higher education continues to pressure universities to embrace quality reforms. Those reforms involve borrowing that is based on models, and which support best practices. In this chapter, we adopted a remedial approach to moderating student plagiarism. The problem of plagiarism was framed within the broader context of institutional borrowing and best practices. Second, provided a literature review, which highlighted several critical studies from around the globe. The approach taken in this chapter was that student plagiarism should be embraced as a powerful learning opportunity for all, and a vital component of the development of essential academic skills. We believe that initiatives involving the development of practical online university resources, for a diverse student body, will be empowered by the typology and remedial framework presented in this chapter.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Abasi, A. R., Akbari, N., & Graves, B. (2006). Discourse appropriation, construction of identities, and the complex issue of plagiarism: ESL students writing in graduate school. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), 102-117. DOI: 10.1016/j .jslw.2006.05.001. Academic dishonesty and plagiarism (n.d.). Retrieved December 30, 2019, from https://sydney.edu.au/students/academic-dishonesty.html. Amsberry, D. (2009). Deconstructing plagiarism: International students and textual borrowing practices. The Reference Librarian, 51(1), 31-44. Armitage, P. (2014). A handbook for deterring plagiarism in higher education. Journal of Pedagogic Development, 4(1). Retrieved December 30, 2019, from https:// www.beds.ac.uk/jpd/volume-4-issue-1/a-handbook-for-deterring-plagiarism-in -higher-education. Anderson, L., Bloom, B. S., Krathwohl, D., & Airasian, P. (2000). Taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Allyn & Bacon, Inc. Bamford, J., & Sergiou, K. (2005). International students and plagiarism: An analysis of the reasons for plagiarism among international foundation students. Investigations in University Teaching and Learning, 2(2). Barrett, R., & Malcolm, J. (2006). Embedding plagiarism education in the assessment process. International Journey for Educational Integrity, 2(1). Retrieved December 30, 2019, from https://www.beds.ac.uk/jpd/volume-4-issue-1/a-handbook-for -deterring-plagiarism-in-higher-education. Betts, M, & Smith, R. (1998). Developing the credit-based modular curriculum in higher education. Hong Kong: Graphicraft Limited.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Student Plagiarism in Higher Education 131

Beech, J. (2006). The theme of educational transfer in comparative education: A view over time. Research in Comparative and International and International Education, 1(1), 2–13. Berry, C. (2013). Metrics-based assessments of research: Incentives for ‘institutional plagiarism.’ Science & Engineering Ethics, 19, 337–340. DOI: 10.1007/s11948012-9352-0. Braverman, B. (1947). Remedial arithmetic in high school. The Journal of Business Education, 22(5), 15–16. DOI: 10.1080/08832323.1947.10115421 Carnero, A. M., Mayta-Tristan, P., Konda, K. A., Mezones-Holguin, E., BernabeOrtiz, A., Alvarado, G. F., . . . Lescano, A. G. (2017). Plagiarism, cheating and research integrity: Case studies from a master’s program in Peru. Science & Engineering Ethics, 23, 1183-1197. Carroll, J. (n.d.). Teaching international students: Strategies for enhancing students’ learning. Dundalk Institute of Technology, Dundalk, Ireland. Retrieved December 6, 2019, from https://www.dkit.ie/system/files/Jude%20Carroll%20Talk%20 2%20Strategies%20for%20enhancing%20students%E2%80%99%20learning%20 Oct%2012.ppt.pdf. Charley (2019). Academic Integrity. Retrieved December 6, 2019, from https://www .extension.harvard.edu/academic-integrity. Chen, Y-H., & Van Ullen, M. K. (2011). Helping international students succeed academically through research process and plagiarism workshops. University Libraries Faculty Scholarship, 11. Comas-Forgas, R., & Sureda-Negre, J. (2010, September). Academic plagiarism: Explanatory factors from students’ perspective. Journal of Academic Ethics,8(3), 217-232. Cummings, W. (1999). The institutions of education: Compare, compare, compare! Comparative Education Review, 43(4), 413–437. Defeldre, A. (2005). Inadvertent plagiarism in everyday life. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1033–1040. Denman, B. D., & Dunstan, N. (2011). Education for all and cross-border provision of higher education in the Asia-Pacific. International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 10(1), 61–79. Retrieved December 6, 2019 from http://ojs-prod .library.usyd.edu.au/index.php/IEJ/article/view/6838/7471. Devlin, M., & Gray, K. (2007). In their own words: A qualitative study of the reasons Australian university students plagiarize. Higher Education Research and Development, 26(2), 181-198. Eckel, E. (2011). Textual appropriation in engineering master’s theses: A preliminary study. Science & Engineering Ethics, 17, 469-483. de Wit, H. (2010). The networked university: The structure, culture, and policy of universities in a changing environment. Tertiary Education and Management, 16(1), 1–14. Fenton, A. (2017). Internationalization and Quality Assurance in Higher Education: Action-based case study of a Japanese Private University. Tokyo, Japan: BlueSky Publishing.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

132

Anthony L. Fenton and Cynthia Gralla

Gunnarsson, J., Kulesza, W. J., & Pettersson, A. (2014). Teaching international students how to avoid plagiarism: Librarians and faculty in collaboration. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(3/4), 413-417. Haitch, R. (2016, July). Stealing or sharing? Cross-cultural issues of plagiarism in an open-source era. Teaching Theology & Religion, 19(3), 264-275. Hayes, N., & Introna, L. D. (2005). Cultural values, plagiarism, and fairness: When plagiarism gets in the way of learning. Ethics & Behavior, 15(3), 213-231. Howard, R. M. (November 16, 2001). Forget About Policing Plagiarism. Just Teach. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved December 6, 2019 from https:// www.chronicle.com/article/Forget-About-Policing/2792. Kim, K., Hwang, J. Y., Dong-Wook, L., & Shim, M. (2016). Letter to the editor: Medical student plagiarism in problem-based learning courses. Medical Education Online, 21, 30537. Retrieved December 6, 2019 from https://www.tandfonline .com/doi/full/10.3402/meo.v21.30537. Kitahara, K. (2003). A case study of internationalization in a Japanese university: Organizational change and communication (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI No. 9916427). Kitamura, K. (1999). ‘Gurobarizeshon’ go gendai no koto kyoiku [Globalization and higher education]. IDE Gendai no Koto Kyoiku [IDE Modern Higher Education], 409, 11-18. Knight, J. (2004). Internationalization remodeled: Definition, approaches, and rationales. Journal of Studies in International Education, 8(1) 5-31. Knight, J., & de Wit, H. (1997). Internationalization of higher education in Asia Pacific countries. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: European Association for International Education, in cooperation with IDP Education Australia and the Programme on Institutional Management in Higher Education of OECD. Lei, H., & Hu, G. (2015). Chinese university EFL teachers’ perceptions of plagiarism. Higher Education, 70, 551-565. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-014-9855-5. McLeod, S. (1995). Pygmalion or Golem? Teacher Affect and Efficacy. College Composition and Communication, 46(3), 369-386. DOI: 0.2307/358711. Marginson, S., & Rhoades, G. (2002). Beyond national states, markets, and systems of higher education: A global agency heuristic. Higher Education, 43(10), 281309. Nussbaum, M. (2004). Women’s education: A global challenge. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture & Society, 29(2). Park, C. (2003). In other (people’s) words: Plagiarism by university students— literature and lessons. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(5), 1-18. Park, C. (2004). Rebels without a clause: Towards an institutional framework for dealing with plagiarism by students. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 28(3), 291-306. Pickering, J., & Hornby, G. (2005, November). Plagiarism and international students: A matter of values differences? [Conference paper] Retrieved December 6, 2019 from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236169806_Plagiarism_and_inter national_students_A_matter_of_values_differences.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Student Plagiarism in Higher Education 133

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Phillips, D., & Ochs, K. (2004). Researching policy borrowing: Some methodological challenges in comparative education. British Educational Research Journal, 30(6), 773-784. Power, L. (2009). University students’ perceptions of plagiarism. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(6), 643-662. Prince Edward Island, Department of Education (2008). Evaluation and Selection of Learning Resources: A Guide. Retrieved December 30, 2019, from http://www .gov.pe.ca/photos/original/ed_ESLR_08.pdf. Research guides (September 21, 2018). Retrieved December 6, 2018, from https:// onesearch.library.utoronto.ca/research-guides. Rielly, M. (October 27, 2015). What is academic misconduct? Retrieved December 30, 2019, from https://www.plagiarism.admin.cam.ac.uk/what-academic-misconduct. Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Zed Books. Sutherland-Smith, W. (2005). The tangled web: Internet plagiarism and international students’ academic writing. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 15(1), 15-30. DOI: 10.1075/japc.15.1.04sut. University of Victoria Technology Integrated Learning (2019). Plagiarism detection. Retrieved December 6, 2019 from https://www.beds.ac.uk/jpd/volume-4 -issue-1/a-handbook-for-deterring-plagiarism-in-higher-education. Vehviläinen, S., Löfström, E., & Nevgi, A. (2018). Dealing with plagiarism in the academic community: Emotional engagement and moral distress. Higher Education, 75, 1-18. What Is Plagiarism? (n.d.). Retrieved December 30, 2019, from https://community standards.stanford.edu/policies-and-guidance/what-plagiarism.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter Seven

Understanding the Academic Integrity Discourse and its Latent Associations with English Language Proficiency Beena Giridharan

Most universities and higher education institutions have academic policies and procedures that communicate to students the institutional expectations regarding ethical scholarship, integrity, and academic honesty. Many institutions embrace “integrity” as a key value, demonstrable in staff and students. However, it is acknowledged that student plagiarism is still prevalent in most higher education institutes. What structures institutions create to address the issue, and how plagiarism is dealt with by institutions, reflect the importance and significance placed by the institution on inculcating academic integrity in students. Nevertheless, it is important to probe why students resort to cheating so that institutions are able to set up procedures and support systems to correct student behaviors originating from a lack of understanding of good academic practices.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Student Plagiarism and Academic Integrity There is no doubt that plagiarism is damaging to both student learning and to institutional reputation, and that plagiarism could be more prevalent in online learning environments than traditional contexts (McCord, 2009). Language differences have been identified as potential barriers to academic writing, which in turn is related to academic integrity (LaRay Barna, 1994; Correa, 2011). Students have highlighted language differences as impeding intercultural communication due to the need to use vocabulary in the right contexts, as sometimes learners only know of one vocabulary meaning for a word or are unable to use words in appropriate contexts (Dillon, 1998), which in turn affects their ability to paraphrase or rephrase concepts in their own understanding. Cultural differences and language barriers have been ascribed for 135

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

136

Beena Giridharan

the uptick in plagiarism incidents among ESL students at university. Global demand for higher education has invariably led to the increase in international student mobility and movement of students across continents and institutions (Giridharan, 2017). International students constitute a large portion of the diverse student community in many Western higher education sectors, and for many international students, English is a second language or a foreign language. Although there is a reasonably high English language requirement set by most institutions that students fulfil, there is a need for institutions to have quality learning support systems in place for continued support for English language proficiency and student academic growth and development. Approaches to responses to plagiarism by educational institutions are highly influential and determine responses by staff and students. Formulating institutional strategies to embed academic integrity among students should consider approaches to faculty training for enhanced processes linked to assessment marking and evaluation so that staff are able to identify irregularities (Morris, 2018). Institutions could take a centralized approach or a decentralized approach to plagiarism and other forms of cheating in assessments and assignments by students. Decentralized procedures often engender arbitrary responses with staff reporting to their heads of department or their deans, whereas in a centralized process, plagiarism and cheating is reported to academic integrity units in methodical processes (Garrett, 2011). The intent of most institutions is to instill in students the values of ethical scholarship at the onset of their studies so that students demonstrate ethics, integrity, and academic honesty in their professional and personal lives long after they complete their studies. Researchers agree that formulation of institutional wide academic policies and procedures, standardized approaches to plagiarism, and actively promoting academic integrity and honor codes in students are essential to raise awareness and encourage ethical behavior in students. Professors should also emphasize that intellectual responsibility is an imperative and that academic misconduct would not be allowed under any circumstances (Cavico and Mujtaba, 2009). Academic integrity researchers encourage teachers to have open conversations with students regarding plagiarism in writing classes where they are first introduced to the concepts of academic honesty where students demonstrate not only their knowledge and writing competencies but also social and cultural norms, including academic integrity (Thomas and Sassi, 2011). Studies conducted on millennial students in a South African university showed that new to university learners regarded technology as a fundamental source of communication being the generation where collaborative social communication was considered the norm and were also identified as being more concerned with outcomes

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Understanding the Academic Integrity Discourse 137

rather than processes (van Zyl and Thomas, 2015). There is also research evidence to show that plagiarism could be reduced through the use of online training and developmental tests that focused on improving awareness of academic integrity, and referencing (Curtis et al., 2013). Therefore, it is understandable that there is a need for institutions to introduce more programs on academic integrity, both face-to-face sessions as well as through online platforms, and embed developmental programs in the first year to uphold desired ethical behaviors.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Academic Writing in an ESL Context Academic writing could be perceived to be onerous by both native and nonnative speakers of English as it conforms to certain norms, standards, and expectations. However, academic writing is a real challenge for non-native speakers of English, or for learners with English as a Second Language (ESL) backgrounds. The challenges faced by ESL learners in an academic context have been well-documented and researched. A study carried out by the author in 2012 (Giridharan, 2012) identified critical gaps in academic writing standards in ESL students in a pre-tertiary year at university. The study showed that students grappled with the writing standards expected of them and tended to cause grammatical, structural, and syntactic errors in their writing tasks. An error analysis review carried out in the study revealed that these deficiencies occurred mainly because the students had not engaged in academic discourses in writing courses in their high schools and were introduced to academic writing standards only after entry to university (Giridharan, 2012). Research conducted in ESL writing pedagogy maintains that writing is a form of learning and that pedagogical choices made by teachers and instructors must take into account the multicultural background of students, as learning contexts are not culturally homogenous (Reid, 1999, chapter 3, pedagogical issues in ESL writing). Therefore, facilitators in ESL writing are duty bound to be cognizant of language learning issues that originate from the cultural backgrounds of the students, in addition to the linguistic backgrounds and provide instructional guidance about the target culture as well as the academic culture expectations (Giridharan, 2012). Studies conducted by He and Shi (2012) show that teaching academic writing to students from ESL backgrounds may be hampered due to cultural and linguistic barriers. Other researchers maintain that instructors and facilitators play an important role in developing students’ academic writing skills through continuous feedback that is both specific and encouraging (Nurmukhamedov and Kim, 2010). There are also issues of students from an ESL

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

138

Beena Giridharan

context being viewed through a stereotypical lens in that they are seen as the group that tended to plagiarize due to their English language inadequacies. In summary, it is a known fact that misinterpretation can occur at multiple levels with regards to university students for whom English is a second or is a foreign language, when it comes to understanding the norms of referencing and academic writing requirements.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Project Background Evaluating student understanding of academic integrity and ethical scholarship enable institutions to structure effective developmental programs. This chapter summarizes findings from a research project that sought to advance student awareness and understanding of integrating source use and develop academic facilitator skills. The project focused on achieving the values underpinning principles of academic integrity that guide the academic community in its work so that students practiced responsible behavior with reference to citing and acknowledging the work of others in their own work (Centre for Academic Integrity, 2005). The project aim was to instill better understanding of the principles of academic integrity and develop academic writing proficiency so as to minimize plagiarism incidents. Researchers have examined plagiarism occurrences among student in higher education over a long period of time (Hart and Friesner, 2004). Empirical investigations in the area of academic integrity have been recognized as critical in order for higher education institutions to develop in-depth understanding regarding reasons students resort to plagiarism and engaging third parties to complete assignments so that systematic processes could be established to address all forms of student academic misconduct (Morris, 2018). What construes plagiarism need to be made explicit to students right at the onset of their university experience. In most universities, students undertake orientation and academic activities prior to regular class commencement that highlights academic integrity procedures at the institutions. In some instances, students complete preparatory modules online regarding ethical scholarship that are mandatory and to be completed successfully before progressing to undertake class assignments. Getting students to understand the concept of plagiarism is not easily achieved as it is a complex notion and can be exacerbated in cultures where rote learning had been part of the learning process in their schooling. In some parts of Asia, students are expected to memorize definitions verbatim as cited in textbooks, which could pose challenges to them in understanding concepts of paraphrasing and acknowledging in academic contexts in tertiary environments. Preparatory courses where academic writing is introduced at

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Understanding the Academic Integrity Discourse 139

the commencement of tertiary education is quite often the first time students from non-native English speaking backgrounds or ESL backgrounds are introduced to paraphrasing and acknowledging external references, in their own writing. Plagiarism constitutes the act of presenting the work of others as one’s own or not referencing or paraphrasing source clearly. In some cases, students may present sections of their own previously submitted work or assignments in its entirety without acknowledging their previous work and not being cognizant that it is an act of plagiarism. Once students are better trained and knowledgeable about integrating source use, instances of plagiarism could be considerably reduced. The project objectives were as follows: 1.  To improve understanding of academic integrity among students 2.  To enhance academic writing practices among students with better paraphrasing, synthesis of information, and referencing 3.  To increase awareness among academic staff regarding integrating source use and synthesis skills training for pedagogical practice 4.  To help identify the resource requirements and support needed for raising academic integrity awareness in students and training for staff practices

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY To achieve the research objectives outlined earlier a case study approach was taken to understand the topic being investigated. A case study offers researchers an opportunity to conduct a comprehensive investigation of issues at specific junctures and locales. In a case study design, one is able to identify the attitudes and beliefs of groups involved as well as study the interactions among the groups. Case studies are widely used in organizational studies and are regarded as a “rigorous research strategy in its own right” (Hartley, 2004, p. 208). The overall focus of the project was to specifically improve students’ understanding about what constitutes acts of plagiarism and to identify and develop programs required for students and staff to enhance academic integrity. In line with the case study strategies, which allows for the gathering of both qualitative and quantitative evidence, firstly, a survey was conducted among students in a first-year undergraduate program at the beginning of a twelve-week semester to examine students’ awareness of plagiarism and what constitutes plagiarism. Following the survey, a series of dedicated workshops and seminars were offered to students at various stages in the semester to

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

140

Beena Giridharan

develop student understanding of referencing, synthesis of information, and citing from external sources accurately. In these seminars, information and guidance was provided to students about working in groups and teams, but also being able to present information individually for assignments and assessments that require individual reports, as there is a focus at the university about developing team dynamics in students. Following the seminars, a subsequent survey was administered to respondents at the end of the semester. The project also included academic training and development to academic staff for increasing awareness of academic integrity among students. Data collection and analysis were developed together in an “iterative process” (Hartley, 2004, p. 220) as it permits conceptual understanding that is underpinned by evidence. Complementary strategies provided the opportunity to triangulate the data (Creswell, 2003) and improve validity and reliability.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION The survey was structured in two parts: the first set of questions were in a five-point Likert scale format with degrees of agreement ranging from strongly agree (SA) to strongly disagree (SD), and the second part of the survey comprised of 10 multiple choice questions. The survey was administered to 300 students in a first-year undergraduate program, and 202 completions were achieved (67.3 percent; n = 202). The first section of the survey attempted to gain students’ perception of their own English language skills and how the skills were linked to their ability to paraphrase and reference accurately. The second section of the survey focused on measuring student understanding of what plagiarism represented, student understanding of paraphrasing, and eliciting reasons why students should be cautious while paraphrasing and citing sources. The survey also measured student understanding of the consequences of plagiarism. Among the students that responded to the survey, 79 percent agreed that having a high proficiency in English language would enable them to paraphrase better. 60 percent of the respondents agreed that the better a students’ English language skills, the less he/she was likely to plagiarize. This finding indicates that students believed in advancing and developing their English language skills to distance themselves from plagiarism. However, only 47 percent of the respondents perceived that their own English language skills were adequate for better paraphrasing as shown in Figure 7.1 below. 60 percent of the respondents stated that they found paraphrasing to be rather challenging. An overwhelming 83 percent of respondents agreed that learning how to paraphrase was essential to improving their academic writing

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Understanding the Academic Integrity Discourse 141

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Figure 7.1.  English Skills Assist in Paraphrasing

capabilities. Nevertheless, only 48 percent expressed confidence in their own referencing skills, and a synthesis of external sources within their own work. In the follow-up survey administered to 300 students after the conduct of dedicated seminars on paraphrasing, citing, and how to avoid plagiarism, during a twelve-week semester, 210 participants responded with a 70 percent response rate, (n = 210). The analyses showed that 88 percent of the respondents were able to define plagiarism accurately, indicating that the awareness of academic integrity was relatively high among first year undergraduates who were specifically trained in sessions. 78 percent of the respondents in the follow-up survey agreed that it was important to acknowledge all authors and external sources and that authors should receive the credit for their work. Moreover, citing and referencing allowed readers to check the original sources. When respondents were asked what their chances of getting caught for plagiarizing was, the respondents acknowledged that there was a 10 percent to 60 percent chance of getting caught with 38 percent agreeing to a 60 percent chance of being identified as plagiarizing. This showed that they had increased awareness and understanding of what was deemed to be plagiarism after attendance at seminars and workshops on academic integrity. There are strong procedures institutionally

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

142

Beena Giridharan

Figure 7.2.  Paraphrasing Skills Integral to Improving Academic Writing

for building awareness among students regarding academic integrity through a series of developmental programs and support systems that assisted students to gain ethical scholarship through an educative process in the first year at university. Remedial workshops and resubmission of work was permitted if a student was found to have inept referencing or had inadequate in-text citations, etc. in their work during their first year in the course. Stronger penalties were applied if student academic misconduct was found to be a deliberate action.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION In summary, ideals of academic integrity must be upheld and communicated to students throughout the duration of their course. Efforts to develop ethical scholarship in students as part of graduate capabilities must be encouraged and continued. It is important to provide continuous training and support for students to transition from diverse backgrounds and pathways to university and to inculcate a culture of honesty and fairness among students. It is equally significant to train academic staff to provide a supportive environment and advise students at the onset of their studies at university to encourage academic integrity. The chapter provides ESL student perceptions of challenges faced in academic writing due to cultural differences and linguistic capacities. The growing number of plagiarism detection tools and their increasing

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Understanding the Academic Integrity Discourse 143

use offer students and staff opportunities to improve the quality of their submissions. Further research in academic integrity should consider how the changing learning environment and transition to more online and authentic assessments impact student behavior.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Barna, L. M. (1994). Stumbling Blocks in Intercultural Communication. In L. A. Samovar and R. E Porter (Eds), Intercultural Communication: A Reader, 7th Edition (pp. 337-346). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Cavico, F. J., & Mujtaba, G. B. (2009). Making the Case for The Creation of an Academic Honesty and Integrity Culture in Higher Education: Reflections and Suggestions for Reducing the Rise in Student Cheating. American Journal of Business Education, 2(5), 75-88. Centre for Academic Integrity (2005). The Fundamental Principles of Academic Integrity. Retrieved on December 3, 2019 from http://ethics.sandiego.edu.eac/ Summer2000/Readings/Principles.html. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 2nd Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Curtis, G. J., Gouldthorp, B., Thomas, E. F., O’Brien, G. M., & Correia, H. M. (2013) Online academic-integrity mastery training may improve students’ awareness of, and attitudes toward, plagiarism. Psychology: Learning and Teaching 12(3), 282–289. Dillon, R. K. (1998). Intercultural Communication Activities in the Classroom: Turning Stumbling Blocks into Building Blocks. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Central States Communication Association (Chicago, IL, April 2-5, 1998). Retrieved on December 3, 2019 from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED419254 .pdf. Garrett, J. (Ed.) (2011). Building a Culture of Academic Integrity. Madison: Magna Publications, Inc. Giridharan, B. (2012). Identifying Gaps in Academic Writing of ESL Students, USChina Education Review A, 2(6). ISSN 2161-6236. Giridharan, B. (2017). English Language development and academic integritymaking the connection. Paper presented at the European Conference on Education, Brighton, United Kingdom, June 30 to July 2, 2017. Hartley, J. (2004). Case study research. In C. Cassell, & G. Symon (Eds.), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research (pp. 323-333). London: Sage. He, L., & Shi, L. (2012). Topical knowledge and ESL writing, Language Testing, 29(3), 443-464. Retrieved on December 3, 2019 from https://journals.sagepub .com/doi/10.1177/0265532212436659. McCord, A. (2009). Detection and deterrence of plagiarism in online learning environments (pp. 604-616). IGI Global. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-60566-198-8.ch087.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

144

Beena Giridharan

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Morris, E. J. (2018). Academic integrity matters: five considerations for addressing contract cheating. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 14(15). DOI: 10.1007/s40979-018-0038-5. Nurmukhamedov, U., & Kim, S. H. (2010). “Would you Perhaps Consider . . . ”: Hedged Comments in ESL Writing, ELT Journal, 64(3), 272-282. Retrieved on December 3, 2019 from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ910458. Reid, J. M. (1999). The Process of Composition (Reid Academic Writing), 3rd Edition. Pearson Education ESL. Thomas, E. E., & Sassi, K. (2011). An Ethical Dilemma: Talking about Plagiarism and Academic Integrity in the Digital Age. English Journal, 100(6), 47-53. Van Zyl, A., & Thomas, A. (2015). Academic honesty: perceptions of millennial university students and the role of moderating variables. KOERS—Bulletin for Christian Scholarship, 80(1), Art. #2210, 15 pages. DOI: 10.4102/KOERS.V80I1.2210.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter Eight

Undermining Education: An Account of Selected Experiences of Persons who live in the Rural Areas of Australia Jillian Marchant

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Dedicated to my adviser Dr. Lai Kuan Lim The research discussed in this chapter is part of a PhD study that explored the experiences of tertiary education and community experiences for twenty persons who lived in one of fourteen rural areas in Australia. A selection of experiences from four contributors is presented here. The focus in this chapter is variant and resemblant experiences of threats to educational integrity; related by persons under the pseudonyms of Margaret, Jane, Heidi and Julie who all engaged with at least one tertiary education course while resident in their respective rural areas. Broadly, their education experiences relate to navigating learning and assessment to attain their credentials through both classroom and online delivery. This presentation of an account of what experiences mean for a small number of persons who reside in rural areas expands what is known in research about threats to integrity in the provision of tertiary education. Understanding the experiences of each person in their particular rural context requires a definition of three broad terms used in this study that attract different interpretations in the literature. First, for the sake of clarity, the term “Undermining Education” is used here to describe an experiential theme generated during my analysis that unified contributor’s experiences; including their perspectives about acts, both intentional and unintentional, of persons and education providers alike that threatened integrity of learning and assessment practice in the provision of their tertiary education. Second, “tertiary education” includes courses undertaken to attain credentials that 145

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

146

Jillian Marchant

are approved by the Australian Qualifications Framework Council (2013, p. 107). Approved Australian credentials include vocational education and training certificates I to IV, as well as all of the qualifications traditionally associated with a university education. For the purpose of this study, a broad range of credentials is included under the term “tertiary education” as I anticipated that persons who live in rural areas undertake a diverse range of courses to meet their needs in their context. Last, for purposes of understanding rural areas in this study, I defer to the geographical description proposed by Cameron-Jackson (1995); who for the purpose of education research, defined the rural areas of Australia as including towns and the outlying areas that are within a day return trip. For the sake of clarity, areas in this study have low population densities of between two hundred and thirty thousand residents in towns and their surrounding areas (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011a). Further, the multiplicity of associations among residents gives each rural area a distinctive cultural identity (Cloke, Marsden, & Mooney, 2006; Gorman-Murray, Darian-Smith, & Gibson, 2008; Holt, 2009). Taken together, the definitions that I have provided for “undermining education,” “tertiary education,” and “rural areas” outlines the context for this research.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW To support the exploration of tertiary education experiences for persons who live in the rural areas of Australia, I summarize previous research that offers an overview of some of the circumstances that influence their experiences. This summary includes contemporary complexities navigated by people in rural areas to maintain their existence; their views and opportunities to continue their education and; ideas in research about practices that undermine the integrity of learning and assessment in tertiary education. This overview provides a platform to discuss the way that the findings in this study builds on researched understandings of threats to academic integrity. The complex sociocultural aspects of rural areas in Australia are continuing to evolve. Since the 1970s, rural areas and their residents have been subject to growing influence from increasing population mobility and diversity, changing local economies and stronger influence from state initiatives (Woods, 2005). The complex cultural array in each contemporary rural society permits an opportunity for this study to provide researched understandings from the perspective of each person as a resident in a distinctive rural place. It is my intent to explore the learning-related experiences to present

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Undermining Education 147

an account that privileges the understandings of each person as part of their rural context. In recent decades, some of the investigations into the well-being of persons and their rural areas have reported grim conditions. Research by Alston (2005) and Gray (1994) has been concerned with state initiatives that are inspired by neoliberal ideals or financialization that prioritizes economic outcomes in public policies (Fine, 2012). A neoliberal approach to the distribution of public benefits assumes inherent equity between people and their regions of occupancy (Alston, 2004; Gray & Lawrence, 2001). For residents of rural areas in Australia, the neoliberal approach has manifested as restrictions in their engagement with social practices that the majority of Australians enjoy (Alston, 2004; Gray & Lawrence, 2001). Research by Tonts (2000) and Pritchard and McManus (2000) explain that people who live in rural areas are now considered to be among the most socially deprived and marginalized in Australian society. Significant for the contributors to this study is that they potentially live in circumstances of considerable precarity that influences their tertiary education experiences. Research that engaged with adults who live in rural areas of Australia, illustrates that the decision to continue their education has a broad range of potential outcomes. Namely, research by Dymock (2007) that was informed by a small number of persons in a rural area advises that his participants viewed education as more than a credentialing exercise for careers; they recognized that education of residents is also a valuable activity for its own sake as well as providing benefits for their rural area. This illustrates that the tertiary education experiences of persons who live in rural areas may be influenced by their views on their employment prospects as well as their ideas about contributing to the well-being of their rural area. Coupled with a sense of precarity in their context, knowledge gained from a tertiary education assists people in securing their future as well as that of their rural area. Despite research illustrating that adults value education, many of the reports about education outcomes for adults who live in rural areas highlights discrepancies in engagement and completion in relation to their metropolitan counterparts. Namely, Black, Duff, Saggers, and Baines (2000) and Maltzan (2006) both state that people who live in rural areas of Australia have a history of poor educational attainment. Early research by Sher and Sher (1994) suggested that reports of such limited educational attainment are indicative of missing opportunities for people in rural areas to pursue their educational ambitions; supporting that a study to examine the experiences of a small number of tertiary education students has an important role in understanding challenges in educational attainment.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

148

Jillian Marchant

Education opportunities for people who live in the rural areas of Australia have been influenced by government initiatives since the mid-1990s through the provision of public funding to support the delivery of tertiary education. Such initiatives include the installation of local infrastructure to support information and communication technologies that provide a platform for the online delivery of tertiary education courses (Black et al., 2000; Maltzan, 2006). Concurrently, government regulations have changed to permit an expansion in the number of private education providers (Black et al., 2000; Maltzan, 2006). Policymakers anticipate that online delivery coupled with a greater choice of education providers will offer all Australians, regardless of their location, unprecedented opportunities to engage with tertiary education courses; through either online delivery or the establishment of education providers in rural areas (Black et al., 2000; Maltzan, 2006). Such developments in the delivery of tertiary education offer researchers opportunities to inform about the learning experiences of people in different locations. This research offers a service to both persons and education provision alike. Understanding the motives for adults to engage with tertiary education when it is more accessible is informed by Australian research that examines the education ambitions of mature-age students or people who are at least twenty-five years of age when they begin their course. May, Delahunty, O’Shea, and Stone (2016) engaged with a number of adults who were first in their family to attend university and reported that participants in their study engaged with tertiary education for purposes of employment and; in particular, to engage with a career that they are passionate about. O’Shea, May, Stone, and Delahunty (2017) build on their earlier research by illustrating that mature-age students anticipate a direct link between realizing their tertiary education ambitions and securing their employment goals. For adults who live in the rural areas of Australia, their education ambitions may be inspired by career goals with their knowledge gain offering coincidental benefits to their local area. So far, reviews of government initiatives to influence tertiary education outcomes for people who live in rural areas illustrate that such initiatives have met with modest success. Recent investigations highlight that people from rural areas are less likely to engage with tertiary education courses and if they do so, their attrition rates are higher than students from metropolitan areas (Department of Education and Training, 2017; Stone & O’Shea, 2019). Continued poor educational attainment despite infrastructure and funding initiatives means that understanding experiences of tertiary education is both urgent and important for persons who originate from rural areas. Many reports about the tertiary education of Australian students in various locations focus on enumerative factors and their experiences with learning are largely absent from the literature. Further, education providers have

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Undermining Education 149

been preoccupied with grappling with the technical aspects of distance delivery rather than determining its learning quality (Zawacki-Richter, 2009; Zawacki-Richter & Anderson, 2014). The omission of understanding experiences with learning qualities limits the information that could be utilized to improve practice in tertiary education delivery (Naylor, Coates, & Kelly, 2016). Murray (2009) and Peacock (2012) also both advise that knowing so little about the qualities of experiences related to tertiary education in rural areas is a missed opportunity for research to influence the debate to secure education benefits for people and their communities. Absence of documented individual experiences has inspired researchers to conduct studies that contribute to what is known about practices that detract from as well as promote learning in the provision of tertiary education: with a view to understanding benefits for both individuals and their rural areas. This study focusses on experiences of persons who live in rural areas that detract from the provision of tertiary education, and in particular, practices that undermine learning and assessment in courses. As I explained previously, the attainment of knowledge from a tertiary education course is important for the goals of individuals as well as improving well-being in their rural areas. Further, students who understand the importance of practicing integrity during their courses, integrate such practices into their personal value system as a foundation for their conduct in their future careers (Nonis & OwensSwift, 2011); suggesting that the chance to practice integrity during a tertiary education course is directly related to the practice of professional integrity in the workplace (Nonis & Owens-Swift, 2011). Many terms in the literature relate to practices of both individuals and education providers that undermine educational integrity (Montoneri, 2018). For the purposes of this study, I summarize three broad categories that are identified in the literature as undermining the integrity of learning and assessment for the purpose of attaining a tertiary education credential; namely, academic misconduct, academic malpractice and provider negligence. The first category, academic misconduct relates to the behaviors of individuals that may threaten integrity in learning and assessment. A clear definition of academic misconduct is provided by Young (2015) who proposes that: It is academic misconduct if a student: a. in relation to an assessment: i. cheats; or ii. engages in plagiarism; or iii. improperly colludes with another person; or iv. acts, or assists another person to act, dishonestly or unfairly in or in connection with an examination; or

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

150

Jillian Marchant

v. takes a prohibited document into an examination venue; or fails to comply with examination or assessment rules or directions; or vi. engages in other conduct with a view to gaining unfair or unjustified advantage; or vii. submits work that is not original; or b. in relation to research, commits research misconduct. The definition of academic misconduct by Young (2015) that originated in the Australian context, highlights that the deliberate behavior of students is at the forefront of defining academic misconduct; however, for the purpose of this research, there are two other categories explaining both unintentional behaviors and provider practices that threaten educational integrity. The second category, academic malpractice, is a broader definition of behaviors threaten the educational integrity of courses and is provided by The University of Manchester (2014). Accordingly,

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Academic malpractice is any activity—intentional or otherwise—that is likely to undermine the integrity essential to scholarship and research. It includes plagiarism, collusion, fabrication or falsification of results, and anything else that could result in unearned or undeserved credit for those committing it. Academic malpractice can result from a deliberate act of cheating or maybe committed unintentionally. (The University of Manchester, 2014, p. 2)

The definition of academic malpractice differs from ideas about academic misconduct in that it encompasses behavior that is intentional as well as unintentional; suggesting that those who are unfamiliar with tertiary education, such as many people who live in rural areas, may be at risk of inadvertently engaging in academic malpractice during their courses. The last category that I consider significant for this research is what I term provider negligence; where education provider practices that are either intentional or unintentional, threaten the integrity of tertiary education credentials approved by the Australian Qualifications Framework Council (2013). I am driven to outline provider negligence as a threat to educational integrity in part by the research of Chapman and Lindner (2014) whose Australian research describes that one in five respondents in their study reported their education institution as corrupt. Corrupt practices that I include in a category of provider negligence concern matters such as the issue of tertiary education credentials without adequate provision of learning and assessment opportunities during a course (Chapman & Lindner, 2014). Such negligent issue of credentials is often attributed to education providers that function as either diploma or accreditation mills and operate in different locations around the globe (Altbach & Knight, 2016; Ezell, 2009). For the purpose of this study

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Undermining Education 151

that involves people in rural areas who engage with distance education, Piña (2010) research in the North American context supports an argument that accreditation mills present a threat to the legitimacy of distance education courses. Likewise, this research may also offer a better understanding of the nuances of education provider practices that pose a threat to the integrity of tertiary education. In summary, while situated in a sociocultural context with unique complexities, people who live in rural areas navigate challenges to their futures. They do so in contexts that predominately have a history of poor educational attainment and persistent precarity. Nonetheless, adults who live in rural areas may be inspired to engage with tertiary education courses to secure a career that they are passionate about and inadvertently gain knowledge that benefits the well-being of their areas. Government initiatives support the aspirations of people in rural areas through expansion in the provision of tertiary education. Since the implementation of such initiatives, the qualities of learning experiences for people who live in rural areas are largely unexamined in reports and literature. In particular, the details of threats to educational integrity for people who live in rural areas such as academic misconduct, academic malpractice and provider negligence are relatively unknown.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

RESEARCH QUESTION The research question guiding this study is, “What do experiences of threats to educational integrity mean for persons who live in the rural areas of Australia?” Respecting and privileging each person’s understanding of their experiences is with the intent that both an individual and their perspectives about activities in rural areas are the foremost focus of the research. Such a focus values the qualities in a plurality of perspectives gathered from contributors that may otherwise be overlooked or lacking in the research literature. Exploring the meanings of threats to educational integrity for particular persons in their context also illuminates dominant and rival understandings of experiences with a view to providing a platform for further research that explains how and why practices promote integrity in tertiary education courses. METHODOLOGY In this study, I use a phenomenological approach to understand what experiences with threats to educational integrity means for a small number

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

152

Jillian Marchant

of persons who reside in the rural areas of Australia. A phenomenological approach is an established way to generate a researched understanding of the meanings from each person’s contributed experience of a particular phenomenon (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009; Smith & Osborn, 2003); in this instance the threats to educational integrity. Further, a researched understanding utilizing phenomenological approaches preserves the significance of each person’s experiences as well as recognizing the importance of context for understanding the meanings of their experiences (Smith et al., 2009; Smith & Osborn, 2003). A phenomenological study requires the careful collection and analysis of what a person’s experience is of a particular phenomenon. Both Kvale (1996) and Smith et al. (2009) recommend that one of the best approaches to gathering experiential data is to engage a selection of persons who have experienced the phenomenon in a semistructured interview. By following this recommendation, I was able to collect rich data about each person’s understandings of their experiences during the interview process by asking exploratory questions to examine educational integrity as a phenomenon of research interest. Twenty persons with experiences of engaging with tertiary education courses while living in a rural area volunteered to be interviewed for the purpose of the PhD study and the contributions of a subset of four subsequently inform this study. Each person in the PhD study was selected through nonprobability sampling that included initiating a chain-referral process through persons who were known to me as well as some being referred to me by Australian education providers. Enlisting the assistance of education providers was intended to mediate any community bias or greater consensus about experiences that occur among persons who are known to one another (Biernacki, 1981; Jones, Torres, & Arminio, 2006). In this way, I anticipated gathering experiences with a greater variety. Data were collected through interviews recorded in person, or when it wasn’t feasible to travel, a telephone interview was recorded. I transcribed the audio recording verbatim and returned each transcript to the contributor so they could edit their transcript and remove sensitive or inaccurate information. Contributors approved a finalized interview transcript and completed a signed consent to permit their data to be analyzed to inform research. I analyzed the data through conducting an Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, to analyze the meanings of experiences for each contributor in this study (Smith et al., 2009; Smith & Osborn, 2003). In this way, I applied language and thoughtfulness to interpret the meaning of each person’s tertiary education experiences that occurred in their everyday life (Heidegger & Dahlstrom, 2005; van Manen, 1990). The findings are an account intended

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Undermining Education 153

to respect and privilege a person’s understanding of what their experiences meant for them. My analysis of the data in the interview transcripts was guided by Smith et al. (2009) and Smith (1996) recommendations about the sequence used to perform an Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. After receiving an approved transcript, I uploaded the textual data into NVivo software and began the initial analysis. I descriptively labelled particularly evocative phrases according to the meanings attributed to them as a beginning in exploring experiential aspects of the data. I generated preliminary themes about experiences, by collating the descriptive labels according to each contributor’s key experiences (Smith et al., 2009), such as their engagement with their course or their experiences with learning. Often, the unifying qualities of meanings for experiences were allocated according to a preliminary theme because of a primary rather than sole relationship to that theme. The generation of key themes according to key experiences permitted a connection between each contributor’s experiences to generate a plurality of voices clustered according to a unifying experiential quality. This meant that the generation of themes didn’t overshadow each individual’s experiences that are preserved in the findings through verbatim extracts from the transcripts that represent contributors spoken words (Smith & Osborn, 2003). I began the next stage of the analysis by clustering preliminary themes according to key experiences of contributors to begin the finalized subthemes and themes. This means that I collated resemblant and variant meanings of key experiences. Until I began the more formal process of writing about experiential aspects in the most compelling verbatim extracts to form the subthemes and themes, a process that had oversight by my adviser, my ideas about meanings in the verbatim extract were tenuous and underdeveloped. As I paid attention to the language of the contributors, I was able to analyze their data and I interpreted what their experiences meant for them in their context. To ensure the quality of this study, I heeded Smith et al.’s (2009) advice to maintain academic rigor by heeding the principles proposed by Yardley (2000) including sensitivity to context; commitment and rigor; transparency and coherence; impact and importance. Adherence to these principles throughout this study upholds its research quality. The findings captured in the experiential theme “undermining education” are presented here. The theme was generated from an analysis of the experiences of contributors with the pseudonyms of Margaret, Jane, Heidi and Julie who ages ranged between thirty-five and fifty-five years of age. Students in this age range are often labelled as mature-age students within

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

154

Jillian Marchant

Australian research and policy literature. An absence of younger people in this study aligns with findings in other research identifying that they often relocate to the metropolitan areas to engage with tertiary education and employment; subsequently, the median age of persons who live in rural areas is older (Corcoran, Faggian, & McCann, 2010; Olfert & Partridge, 2010). An overrepresentation of women in this study is congruent with other research about women forming the majority of tertiary education engagement for older adults living in rural areas (Jarvis, 2004; Williamson, 2000). Margaret, Jane, Heidi and Julie are all holders of postgraduate credentials, a feature that makes their educational attainment considerably above the average level of education in Australian rural areas. Each contributor lived in a rural area that is considered to be “medium disadvantaged” according to the Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas of Australia. The designation of medium disadvantage means that in relation to the other areas in Australia each contributor lived in a context that wasn’t the most disadvantaged, but their circumstances were worse than areas with less disadvantage and quite removed from the benefits of socioeconomic advantage (Adhikari, 2006; Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011b). While each contributor is highly educated and possibly has a better income, they are nonetheless living in areas with formidable precarity that influences their experiences that are discussed in the findings of this study.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

FINDINGS During the interviews and the subsequent analysis of transcripts, it became apparent that contributors as residents in rural areas had experiences that threatened educational integrity. Margaret, Jane, Heidi and Julie had a similar sense that their attainment of credentials and educational achievements were undermined by some of their experiences with tertiary education practices. As the findings in this study are solely informed by the contributors and omit the understandings of others about practices related to educational integrity, I collated their experiences under the experiential theme “Undermining Education” to explicitly capture the meanings for the contributors in this study. I chose this term “undermining” to refer to a broad range of practices that threaten the integrity of tertiary education and likewise “education” is intended to refer to learning, assessment and other activities that provide evidence for the legitimacy of issued tertiary education credentials. An explication of the meanings of Margaret, Jane, Heidi and Julie’s experiences with reference to their verbatim extracts that are related to “Undermining Education” are discussed below.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Undermining Education 155



Margaret Margaret has lived the majority of her life in the rural area in which she was born. After completing her secondary education at her local high school, Margaret endured the inconvenience of temporary relocation to the city to complete her undergraduate course. Afterwards, she secured full-time employment in her rural area. The only option at that time to complete her first postgraduate course to secure a better position was extensive travel to the metropolitan area. When Margaret once again considered furthering her career through building on her education, she embraced the opportunity to complete her next postgraduate degree by online delivery that had become available to residents in her rural area. Since finishing that course, she has achieved her employment goal and as someone who has previously learnt in a classroom, Margaret reflected on her experience of learning through online delivery:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

I enjoyed online, I enjoyed some of the teachers. Some of the teachers were awful. Some of them I think were being made to teach stuff while they were trying to do something else. And then I think they didn’t teach very well, but ones who were good, were great, and the ones that were ordinary were terrible. Like, it’s almost like online learning exaggerates that. Because you’re removed from it, because you’re so reliant on them doing the right thing, you don’t have any recourse. Like, you can’t go and knock on their door or anything like that, like you can in a real university. So, you are very reliant on them and there’s so much online now and I just wonder about the quality of it all.

Margaret is adamant that she “enjoyed online and some of the teachers,” indicating that online delivery of her postgraduate course included guidance from educators who added to her enjoyment of her course. She also raises the issue that her experiences with her educators varied significantly, with those who were “good being great” and those who were “ordinary being terrible” and online delivery methods “exaggerate” or emphasize these experiences. Margaret then highlights that despite enjoying the guidance of some of her educators, her connection with them was tenuous at best, and she was “removed from it” or experienced being socially as well as physically distant from them. A lack of interactions through direct contact with her educators meant that Margaret felt that she was “reliant” on her educators’ opinion of her learning without them having a full understanding of her knowledge and learning progression; undermining her confidence about online courses. This doubt is emphasized in Margaret’s use of “real university,” to suggest that online delivery is a likeness rather than an authentic learning experience. A lack of interaction to generate mutual understanding meant that despite the

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

156

Jillian Marchant

popularity of online delivery in tertiary education, Margaret “wondered about the quality of it all” or called into question the quality of learning where there are tenuous connections between educators and their students. For Margaret, a lack of familiarity between her and her educator means that the educator is also unfamiliar with the extent of her knowledge gains, undermining Margaret’s sense that learning integrity is upheld by the online delivery of tertiary education courses. Jane

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

After receiving funding to continue her education as part of a redundancy package, Jane decided to engage with a postgraduate course by online delivery offered by a university. She had first considered her options for continuing her education over fifteen years ago when she attained employment in her rural area after completing her undergraduate degree at a metropolitan campus. At that time, Jane was interested in gaining skills to improve her workplace performance by engaging with a vocational education provider. More recently, Jane was involved with the formal certification of her employment skills through the same vocational education provider as part of a redundancy package. She spoke about her experiences with that provider: There were two courses that I’d been involved with. One was wanting to develop my professional skills at the time when I first lived here and that was an external course and one was through my previous employment role. In a professional sense, we were offered the opportunity to gain some accredited . . . some [vocational] competencies through the recognition for prior learning system that they have. So, first with the remote course, you were sent a book with some various exercises to work through and it felt very much like you were just needing to regurgitate what was in the book. There was no personal service, so you were assigned a tutor but you either didn’t get responses or they were very cut and pasted. So, I didn’t actually finish that course, I didn’t feel like it was worth my time and money continuing with that. The recognition for prior learning service there was a whole batch of us across the state in my previous role that went through the same process. They were looking to assess where people’s various levels were in light of the impending restructure that was happening or about to happen at that time. So as part of that process, people were granted individual interviews you brought in your paperwork where you had it, you talked to the person about what your skills were, they helped aligned them with the national competencies at the time and then you came out with a piece of paper at the end. A couple of us who unfortunately for [education provider name] were coincidentally were university graduates so we were familiar with a quite rigorous academic system. Were actually sent our certificates before we’d

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Undermining Education 157



Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

even had our interview or submitted any paperwork from our end, which really smacked of just a rubber-stamping exercise and instantly that lost all credibility in our eyes as to the process. So, they were my experiences and it just has never reflected very well on them since.

As a graduate, Jane could rely on her previous course experience to assess the practices of her vocational education provider. In a similar way to her engagement with a university course, Jane anticipated that by engaging in a vocational education course that she would improve her skills to perform tasks in her paid role. Her experience of “regurgitating” course materials related to a repugnant practice of rote learning that Jane viewed as a poor chance to gain knowledge from her course; a view that was reinforced by the lack of “personal service” or nuanced human interaction in learning support communications with her education provider. More recently, as she progressed through her redundancy transition process, Jane was able to compare her recognition of prior learning experience by her vocational education provider with the rigours of university to gain a “piece of paper at the end” or attain her credential. With her undergraduate experience as reference, Jane recognized questionable “rubber-stamping” or careless credentialing practices by her vocational education provider that included dishonest accreditation or the issue of a credential without adequate training or assessment. Her communication with her graduate colleagues about their similar experiences further influenced Jane’s view about the poor value of a credential issued by that vocational education provider. Jane’s intent to learn for employment purposes meant that she was determined to continue her education by reengaging with a course provided by a university where she previously demonstrated her learning from course materials before receiving a credential. To avoid being complicit in dishonest credentialing, Jane continued her education by enrolling in a “rigorous” postgraduate course with her previous university. For Jane, experiences of inadequate training and assessment by a vocational education provider mean that such undertakings are best avoided as they are worthless to support knowledge gain that is integral to her employment. Heidi Heidi completed her secondary education at her local high school, and she has spent many years attaining her credentials through classroom and online delivery while resident in her rural area. She has recently completed an honors degree to secure employment in her rural area. Heidi spoke about her profound sense of disconnection from her educators throughout the recent

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

158

Jillian Marchant

online delivery of her course. She spoke about her concerns about this lack of personal connection:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

I just don’t agree with online study. And sometimes, what’s to say it was me that submitted my work? You know, it could be anybody. So, they’re so stringent on privacy, confidentiality and all this and I mean it could have been someone else that done my degree. Not that would have, they probably would have got a lot better marks. But, I just feel that there could be this ticket being issued to someone and if it’s online and how do you know? So, if you have that web contact while they submit some stuff or ask questions, you are sort of getting a bit of a connection. But, I mean when they started studies away, how do you give those experiences of other people by reading from a book or some articles online?

Heidi expresses that she stringently opposes, “I just don’t agree with,” the online delivery of tertiary education courses. She holds this view because the extent of her depersonalization in the online delivery of her course meant that the distinctive style of her submissions for course assessments went undetected by her educators. Her perspective is that online delivery obscures students’ individual assessment styles, permitting the advance of academic misconduct, such as someone “submitting her work” or completing her course assessment pieces. Heidi is puzzled that other administrative procedures, and “all this,” have received attention; when what she perceives as a fundamental issue, procedures for ascertaining that a student understands the course materials in online delivery, have yet to be adequately realized. Through humor and self-deprecation, Heidi offers reassurance that another person who completed her course assessments would have received “better marks” or higher grades. She continues with her view that it is highly likely that people enrolled in the course could very easily enlist others to complete their assessments. She then expresses her primary concern that “tickets” or credentials could be issued to people who have not studied the course materials. Heidi expresses that even “web contact” or online interaction that verifies the knowledge gain of individuals by educators is absent throughout the course. The final criticism of online delivery is Heidi’s view that educators sharing experiences is of the utmost importance for gaining knowledge. “Reading from a book or online articles” in her view does not impart an adequate learning experience for employment purposes. Overall, in Heidi’s experience practices in the online delivery of tertiary education lack the integrity necessary to foster learning and determine knowledge acquisition before the issue of a credential. Heidi has observed that other local people have also recently attained certificate credentials that are similar to hers. She shared her thoughts about the quality of the courses attended by others and her perspective on some education providers:

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Undermining Education 159



Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Another thing that annoys me is all these little training organizations that pop up everywhere that are just doing ticks and flicks. And I’ve even written to the newspaper to say if you want a good story, why don’t you get your journalists to look into this, I got no response. I did the same with the radio. As a worker, I was getting so frustrated with having some people come in with “oh yeah, I’ve done my certificate.” This woman enrolled who could hardly use a computer, “I went down to [Metropolitan] and got it in 4 days.” I said do “you know what this is, so do you know what this is?” “No.” And it just used to get up my nose to think. I’ve done all this hard work, but other people are getting issued these tickets that have no value really. Because it was devaluing my education and that, I found really frustrating.

On more than one occasion, Heidi has been “frustrated” by dubious accreditation practices when she has encountered local people in her workplace, who despite their lack of skills and knowledge, have been credentialed by education providers. Heidi’s frustration is amplified by the fourth estate neglecting their responsibility to expose the negligent practices by education providers. Her experience is that she has “worked hard” for many years to achieve her credentials or “tickets” that offer her a pass into better employment for her future. Subsequently, negligent practices of some education providers “get up her nose” or irritate and annoy her as they devalue her efforts and education as well as threaten her future. Her exasperation with some education providers and credentials that are available to local residents is evident in her view of “little training organizations”; a term that she uses to discuss her derogatory perspective about the proliferation of education providers that have fundamental limitations in their services. She views their focus is on achieving “ticks and flicks” a term with economic connotations originating in the Australian banking industry that Heidi uses to highlight education providers that are centered on administering to students for financial gain rather than imparting knowledge. Heidi views some education providers are primarily concerned with issuing credentials and dismissing the student as quickly as possible to maximize enrolments and course fee payments. Ensuring competency gain holds little priority as it may expose education providers to the possibility of slowing financial gain due to fewer enrolments. Such practices mean that the value of Heidi’s efforts to gain knowledge and the attainment of her credentials is severely undermined. Julie Julie is a long-term resident in her rural area who has engaged with both classroom and online delivery to build on her secondary education and attain her master’s degree. In her business, Julie frequently encounters local people

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

160

Jillian Marchant

with credentials that she recognizes as being attributed to them without them attending or even enrolling in a course. She spoke of the role of contractors of government employment services in sponsoring this practice: I knew of an unemployed man, who was supposedly signed off on having a white card and a forklift license, he had never been to a course. And within the business community, not only here, but even interstate, it’s the same thing. And it’s sad when it’s the same organization.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

When a local person’s credentials were “supposedly signed off,” it was a deception by the contractor intended to falsely lead Julie to believe that the issue of the credential was legitimate and; that the credential holder was knowledgeable about workplace safety, but he was forthright in disclosing that despite his credential, he had not attended a course. After communicating with other business owners Julie’s experience is that such credentialing practices without adequate training and assessment are widespread, influencing workplace safety in both her local region and other interstate regions where she does business. Julie’s perspective that the situation is “sad” is an expression of her contempt for monitoring regulatory bodies that are yet to curb the ongoing negligent practices of this particular national government contractor. Julie continued by describing the most recent incident of dishonest accreditation that she has faced. As someone who is extensively experienced with education matters, Julie spoke about being approached by a former local person for support in dealing with a particular national contractor of government employment services that issues credentials. Julie began by describing the motive of the contractor in sponsoring dishonest accreditation practices: It’s a monetary reward, as long as they sign off that this person’s had training. I know of another girl that moved interstate, she rang me up and she said, “I don’t know but something funny’s going on because I applied to do an early childhood development course through interstate, they accepted me and filled in my forms and everything and then they told me I can’t do it because the money had already been spent in that area on me.” According to her, she had a Cert III in Childhood Development, at the learning center here.” So, I told her “you know what I would be doing, I would be ringing the learning center and demanding that certificate.” She said, “but, I haven’t done it, I want to do it.” I said, “No, you’ve done it because they have said you’ve done it and paid for that training, now you ring up and get a copy of that certificate.” She said, “can you ring up for me,” and I said, “I can ring up for you.” So, I rang up and I say that “I wanted to know why according to the job search provider has this girl done a certificate III” and they rang me back and said that “they can’t discuss it with me as I have no legal right to that information.” So, I said, “I will get permission from the girl to be her legal guardian.” They said “no, no, no, I can’t discuss

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Undermining Education 161

it,” and then I got another phone call saying from another person “it is not any of my business, don’t bother ringing up anymore.” So, my next venture will be investigating that, very seriously.

In Julie’s view, the “monetary reward” or government funding is advancing dishonest accreditation by contractors of government employment services is at the expense of the benefits of educating local people. Subsequently, Julie was eager to support a person who approached her for assistance with a credential that had been issued without any training and assessment. When Julie attempted to disrupt this instance of dubious credentialing practice by inquiring with “the job search provider” or contractor, she was stonewalled by them but is determined to continue her resistance. Julie’s “next venture will be investigating that, very seriously” indicating that opposing dishonest accreditation is an urgent and significant role for her. For Julie, as the holder of a postgraduate credential, a lack of integrity in training and assessment practices by contractors of government employment services means that she has a sense of responsibility for assisting local people; to both expose and prevent threats to educational integrity.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Each of the four contributors in this study related threats to educational integrity in their experiences that meant undermining education for them. Margaret’s experience during online delivery was that she doubted that her educators understood her or the extent of her knowledge acquisition. A lack of connection between her and her educator during distance education means that Margaret questions the educational integrity in the online delivery of all courses. Heidi’s experience was similar, in that she reported a sense of depersonalization during the online delivery of her course and condemned the online delivery of courses because depersonalization threatens educational integrity. Primarily, Heidi experienced a particular threat to assessment integrity with many opportunities throughout her tertiary education course to engage in academic misconduct. She also had the experience of interactions with a work colleague who had attained similar credentials, despite strong evidence of her colleague’s inadequate knowledge and skill. Heidi’s perspective is that threats to educational integrity that undermine her education primarily originate from provider negligence and that she is frustrated in her attempts to draw the attention of authorities to this issue. Similarly, Jane’s experience was that a local vocational education provider issued credentials without an adequate assessment that prompted her to engage with a course from a more

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

162

Jillian Marchant

rigorous education provider. Julie’s experiences in her local business with dishonest accreditation by contractors of government employment services she viewed as threatening educational integrity and prompted her, as the holder of a postgraduate credential, to vehemently oppose. Despite the different experiences, each contributor as a resident in a rural area had experienced threats to educational integrity that eroded the value of their credentials and undermined their education. Each person who contributed to this study lived in a rural area where her future was precarious. Similar to previous research about mature-age students, each contributor expressed being inspired to continue their education for the purposes of achieving their employment goals (May et al., 2016; O’Shea et al., 2017). Engaging with tertiary education as a person in a rural area was with the express purpose of gaining knowledge as well as credentials to secure their employment futures, meaning that any threats to educational integrity were perceived as devaluing credentials and undermining education. Rather than welcome the chance to take shortcuts to credentials that were available due to provider negligence (Chapman & Lindner, 2014), each contributor found shortcut practices abhorrent for their purposes and combatted them. The findings here about threats to educational integrity also illuminate that in some cases, such threats may prompt people in rural areas to withdraw from their course if it has little educational value (Department of Education and Training, 2017; Stone & O’Shea, 2019). In rural contexts, persons and their activities are often highly visible and as Heidi explained, a lack of knowledge and skills despite a credential is likewise highly visible (Nonis & Owens-Swift, 2011). While Heidi’s undeservedly credentialed work colleague wasn’t interviewed, the experience that Heidi and Jane both related highlights that unintentional academic malpractice may manifest for people in rural areas who are unwittingly credentialed and are unfamiliar with the rigors of tertiary education. Tellingly, it is perhaps no coincidence that each contributor who related their concerns about educational integrity in this study was a holder of a postgraduate credential and had formed their academic value system in classrooms before engaging with online delivery. Without further research, it is difficult to know if others simply haven’t experienced issues with educational integrity, have different value systems or, without prior exposure to tertiary education have inadvertently embraced academic malpractice as the norm. As proposed by Nonis and Owens-Swift (2011), establishing practices related to academic integrity improve the chances for developing professional integrity. As Heidi and Julie related, while dishonest accreditation may be inadvertent, a lack of professional conduct is highly visible to employers and employees alike. Dishonest accreditation experiences illuminate that from the

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Undermining Education 163

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

perspective of local people the proliferation of education providers without adequate monitoring devalues rather than promotes educational endeavor in rural areas. As Julie’s experience illustrates, provider negligence related to the issue of credentials may place employers as well as other local people at risk. This account also offers an understanding of the experience of erosion in the value of education for employment purposes in rural areas. In this study, the intent of all contributors was to gain knowledge and avoid or halt practices that undermine their education. Each of their experiences highlights that their engagement with tertiary education and their knowledge gain is of benefit to other people, through both their employment and as a person who is an advocate for tertiary education. Further, because the motive of each contributor in this study was to gain knowledge, they were keen to candidly share the experiences that they considered the greatest threat to tertiary education. Their contributions that forms the findings presented here is of potential benefit to learning endeavors of all students as well as the enterprise of distance education (Zawacki-Richter, 2009; Zawacki-Richter & Anderson, 2014). This study explored the experiences of four contributors whose employment goals in their rural contexts prompted them to engage with tertiary education. This research highlights the potential to engage with intentional academic misconduct; outlines the experiences that may lead to academic malpractice; and illustrates serious incidences of provider negligence. Despite this study being informed by a small number of contributors and is without an intention to generalize the findings, it nonetheless highlights experiences with troubling practices in the delivery of tertiary education for persons who live in rural areas. The findings discussed here provide a platform for further research to inform about practices that can promote integrity in the provision of tertiary education. REFERENCES Adhikari, P. (2006). Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas: Introduction, Use and Future Directions. Catalogue No. 2033.0.55.001. Canberra, Australia: Australian Bureau of Statistics. Alston, M. (2004). Market Led Recovery and Rural Community Self Help: A Failure of Social Policy Solutions in Australia’s Small Rural Towns. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 39(3), 299-366. Alston, M. (2005). Social Exclusion in Rural Australia. In C. Cocklin, & J. Dibden (Eds.), Sustainability and Change in Rural Australia (pp. 157-170). Sydney, Australia: University of New South Wales.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

164

Jillian Marchant

Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2016). The Internationalization of Higher Education: Motivations and Realities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3-4), 290-305. DOI: 10.1177/1028315307303542. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2011a). Australian Statistical Geography Standard: Volume 4—Significant Urban Areas, Urban Centres and Localities, Section of State. Catalogue No. 12700.55.004. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth of Australia. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2011b). Technical Paper: Postal Area, SA1 Distributions, SEIFA 2011. Catalogue No. 2033.0.55.001. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth of Australia. Australian Qualifications Framework Council. (2013). Australian Qualifications Framework. Adelaide, South Australia: Department of Industry, Innovation Science Research and Tertiary Education. Biernacki, W. (1981). Snowball Sampling: Problems and Techniques of Chain Referral Sampling. Sociological Methods & Research, 10(2), 141–163. Black, A., Duff, J., Saggers, S., & Baines, P. (2000). Rural Communities and Rural Social Issues: Priorities for Research. Barton, Australian Capital Territory: Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. Cameron-Jackson, F. B. (1995). Semantic Complexities in Defining Rurality: Towards a Definition Based on Human Considerations. Education in Rural Australia, 5(1), 1-7. Chapman, D. W., & Lindner, S. (2014). Degrees of Integrity: The Threat of Corruption in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education, 41(2), 247-268. DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2014.927854. Cloke, P., & Little, J. (Eds.). (1997). Contested Countryside Cultures: Otherness, Marginalisation, and Rurality. London, UK: Routledge. Corcoran, J., Faggian, A., & McCann, P. (2010). Human Capital in Remote and Rural Australia: The Role of Graduate Migration. Growth and Change, 41(2), 192-220. Department of Education and Training. (2017). Final Report—Improving Retention, Completion and Success in Higher Education. Canberra, Australia: Australian Government. Dymock, D. (2007). Exploring Learning in a Small Rural Community. In D. Dymock, M. Osborne, M. Houston, & N. Toman (Eds.), The Pedagogy of Lifelong Learning: Understanding Effective Teaching and Learning in Diverse Contexts (pp. 90-100). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Ezell, A. (2009). Recent Developments with Degree Mills: Accreditation Mills and Counterfeit Diploma and Transcript Operations. College and University, 85(2), 41-50. Fine, B. (2012). Neoliberalism in Retrospect? It’s Financialisation, Stupid. In K.-S. Chang, B. Fine, & L. Weiss (Eds.), Developmental Politics in Transition: The Neoliberal Era and Beyond (pp. 51–69). Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Gorman-Murray, A., Darian-Smith, K., & Gibson, C. (2008). Scaling the Rural: Reflections on Rural Cultural Studies. Australian Humanities Review, 45, 37-52. Gray, I. (1994). The Changing Structure of Rural Communities. Rural Society, 4(34), 17-21.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Undermining Education 165

Gray, I., & Lawrence, G. (2001). A Future for Regional Australia: Escaping Global Misfortune. North Ryde, New South Wales: Cambridge University. Heidegger, M., & Dahlstrom, D. O. (2005). An Introduction to Phenomenological Research. Bloomington: University of Indiana. Holt, B. S. (2009). On Being Rural: Identity Claims, Higher Education and the Global Citizen. Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education International Education Research Conference: Innovative Research in Education—Creating Global Networks—A Capital Idea! , Canberra, Australia. Jarvis, P. (2004). Adult Education and Lifelong Learning: Theory and Practice (Third ed.). London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer. Jones, S. R., Torres, V., & Arminio, J. (2006). Negotiating the Complexities of Qualitative Research in Higher Education: Fundamental Elements and Issues. New York: Routledge. Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE. Maltzan, T. L. (2006). Rurality and Higher Education: Implications for Identity and Persistence. (Ph.D.), Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. May, J., Delahunty, J., O’Shea, S., & Stone, C. (2016). Seeking the Passionate Career: First-in-Family Enabling Students and the Idea of the Australian University. Higher Education Quarterly, 70(4), 384-399. DOI: 10.1111/hequ.12104. McMichael, P. (2004). Settlers and the Agrarian Question: Capitalism in Colonial Australia. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University. Montoneri, B. (2018). Plagiarism and Ethical Issues: A Literature Review on Academic Misconduct. In S. R. Nair, & J. M. Saiz-Alvarez (Eds.), Ethics, Entrepreneurship, and Governance in Higher Education (Chapter 1, pp. 1-25). USA: IGI Global. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-5837-8.ch001. Murray, J. (2009). The Wider Social Benefits of Higher Education: What Do We Know About Them? Australian Journal of Education, 53(3), 230–244. Naylor, R., Coates, H., & Kelly, P. (2016). From Equity to Excellence: Reforming Australia’s National Framework to Create New Forms of Success. In A. Harvey, C. Burheim, & M. Brett (Eds.), Student Equity in Australian Higher Education: Twenty-five years of A Fair Chance for All (pp. 257-274). Gateway East, Singapore: Springer. Nonis, S., & Owens-Swift, C. (2011). An Examination of the Relationship Between Academic Dishonesty and Workplace Dishonesty: A Multicampus Investigation. Journal of Education for Business, 77(2), 69-77. O’Shea, S., May, J., Stone, C., & Delahunty, J. (2017). First-in-Family Students, University Experience and Family Life: Motivations, Transitions and Participation. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Olfert, M. R., & Partridge, M. D. (2010). Best Practices in Twenty First Century Rural Development and Policy. Growth and Change, 41(2), 147-164. Peacock, D. (2012). Neoliberal Social Inclusion? The Agenda of the Australian Universities Community Engagement Alliance. Critical Studies in Education, 53(3), 311-325.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

166

Jillian Marchant

Piña, A. A. (2010). Online Diploma Mills: Implications for Legitimate Distance Education. Distance Education, 31(1), 121-126. DOI: 10.1080/01587911003725063. Pritchard, B., & McManus, P. (2000). Land of Discontent: The Dynamics of Change in Rural and Regional Australia. Sydney, Australia: University of New South Wales. Sher, J. P., & Sher, K. R. (1994). Beyond the Conventional Wisdom: Rural Development as if Australia’s Rural People and Communities Really Mattered. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 10(1), 2-43. Smith, J. A. (1996). Beyond the Divide between Cognition and Discourse: Using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis in Health Psychology. Psychology & Health, 11(2), 261-271. Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research. London, UK: SAGE. Smith, J. A., & Osborn, M. (2003). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. In J. A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods (pp. 25-52). London, UK: SAGE. Stone, C., & O’Shea, S. (2019). Older, Online and First: Recommendations for Retention and Success. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1), 57-69. The University of Manchester (2014). Academic Malpractice: Procedure for the Handling of Cases. Manchester, UK: The University of Manchester. Tonts, M. (2000). The Restructuring of Australia’s Rural Communities. In B. Pritchard, & P. McManus (Eds.), Land of Discontent: The Dynamics of Change in Rural and Regional Australia (pp. 52-72). Sydney, Australia: University of New South Wales. van Manen, M. (1990). Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy. Albany, New York: State University of New York. Williamson, A. (2000). Gender Issues in Older Adults’ Participation in Learning: Viewpoints and Experiences of Learners in the University of the Third Age (U3A). Educational Gerontology, 26(1), 49-66. Woods, M. (2005). Rural Geography: Processes, Responses and Experiences in Rural Restructuring. London, UK: SAGE. Yardley, L. (2000). Dilemmas in Qualitative Health Research. Psychology & Health, 15(2), 215-228. Young, I. (2015). The Australian National University: Academic Misconduct Rule 2015. Canberra, Australia: Australian National University. Zawacki-Richter, O. (2009). Research Areas in Distance Education: A Delphi study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(3), 1-17. Zawacki-Richter, O., & Anderson, T. (Eds.). (2014). Online Distance Education: Towards a Research Agenda. Athabasca, Alberta: Athabasca University.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter Nine

Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light: Critical Reflection and Literature Review

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Bernard Montoneri

This chapter focuses on the rise of fake information and fake research, it shows how easy it has become, notably because of the advances in technologies and the advent of social media, to spread lies, to cheat, to plagiarize, to publish fake data and research, and how difficult it is to fight these new threats. There are around thirty thousand journals and an average of two million articles published per year. But only 20 percent of scholars around the world become peer reviewers, generally for a short period of time (Bailey, 2019). Therefore, journals and editors need to rely on technology to cope with the fast-growing number of papers published around the world. Bailey (2019) gives a useful list of platforms and high tech tools to help with the reviewing process, including Statcheck; Artificial Intelligence Review Assistant (AIRA) and Evise (from Elsevier) are also able to suggest reviewers to contact for each paper submitted. The huge number of submissions is notably linked to the pressure to publish (Haley, 2017; Moosa, 2018), which has become unbearable for many scholars, not only because obtaining research funding is a growing challenge, but because rejection rates (especially in indexed journals) are getting higher; this situation seems to push some scholars towards various forms of plagiarism and academic malpractice (Necker, 2014; van Wesel, 2016; Fong & Wilhite, 2017; Montoneri, 2018). This chapter is divided into three main parts. It is both a critical reflection and a literature review, looking at the most recent articles and news related to the rise of fake news and at cases of academic hoaxes, which, according to their authors, were elaborated to expose academic malpractice and problems linked to the publications of papers in some conferences and academic journals. 167

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

168

Bernard Montoneri

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

In part one, I would like to discuss the notion of truth in Plato’s book, The Republic and reflect on the Allegory of the Cave. According to Plato, education may dispose us towards the truth by learning reason and logic. If one prisoner can escape from the darkness of the cave and the world of sensory knowledge, he can guide the other prisoners into the light, that is, the world of true knowledge, the world of reality and ideas, even thought they would probably turn on him and refuse to leave the cave. Part two introduces the expression “fake news,” its origins and the consequences of the recent growth of misleading online information. “Fake news” was already used at the end of the nineteenth century, but 2016 can be considered a turning point as the phrase went viral. We will analyze why people spread false information and how to fight this new threat without jeopardizing our freedom and privacy. In the past three years, things have changed quickly and deeply and most schools have begun to prepare children and students to spot false information online and to develop media literacy and critical thinking. Part three presents two cases of academic hoaxes. This is an interesting philosophical problem: Should we lie and deceive people in order to expose the truth? The first case is particularly important as it is the birth of computergenerated papers. Ironically, Stribling, Aguayo, and Krohn in 2005 lied to expose the flaws of some conferences and academic journals (the worst would be to publish a submission without even reading it) and the rise of nonsensical papers. The other hoax is more recent and got more criticism. The so-called grievance studies affair, or “Sokal Squared” scandal (named after Alan Sokal’s 1996 hoax in Social Text) had considerable backlash. Many academics praised the hoax for exposing flaws in the fields of the humanities and social sciences, but some accused the authors of the hoax (James A. Lindsay, Peter Boghossian, and Helen Pluckrose) of conducting academic fraud and dishonesty. “TRUTH, ABOVE ALL” In Montoneri (2016), I discuss the notions of truth and virtue through the ages, notably in the works of Homer, Plato, Cicero, Virgil, Thomas Malory, and Benjamin Franklin. One of my favorite quotes is without a doubt Merlin’s answer to King Arthur in the movie Excalibur (1981), the best adaptation of Sir Thomas Malory’s Le Morte d’Arthur (1485): Arthur: “Which is the greatest quality of knighthood? Courage? Compassion? Loyalty? Humility? What do you say, Merlin?” [ . . . ]

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 169

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Merlin: “All right, then. Truth. That’s it, yes, it must be truth, above all. When a man lies he murders some part of the world. You should know that.” (Montoneri, 2016, p. 149)

Before we reflect on what happened during the two first decades of the twenty-first century, perhaps we should go back in time and meditate on what Plato said about the notion of truth. In this first section, we are going to concentrate on the Allegory of the Cave and see how it is still relevant more than twenty-four centuries later. Plato (around 428–348 BC) is not only credited for being the founder of the Academy in c. 387 BC in Athens (considered to be the first university in the Western world), he is also the student of Socrates (470–399 BC) and the teacher of Aristotle (384–322 BC). Ironically, his master, Socrates, one of the founders of Western philosophy and Western ethical tradition, which emphasizes virtues of mind and honesty, got arrested and trialed in 399 BC and was found guilty of corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens, and sentenced to death. According to Encyclopædia Britannica (2009), “Socrates was indeed corrupting the youth of Athens, though he himself considered the destruction of beliefs that could not stand up to criticism as a necessary preliminary to the search for true knowledge.” Plato wanted to pursue a career in politics, but after the death of Socrates, he turned to philosophy. In The Republic (360 BC), Plato discusses, among other things, the notion of truth. He notably introduces the famous Allegory of the Cave in Book VII (514 a, 2 to 517 a, 7; cf. Plato, 1969); Plato has Socrates present an allegory to his student Glaucon (Plato’s brother): some people are imprisoned in a cave (“from childhood,” not birth; Plato, 1969, 514a) in which they are forced to watch shadows on a wall in front of them; the cave represents empirical evidence (sensory knowledge). The prisoners consider the shadows to be real, but they are misled by their senses. Socrates imagines that one prisoner escapes and is able to see the light (the fire, and then the sun), the puppets, and the artists making them move (“It seems most likely that the puppeteers represent the poets and the script followed is the poly and theocentric worldview they sustain in their poetry,” Eckert, 2012, p. 45). Eckert (2012) also notes that the shadow-play is coherent, consistent, and comprehensive, so that the prisoners do not grow suspicious and continue to believe what they can hear and see. True knowledge can only be found outside of the cave, but the process is disturbing and painful. Plato considers that the light (knowledge, the world of reality and Ideas, the nonphysical forms) can only be found by crawling out of the cave, that is, by being educated in logical and critical thinking, and by using reason: [. . .] in the world of knowledge the idea of good appears last of all, and is seen only with an effort; and, when seen, is also inferred to be the universal author of

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

170

Bernard Montoneri

all things beautiful and right, parent of light and of the lord of light in this visible world, and the immediate source of reason and truth in the intellectual; and that this is the power upon which he who would act rationally, either in public or private life must have his eye fixed. (Plato, 1991)

Socrates invites Glaucon to think about what would happen if someone who has lived in the cave for so many years could set himself free. He “would be able to look upon the sun itself and see its true nature” (Plato, 1969, 516b). The prisoner would first see the firelight; then, he would slowly get out of the cave and would gaze directly at the sun, a metaphor for human beings’ ability to conceive of the truth. He would then probably pity the other “strange prisoners” (515a) and would try to set them free (516c). The prisoners in the cave are passive observers, but knowledge requires a proactive attitude (taking control, being flexible and able to learn from criticism), some courage and determination. Plato believes that most people would be scared and would refuse to trust the philosopher who wishes to enlighten them. The prisoners would be dazzled by the light of the sun. But they would feel pain and anger and would certainly not only distrust, but kill anyone who attempts to drag them out of the cave (517a). This is obviously a reference to the fact that his master, Socrates, was forced to kill himself by drinking the hemlock (Frey, 1978, argues that Socrates took the hemlock willingly). As Mark Twain famously said, “The glory which is built upon a lie soon becomes a most unpleasant incumbrance. . . . How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and how hard it is to undo that work again!” (Twain, 1906). Can people who have been fooled, misled, or brainwashed listen to reason and logic? Can they see the light? How would they react when exposed to other viewpoints? Why would people prefer to share fake news than true information?

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

THE GROWTH OF FAKE NEWS AND MISLEADING INFORMATION Fake News in the Twenty-First Century Sir Tim Berners-Lee, a Professorial Fellow of computer science at the University of Oxford and a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), is the recipient of the 2016 Turing Award “for inventing the World Wide Web, the first web browser, and the fundamental protocols and algorithms allowing the Web to scale” (Haigh, 2016). In 2017, Berners-Lee warned the world of three disturbing internet trends and threats: citizensurveillance, cyber-warfare, and fake news (Swartz, 2017). He notably said that “the current business model for many websites offers free content in

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 171

exchange for personal data” and that “misinformation, or fake news, which is surprising, shocking, or designed to appeal to our biases, can spread like wildfire” (Berners-Lee, 2017). Even though the expression fake news is not recent (“Fake news appears to have begun seeing general use at the end of the 19th century,” according to Merriam-Webster, 2017), 2016 can be considered a turning point because of the surprising election results in some Western countries, notably the US presidential election (Holan, 2016; Connolly et al., 2016; Guess, Nyhan, & Reifler, 2018), that was integral to “Fake news” going viral in 2016 (Sarlin, 2018). As a matter of fact, Collins Dictionary’s lexicographers, who monitor the 4.5 billion word Collins corpus, said that “usage of the term had increased by 365% since 2016” (Flood, 2017). The term was selected by Collins as the “word” of the year 2017 (Collins Dictionaries, 2017). Collins also selected “echo chamber” as one of the top expressions of 2017, defined as a “perfect metaphor for the world of social media, where many people only talk with those who agree with them” (Collins Dictionaries, 2017). At the same time, “post-truth” (Keyes, 2004; Kalpokas, 2019) was selected by Oxford Dictionaries as the word of the year in 2016 because emotion and personal belief seem to have become more “influential in shaping public opinion” than objective facts and because “truth itself has become irrelevant” (Oxford Dictionaries, 2016). According to Picciotto (2018), “The contemporary post-truth phenomenon is characterized by denial of facts and tolerance of politicians’ lies” that appeal to the highly emotively charged beliefs of some of the population.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

The Use of the Expression “Fake News” in Its Modern Context According to the global report for 2017-2018 published by UNESCO (2018), “‘Fake news’ is not simply ‘false’ news.” A lie becomes “fake news” when it gains the ability to travel fast and far, that is, when it is “retransmitted by hundreds of websites, cross-posted over thousands of social media accounts and read by hundreds of thousands” (Bounegru et al., 2017). Fake news is now part of our daily life (Connolly et al., 2016; Young, 2017). Fake news stories are ubiquitous and pervasive on the internet and can reach millions (Garcia and Lear, 2016); as to the consequences of spreading lies and false information, they can be dire (Akpan, 2016; Burgess, 2018). What makes this type of misinformation dangerous is both the lack of critical thinking (Wineburg et al., 2016; MindEdge, 2017; Williams, 2017) and the desire to share news, knowledge, and information on social media as quickly as possible, with little to no filtering (“People form an opinion based on a summary, or a summary of summaries, without making the effort to go

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

172

Bernard Montoneri

deeper,” according to Arnaud Legout, cited by Shah, 2016). Legout is one of the co-authors of Gabielkov et al. (2016), who found that 59 percent of people who share news URLs on Twitter don’t read them. Technology and social media, especially Facebook (Silverman, 2016; Lekach, 2017; Sarlin, 2018) help share fake news and information. According to Joanna Burkhardt:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram are fertile ground for the spread of fake news. Algorithms known as bots are increasingly being deployed to manipulate information, to disrupt social media communication, and to gain user attention. (Burkhardt, 2017)

In fact, according to a study published by Pew Research Center, 67 percent of Facebook’s users get their news there, as do 71 percent of Twitter’s users and 73 percent of Reddit users (Pew Research Center, 2018). Social media news users expect information to be inaccurate; they are especially concerned about “unreliable sources, lack of fact checking, and fake news” (Pew Research Center, 2018). Sadly, the biggest study ever on the spread of fake news on Twitter (using 126,000 rumors spread by three million people from 2007 to 2016), shows that falsehood is “diffused significantly farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth in all categories of information” (Vosoughi, Roy, & Aral, 2018). A false story “reaches 1,500 people six times quicker, on average, than a true story does” (Meyer, 2018). Falsehood is probably creating a sense of drama. Young (2008) shows that humor reduces critical argument scrutiny; as most people have a limited capacity to process information in working memory (Baddeley, 1998; Akpan, 2016), “humor’s effects on persuasion are certain to be influenced by the role of affect” (Young, 2008, p. 123). According to Young, in an interview on PBS News Hour, “the special sauce of humor is that you might get people to entertain ideas of constructs that they otherwise might reject out of hand [. . .] and this powerful mode of persuasion extends to sensational fake news as well” (Akpan, 2016). Some fake news websites seem to spread false information for financial gain (Silverman & Alexander, 2017); even though they “sometimes publish accurate information, they also frequently publish false claims, distort genuine news reports, and copy or repurpose content from other outlets” (Guess, Nyhan, & Reifler, 2018). According to Attkisson (2018), a five-time Emmy Award winner and recipient of the Edward R. Murrow award for investigative reporting, a nonprofit called First Draft “appears to be the about the first to use ‘fake news’ in its modern context.” She notes that “on September 13, 2016, First Draft announced a partnership to tackle malicious hoaxes and fake news reports” (Heine, 2018). Attkisson’s point is that Google was a founding partner and

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 173

donor behind First Draft (Abril, 2019) and that Eric Schmidt, the executive chairman of Alphabet Inc. (Google’s parent company) from 2015 to 2017 (he surprisingly resigned at the end of 2017; Heater, 2017), was a generous Hillary Clinton supporter (Heine, 2018). In her Tedx Talk at the University of Nevada, Attkisson also notes that the fake news narrative was pushed by Democrat politicians in 2016. Ironically, President Trump claimed the expression as his own and using it against the mainstream media and liberal politicians to disseminate truth and fiction alike. CNN (2017) says Trump claimed he invented the term “fake news”; he also used it to dismiss criticism against him or his administration (Ross & Rivers, 2018).

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

“Alternative Facts,” an Orwellian Sophism President Trump’s campaign strategist and counselor, Kellyanne Conway, in order to defend Sean Spicer’s false statement about the size of the crowd at Trump’s inauguration on January 20, 2017, coined the expression “alternative facts” in an interview on NBC (Meet the Press with Chuck Todd, on January 22, 2017). Chuck Todd’s reaction was immediate: “Look, alternative facts are not facts. They’re falsehoods” (Blake, 2017). A large number of people criticized Kellyanne Conway’s use of the expression “alternative facts.” Six language experts at Darmstadt University, Germany, chose “alternative facts” as the nonword of 2017, defining it as “the growing practice of replacing factual arguments with claims that cannot be proven” (The Associated Press, 2018). According to Kharpal (2017), Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz “expressed dismay at what he described as the undermining of the basis of a common agreement about what is truth”; Stiglitz notably added that: “Now we have an administration that says we have alternative facts. It’s going to be very very difficult to reach a consensus on the way forward if you’re questioning theory, you’re questioning facts.” Cohen (2017) argues that, “for Plato, there can, indeed, be alternative opinions, but not alternative facts because facts are eternal and unchangeable; they exist outside the limits of space and time, and outside of human minds.” Many called the phrase “alternative facts” Orwellian (Freeman, 2019); personally, it made me think of the Sophists. Actually, I heard about Sophistry Redux by Andrew Grosman (Grossman, 2019, notably p. 95) only a few days before I submitted my chapter. In this chapter, I use “Sophists” in its most pejorative sense, that is, Plato’s opinion of them. In fact, most of their writings survived only through the lens of Plato’s judgment in his books: a sophist would be an instructor who teaches deception for a high price. It is difficult to know whether Plato criticizes them fairly, but after all Aristophanes, in The Clouds (423 BC), called the Sophists hair-splitting instructors (Strepsiades,

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

174

Bernard Montoneri

an elderly farmer: “How’m I going to learn hair-splitting arguments, all that fancy stuff?,” Aristophanes, 2017, p. 17). Sophism is, in Aristophanes’ play, “an art whose purpose is not to bring objective truth to light, but to conquer the opponent, regardless of what he defends” (Schell, 1940, pp. 11-12). This is the core of the issue nowadays: for political or financial gain, some people may resort to deceptive and hair-splitting arguments in order to win their case no matter the moral or ethical cost: “The man of real power, therefore, needn’t be an expert in any single discipline but only a master manipulator [. . .] non-knowers are not merely unbiased by knowledge but are more likely to agree with one who shares their disposition” (Grossman, 2019, p. 98). Credibility and Trust

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

People expect journalists to report the truth (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2007; Tandoc, Lim & Ling, 2018). Fake data and fake or distorted news are at a record high and an increasing number of people mistrust not only the media (Knight Foundation, 2018), but also experts and challenge scientificly proven facts (“People are prone to resist scientific claims when they clash with intuitive beliefs,” Gawande, 2016). Of course the media share some responsibility in the current situation. After all, if so many people turn away from the mainstream media (Ingram, 2018), it is because of a series of scandals and blatant lies that nobody has forgotten; for example, millions of people around the world remember the infamous “weapons of mass destruction” of Iraq: “most American media did not act to check and balance the exercise of executive power, essential to the functioning of a civil democracy” (from Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Media: Anatomy of a Failure by Moeller, 2004). As a result, “no media outlet is considered credible any longer” (Hempel, 2016). Vazquez (2016) sums up the situation quite clearly: “Why do people believe fake news? It’s not because it gets shared all over Facebook; it’s because they don’t trust mainstream news.” Children and Students Lack of Preparation to Face the Flood of Fake News According to Silverman and Singer-Vine (2016), a 2016 BuzzFeed survey shows that “fake news headlines fool American adults about 75% of the time.” As to children and students, they have not been sufficiently educated on these threats and lack media literacy: a 2018 UK survey shows that 53.5 percent of the instructors “believe that the national curriculum does not equip children with the literacy skills they need to identify fake news, and a third (35.2%) feel the critical literacy skills taught in schools are not transferable to the real world”

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 175

(National Literacy Trust, 2018). The report notably shows that only 2 percent of schoolchildren in the United Kingdon are able to recognize fake news. Loos, Ivan, and Leu (2018), in a replication of a US empirical study in the Netherlands, show that only two out of twenty-seven schoolchildren (7 percent) are able to recognize that the website Save the Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus (http://chadoh.github.io/tree-octopus/index.html) is a fake. A study made by Stanford University’s History Education Group (HEG) in the United States (twelve states, 7,804 student responses) focusing on “news literacy, as well as students’ ability to judge Facebook and Twitter feeds, comments left in readers’ forums on news sites, blog posts, photographs and other digital messages that shape public opinion” (Donald, 2016); it shows that most students are not equipped to spot fake or misleading information and have difficulty distinguishing advertisements from news articles: “82 percent of middle school students couldn’t distinguish between a news story and one labeled as sponsored content” (Shellenbarger, 2016). Another study by the Knight Foundation shows that 45 percent struggle to discern real news from fake news (Callahan, 2018). Solutions to Fight Fake News Fighting misleading information is a complex and difficult challenge. Surely, many types of solutions can be implemented. According to Lazer et al. (2017), there are three main courses of solutions to fight fake news in the United States: to make the discussion bipartisan and invite conservatives in the debate, to work with journalists in order to “make the truth louder,” and to conduct new research or replicate prior studies. In this chapter, I present three ways to fight fake news:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Education Research suggests that people with better literacies are more likely to spot and refute fake news (Jang & Kim, 2018; Mihailidis & Viotty, 2017). According to Jones-Jang, Mortensen, and Liu (2019), “information literacy, which emphasizes users’ abilities to navigate and locate verified and reliable information, was positively associated with fake news identification.” Their study shows that the other forms of literacy, such as media literacy, are not positively associated with the likelihood of identifying fake news stories. According to Zannettou et al. (2018), “a system that can meaningfully assist in detecting false information across multiple formats does not exist” (most studies focus only on one format, that is, pictures, or text, or video). They also add that “a post from an expert on a particular subject should not be treated with the same weight as a post by a typical user.” However,

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

176

Bernard Montoneri

credibility based on user profiling is very subjective and may cause privacy issues. While direct contradiction does not seem to be efficient, Lazer et al. (2017) show that shaming websites which post misleading information is more useful. Moreover, as people are generally “biased information-seekers,” they prefer information that supports their view. As mentioned before, fake news is “designed to appeal to our biases” (Berners-Lee, 2017). His definition highlights the fact that we are all biased (Kahneman & Tversky, 1973; Kahneman, 2011). Fleming (2019) asks two important questions: “If humans have the capacity for reason, why do we make so many bad decisions? How come people cling to extreme or irrational views in the face of facts?” In a 2014 study, Mercier and colleagues found only 22 percent of participants could solve a reasoning task on their own, but when small groups discussed their thinking, this rose to 63 percent. “If people are reasoning on their own or only with people they agree with, nine times out of 10 they will stick to biased positions and you are going to get polarization,” he says. “But if you take a group of people with some kind of common incentive, but who disagree about something, then reason can help them get a better answer” (Fleming, 2019). I find the idea of public people shaming very disturbing and we probably need more positive solutions and encouragement to share the truth. Children need to know that if they fight misleading information and share facts, they will be protected and praised. As to scholars, they have to set an example of good behavior so that children can look up to them. Gibbs (2019) argues that academics should be “truth-tellers.” Many schools around the world have decided to teach children about fake news and how to spot misleading information, especially online. BBC (2019) says that in the United Kingdom, “children in primary school and secondary school will learn about fake news from 2020.” Other countries vow to teach schoolchildren about fake news (Smith, 2017). Finland ranks first out of thirty-five countries in resilience to the posttruth phenomenon (Mackintosh, 2018). This will, hopefully, have many follow on benefits, such as reducing cheating at school, plagiarism or contract cheating. Technology First, there are numerous fact-checking sites available, such as Snopes, Politifact, and FactCheck.org. In Finland, for example, fact-checking agency Faktabaari (FactBar) created a digital literacy “toolkit” for students (Mackintosh, 2018). Second, we can use platforms like Statcheck and high tech tools to help with the reviewing process to make sure scientific knowledge is valid, accurate, and reliable. Journalists must make sure they don’t share academic hoaxes, fake papers, and fake data in their newspapers.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 177

Despite the fact that, according to Shao et al. (2016) and Ferrara et al. (2016), “social bots” have become influential in spreading fake news online, artificial intelligence (AI) and bots may also help detect and flag them. Artificial Intelligence Review Assistant (AIRA), Evise (from Elsevier) and many others cannot only check submissions, but also suggest peer reviewers. It might also be useful to revise some of the algorithms to reduce the appearance of fake news (Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017). More recently, IGI Global has released a handbook on fake news. The New York Times and IBM are collaborating on high tech solutions to fight fake news, using blockchain technology (Chiluwa & Samoilenko, 2020). Clayton et al. (2019) show that tagging headlines as “Rated false” or “Disputed” may provoke more skepticism toward false news, but may also cause distrust of legitimate news. Pennycook, Bear, Collins, and Rand (2017) also show that the “Disputed” labels on Facebook might backfire. One of the main challenges of the new decade is certainly the fight against deep fakes, which might have dire consequences (The Guardian had a quite shocking piece entitled “You thought fake news was bad? Deep fakes are where truth goes to die,” Schwartz, 2018).

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Politics Despite the political pressure, notably in the United States and Europe, Facebook doesn’t even fact check political ads, but bans misleading content and ads about the 2020 census (Matyus, 2019). Former vice president of the United States Joe Biden, who is a candidate for president in the 2020 election says Section 230 should be revoked, meaning online companies could be held legally responsible for misinformation on their platforms (Nicol, 2020). Several countries have passed laws making it illegal to spread “false statements of fact” (Griffiths, 2019; Sasipornkarn, 2019; Jaswal, 2019). Even if some of these laws and regulations are useful, many people worry that they are Trojan horses for censorship and control of online speech. Deputy Asia director of Human Rights Watch Phil Robertson believes that the threat of fake news has been exaggerated and is used to ban information that government and countries do not want to see on the internet (Sasipornkarn, 2019). By the way, I found an amazing statement in the Detroit Free Press of September 20, 1866: “The French press knows little, and under laws which punish “false news,” and render a journal liable to suppression if it displeases the executive power, is naturally afraid to say what little it knows” (according to Merriam-Webster, 2017). Nothing has changed under the sun. China’s Ren Xianling of the Cyberspace Administration of China proposed a “reward and punish” system to fight fake news (Cadell, 2016). More recently, China has decided to censor fake news generated with AI and bots

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

178

Bernard Montoneri

beginning January 1, 2020 (AFP News, 2019). Ironically, China is also accused of spreading rumors and fake news in Taiwan (Lin, 2018). Singapore passed a law to fight fake news, which, according to companies like Google and Facebook, give the government “too much power in deciding what qualifies as true or false” (The Guardian, 2019). People need to reflect on how much freedom they want to lose over the fight against fake news. Exposing lies is a necessity, as long as it is not an excuse to censor alternative voices and to silence the opposition. It would considerably damage the little trust people have left in politicians. Our next section focuses on the issue of trust in science and academic publishing, which is also jeopardized by the flood of fake research and data. Worse, according to Stanford University epidemiologist John Ioannidis, many scientific findings are unreliable or simply wrong and the majority of results are false. Too many publications contain exaggerated claims and inflated results (Moody, 2017). LYING TO EXPOSE ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

A Turning Point: SCIgen and the Birth of Computer-Generated Papers According to Dunne (2019), “Computer-generated papers (CGP) pose a serious problem to academic integrity and publishing. The problem began with SCIgen.” Montoneri (2018) briefly discusses the case of Jeremy Stribling, Dan Aguayo, and Maxwell Krohn, the three computer-science graduates at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge who wrote in 2005 the infamous SCIgen, a computer program able to generate “academic” papers. According to Conner-Simons (2015), “SCIgen emerged out of Krohn’s previous work as co-founder of the online study guide SparkNotes, which included a generator of high-school essays that was based on ‘contextfree grammar.’” Impact and Consequences of Hoaxes According to Collins English Dictionary (2014), a hoax is “a deception, esp[ecially] a practical joke.” Some hoaxes are pranks and tricks, such as in the cases we discuss in the following section; others are frauds, usually to take money from someone. One of the first famous academic hoaxes was perpetuated in 1996 by Alan Sokal, a professor of mathematics at University College London and a professor of physics at New York University. He was curious

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 179

to see whether Social Text (Duke University Press), a nonpeer-reviewed journal focusing on postmodern cultural studies, would accept his nonsensical article entitled “Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity. Social Text” (Sokal, 1996a). Sokal (1996b) reveals that the paper was a hoax. He notably writes: “Throughout the article, I employ scientific and mathematical concepts in ways that few scientists or mathematicians could possibly take seriously” (Sokal, 1996b, p. 2) and “What’s more surprising is how readily they accepted my implication that the search for truth in science must be subordinated to a political agenda” (3). A large number of academic hoaxes have been perpetrated since then (Bohannon’s hoax for example; he published his report in Science: Bohannon, 2013); we only discuss two in detail to see their impact and influence. Obviously, academic hoaxes involve submitting false information, fabricating data and nonsensical results; it is wasting editors and reviewers’ time and energy and the authors of these hoaxes might be subject to ethical criticism. My advice, as an editor for many years, is to make sure every submission is read very carefully by three to five specialists in the field. In my experience, lots of scholars around the world are willing to join editorial teams and help review papers. For example, the IAFOR Journal of Education I cofounded and edited for years has now a team of more than eighty scholars.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Case 1 In 2005, Stribling, Aguayo, and Krohn submitted an article generated with SCIgen to the World Multiconference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, or WMSCI. As disturbing as that sounds, the nonsensical paper entitled “Rooter: a methodology for the typical unification of access points and redundancy” submitted by Jeremy Stribling and coauthored with Daniel Aguayo and Maxwell Krohn, was accepted as a nonreviewed paper (Sample, 2014). The article is still available at this address: https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/ archive/scigen/rooter.pdf. According to the three pranksters on their webpage (https://pdos.csail.mit .edu/archive/scigen), the main objectives of the computer program were to “to maximize amusement” and to expose “bogus conferences,” that is, conferences with very low standards that appear to accept nonsensical articles with obviously no peer-review process. WMSCI organizers learned of the prank and disinvited them, but the three graduate students in the PDOS research group at MIT CSAIL decided to do their talk anyway; after receiving donations, they used the money “to hold our own session at the same hotel as WMSCI 2005” in Orlando, Florida. Stribling made a randomly-generated talk called “Synthesizing Checksums and Lambda Calculus using Jog,” and

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

180

Bernard Montoneri

pretended to be a certain Dr. Mark Zarqawi, from the American Freedom University. Daniel Aguayo and Maxwell Krohn also used an alias: Dan was Franz T. Shenkrishnan, PhD, Network Analysis Laboratories and Max was Dr. Thaddeus Westerson, Institute for Human Understanding (sic) and presented a randomly-generated talk. They videotaped the three presentations and posted the movies on their site. According to Ball (2005), WMSCI’s general chairman, Nagib Callaos, was based in Venezuela and had no listed academic affiliation. Professor Jeff Erickson, who was an associate professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 2005, defended the three pranksters in his blog and perfectly summed up the main issue: “Callaos seems unaware of the differences between “review” and “sanity check.” It’s one thing to accept some submissions without review; it’s quite another to accept papers without reading them at all.” He also adds:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

The acceptance letters are sent from a Venezuelan email address, but include an office building in Orlando as a return address; the conference website is full of meaningless pseudo-intellectual gibberish; and most tellingly, they send ridiculous amounts of spam to attract submissions. These are not actions of a reputable publisher. (Erickson, 2005)

As a matter of fact, WMSCI is, according to Krohn, a conference known for “being spammy and having loose standards” (Conner-Simons, 2015). Stribling, Aguayo, and Krohn write in the “about” section of their website: “One useful purpose for such a program is to auto-generate submissions to conferences that you suspect might have very low submission standards. A prime example, which you may recognize from spam in your inbox” (https://pdos. csail.mit.edu/archive/scigen). Actually, just as I was writing this paragraph, I received several spam emails in my mailbox praising my work and asking me to submit a paper to bogus journals included on Beall’s list (Beall, 2012; Quek & Teo, 2018; Montoneri, 2018). As we all know, these spams always begin with the infamous “I have had an opportunity to read your paper . . . published in . . . and believe that you are an expert in this field.” Academic spamming includes “inventive language, flattery, and exuberance” (Grey et al., 2016); it is often sent by bots (“almost 30% of the spam and content spread on the Internet originates from these software bots,” according to Burkhardt, 2017) and usually forgets to tell the author(s) that a publication fee must be paid if the paper is accepted (“less than 25% of e-mails from predatory journals mentioned publication fees,” according to Burggren et al., 2018), that is, almost always, one or two weeks after submission, as long as the author(s) can pay hundreds of US dollars (Fast Company, 2015). “These charges were often told to the authors after the article had been accepted for

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 181

publication. This is akin to paying a ransom for your article to be known in the academic arena” (Quek & Teo, 2018). Stribling (2009, p. 8) says:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Nagib Callaos deserves much of the credit for my fifteen minutes of fame, as do Max and Dan, the SCIgen donors, Dr. Thaddeus Westerson, Dr. Mark Zarqawi, and Franz T. Shenkrishnan, PhD. And those are just the people who influenced my research directly.

I was surprised to find Stribling, Aguayo, and Krohn (2005) on ResearchGate (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247434752_Rooter_A_Method ology_for_the_Typical_Unification_of_Access_Points_and_Redundancy) when I wrote this chapter. As of January 2020, it had 136 reads, 2 citations and a research interest score of 1.5. One of my concerns is that RG is offering “related research,” that is, genuine academic papers, related to this hoax. The fake paper is also on Academia, which also offers related research (https:// www.academia.edu/4880269/Rooter_A_Methodology_for_the_Typical_ Unification_of_Access_Points_and_Redundancy). It is not that surprising: McCook (2015) for example showed that “Half of anesthesiology fraudster’s papers continue to be cited years after retractions.” Little progress seems to have been made on this issue. Two decades ago, Pfeifer and Snodgrass (1990) showed that 82 completely retracted articles still got cited 733 times after retraction. Clearly, once a lie or an error has spread, it is difficult to set the record straight as Mark Twain said. WMSCI started in Baden-Baden, Germany, in 1995 and is often held in Orlando, Florida. Until 2005, WMSCI allowed around 15 percent of non­ reviewed submissions and the three MIT graduate students’ fake research was accepted in this category. Probably because of the scandal caused by the acceptance of the computer-generator nonsensical submission, since 2006, nonreviewed papers are not accepted anymore; moreover, authors have access to the reviews of their accepted papers. To defend themselves after the 2005 scandal, the International Institute of Informatics and Systemics (IIIS), which organized the 2005 WMSCI conference, notably stated in their very lengthy acceptance policy: This is one of the reasons why, in ICSIT Conferences, we accepted in the past non-reviewed papers taking the intrinsic risks of this kind of paper acceptances. Deception was a risk that was not perceived at the moment of examining the risks of this kind of acceptance policy. (International Institute of Informatics and Systemics, 2019)

The first CGP created with SCIgen was clearly a prank submitted to what the three MIT graduates thought was a bogus conference. However, after

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

182

Bernard Montoneri

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

their fake paper got accepted, the online free program became famous and a lot of “researchers” used it to cheat in order to increase their publication record. After 2005, a fast growing number of nonsensical CGP got submitted, not because the author(s) wanted to expose flaws in academia and publishing anymore, but because of “the publish or perish paradigm that drives desperate faculty to compromise academic integrity by submitting CGP to journals” (Dunne, 2019). As anybody can generate a paper, pretend to be a scholar and submit gibberish to international conferences and academic journals, a lot of people succumbed to the temptation. The most disturbing fact is that all types of journals got caught into retraction scandals, even the most prestigious. Springer (Germany) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) in New York City retracted around 120 conference proceedings in 2014 after Cyril Labbé, a French computer scientist, discovered that the articles were generated with SCIgen (Labbé & Labbé, 2012; Van Noorden, 2014). According to McCook (2018), the Retraction Watch database records that around 40 percent of the retractions originate from conference abstracts submitted to IEEE. The spike in retractions is between 2009 and 2011. In total, more than 7,300 abstracts got quietly removed, most of them submitted from China. Reasons for retractions are vague. However, Brainard and You (2018) provide more precise information and data on the main reasons for retraction: first, they noted that the blog Retraction Watch included 18,000 retracted papers and conference abstracts, from the 1970s to 2018; the withdrawal is often due to honest error, not always to deliberate fraud. However, Science and Retraction Watch analyzed about 10,500 retracted journal articles and found out that “much of the rise appears to reflect improved oversight at a growing number of journals” and that “the majority of retractions have involved scientific fraud (fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism) or other kinds of misconduct (such as fake peer review)” (Brainard & You, 2018). According to McCook (2017), Springer retracted 64 papers from 10 journals in 2015 and 107 in 2017 over fake peer reviews. Case 2 The grievance studies affair, or Sokal Squared scandal (named after Alan Sokal’s 1996 hoax in Social Text), started in 2017. The hoax was elaborated by Peter Boghossian (assistant professor of philosophy, Portland State University), James Lindsay (writer), and Helen Pluckrose, (writer and editor of Areo online magazine). The trio submitted twenty nonsensical papers to academic journals in the field of postmodernism. Cogent Social Sciences (affiliated with Taylor & Francis) accepted to publish one of their articles entitled “The conceptual penis as a social construct” (which contains sentences such as

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 183

“the conceptual penis is better understood not as an anatomical organ but as a social construct isomorphic to performative toxic masculinity”; Lindsay & Boyle, 2017). James A. Lindsay and Peter Boghossian immediately revealed it was a hoax to discredit gender studies (Jaschik, 2017). It should be noted that one of the editors of NORMA: International Journal for Masculinity Studies immediately rejected the submission, adding: “we thought it was sheer nonsense” (Jaschik, 2017). The paper got of course taken down; it is archived on Wayback Machine (Lindsay and Boyle, 2017). As Peter Boghossian is a university professor, the Oregon university’s institutional review board started disciplinary proceedings in 2018 against him for violation of Portland State’s ethical guidelines. Some criticized the papers because they seem “to humiliate entire fields while the authors gin up publicity for themselves without having made any scholarly contributions whatsoever” (Mangan, 2019). But around one hundred scholars defended Boghossian, including Steven Pinker, a professor of psychology at Harvard University, and the famous Alan Sokal himself, now at University College London. As of February 2020, he is still an assistant professor at Portland State University. I like what James Lindsay wrote about the hoax: “We hope the increased attention on gender scholarship either vindicates the field, if it has no problems, or initiates the housecleaning it needs, if it does” (Jaschik, 2017), it sounds like “he himself considered the destruction of beliefs that could not stand up to criticism as a necessary preliminary to the search for true knowledge” I mentioned earlier (Encyclopædia Britannica, 2009). Interestingly, one of Boghossian’s areas of expertise is the Socratic method that encourages critical thinking. McBain (2018) notes that journalists were the first to grow suspicious of the papers published by the trio; the media attention made them cut their hoax short. As journalists regularly relay scientific discoveries in their newspaper, they can also help to check the validity and reliability of the publications they read. McBain considers that the pranksters wanted to expose the partisan and intolerance of some journals and campuses in the United States. Academic hoaxes are a test, not only for scholars and publishers, but also for journalists and newspapers. However, a more positive approach would probably have a better impact, that is, exposing the papers already published that contain nonsense and false claims, instead of adding more nonsensical papers. At least, the authors would have real publications and more recognition from the scientific community. Below is Table 9.1, which I designed with some advice and solutions already implemented to fight fake news and fake research. Obviously, it is not an exhaustive list.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Table 9.1.  Advice and Solutions to Fight Fake News and Fake Research Solutions

Fake News

Fake Research

Sanity check

“For the modern newspaper reader, reading the headline of a news item replaces the reading of the whole story” (Luu, 2019). Gabielkov et al. (2016): 59 percent of people who share news URLs on Twitter don’t read them. People tend to share on social media without reading or checking (Harnett, 2018).

Erickson (2005): “It’s one thing to accept some submissions without review; it’s quite another to accept papers without reading them at all.” The editor and at least two reviewers (specialists in the field) should carefully read the entire submission (Council of Science Editors, 2012).

Education

Jones-Jang, Mortensen, & Liu (2019): “information literacy […] was positively associated with fake news identification.” In many countries now, schoolchildren learn how to spot fake news (BBC, 2019; Smith, 2017; Mackintosh, 2018).

“Rebutting bad science may not be effective, but asserting the true facts of good science is” (Gawande, 2016). Lazer et al. (2017): “Make the truth louder.”

Technology

Using machine algorithms, AI (Fabula AI, Good News), and blockchain to detect and contain fake news (Waugh, 2019: MIT study of 2018 found that AI 65 percent effective in detecting fake news). Online fact checkers: PolitiFact, Snopes, Fact Checker, Full Fact… The New York Times and IBM are collaborating on high tech solutions to fight fake news, using blockchain technology (Chiluwa & Samoilenko, 2020).

Automated plagiarism detection tools such as iThenticate, Turnitin, are useful, but results of the evaluation should be checked by human reviewers. Lavoie & Krishnamoorthy (2010) were able to identify Scigen papers using Algorithmic Detection. Also on Scigen detection: Labbé, Labbé, & Portet (2013); Nguyen (2018).

Laws, regulations

Facebook doesn’t even fact check political ads, but bans misleading content and ads about the 2020 census (Matyus, 2019). Joe Biden says Section 230 should be revoked, meaning

Academic misconduct is punished by universities and by journals. In China: after Springer in 2017 retracted 107 papers by Chinese authors, Beijing vowed to severely punish (deprived of funding, sacked, publicly

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 185

Solutions

Fake News

Fake Research

  online companies could be held legally responsible for misinformation on their platforms (Nicol, 2020). China’s Ren Xianling of the Cyberspace Administration of China for a “reward and punish” system to fight fake news (Cadell, 2016). Several countries passed laws making it illegal to spread “false statements of fact” (Griffiths, 2019; Sasipornkarn, 2019; Jaswal, 2019).

  shamed) the offenders for damaging the reputation of the country (Chen, 2017). Oransky (2014) discusses the case of the scandal involving Taiwan’s Education Minister Chiang Wei-ling, who got forced to resign (peer review ring). The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), founded in 1997, provides guidelines on the ethics of scholarly publishing (COPE, 1999).

CONCLUSION Oxford Dictionaries’ statement from 2016 that “truth itself has become irrelevant” is shocking and worrisome. Fake news, fake data and fake research clearly undermine the idea of truth and the trust of the people in the media and the scientific community. On the bright side, things are moving fast and a lot of reliable research and studies have been published on these issues and this is an opportunity, notably for the younger generation to be better prepared by learning logic, reason, and critical thinking.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

It’s true that social media and the ubiquity of digital platforms have made spreading false or biased information easier. But the core issue isn’t just technology—and neither can it be solved with better fake-news filters or algorithms. (Timsit, 2019)

The creation and spread of fake news is a human problem. We can of course use bots and software, and make laws, but we obviously need to educate people to learn “the skills to absorb, assess, and sort the unprecedented amounts of information coming from new technologies” (Timsit, 2019). The same is true with the issues of fake publications (including computergenerated papers, fake peer-review, identity theft, fake or doctored data, and so on) and plagiarism. Journalists and scholars must set the example and share unbiased and truthful information and knowledge. Since 1947, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists maintains the Doomsday Clock, a symbol representing the risk of humanity destroying itself, because

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

186

Bernard Montoneri

of man-made global catastrophes and unchecked scientific and technical advances. At the time, the main threat was nuclear war. On January 23, 2020, the clock got the closest ever to midnight:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Information warfare and a looming space arms race are among the emerging threats that led a group of scientists today to reset their iconic Doomsday Clock to 100 seconds to midnight. [. . .] Other risks feeding the new Doomsday Clock setting were the dissemination of fake news online, unregulated genetic engineering, and hypersonic weapons developed by Russia and the United States. (Ortega, 2020)

My three major concerns over the dissemination of fake news and the spread of fake research are the potential to affect election results (Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017), the risk of war based on misleading information (Goldman, 2016) and the spread of useless or false results in the field of medicine, especially with the risk of a global epidemic (Molteni, 2020). As we can already see on the news, fake news and misinformation about the Wuhan virus is spreading fast and fueling racism and xenophobia around the world. “Discrimination is not acceptable. It is not helpful and spreading misinformation does not offer anyone protection,” said Dr. Eileen de Villa, Medical Officer of Health, Toronto Public Health, at the end of January 2020. She added, “I want to remind people to check credible, evidence-based sources to get the facts when seeking information” (Sutton, 2020). Governments, however, need to pay more attention to privacy and liberty concerns. Censoring information and randomly branding anything fake news can be dangerous and counterproductive; for example, many begin to criticize China for turning against people who tried to warn the media and the politicians of the threat of the coronavirus: “Politicians downplayed the severity of the virus, while police went after ‘rumormongers’ and censors deleted any commentary that questioned the official line” (Griffiths, 2020). Labeling information “fake news” should not be a weapon to silence voices and create an atmosphere of “white terror.” And going after whistleblowers who tell the truth and want to prevent catastrophes (“rumormongers” were in fact “medical workers trying to warn people of the potential dangers of the new virus,” Griffiths, 2020) shows that we have made little progress since the time of Socrates after all. I wanted to finish this chapter on a more positive note, so here it is: The National Science Foundation’s Daniel K. Inouye Solar Telescope (Hawaii) released a close-up high resolution view of the sun’s surface (National Science Foundation, 2020). These images give us the opportunity to gaze at the sun (including a picture taken at 789 nanometers), a star which has been active for about 5 billion years and that many civilizations worshiped as a god. Today is Sunday, February 2, 2020, and this is the end of my chapter.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 187

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Abril, D. (March 20, 2019). Google Introduces New Tools to Help Journalists Fight Fake News. Fortune. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://fortune.com/ 2019/03/20/google-new-tools-fight-fake-news. AFP News (November 30, 2019). China Bans ‘Fake News’ Created with AI, Bots. International Business Times. Retrieved February 2, 2020 from https://www .ibtimes.com/china-bans-fake-news-created-ai-bots-2876388. Akpan, N. (December 5, 2016). The very real consequences of fake news stories and why your brain can’t ignore them. PBS News Hour. Retrieved January 29, 2020 from https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/real-consequences-fake-news-stories -brain-cant-ignore. Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211-236. DOI: 10.1257/jep.31.2.211. Aristophanes (2017). Clouds: A Dual Language Edition. Greek Text Edited (1907) by F. W. Hall and W. M. Geldart, English Translation and Notes by Ian Johnston, Edited by Evan Hayes and Stephen Nimis. Oxford, Ohio: Faenum Publishing. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from http://www.faenumpublishing.com/uploads/2/3/9/8/23987979/ aristophanes_clouds_a_dual_language_edition_-_johnston.pdf. Attkisson, S. (February 13, 2018). Is Fake News Real? Tedx Talk. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://sharylattkisson.com/2018/02/is-fake-news-real-watch-my -tedx-talk-and-find-out. Baddeley, A. (1998). Human Memory. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Bailey, J. (August 15, 2019). The Rise of the Peer Review Bots. Plagiarism Today. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2019/08/15/ the-rise-of-the-peer-review-bots/. BBC (July 15, 2019). Fake news and how to spot it to be taught in schools. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/48988778. Beall, J. (2012). Predatory publishers are corrupting open access. Nature, 489(7415), 179. DOI: 10.1038/489179a. Berners-Lee, T. (March 12, 2017). Tim Berners-Lee: I invented the web. Here are three things we need to change to save it. The Guardian. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/11/tim-berners-lee -web-inventor-save-internet. Blake, A. (January 22, 2017). Kellyanne Conway says Donald Trump’s team has ‘alternative facts.’ Which pretty much says it all. Washington Post. Retrieved January 22, 2020 from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/22/ kellyanne-conway-says-donald-trumps-team-has-alternate-facts-which-pretty -much-says-it-all/. Bohannon, J. (2013). Who’s afraid of peer review? Science, 342(6154), 60-65. DOI: 10.1126/science.342.6154.60. Bounegru, L., Gray, J., Venturini, T., & Mauri, M. (2017). A Field Guide to Fake News: A Collection of Recipes for Those Who Love to Cook with Digital Methods (Chapters 1-3). Public Data Lab, Research Report. Retrieved January 22, 2020 from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3024202.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

188

Bernard Montoneri

Brainard, J., & You, J. (October 25, 2018). What a massive database of retracted papers reveals about science publishing’s ‘death penalty’. Science. Retrieved January 30, 2020 from https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/10/what-massive-database -retracted-papers-reveals-about-science-publishing-s-death-penalty. Burgess, M. (October 18, 2018). To fight fake news on WhatsApp, India is turning off the internet. Wired. Retrieved January 22, 2020 from https://www.wired.co.uk/ article/whatsapp-web-internet-shutdown-india-turn-off. Burggren, W., Madasu, D., Hawkins, K.S., & Halbert, M. (2018). Marketing via Email Solicitation by Predatory (and Legitimate) Journals: An Evaluation of Quality, Frequency, and Relevance. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 6 (General Issue), eP2246. DOI: 10.7710/2162-3309.2246. Burkhardt, J. M. (2017). Combating Fake News in the Digital Age. Library Technology Reports, 53(14). American Library Association. ProQuest 1967322547. Cadell, C. (November 20, 2016). China says terrorism, fake news impel greater global internet curbs. Reuters. November 20, 2016. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-internet-idUSKBN13F01K. Callahan, M. (October 16, 2018). Faced with a daily barrage of news, college students find it hard to tell what’s real and what’s ‘fake news’. Northeastern University. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https://news.northeastern.edu/2018/10/16/ faced-with-a-daily-barrage-of-news-college-students-find-it-hard-to-tell-whats -real-and-whats-fake-news. Chen, S. (July 28, 2017). 486 face punishment for links to China’s fake research paper scandal. South China Morning Post. Retrieved January 26, 2020 from https:// www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2104532/486-face-punishment-links -chinas-fake-research-paper-scandal. Chiluwa, I. E., & Samoilenko, S. A. (2020). The New York Times and IBM Partner to Save Journalism from “Fake News” Through Blockchain Technologies. Handbook of Research on Deception, Fake News, and Misinformation Online. IGI Global Publication. Retrieved February 2, 2020 from https://www.igi-global.com/book/ handbook-research-deception-fake-news/218293. Clayton, K., Blair, S., Busam, J. A., . . . & Nyhan, B. (2019). Real Solutions for Fake News? Measuring the Effectiveness of General Warnings and Fact-Check Tags in Reducing Belief in False Stories on Social Media. Political Behavior, 1–23. DOI: 10.1007/s11109-019-09533-0. CNN (October 26, 2017). Donald Trump just claimed he invented ‘fake news’. CNN. Analysis by Chris Cillizza. Retrieved January 22, 2020 from https://edition.cnn. com/2017/10/08/politics/trump-huckabee-fake/index.html. Cohen, E. D. (February 12, 2017). Plato’s Prognosis of “Alternative Facts.” Psychology Today. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://www.psychologytoday.com/ us/blog/what-would-aristotle-do/201702/plato-s-prognosis-alternative-facts. Collins English Dictionary (2014). Hoax. Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition. HarperCollins Publishers. Retrieved January 25 2020 from https://www.thefreedictionary.com/hoax. Collins Dictionaries (November 2, 2017). Etymology Corner—Collins Word of the Year 2017. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://www.collinsdictionary

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 189

.com/word-lovers-blog/new/etymology-corner-collins-word-of-the-year-2017,400 ,HCB.html. Conner-Simons, A. (April 14, 2015). How three MIT students fooled the world of scientific journals. MIT News. Retrieved January 22, 2020 from http://news.mit .edu/2015/how-three-mit-students-fooled-scientific-journals-0414. Connolly, K., Chrisafis, A., McPherson, P., Kirchgaessner, S., Haas, B., Phillips, D., Hunt, E., & Safi, M. (December 2, 2016). Fake news: an insidious trend that’s fast becoming a global problem. The Guardian. Retrieved January 22, 2020 from https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/dec/02/fake-news-facebook-us -election-around-the-world. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (1999). Guidelines on Good Publication Practice. In the Annual Report of 1999 (pp. 43-47). Retrieved on January 30, 2020 from https://publicationethics.org/files/u7141/1999pdf13.pdf. Council of Science Editors (March 30, 2012). Reviewer Roles and Responsibilities. Original section by Trudgett, A. in 2009. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https:// www.councilscienceeditors.org/resource-library/editorial-policies/white-paper-on -publication-ethics/2-3-reviewer-roles-and-responsibilities/. Donald, B. (November 22, 2016). Stanford researchers find students have trouble judging the credibility of information online. Stanford Graduate School of Education. Retrieved January 24, 2020 from https://ed.stanford.edu/news/stanford -researchers-find-students-have-trouble-judging-credibility-information-online. Dunne, M. (2019). Computer Generated Papers as a New Challenge to Peer Review. Graduate Theses & Non-Theses. Master of Science (MS). 210. Montana Tech. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://digitalcommons.mtech.edu/grad_rsch/210. Eckert, M. (2012). Cinematic Spelunking inside Plato’s Cave. Glimpse Journal, 9, 42-49. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://philpapers.org/archive/ECKCSI.pdf. Encyclopædia Britannica (2009). Ethics. Contributor: Peter Singer. Retrieved January 6, 2020 from https://www.britannica.com/topic/ethics-philosophy. Erickson, J. (April 19, 2005). On having a huge sadneess (sic). Retrieved on January 6, 2020 from https://3dpancakes.typepad.com/ernie/2005/04/sci_followup.html. Fast Company (January 27, 2015). Why a fake article titled “Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs?” was accepted by 17 Medical Journals. Retrieved on January 6, 2020 from https://www.fastcompany.com/3041493/why-a-fake-article-cuckoo-for-cocoa -puffs-was-accepted-by-17-medical-journals. Ferrara, E., Varol, O., Davis, C.A., Menczer, F., & Flammini. A. (2016). The rise of social bots. Communications of the ACM, 59(7), 96–104. DOI: 10.1145/2818717. Fleming, N. (January 12, 2019). Everyone is biased, including you: the play designed by neuroscientists. The Guardian. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://www .theguardian.com/science/2019/jan/12/psychology-of-group-reasoning-versus -individual. Flood, A. (November 2, 2017). Fake news is ‘very real’ word of the year for 2017. The Guardian. Retrieved January 18, 2020 from https://www.theguardian.com/ books/2017/nov/02/fake-news-is-very-real-word-of-the-year-for-2017. Fong, E. A., & Wilhite, A. W. (2017). Authorship and citation manipulation in academic research. PloS one, 12(12), e0187394. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187394.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

190

Bernard Montoneri

Freeman, F. (October 25, 2019). George Orwell and the fight against ‘alternative facts’. Retrieved January 18, 2020 from https://www.americamagazine.org/arts -culture/2019/10/25/george-orwell-and-fight-against-alternative-facts. Frey, R. (1978). Did Socrates Commit Suicide? Philosophy, 53(203), 106-108. Retrieved January 23, 2020 from www.jstor.org/stable/3749734. Gabielkov, M., Ramachandran, A., Chaintreau, A., & Legout, A. (2016). Social Clicks: What and Who Gets Read on Twitter? ACM SIGMETRICS / IFIP Performance 2016, Antibes Juan-les-Pins, France. Retrieved January 23, 2020 from https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01281190/document. Garcia, A., & Lear, J. (November 2, 2016). 5 stunning fake news stories that reached millions. CNN Business. Retrieved January 23, 2020 from https://money.cnn .com/2016/11/02/media/fake-news-stories/index.html. Gawande, A. (June 10, 2016). The Mistrust of Science. New Yorker. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-mistrust-of -science. Gibbs, P. (2019). Why academics should have a duty of truth telling in an epoch of post-truth? Higher Education, 78(3), 501–510. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-018-0354-y. Goldman, R. (December 24, 2016). Reading Fake News, Pakistani Minister Directs Nuclear Threat at Israel. New York Times. Retrieved January 26, 2020 from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/24/world/asia/pakistan-israel-khawaja-asif -fake-news-nuclear.html. Grey, A., Bolland, M. J., Dalbeth, N., Gamble, G., & Sadler, L. (2016). We read spam a lot: Prospective cohort study of unsolicited and unwanted academic invitations. British Medical Journal, 355. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i5383. Griffiths, J. (November 30, 2019). Singapore just used its fake news law. Critics say it’s just what they feared. CNN Business. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https:// edition.cnn.com/2019/11/29/media/singapore-fake-news-facebook-intl-hnk/index .html. Griffiths, J. (February 1, 2020). Anger over the Wuhan virus is sparking pushback against censorship in China. It won’t last. CNN. Retrieved February 1, 2020 from https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/31/asia/wuhan-virus-china-censorship-intl-hnk/ index.html. Grossman, A. (2019). Sophistry Redux. Mythology and Ancient Rhetoric Reborn in the Trump Age. In S. J. Murguia (Ed.), Trumping Truth: Essays on the Destructive Power of “Alternative Facts.” Jefferson, NC, United States: McFarland and Company. Guess, A., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (January 9, 2018). Selective exposure to misinformation: Evidence from the consumption of fake news during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign. Retrieved January 15, 2020 from https://www.dartmouth .edu/~nyhan/fake-news-2016.pdf. Haigh, T. (2016). A. M. Turing Award (Sir Tim Berners-Lee). Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved January 15, 2020 from https://amturing.acm.org/ award_winners/berners-lee_8087960.cfm. Haley, M. R. (2016). On the inauspicious incentives of the scholar-level h-index: an economist’s take on collusive and coercive citation. Applied Economics Letters, 24(2), 85–89. DOI: 10.1080/13504851.2016.1164812.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 191

Harnett, S. (May 17, 2018). People Don’t Read Everything They Share Online . . . and That’s a Big Problem. KQED Inc. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https:// www.kqed.org/news/11668494/people-dont-read-everything-they-share-online -and-thats-a-big-problem. Heater, B. (December 22, 2017). Eric Schmidt stepping down as Alphabet’s executive chairman to become a ‘technical advisor’. TechCrunch. Retrieved January 15, 2020 from https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/21/eric-schmidt-stepping-down-as -alphabets-executive-chairman-to-become-a-technical-advisor. Heine, D. (February 14, 2018). Sharyl Attkisson Explains the Origins of the 2016 ‘Fake News’ Narrative. TedX Talk. Retrieved January 15, 2020 from https:// pjmedia.com/video/sharyl-attkisson-explains-tedx-talk-origins-2016-fake-news -narrative/. Hempel, J. (November 16, 2016). According to Snopes, Fake News Is Not the Problem. Backchannel. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https://www.wired.com/ 2016/11/according-to-snopes-fake-news-is-not-the-problem/#.wt1ssy4ul. Ingram, M. (September 12, 2018). Most Americans say they have lost trust in the media. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https://www .cjr.org/the_media_today/trust-in-media-down.php. International Institute of Informatics and Systemics (2019). Acceptance policy for papers to be presented at conferences organized by IIIS. Retrieved on January 15, 2020 from http://www.iiis.org/acceptance-policy.asp. Jaschik, S. (May 25, 2017). How the Hoax Got Published. Inside Higher Education. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/ 2017/05/25/publisher-explains-how-article-about-viewing-male-organ-conceptual -got-published. Jaswal, M. (May 10, 2019). From Singapore to France: These countries have created laws to fight fake news. Business Today. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https:// www.businesstoday.in/current/world/fake-news-fake-news-law-singapore-fake -news-law-countries-that-have-fake-news-law-/story/345144.html. Jones-Jang, S. M., Mortensen, T., & Liu, J. (2019). Does Media Literacy Help Identification of Fake News? Information Literacy Helps, but Other Literacies Don’t. American Behavioral Scientist, 1-18. DOI: 10.1177/0002764219869406. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and Effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Kalpokas I. (2019). Post-truth: The Condition of Our Times. In: A Political Theory of Post-Truth, 9-49. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1007/9783-319-97713-3_2. Keyes, R. (2004). The Post-truth Era: Dishonesty and Deception in Contemporary Life. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Kharpal, A. (February 13, 2017). Trump alternative facts saga ‘disturbing’, says Nobel Prize-winner Stiglitz. CNBC. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://www .cnbc.com/2017/02/13/trump-alternative-facts-fake-news-disturbing-nobel-prize -winner-joseph-stiglitz.html. Knight Foundation (January 16, 2018). American views: Trust, media and democracy. 2017 Gallup/Knight Foundation Survey on Trust, Media and Democracy.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

192

Bernard Montoneri

Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https://knightfoundation.org/reports/american -views-trust-media-and-democracy/. Kovach, B., & Rosenstiel, T. (2007). The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and The Public Should Expect. 1st rev ed. New York: Three Rivers Press. Labbé, C., & Labbé, D. (2012). Duplicate and fake publications in the scientific literature: how many SCIgen papers in computer science? Scientometrics, 94(1). DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0781-y. Labbé, C., Labbé, D., & Portet, F. (2013). Detection of Computer-Generated Papers in Scientific Literature. In Creativity and Universality in Language. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303362310_ Detection_of_Computer-Generated_Papers_in_Scientific_Literature. Lavoie, A., & Krishnamoorthy, M. (2010). Algorithmic Detection of Computer Generated Text. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from arXiv:1008.0706. Lazer, D., Baum, M., Grinberg, Friedland, N. L., Joseph, K. Hobbs, W., & Mattsson, C. (May, 2, 2017). Combating Fake News: An Agenda for Research and Action. Harvard Kennedy School. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https://shorenstein center.org/combating-fake-news-agenda-for-research. Lekach, S. (December 21, 2017). ‘Misinformer of the Year’ award goes to Mark Zuckerberg. Mashable. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://mashable .com/2017/12/20/mark-zuckerberg-fake-news-misinformer-award. Lin, I-F. (November 24, 2018). Made-in-China fake news overwhelms Taiwan. Global Voices. Retrieved February 2, 2020 from https://globalvoices.org/2018/11/24/ made-in-china-fake-news-overwhelms-taiwan/. Lindsay, J., & and Boyle, P. (2017). The conceptual penis as a social construct. Cogent Social Sciences, 3, 1330439. Archived on Wayback Machine. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://web.archive.org/web/20170520194758/https://www .cogentoa.com/article/10.1080/23311886.2017.1330439.pdf. Loos, E., Ivan, L., & Leu, D. (2018). “Save The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus”: a hoax revisited. Or: how vulnerable are school children to Fake News? Information and Learning Science, 119(9, 10), 514-528. DOI: 10.1108/ILS-04-2018-0031. Luu, C. (November 20, 2019). The Incredibly True Story of Fake Headlines. JSTOR Daily. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https://daily.jstor.org/the-incredibly-true -story-of-fake-headlines. McBain, S. (17 October 2018). How academic hoaxes can prove helpful. The NewStateman. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://www.newstatesman.com/ politics/feminism/2018/10/how-academic-hoaxes-can-prove-helpful. McCook, A. (July 14, 2015). Half of anesthesiology fraudster’s papers continue to be cited years after retractions. Retrieved on January 20, 2020 from http:// retractionwatch.com/2015/07/14/half-of-anesthesiology-fraudsters-papers -continue-to-be-cited-years-after-retractions. McCook, A. (April 20, 2017). A new record: Major publisher retracting more than 100 studies from cancer journal over fake peer reviews. Retrieved on January 30, 2020 from http://retractionwatch.com/2017/04/20/new-record-major-publisher -retracting-100-studies-cancer-journal-fake-peer-reviews.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 193

McCook, A. (October 2018). One publisher, more than 7000 retractions. Science, 362(6413), 393. DOI: 10.1126/science.362.6413.393. Mackintosh, E. (2018). Finland is winning the war on fake news. What it’s learned may be crucial to Western democracy. Special Report. Retrieved January 26, 2020 from https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2019/05/europe/finland-fake-news-intl. Mangan, K. (January 7, 2019). Proceedings Start Against ‘Sokal Squared’ Hoax Professor. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Proceedings-Start-Against/245431. Matyus, A. (December 19, 2019). Facebook bans misleading content and ads about the 2020 census. Digital Trends. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://www .digitaltrends.com/social-media/facebook-bans-misleading-content-ads-2020 -census/. Merriam-Webster (March 23, 2017). The Real Story of ‘Fake News’. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/the-real -story-of-fake-news. Meyer, R. (March 8, 2018). The Grim Conclusions of the Largest-Ever Study of Fake News. The Atlantic. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://www.theatlantic.com/ technology/archive/2018/03/largest-study-ever-fake-news-mit-twitter/555104/. Mihailidis, P., & Viotty, S. (2017). Spreadable spectacle in digital culture: Civic expression, fake news, and the role of media literacies in “post-fact” society. American Behavioral Scientist, 61, 441-454. MindEdge (2017). Dig Deeper: Critical Thinking in the Digital Age. MindEdge Online Survey of Critical Thinking Skills. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https:// www2.mindedge.com/page/dig-deeper. Moeller, S. (April 14, 2004). Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Media: Anatomy of a Failure. YaleGlobal Online. Yale University: MacMillan Center. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/weapons-mass -destruction-and-media-anatomy-failure. Molteni, M. (January 22, 2020). Could China’s New Coronavirus Become a Global Epidemic? Wired. Retrieved January 29, 2020 from https://www.wired.com/story/ could-chinas-new-coronavirus-become-a-global-epidemic/. Montoneri, B. (2016). Modern Renaissance Education in Taiwan’s Departments of Foreign Languages. In P. Haseltine and S.-M. Ma., Doing English in Asia: Global Literature and Culture (pp. 147-160). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Montoneri, B. (2018). Plagiarism and Ethical Issues: A Literature Review on Academic Misconduct. In S. R. Nair, & J. M. Saiz-Alvarez (Eds.), Ethics, Entrepreneurship, and Governance in Higher Education (Chapter 1, pp. 1-25). USA: IGI Global. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-5837-8.ch001. Moody, O. (June 30 2017). Most scientific papers contain inflated claims. The Sunday Times. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ most-scientific-papers-contain-inflated-claims-says-david-spiegelhalter-qxqnt6grk Moosa, I. A. (2018). Publish or perish—perceived benefits versus unintended consequences. Cheltenham UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. National Literacy Trust (2018). Fake news and critical literacy. The final report of the Commission on Fake News and the Teaching of Critical Literacy in School.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

194

Bernard Montoneri

London: National Trust. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://literacytrust.org .uk/research-services/research-reports/fake-news-and-critical-literacy-final -report. National Science Foundation (January 29, 2020). NSF’s newest solar telescope produces first images. News Release 20-002. Retrieved January 29, 2020 from https:// www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=299908. Necker, S. (2014). Scientific misbehavior in economics. Research Policy, 43(10), 1747–1759. Nguyen, M. T. (2018). Detection of automatically generated texts. Document and Text Processing. Université Grenoble Alpes. Retrieved January 16, 2020 from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/31a4/93cf0bfd80c23f53ff776b70d5733e404990 .pdf. Nicol, W. (January 17, 2020). Joe Biden’s plan to save democracy would kill the internet. Digital Trends. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://www.digitaltrends .com/news/joe-biden-section-230-repeal-kill-the-internet/. Oransky, I. (2014). SAGE Publications busts “peer review and citation ring,” 60 papers retracted. Retraction Watch. Retrieved January 30, 2020 from http:// retractionwatch.com/2014/07/08/sage-publications-busts-peer-review-and-citation -ring-60-papers-retracted/. Ortega, R. P. (January 23, 2020). Doomsday Clock is reset to 100 seconds until midnight, closest ever. Science. Retrieved January 27, 2020 from https://www .sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/doomsday-clock-reset-100-seconds-until-midnight -closest-ever. Oxford Dictionaries (2016). Word of the Year 2016 is . . . Oxford University Press. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://languages.oup.com/word-of-the-year/ word-of-the-year-2016. Pennycook, G., Bear, A., Collins, E., & Rand, D. G. (2017). The Implied Truth Effect: Attaching Warnings to a Subset of Fake News Headlines Increases Perceived Accuracy of Headlines Without Warnings. SSRN (Social Science Research Network). Retrieved February 2, 2020 from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers .cfm?abstract_id=3035384. Pew Research Center (September 10, 2018). News Use across Social Media Platforms 2018. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https://www.journalism.org/2018/09/10/ news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2018/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_ medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosmediatrends&stream=top. Pfeifer, M. P., & Snodgrass, G. L. (1990). The continued use of retracted, invalid scientific literature. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263(10), 1420– 1423. DOI: 10.1001/jama.1990.03440100140020. Picciotto, R. (2018). Is evaluation obsolete in a post-truth world? Evaluation and Program Planning, 73, 88-96. DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.12.006. Plato (1991). The Republic: the complete and unabridged Jowett translation. The Allegory of the Cave, Book VII, pp. 253-261. New York: Vintage Classics. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.8.vii.html. Plato (1969). Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vols. 5 & 6 translated by Paul Shorey. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. Re-

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 195

trieved January 20, 2020 from https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Per seus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0168%3Abook%3D7%3Asection%3D514a. Quek, H. C., & Teo, E. K. (2018). Predatory publishing; pressures, promotions and perils. Proceedings of Singapore Healthcare, 27(1) 3-5. DOI: 10.1177/2010105 817749602. Ross, A. S., & Rivers, D. J. (2018). Discursive Deflection: Accusation of ‘Fake News’ and the Spread of Mis- and Dis-information in the Tweets of President Trump. Social Media + Society, 4, 1-12. DOI: 10.1177/2056305118776010. Sample, I. (February 26, 2014). How computer-generated fake papers are flooding academia. The Guardian. Retrieved on January 20, 2020 from https://www.the guardian.com/technology/shortcuts/2014/feb/26/how-computer-generated-fake -papers-flooding-academia. Sarlin, B. (January 14, 2018). ‘Fake news’ went viral in 2016. This expert studied who clicked. NBC News. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://www.nbcnews .com/politics/politics-news/fake-news-went-viral-2016-expert-studied-who -clicked-n836581. Sasipornkarn, E. (October 16, 2019). Southeast Asia ‘fake news’ laws open the door to digital authoritarianism. Deutsche Welle. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://www.dw.com/en/southeast-asia-fake-news-laws-open-the-door-to-digital -authoritarianism/a-50852994. Schell, J. O. (1940). Aristophanes and the Sophists. Master’s Theses, 359. Loyola University, Chicago. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://ecommons.luc.edu/ luc_theses/359. Schwartz, O. (November 12, 2018). You thought fake news was bad? Deep fakes are where truth goes to die. The Guardian. Retrieved February 2, 2020 from https:// www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/nov/12/deep-fakes-fake-news-truth. Shah, S. (June 18, 2016). Study finds people don’t read the majority of news they share on Twitter. Digital Trends. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://www .digitaltrends.com/social-media/twitter-study-news-sharing. Shao, C., Ciampaglia, G.L., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2016). Hoaxy: A platform for tracking online misinformation. In Proc. Third Workshop on Social News On the Web (WWW SNOW). Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://arxiv.org/ pdf/1603.01511.pdf. Shellenbarger, S. (November 21, 2016). Most Students Don’t Know When News Is Fake, Stanford Study Finds. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https://www.wsj.com/articles/most-students-dont-know-when-news-is-fake -stanford-study-finds-1479752576. Silverman, C. (November 16, 2016). This Analysis Shows How Fake Election News Stories Outperformed Real News On Facebook. Buzzfeed. Retrieved August 20, 2019 from https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news -outperformed-real-news-on-facebook?utm_term=.ohXvLeDzK#.cwwgb7EX0. Silverman, C., and Alexander, L. (November 3, 2016). How Teens In The Balkans Are Duping Trump Sup-porters With Fake News. Buzzfeed. Retrieved August 20, 2019 from https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/how-macedonia-became-a -global-hub-for-pro-trump-misinfo?utm_term=.uvYP3Eqzw#.prLdJqWP6.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

196

Bernard Montoneri

Silverman, C., & Singer-Vine, J. (2016). Most Americans Who See Fake News Believe It, New Survey Says. Buzzfeed Poll about Fake News. Retrieved January 25, 2020 https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/fake-news-survey. Smith, N. (April 7, 2017). Schoolkids in Taiwan Will Now Be Taught How to Identify Fake News. Time. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://time.com/4730440/ taiwan-fake-news-education. Sokal, A. (1996a). Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity. Social Text, 46/47, 217–252. DOI: 10.2307/466856 Sokal, A. (1996b). A Physicist Experiments with Cultural Studies. Lingua Franca, 62–64. Retrieved January 25, 2020 from https://physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/ lingua_franca_v4.pdf. Stribling, J., Aguayo, and Krohn (2005). SCIgen—An Automatic CS Paper Generator. Available online (as to January 20, 2020) at https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/archive/ scigen. Stribling, J. (2009). Flexible, wide-area storage for distributed systems using semantic cues. Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, on August 31, 2009, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Retrieved on January 20, 2020 from https://core.ac.uk/reader/4418793. Stribling, J., Aguayo, D., and Krohn, M. (July 2005). Rooter: A methodology for the typical unification of access points and redundancy. In the 2005 World Multiconference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics (WMSCI). Accepted, but not published. Retrieved on January 20, 2020 from https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/archive/ scigen/rooter.pdf. Sutton, J. (January 30, 2020). Chinese community in Canadian city facing discrimination. CNN. Retrieved January 31, 2020 from https://edition.cnn.com/asia/live -news/coronavirus-outbreak-01-30-20-intl-hnk/index.html. Swartz, J. (March 11, 2017). The World Wide Web’s inventor warns it’s in peril on 28th anniversary. USA Today. Retrieved January 21, 2020 from https://www .usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/03/11/world-wide-webs-inventor-warns-s -peril/99005906/. Tandoc, E. C. Jr., Lim, Z. W., & Ling, R. (2018). Defining “Fake News.” Digital Journalism, 6(2), 137-153. DOI: 10.1080/21670811.2017.1360143. The Associated Press (January 16, 2018). German linguists: ‘Alternative facts’ the non-word of 2017. State Journal-Register, Springfield, USA. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://www.sj-r.com/news/20180116/german-linguists-alternative -facts-non-word-of-2017. The Guardian (May 9, 2019). Singapore fake news law a ‘disaster’ for freedom of speech, says rights group. Retrieved January 30, 2020 from https://www.the guardian.com/world/2019/may/09/singapore-fake-news-law-a-disaster-for-freedom -of-speech-says-rights-group. Timsit, A. (February 12, 2019). In the age of fake news, here’s how schools are teaching kids to think like fact-checkers. Quartz. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https://qz.com/1533747/in-the-age-of-fake-news-heres-how-schools-are-teaching -kids-to-think-like-fact-checkers/.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Fake News and Fake Research, from the Cave to the Light 197

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Twain, M. (December 2, 1906). Autobiographical dictation, in Autobiography of Mark Twain, Volume 2. Berkeley: University of California Press (2013). UNESCO (2018). World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development Global Report 2017/2018. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from http://www.unesco .org/ulis/cgi-bin/ulis.pl?catno=261065&set=005B2B7D1D_3_314&gp=1&lin= 1&ll=1. Van Noorden, R. (February 24, 2014). Publishers withdraw more than 120 gibberish papers. Nature News. Retrieved on January 30, 2020 from http://www.nature.com/ news/publishers-withdraw-more-than-120-gibberish-papers-1.14763. van Wesel, M. (2016). Evaluation by Citation: Trends in Publication Behavior, Evaluation Criteria, and the Strive for High Impact Publications. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(1), 199-225. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-015-9638-0. Vazquez, L. (23 November, 2016). Fake news sites aren’t the core problem. The media’s diminished credibility is. Big Think. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from https:// bigthink.com/laurie-vazquez/turns-out-fake-news-isnt-the-problem-the-medias -credibility-is. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (March 9, 2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146-1151. DOI: 10.1126/science.aap9559. Waugh, R. (March 6, 2019). How artificial intelligence has the ability to detect fake news. The Telegraph. Retrieved January 24, 2020 from https://www.telegraph .co.uk/technology/information-age/can-artificial-intelligence-detect-fake-news/. Williams, T. (May 30, 2017). Nearly Half of Millennials Get an ‘F’ In Critical Thinking. GoodCall. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://www.goodcall.com/news/ critical-thinking-011043. Wineburg, S., McGrew, S., Breakstone, J., & Ortega, T. (2016). Evaluating Information: The Cornerstone of Civic Online Reasoning. Stanford Digital Repository. Retrieved January 20, 2020 from https://purl.stanford.edu/fv751yt5934. Young, D. G. (2008). The Privileged Role of the Late-Night Joke: Exploring Humor’s Role in Disrupting Argument Scrutiny. Media Psychology, 11, 119-142. DOI: 10.1080/15213260701837073. Young, K. (2017). Bunk: The True Story of Hoaxes, Hucksters, Humbug, Plagiarists, Forgeries, and Phonies. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Graywolf Press.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter 10

Impact of Turnitin on Deterring Plagiarism: A Follow-Up Study

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Najwa Saba ‘Ayon

In this chapter, the author reports on a follow-up study of the students’ and instructors’ perceptions of the effectiveness of Turnitin (Ti) in deterring plagiarism at a small-sized private Lebanese university. Although Ti could be defined as a “plagiarism detecting software,” the author believes that a “text-matching tool” is a more accurate definition of this software (Rowell, Carroll, Morris & Jameson, 2009, p. 157). Even though academic integrity is concerned with plagiarism, cheating, and buying assignments among others, only plagiarism, which is referred to as “the intentional use of the ideas and words of others without the clear acknowledgement of the source of that information” (Smith, Ghazali, & Minhad, 2007, p. 122), will be addressed in this study. As plagiarism has been a major concern for academicians, universities including the researcher’s are using Ti to fight plagiarism (Batane, 2010; Baker, Thornton, & Adams, 2008; Smith, Ghazali, & Minhad, 2007). However, after investigating the effectiveness of this software from the perspectives of both students and instructors at the university about two years ago, the researcher found that although Ti could deter plagiarism among half of the student participants (56 percent out of 137), it did not inhibit it among the others (Saba ‘Ayon, 2017). The researcher argued that this result could be attributed to three main factors, namely “1) previous students’ experiences with unpunished plagiarism acts, 2) the poor implementation of the [university plagiarism] policy by the majority of colleges and instructors, and 3) students’ perceptions that Ti is not 100% effective in catching plagiarized assignments” (Saba ‘Ayon, 2017, p. 12). That is why the author recommended that instructors consistently use Ti, the university policy of plagiarism be enforced, a developmental approach to using Ti be adopted so that students become 199

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

200

Najwa Saba ‘Ayon

better and more ethical writers, and students be educated about the dangers of plagiarism as well as be made aware of the importance of academic integrity. Now that these recommendations had been in effect for about four semesters, the researcher aimed to reexamine the impact of Ti on students’ plagiarizing behavior from the perspectives of both the students and the instructors at the university. The researcher hypothesized that by controlling the aforementioned factors responsible for students’ continued plagiarism, it was expected that Ti would deter plagiarism among more university students. LITERATURE REVIEW In this section, the researcher reviews some of the literature presented on the topic under investigation. The researcher refers to several studies discussed in the first paper too. The reviewed literature is presented in three subsections, whose titles are derived from the conceptual framework of the study, namely effectiveness of Ti in reducing plagiarism, attitudes of students and instructors toward plagiarism and Ti, and factors for students’ plagiarism.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Effectiveness of Turnitin in Reducing Plagiarism Quite a number of studies have discussed the effectiveness of Ti in reducing plagiarism. To start with, Baker, Thornton, and Adams (2008) found that Ti has been effective in reducing plagiarism among graduates in a small southern university in the United States. Similarly, Chao, Wilhelm, and Neureuther (2009), who used an experimental design, found that the participants in the experimental group had a lower plagiarism rate than those in the control group. According to Batane (2010), Ti has also decreased the level of plagiarism in undergraduate students’ essays, and Heckler, Rice, and Bryan (2013) found that Ti was serving at least as a prevention strategy because students plagiarized less when they knew that their work would run through Turnitin. Based on fifty-five million papers analyzed over five years, it was found that “colleges and universities using Turnitin experience an aggregate reduction in unoriginal writing of 39.1%” (Turnitin.com, 2015a) (see Saba ‘Ayon, 2017 for more information about the effectiveness of Ti in reducing plagiarism). More recent evidence of the effectiveness of Ti has been presented in a report on Turnitin’s website, namely The Effectiveness of Turnitin Feedback Studio (2018). It was found that Ti has been effective in reducing similarity rate among both higher education and secondary students. In this report, the authors investigated the similarity rates of individual student’s submission

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Impact of Turnitin on Deterring Plagiarism 201

of the first five essays. Their sample consisted of 2.6 million students in higher education and 2.15 million in secondary education from all over the world. Students’ essays were grouped into four categories on the basis of similarity rate, namely 0-10 percent, 11-25 percent, 26-50 percent, 51-100 percent. There were a lot of similar findings between higher education and secondary students as well as between Anglophonic and non-Anglophonic countries. More specifically, it was found that Ti reduced similarity rate in students’ papers from paper 1 to paper 5. However, the highest drop in similarity rate occurred between the first and second essay in both higher and secondary students as a result of students’ receiving feedback through similarity reports. Ti has also reduced plagiarism and promoted more original writing in an Institute of Science & Technology in India (Panneerselvam, 2018). Comparing the number of active classes, the number of submitted assignments, and the percentage of similarity between 2013 and 2017, Penneerselvam (2018) noticed an increase in the number of active classes created by faculty and staff (7 classes in 2013 vs. 119 classes in 2017), an increase in the number of submitted assignments (198 in 2013 vs. 5,298 in 2017), and a drop in the ratio of similarity (38 percent in 2013 vs. 26 percent in 2017). The author acknowledged the importance of this software in reducing plagiarism in the institution and argued that it was the responsibility of all educational institutions to fight plagiarism, to raise awareness about the dangers of plagiarism, and to encourage creativity as well as original writing among students.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Attitudes of Students and Faculty toward Plagiarism and Turnitin Students’ and instructors’ attitudes toward plagiarism as well as their perception of Ti are important for them to use Ti and hence to fight plagiarism (Saba ‘Ayon, 2017). That’s why students’ and instructors’ attitudes have been the subject of investigation in several research studies, some of which reported students’ positive attitudes toward Ti as it helped them refrain from plagiarism and improve their writing skills (Batane, 2010; Graham-Matheson & Starr, 2013; Turnitin.com, 2015c; Saba ‘Ayon, 2017). Participating instructors were also found to be supportive of the use of Ti as it helped them both to identify plagiarized assignments (Batane, 2010; Turnitin.com, 2015b; Graham-Matheson & Starr, 2013; Saba ‘Ayon, 2017) and to make students more engaged in the writing process (Turnitin.com, 2015b). However, a few other studies reported negative attitudes toward the software and some tolerance to plagiarism. For example, Smith et al. (2007) found that students perceived citing sources as not important and that their

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

202

Najwa Saba ‘Ayon

instructors would not be able to detect their plagiarism. Similarly, Stoltenkamp and Kabaka (2014) found that there was a slow uptake of Turnitin by lecturers at the University of the Western Cape, which deprived students from the opportunity to benefit from the originality reports produced by Ti to improve their writing skills (see Saba ‘Ayon for more details about the aforementioned studies). In another study, Akakandelwa and Sitali (2010), who surveyed the attitudes of three hundred students toward plagiarism in the University of Zambia, found that although the majority of the participants (89 percent) were familiar with plagiarism and its dangers, a lot of them (69 percent) were involved in acts of plagiarism such as copying somebody’s paper and plagiarizing parts or all the paper. A lot of these participants (63 percent) did not believe that their instructors, who checked their assignments for plagiarism, were always able to detect plagiarized ones. As one way to discourage plagiarism, most of the participants were in favor of using electronic detecting tools such as Ti.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Factors for Students’ Plagiarism Finding out about the motives that push students to plagiarize was the aim of several researchers, namely Saba ‘Ayon (2017), Batane (2010), and Baker, Thornton, and Adams (2008) among others. These researchers named similar factors to be responsible for students’ plagiarism. For example, these factors were: (1) lack of citation and documentation skills (Saba ‘Ayon, 2017; Batane, 2010; Chao et al., 2009), (2) laziness (Saba ‘Ayon, 2017; Batane, 2010), (3) lack of moral responsibility and tolerance to plagiarism (Saba ‘Ayon, 2017; Baker et al., 2008; Smith, Ghazali, & Minhad, 2007), (4) lack of awareness (Batane, 2010; Smith, Ghazali, & Minhad, 2007), and (5) the time and effort required to write correctly. Batane (2010) and Saba ‘Ayon (2017) named two more factors: (1) unpunished students’ plagiarism acts and (2) the tendency of lecturers to give the same essays and tests every year (see Saba ‘Ayon, 2017 for further information about these studies). Similar to Batane (2010), Comas-Forgas and Sureda-Negre (2010) found that instructors and the type of assignments they give could be contributing factors to plagiarism among students in a medium-sized university in Spain. Using a mixed-methods approach, the researchers surveyed the perceptions of 727 participants randomly selected and employed four discussion groups, each of which consists of seven to ten participants and lasts about sixty to ninety minutes. They found the most contributing factors are the following: (1) the number and the nature of assignments, (2) students’ poor time management, and (3) some instructors’ characteristics and behavior. More

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Impact of Turnitin on Deterring Plagiarism 203

specifically, the students reported that because they had to work on too many assignments simultaneously and because they had poor time management, they resorted to copying/pasting as it was easier and simpler than writing originally. They also explained that the assignments that were theoretical in nature contributed to their plagiarism. The participants stated that another contributing factor for their plagiarism was the lecturer who is perceived as neither “very skilled at using the internet” (224) nor “paying much attention to the assignment” (229). Akakandelwa and Sitali (2010) also reported time pressure, inability to cope with the workload, external pressure to succeed, pressure to help a friend, the advancement in internet and mobile phones, and lack of research skills as the main reasons for students’ plagiarism. After learning about the effectiveness of Ti in several contexts, students’ and instructors’ attitudes toward plagiarism and Ti, as well as the factors that contribute to students’ plagiarism, it was necessary to find out about these issues in the researcher’s context. Research Questions The following research question and subquestions guided this research study: How does Turnitin impact students’ plagiarizing behavior from the perspectives of both students and instructors? 1.  What is the attitude of students and instructors toward plagiarism? 2.  How do students and instructors perceive Turnitin? 3.  To what extent does Turnitin deter students’ plagiarism? 4.  What are the factors that contribute to students’ plagiarism?

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

METHODOLOGY AND METHODS To be able to compare the findings with the previous study, the researcher replicated that study by using the same methodology and data-collection methods. In more detail, the researcher employed a mixed-methods design, which involves the use of quantitative and qualitative data collection methods. Incorporating these two types of methods is likely to provide “an expanded understanding of research problems” (Creswell, 2009, p. 203). Of the different types of mixed-methods, the researcher employed the concurrent design whereby both quantitative and qualitative data are collected at the same time, and the analyses of the two types of collected data are compared “side by side in a discussion” (Creswell, 2009, p. 213).

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

204

Najwa Saba ‘Ayon

Description of Data-Collection Methods The researcher used two main data-collection instruments, namely a selfcompletion questionnaire and semistructured interviews with students as well as instructors. The questionnaire, which consists of twenty-seven multiplechoice items, surveys the student participants’ perceptions of Ti, their attitudes toward plagiarism, and their opinions of the factors that push students to plagiarize (see Saba ‘Ayon, 2017, p. 2097 for more information about this instrument). Ten semistructured interviews, which were conducted with five participating students and five instructor participants, comprised the qualitative data. Each interview lasted about twenty minutes during which the researcher got deep, rich data about the participants’ “experiences using Ti, their perceptions of the software, and the factors they perceived to lead to students’ plagiarizing behavior” (Saba ‘Ayon, 2017, p. 2097). Unlike the previous study, the researcher asked not only students about their attitudes towards plagiarism but also instructors to learn about their tolerance towards plagiarism and their compliance with the university’s policy on academic integrity.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Description of Data Analysis Quantitative and qualitative data analysis methods were used. The quantitative data were entered into SPSS (version 19) for descriptive analysis. Cronbach’s Alpha indicated .750. To compare means, the researcher used Kruskal-Wallis (KW) test, which is a nonparametric (distribution free) test. Thematic analysis was used for qualitative data. The derived themes, which were almost the same as those of the first study, were familiarity with Ti, perceptions of Ti, attitudes towards plagiarism, factors for students’ plagiarism, and the impact of Ti on students’ plagiarism. The conclusions derived from the different analyses of the multisourced data were triangulated. There were a lot of commonalities among these conclusions, a matter which can contribute to the trustworthiness of the findings. Description of Context This research was done in a small-sized private English-speaking university in Lebanon. This university has four colleges, namely College of Business Administration (CBA), College of Engineering (CE), and College of Communication and Science Information Systems (CSIS), and College of Arts (CA). The university, which aims to instill academic integrity among its students, has its own policy on academic conduct, which states:

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Impact of Turnitin on Deterring Plagiarism 205

[The University] embraces the values of academic honesty and integrity and expects all to uphold strict ethical and professional standards. The University forbids any unauthorized use of the work of others. Acts of plagiarism or cheating on exams or other types of work submitted for assessment as part of a course grade shall risk possible disciplinary action. (University Undergraduate Student Catalogue, 2018-19, p. 76)

That is why this university was among the first universities in Lebanon to utilize Ti services mainly as a plagiarism detection tool. Every instructor had an access to Ti through Moodle (a course management system) and was expected to ask his/her students to upload their writing projects/assignments on a Ti assignment created on Moodle for plagiarism detection. Based on the previous study, it was found that this policy was not strictly enforced in all colleges by all faculty members. That is why and upon the recommendation presented in the first study, the vice president of Academics mandated that Ti should be used by all instructors in all colleges and that the policy be strictly enforced in all classes.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

DESCRIPTION OF PARTICIPANTS The researcher purposively selected a sample of 150 student participants to complete the questionnaire, which was given by hand, but only 134 participants completed it. Those participants were from different colleges (fifty CBA, seventy-one CE, ten CSIS, and three CA) and of different academic statuses (twelve freshmen, forty sophomores, thirty-six juniors, thirty-three seniors, and thirteen graduates). The number of participants in each college is reflective of the number of students in these colleges. In other words, the most populated college in the university is the College of Engineering, and the least populated is the College of Arts. From among the student participants who showed willingness to be interviewed, five were conveniently selected on the basis of their free time. To maintain participants’ voices, the researcher did not edit what they said during the interviews or wrote in the open-ended questions. As to the instructors, five instructors were purposively selected from the different colleges. These instructors showed willingness to share their experiences and perceptions with the researcher. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION In this section, the findings and their interpretations are presented in five subsections, each of which present data from the perceptions of both students and instructors.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

206

Najwa Saba ‘Ayon

Table 10.1.  Comparison between Participants’ in the First and Second Study Familiarity with Ti 1. Have used Ti 2. Familiar with Ti 3. Forced to use Ti in their departments Students’ Perceptions of Ti 1. 2. 3. 4.

Rate their experience with Ti as effective Support its use in the university Ti could detect plagiarism fairly well Ti is beneficial to students’ education

Students’ Attitudes towards Plagiarism

First Study

Second Study

72% 80% 72.3%

98.5% 99% 71.6%

First Study

Second Study

57% 74% 87% 49%

77.1% 85.7% 94.7% 73%

First Study

Second Study

57%

47%

1. Have intentionally plagiarized or knew someone who did so 2. Know anyone caught for plagiarism 3. Plagiarizing behavior was penalized 4. Fairness of penalty

About 51% About 53% About 52%

53.7% 57.6% 42.9%

Factors for Students’ Plagiarism

First Study

Second Study

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

About 50% About 31% About 18% 48.2% — 73.9%

38.3% 47.4% 4.5% 34% 6% 86.6%

Lack of citation skills Laziness Lack moral responsibility Plagiarize under pressure Don’t think they can be caught Pressure to achieve grades

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Students’ Familiarity with Ti As the data in Table 10.1 indicate, more students have used Ti and are familiar with the software; however, fewer students were forced to use Ti in their departments, which was a bit surprising because it was expected that with mandating the use of Ti in all colleges, many more students would be forced to do so in their respective department and colleges. This was confirmed by the Kruskal-Wallis (KW) test, which compares the means of both sets of data. As could be seen in Table 10.2 below, the KW test found a significant difference between the two studies in terms of students’ familiarity with Ti and their use. Thus, the null hypotheses for both using and familiarity with Ti were rejected as the P-value was 0.00420 and 0.0432, respectively, which are both less than 0.05. Nevertheless, KW test, which found the difference insignificant, accepted the null hypothesis for students’ being forced to use Ti in their departments as the P-value was 0.8625, greater than 0.05.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Impact of Turnitin on Deterring Plagiarism 207



Table 10.2.  Kruskal-Wallis (KW) Test Experience with Ti

P-value

Decision

1. Have used Ti 2. Familiarity with Ti 3. Forced to use it in your department

0.0420 0.0432 0.8625

Reject H0 Reject H0 Accept H0

Students’ Perceptions of Ti

P-value

Decision

1. 2. 3. 4.

0.0019 0.0216 0.2693 0.9615

Reject H0 Reject H0 Accept H0 Accept H0

Students’ Attitudes towards plagiarism

P-value

Decision

1. Intentionally penalized 2. Penalized for plagiarism 3. Fairness of the penalty

0.0279 0.8539 0.1184

Reject H0 Accept H0 Accept H0

Why & When Students Plagiarize

P-value

Decision

1. 2. 3. 4.

0.0047 0.0058 0.0283 0.0051

Rate your Experience with Ti Support Use of Ti Extent to which Ti can detect Plagiarism Benefits to students’ education

Factors for students’ plagiarism Pressure to achieve grades Plagiarize under pressure University provides referencing Skills

Reject Reject Reject Reject

H0 H0 H0 H0

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

This could mean that although more participants are familiar with Ti and have used it than those in the first study, this does not mean that this familiarity with Ti and its use were in their departments/colleges. These participants could most probably have used it in other courses and/or colleges as in their general education courses mostly given in the College of Arts, where Ti was enforced by all the instructors (based on the researcher’s experience and knowledge of the college). Thus, this raises the question about the extent to which the university’s policy is being enforced equally in all four colleges, a matter which will be further discussed in the coming sections. Instructors’ Familiarity with Ti The participating instructors seem to be familiar and knowledgeable of Ti and its functions. They knew that Ti is a tool that helps in detecting plagiarism. In fact, one instructor in the CE was so accurate when she defined Ti “as a tool that determines the level of similarity in students’ writings.” This instructor, together with two other participants in the CBA and CA, talked about allowing students’ multiple submissions of the assignment until the due date as one way to help their students eliminate too much similarity and improve their

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

208

Najwa Saba ‘Ayon

writing assignments. This shows that these instructors are quite familiar with Ti and how it works.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Students’ Perceptions of Ti The participants in this study seem to have a better perception of Ti than those in the first study, for the majority of them (77.1 percent) rated their experience with Ti as effective, and 85.7 percent supported its use in the university. In addition, more participants in this study than the first believed that Ti could detect plagiarism (94.7 percent vs. 87 percent), and many more participants believed Ti was useful for their overall education (see Table 10.1 above). These findings were confirmed by KW test as it indicated that there was a significant difference between the participants’ perceptions in the first and second study in terms of how many participants rated their experiences with Ti as effective and how many supported its use in the university. Hence, the null hypothesis for these two items was rejected (see Table 10.2). However, this test did not find a significant difference between the two data sets for the other two items. Thus, the null hypothesis was accepted (as indicated in Table 10.2). The qualitative data provided further insight about students’ perceptions. As reflected in the participants’ comments, students believed that Ti helped them learn about plagiarism and improve their writing skills. During the interview, one participant said, “Turnitin helped me by changing my perception towards taking others’ work and relate it to me. I used to consider this as normal, but it turned out to be stealing.” Another participant stated, “It allows me to know where and how much I plagiarized which in return enables me to fix my paper.” One student participant wrote, “It is a good way to check the student’s assignment, but it highlights quoting as plagiarism, and even sometimes it identifies unplagiarized statement as plagiarism.” Based on the aforementioned comments, it is obvious that Ti could shape students’ perceptions of plagiarism and help them avoid it, but it is also clear that some of the participants were not knowledgeable enough about the real function of Ti as a text-matching tool and not a plagiarism detector. Thus, as a text-matching tool, Ti is expected to highlight all quotations and references unless the instructor selects the feature in Ti to exclude bibliography and quotations. Instructors’ Perceptions of Turnitin Some of the participating instructors had a better perception of Ti than other participants. One instructor perceived it as an effective and user-friendly tool that could be used easily on the mobile. Another participant had a very

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Impact of Turnitin on Deterring Plagiarism 209

positive attitude towards it to the extent of using it herself to check for similarity rates in her own research papers. However, one participant did not share the same attitude and perception of the software as reflected in his comment, “I would not have used it [Ti] if it had not been mandated by the university . . . it cannot detect students’ cheating or students’ bought assignments.” Although it is true that Ti cannot detect whether students have cheated or bought their assignments because it is neither a cheating nor a plagiarism detector, it shows that this participating instructor is not familiar enough with this software to know that Ti is only a similarity matching tool, and it is the role of the instructor to determine whether this similarity is an act of plagiarism or not. Hence, his faint knowledge of the software could have impacted on his perception of Ti. Students’ Attitudes towards Plagiarism

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

According to the data presented in Table 10.1 above, the students in the university seemed to be less involved in acts of plagiarism. There are fewer students who have intentionally plagiarized or who knew of anyone that did so. However, there is not much difference in terms of the number of caught and penalized plagiarized acts, and fewer participants believe in the fairness of the penalty. The KW test found a significant difference in the number of students who intentionally plagiarized or knew of someone who did. That is why the null hypothesis was rejected. However, no significant difference was found in the number of caught and plagiarized acts (see Table 10.2 above). With fewer attempts of plagiarism, it is expected to have fewer incidences of detected plagiarism. However, it is also expected that with the use of Ti, many more attempts of plagiarism to be detected. The only possible justification the researcher could think of is that not all instructors enforced the Ti policy consistently (explained further in the following subsection). Instructors’ Attitudes towards Plagiarism The participants seem to have different attitudes towards plagiarism as reflected in the policies they adopt in their classes and the penalties they exert when their students plagiarize. Most of the participants have a clearly stated policy in their syllabi except for one instructor who said that he usually warns his students against plagiarizing the analysis part in their reports and threatens them to get an “F” if they do so, but he does not state this explicitly in his syllabus. That instructor seems to penalize students for plagiarism only when their analysis of their economics reports is not original, but he does not mind

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

210

Najwa Saba ‘Ayon

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

the students’ copying definitions or any other part of the introduction or literature review. He states that “as long as students demonstrate understanding of economic concepts through correct and original analysis, I don’t mind any other thing. I don’t teach English or writing, and I don’t care whether students are able to write correctly or accurately . . . I’d rather students plagiarize, copy and paste than use a paraphrasing software and end up with nonsense.” The other participants adopt different policies and take different penalty measures toward plagiarism. In addition to allowing multiple submissions until the due date, some of the participants adopt a developmental approach toward plagiarism. In other words, if the similarity report shows plagiarism as deemed by the instructors, they share the report with their students to give them a chance to revise and eliminate plagiarism from their assignments. If the plagiarism persists, then the students are awarded an “F” on their assignments following the university policy. Still another instructor responds differently to plagiarism depending on the similarity rate. If the similarity rate is 50 percent or more, then the student will be awarded a zero on his/her assignment. However, if the similarity rate ranges between 15-20 percent, ten to fifteen grades will be deducted. Another instructor penalizes all assignments with 10 percent or more similarity rate by deducting 50 percent of the grade. However, she accepts assignments with less than 10 percent similarity rate (excluding quotations and bibliography). Based on what was presented, it seems that not all the participating instructors are following the university policy. There seems to be an inconsistency in penalizing for plagiarism, and it also seems that some of the instructors are selective of what to penalize for. This could justify the insignificant difference in the number of caught and plagiarized acts between the first and follow-up study. In addition, some of the participating instructors are using a benchmark for plagiarism. To some, it is 20 percent, and to others, it is 10 percent, which is likely to mislead the students and not help them understand that plagiarism, whether little or much, is unethical. Factors for Students’ Plagiarism (Students) The participating students named almost the same factors for students’ plagiarism as those in the first study but with different percentages (see Table 10.1 above); the mostly named factor in the follow-up study was pressure to achieve grades (86.6 percent) followed by laziness (47.7 percent); fewer participants named lack of citation skills (38.3 percent), when under pressure (34 percent), and lack of moral responsibility (4.5 percent). A new reason selected by the participants in the follow-up study, which was not named in the first study, was students’ belief that they can’t be caught (6 percent).

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Impact of Turnitin on Deterring Plagiarism 211

The KW test, which rejected the null hypotheses as indicated in Table 10.2 above, found these different percentages significant. It is important to highlight that more participants in the follow-up study believe that the university provides them with the necessary referencing skills to help them avoid plagiarism; that is why fewer participants contributed plagiarism to lack of citation skills. This could be attributed to the necessary actions taken by the university upon the recommendations presented in the first study. The qualitative data provided more information and were almost consistent with the quantitative data. This was evident in the participants’ responses during the interviews and/or open-ended questions. One participant related students’ plagiarism to laziness, “they [students] don’t want to exert effort”; another one attributed it to poor writing skills, “Maybe it feels hard for them to write”; still another participant’s answer reflected poor moral responsibility, “I believe that we can use people’s words.” Nonetheless, interesting data were revealed during the interviews as a result of the researcher’s probing. For example, one participant stated that referencing, citation skills, and hence original writing were required in English courses but not in other courses, “These skills were only enforced in English courses; however, they were to a certain extent ignored in other courses.” Another talked about exploiting the developmental approach that instructors follow to help students eliminate plagiarism and improve their writing when they are pressed with time, “Not having enough time to finish the assignment before the due date and knowing that the instructor will give us a chance to eliminate plagiarism, we resort to copying and pasting as it is faster and easier.” More than one participant talked about inconsistent policies adopted by instructors, an issue which confuses them, “Sometimes it is confusing. In some courses we are allowed 20 percent plagiarism, and when we have this percentage or lower in others, we are penalized.” It seems that some instructors are using a certain benchmark of accepted similarity rate and not completely abiding by the university policy. Factors for Students’ Plagiarism (Instructors) The participating instructors named similar reasons for students’ plagiarism as those reported by the student participants but different from their counterparts in the first study who reported mainly poor citation skills, students’ lack of confidence with their writing skills and the type of assignment given. Participating instructors in a follow-up study named common factors, which were laziness, concern with grades, English language barriers, students’ lack

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

212

Najwa Saba ‘Ayon

of awareness of the dangers of plagiarism, and tolerance with plagiarism. Some of these factors were consistent with what was presented in the literature (Batane, 2010; Baker et al., 2008, among others). From the aforementioned factors, it is evident that the instructor participants as the student participants believe that citation and documentation skills have been taken care of upon the recommendation of the first study, but instructors believe that some students do not have enough language proficiency to paraphrase or summarize well. Besides, one instructor named cultural factors stating that, “like everything in the Lebanese culture, there is no copyright on books, CD’s, DVD’s, and the like, so students might generalize this to other academic sources.” Impact of Turnitin on Students’ Plagiarism (Students) The quantitative data show that fewer participants will plagiarize if they know that their assignments will be checked on Ti. In more details, when the participants were asked whether they would continue to plagiarize even if they knew that their papers would be checked on Ti, their answers were as follows: 19.7 percent Yes, 56.2 percent No, and 24 percent Maybe in the first study, versus 5.2 percent Yes, 83.6 percent No, and 11.2 percent Maybe in the second study. This indicates that Ti could deter more attempts of plagiarism among students at this university. However, this difference between the first and second study was not significant enough according to the KW test (Pvalue 0.7333). Hence, the null hypothesis was accepted.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Impact of Turnitin on Students’ Plagiarism (Instructors) As the participating instructors reported, they are still receiving plagiarized assignments every semester but in smaller number than they used to in the previous semesters. In fact, one participant said, “The plagiarized assignments have significantly reduced; out of thirty-three students in the sophomore marketing course, only three to four students have plagiarized.” He added, “Students are plagiarizing less because they are getting used to Ti and getting adapted to the system as well as the university policy applied in our college.” He believed that with time, students are expected to plagiarize even less. Another participant stated that “although Ti is enforced in our college by all instructors, plagiarism has been reduced but not eliminated, which is weird.” However, another participant did not believe her colleagues in the same college enforce Ti in their classes, “I am the only faculty member in the department to enforce Ti on my students. I don’t think any other colleague in

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Impact of Turnitin on Deterring Plagiarism 213

the college does so and hence implements the policy.” She added, “Ti should be enforced in all departments and colleges to prevent plagiarism.” Thus, it is clear that there is still inconsistency in the use of Ti in the university and hence in enforcing the university plagiarism policy, which could justify why Ti did not completely prevent students from plagiarism.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION In this study, the researcher aimed to investigate the impact of Ti on students’ plagiarism after the university plagiarism policy and the use of Ti had been enforced at her university. Replicating her previous study, the researcher employed the same methodology and data-collection methods. In addition, the researcher used the KW test to compare the means between the two studies. Although the descriptive analysis show differences between round 1 and round 2, some of these differences were not considered significant according to the KW test. This could be due to the sample size, as most statistical tests work better with a bigger sample. However, it could be concluded that more students are familiar with and are using Ti at university. In addition, more students are aware of the importance of Ti in helping them improve their writing skills, and many more students have also become aware of the dangers or the unethicality of plagiarism. Nevertheless, plagiarism was not eliminated but reduced. This is most probably due to three main factors: (1) Ti is still not enforced or used consistently by all instructors in all colleges, (2) not all instructors are adhering to the university policy of plagiarism; some even have created their own policy such as the 10 percent to 20 percent similarity benchmark which misled the students and created some misconceptions about what would be considered plagiarism or not, and (3) the students abused the developmental approach adopted by some instructors to gain some time to finish their assignments. Although the researcher can’t claim generalization of the findings due to the nonprobability sample, the answer to the question of whether Ti could deter plagiarism among students or not is “yes” to a great extent especially when Ti and the university policy are consistently enforced. Therefore, it is recommended that the university ensure more consistent use of Ti in all colleges and departments and more consistent implementation of the university policy. In addition, the researcher also suggests clarifying any misconception about what is considered plagiarism and what is not by educating instructors about the real function of Ti and about the danger of adopting a benchmark in their classes.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

214

Najwa Saba ‘Ayon

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Akakandelwa, A., & Sitali, W. (2010). A survey of Humanities and Social Science Students’ Attitudes towards plagiarism. Zambia Library Association Journal, 25(1& 2), 95-113. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://journals.co.za/ content/zambia/25/1-2/AJA0049853X_520. Baker, R. K., Thornton, B., & Adams, M. (2008). An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Turnitin.Com as a Tool for Reducing Plagiarism in Graduate Student Term Papers. College Teaching Methods & Styles Journal, 4(9), 1-4. DOI: 10.19030/ ctms.v4i9.5564. Batane, T. (2010). Turning to Turnitin to Fight Plagiarism among University Students. Educational Technology & Society, 13(2), 1-12. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220374040_Turning_to_ Turnitin_to_Fight_Plagiarism_among_University_Students. Chao, C. A., Wilhelm, W., & Neureuther, B. D. (2009). A study of electronic detection and pedagogical approaches for reducing plagiarism. The Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, L1(1), 31-42. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://www .researchgate.net/publication/234652876_A_Study_of_Electronic_Detection_and_ Pedagogical_Approaches_for_Reducing_Plagiarism. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (Third ed.). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. Graham-Matheson L., & Starr, S. (2013). Is it cheating or learning the craft of writing? Using Turnitin to help students avoid plagiarism. Research in Learning Technology, 21, 1-13 DOI: 10.3402/rlt.v2li0.17218. Gomas-Forgas, R., & Sureda-Negre, J. (2010). Academic plagiarism: Explanatory Factors from students’ perspective. Journal of Academic Ethics, 8(3), 217-232. DOI: 10.1007/S10805-010-9121-0. Heckler, N., Rice, M., & Bryan, H. (2013). Turnitin Systems: A Deterrent to plagiarism in college classrooms. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(3), 229-248. DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2013.10782604. Panneerselvam, P. (2018). Prevention of plagiarism at B. S. Abdur Rahman Crescent Institute of Science and Technology: A Case Study. IJNGLT 4(2), 1-8. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from http://www.researchgate.net/publication/324941559. Rowell, Carroll, Morris, & Jameson (2009). Educational resource review. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 8(2), 157-166. Saba ‘Ayon, N. (2017). Students’ and Instructors’ Perceptions of Turnitin: A Plagiarism Deterrent? Creative Education, 8, 2091-2108. DOI: 10.4236/ce.2017 .813141. Smith, M., Ghazali, N., & Minhad, S. F. N. (2007). Attitudes towards Plagiarism among Undergraduate Accounting Students: Malaysian Evidence. Asian Review of Accounting, 15(2), 122-146. DOI: 10.1108/13217340710823350. Stoltenkamp, J., & Kabaka, M. (2014). Turnitin adoption and application at a HEI: A developmental approach. Creative Education, 5, 1043-1052. DOI: 10.4236/ ce.2014.512118.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Impact of Turnitin on Deterring Plagiarism 215

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Turnitin.com (2015a). Research Study: Turnitin Effectiveness in U.S. Colleges and Universities. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from http://www.turnitin.com/en_us/ resources. Turnitin. com (2015b). Shift perceptions of plagiarism in a digital age. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from http://www.turnitin.com/en_us/why-turnitin/success/ kentucky-wesleyan-college. Turnitin.com (2015c). What do students think of Turnitin? Retrieved December 26, 2019 from http://www.turnitin.com/en_us/resources. Turnitin.com (2018). The Effectiveness of Turnitin feedback studio. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://www.turnitin.com/papers/the-effectiveness-of -turnitin-feedback-studio.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter Eleven

Plagiarism in Higher Education: Experiences from Asia and the United States

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

The problem of plagiarism is stronger than ever in higher education, particularly with the availability and amount of research material on the internet increasing every year. According to a study by McCabe et al. (2012, pp. 6264), it is estimated that roughly 36-38 percent of North American undergraduates and as many as 25 percent of North American graduate students have committed one of the simplest forms of plagiarism, copying or paraphrasing text from other sources without citation. The numbers increase when other forms of plagiarism are considered. Clearly, plagiarism is major problem in education. But why do students resort to plagiarism? The authors discuss their experiences teaching at different institutions in Asia and the United States to consider some factors they see as prevalent among the different causes of plagiarism. Overall, our experiences describe different reasons to explain why students may resort to plagiarism. The reasons we describe run the gamut from individual-level reasons such as laziness to more structural factors related to economics and principal-agent relationships. In a brief survey of the literature on plagiarism, Curtis and Popal (2011, p. 30) cite multiple reasons at the individual level, including inexperience (Landau et al., 2002) and immaturity (Deikhoff et al., 1996). Curtis and Popal (2011, p. 31) also cite competitiveness and the pressure to achieve or prove themselves (Bennett, 2005; Harding et al., 2004; Davis et al., 1992; Newstead et al., 1996; Davis et al., 1995). Researchers have also cited differences in cultural views toward plagiarism as a relevant factor (Zobel & Hamilton, 2002; Kayaoğlu et al., 2016). The belief is that different perspectives toward the seriousness of plagiarism, or whether it even counts as misconduct, could lead to plagiarism being more 217

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

218

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

prevalent in certain societies than in others. This is consistent with research that suggests that students who do not perceive plagiarism to be a big problem are more likely to commit plagiarism (Maxwell et al., 2008; Stephens et al., 2010; Curtis & Popal, 2011, pp. 31, 38). We touch on the cultural issue below. Another factor that we discuss is the effect of financial pressures on students. Interestingly, the literature shows a paradoxical effect for financial factors as a cause of plagiarism (Curtis & Popal 2011, p. 31). Students who must work to pay for their education consequently have less time to adequately complete their schoolwork. They thus face pressure to complete the same amount of work as other students in less time, which can lead to taking shortcuts such as plagiarism (Devlin et al., 2008; Larkham & Manns, 2002; Maxwell et al., 2008; Passow et al., 2006). On the other hand, students receiving financial support may feel increased pressure to perform well to prove themselves worthy of the financial support, leading to an increase in the likelihood of plagiarism (Diekhoff et al., 1996; Haines et al., 1986; Passow et al., 2006). This adds support to the link between the pressure to prove oneself and plagiarism. Cleary (2017) lays out ten commonly cited reasons for plagiarism. Her list is not the product of rigorous research as the above cited research, but it comes from a journal for professional educators and is still useful for discussion. Cleary’s ten reasons are: 1) laziness; 2) panic derived from poor time management and organization skills; 3) students’ lack of confidence as researchers/writers; 4) students’ feelings that they’re supposed to reproduce exactly what experts have said; 5) difficulty in integrating source material into their own work; 6) lack of understanding about why academics take citations of sources seriously; 7) sloppiness; 8) lack of understanding that they need to cite facts, figures, and ideas, not just quotations (i.e., they do not know how to cite these things); 9) most students are still learning (and will eventually learn how to do it); and 10) students are used to a collaborative model of knowledge production. Some of these points (e.g., #2, #3) are supportive of the research cited above. Undercutting much of these results, including the cultural split and the financial paradox, may be the Cleary’s suggestion that students are simply not adequately taught by educators how to properly cite or that plagiarism is a grave example of misconduct (Cleary’s #6, 8, and 9). If plagiarism is not treated as a “big deal” in some cultures, then it is possible that teaching of how to avoid it is also not prioritized. Likewise, is it possible that students who do not have adequate financial support and who have support are both likely to commit plagiarism? This requires further discussion, which we try to provide below.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Plagiarism in Higher Education 219

The plan of this chapter is as follows. First, the three authors will take turns describing their own experiences with students’ plagiarism. We describe experiences from universities and the field of language education in the United States, Japan, and Southeast Asia. After our narratives describing our experiences, the authors use these experiences to debate what they see as the reasons for plagiarism. EXPERIENCES WITH PLAGIARISM IN OUR TEACHING CAREERS In this portion of the chapter, we will explain some experiences that we have had with plagiarism in our teaching careers. Collectively, the authors of this chapter have experience in education in China, Japan, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the United States. We have taught at both public and private universities, including small liberal arts colleges. We have all taught a mix of Asian and Western students, including Western students at Asian universities. In addition, we also teach a variety of disciplines, including teacher education, language instruction, various social sciences, and statistics. To summarize, our experiences are broad and we have a fairly developed ability to compare experiences between countries, disciplines, and between Asian and Western students.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Experiences from the United States and Japan I came upon my first cases of plagiarism before I had even embarked upon a full-time teaching career. While working on my PhD, I tried to accumulate some teaching experience by lecturing several courses, including an introductory statistics course for social science majors. The assessments for the statistics course consisted of bi-monthly homework assignments, two exams, and a short, analytical term paper assignment. That was a heavy workload for the students, but one that they handled very well, with a few exceptions. My first encounter with plagiarism came not from the greater burden—the frequent homework assignments—but rather from the short term paper assignment. The student in question had been earning below average grades in the course but still managed to submit all homework assignments and pass both exams and was on track for a C or a low B grade in the course. The term paper was an analysis of the strength of a hypothesized relationship between two variables from a U.S. election dataset. The student performed the necessary analyses on SPSS and performed at the student’s usual level in the interpretations. So far, there was no problem. However, when

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

220

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

reading the student’s submitted paper, I kept on returning to the literature review section of the paper. I could not understand the student’s literature review—the text simply did not flow. There were a few citations, and if I had just glanced at the page without actually reading it, I would not have noticed anything strange, but after reading it I was certain something was off. I actually thought that maybe I had just read too many term papers that night so I stopped grading for the evening. When I picked up grading the paper the next day though, the literature review still made absolutely no sense. The literature review was a short one-page section of the paper that I required in the assignment guidelines. I had spent a little time in class explaining literature reviews, but I had not devoted an entire class meeting to the subject. Nevertheless, all of the students understood that it required a cursory look at and summarization of a few articles on their topic, and they knew how to search for articles on JSTOR. The students knew that they did not need to read the entirety of those articles, just the abstracts and introductions, in order to write the short literature review. The literature review written by the student in question however was a puzzle. It was a jumble of sentences that had no connection to each other. Moreover, the sentences exhibited perfect grammar, a quality that I noticed did not occur in the rest of the paper. The text flowed from one sentence to the next just fine in the rest of the paper though. Since I knew something was not right, I decided to check for plagiarism. We had been told about how to check for plagiarism—we had access to Turnitin at the time, but searching the internet with suspect sentences inside quote marks was always the first and easiest step. So I copied and pasted one sentence into Google and struck gold on the first search result. It was an article accessible on JSTOR. I tried the next sentence and had the same result but with a different article. I repeated the process probably several more times, making sure to try sentences at the end of the literature review as well, and received the same result each time. The student had written a literature review in which each successive sentence was directly lifted from a different article and pasted into the term paper without so much as changing a single word. The few citations in the literature review were exact matches for the articles he had lifted the sentences from verbatim, but there were no quote marks. There was not a single original word written in the literature review, and there were no quotations at all. I had to decide the appropriate punishment for the student. By rights, I could have failed the student for the whole course, but the student had worked hard to get to the low B level. I thought about the possible reasons why this student would risk everything by pulling this stunt. Was the student too lazy to read the introductions to a few articles? Did the student run out of time?

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Plagiarism in Higher Education 221

Being a new educator, I struggled with the decision for a while. In the end, I failed the student on the term paper for reasons of plagiarism (though the student never asked why), but still passed the student with a C, the lowest grade needed to pass the course, which was required for graduation. I still feel that this was the right decision. My second encounter with plagiarism occurred a year later in the statistics course once again. I caught two students plagiarizing the homework of a third student. In some of the homework assignments, we worked on datasets in SPSS. For these assignments, the students needed to print out the SPSS output and interpret the output by writing directly on the printed output by hand. This printed output with handwriting was what the students submitted for these types of assignments. In some of these SPSS assignments, all of the students conducted the same analyses on the same variables, meaning their printed output would be identical, though their handwritten interpretations would differ, even if just by slight differences in choice of words. There were a lot of students in those statistics classes (usually over sixty) and I usually only glanced over the homework submissions to ensure that every problem was attempted (I graded the homework submissions with a check plus, check, or check minus). I cannot remember how it stuck in my mind, but in that pile of sixty-plus homework submissions, I noticed that the handwriting and phrases that one student had used appeared in another student’s homework . . . and then in another student’s. I searched through the pile until I found the first instance, and then pulled out the other two that seemed to repeat the language. And I noticed a bizarre thing: Not only did the three homeworks have the same language, but they had the exact same writing in the same places. I had told the students I did not mind if they worked in groups, but this took that a little too far! All three homework submissions were identical copies of each other on each page of the assignment. In fact, upon closer inspection (placing the paper right in front of my eyes), I could see that two of the submissions were photocopies of the third. It was obvious that the two students had not put pen or pencil onto the paper, and as I continued looking closely, I could see some random marks from a copy machine that were identical in two of the submissions but missing on the third. We were only halfway through the semester and in contrast to the previous case, I did not have a sense of how hard the students had been legitimately working. Moreover, I was angrier at the sheer laziness of these two students than I had been in the previous case—they photocopied the homework instead of sitting down and spending ten minutes copying it by hand! After looking through older graded homework assignments that had not been picked up by students, I found the same pattern for the three students existed in one other assignment (and I came to notice that these students did not even care so

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

222

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

much as to come to class to pick up their graded homework assignments). I decided to file an official complaint of academic misconduct with the administration. I did not want the students to get away with a flagrant offense by simply failing the students on two homework assignments. I did not know what to do with the third student however. That student could have been in on the scheme, so I called the student in for an interview. The student replied that the other two were members of the same fraternity/ sorority who had photocopied the homework sometimes for guidance, but this student had been unaware that the others were simply submitting the photocopies as their own. At this point, I knew that there would not be enough evidence against this student, so I only filed the complaint against the other two. The academic misconduct case was like a small trial. In addition to staff from the dean’s office, there were three faculty members and one representative of the student government present as adjudicators. The two students were present (and they brought their parents!). Acting as a sort of prosecutor, I laid out the evidence. I had made photocopies of the photocopied homework with the copy marks and other incriminating, along with the original homework from the third, now uninvolved student, and I passed these out to everyone in attendance. After going through everything with excruciating detail, everyone sighed in exhaustion. The students were “convicted”; one of them was suspended, which went on the student’s academic record, while the other one admitted to the wrongdoing and was placed on academic probation and required to assist a workshop on plagiarism for first-year students. In my years of full-time teaching at two elite liberal arts colleges in the United States after receiving my PhD, I never noticed another case of plagiarism. That is not to say that it did not happen, but simply that I did not suspect or find any cases. Later however, while teaching at two large universities in Japan, I came across a student who plagiarized in two different courses, one taught by myself and another taught by a colleague. This student was a foreigner from a European country. The first instance occurred in the colleague’s freshman writing course, conducted in English. The colleague came to complain to the faculty members one day that this student had not submitted any rough drafts throughout the semester for the term paper, nor did the student pay attention in class. The colleague asked if we noticed any other peculiarities about the student, to which some of us agreed that it was difficult to get a good performance out of the student, even though the student had been one of that year’s top applicants as a transfer student from a major European university. The colleague came back to talk to us at the end of the semester about the student once again. The student had submitted a final paper for the writing

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Plagiarism in Higher Education 223

course that puzzled my colleague. We were all curious so we looked over the paper. It was a thirty-plus page research report on a certain religious figure from medieval England. It was a polished, finished paper with a lot of footnotes and a large bibliography—clearly the result of a lot of research. The assignment for this freshman writing course called for a ten-page paper and the topic did not require intense research. Our institution in Japan had no courses on medieval European history. The choice of topic and amount of research was indeed bizarre. This was an obvious case of plagiarism for several of us, but none of our plagiarism software or Google turned up any evidence. Given the student’s previous experience at the European university, we pondered that the student probably wrote the paper for a class at that university and simply recycled it for her freshman writing class. We tried one other effort to identify the source by asking a medieval historian at another institution if he would look at the paper and give us his thoughts, without fully explaining the situation to him. After a quick read, he replied that the paper was not a professional piece of work for his discipline but was likely written by an undergraduate or graduate student. So that settled it for us. We decided that the student self-plagiarized by submitting a paper written for another course without informing the current professor. Some might think this is a less serious form of plagiarism because the plagiarizt is not stealing from another, but it is still dishonest and a form of academic misconduct. Moreover, it is against the code of conduct at the university (and presumably many other universities). The offense of plagiarism at the university results in a harsh penalty of complete failure in all of the student’s courses that semester—not just the course in which the plagiarism occurred. Disciplining the student was problematic since the student denied the accusation of submitting work from another course. Possibly the matter could have been investigated further by looking at the student’s transcripts and tracking down lecturers at the student’s previous university, but the effort was not deemed to be worth it and the student was instead given a low but passing course grade. Problems with the same student arose in one of my courses in the next semester (another course on statistics). The student was on track to receive a low but passing grade in the course, but on the last homework of the semester, I noticed similarities between this student’s homework and that of two other students in the class. One of the three had submitted the assignment in Excel by email earlier. The student in question and the third student, a close friend who happens to be Japanese, submitted their Excel file a few days after the first student’s submission. When grading the final homework assignment, I came to see that these three students’ submissions were exactly the same. The

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

224

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

data that the class was analyzing for this assignment was the same for all of the students, but still, the sentences explaining the analyses should have been different. Moreover, the graphs and tables should have appeared in different places, since in Excel one chooses on their own where to place graphs and tables. In the three submissions, each sentence interpreting the analyses was exactly the same and the graphs were all in the same location. Like the two students with the photocopied homework in the United States, these two students had taken a third student’s Excel file, saved their names on their copies without changing anything in the file, and submitted it as their own. I had the ability to outright fail the students for the whole course (which would have resulted in failing all their courses for plagiarism), but I instead failed the homework assignment for both students, which lowered their total course grade by 5 percent. The Japanese student still passed the course, but for the student who had previously submitted the medieval history paper, this lowered the total course grade below the threshold necessary for passing (the student had not submitted two earlier assignments). I failed the student for the course (and subsequently became subject to a complaint of bias against the student for my effort). In conclusion, what can I take away from these experiences about the reasons for students to plagiarize? It may not be the preferable academic answer, but the only thing that comes to mind is laziness and a lack of ethics. This is the only common factor I can see across these cases. The two students at the university in Japan have given further support to this contention by refusing professors’ suggestions to improve their work in subsequent classes. One of those, the medieval history writer, told another professor that the student only chooses professors who are known to be easy. I know less about the two photocopiers back in the United States, but submitting photocopies of homework is proof enough of laziness. I am a little reluctant to label the first case, the copy/paste lit review student, into the same group since I am pretty sure that this student worked hard just to get average grades in that class. But that student had to know that copying and pasting sentences randomly from articles was unethical and would result in an incoherent text. Possibly the student was betting that I would not be reading through every term paper from the large class. Yet I understand if attributing plagiarism to laziness seems somehow unsatisfactory to an academic. I can find no common factors between the students to support any structural explanation that was cited in the previous section. The five students were not poor or working night jobs as far as I know, and they represented a mix of high, middle, and low performing students. It may not seem very theoretic to pin it down to laziness, but that is the most likely factor that I can identify.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Plagiarism in Higher Education 225

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Experience from Japan: Some Context about Plagiarism in a Teacher Education Program Among Western academic circles, plagiarism is considered a serious offense. However, in Japan, plagiarism is not taken so seriously, especially by undergraduate students. They tend to commit it without any hesitation. It is a fresh memory that the University of Tokyo, the most prestigious school in Japan, openly reported that one of its students used information from the internet and that 75 percent of the student’s paper was copied (Sato, 2015). This report was regarded a serious wakeup call in the circle of Japanese universities. In this part, I introduce and discuss my experiences about plagiarism in private universities. At “a University,” I taught a sociology course, which was an elective. The course objective was that students explore social exclusion in their daily life, recognizing people with a variety of backgrounds, and respecting both others and themselves as fellow citizens. In the final essay exam, some students simply took from Wikipedia by copying answers into their answer sheet in their own handwriting. I noticed something was wrong, since writing styles suddenly changed in some essays. I put some of their sentences into Google search, and instantly found that they were from Wikipedia. I called the students to come to my office. When I told them that this was plagiarism, which was never allowed in higher education, their answer was “Why is doing this so bad?” I did not know how to answer this. I could only say, “If you were a professor or a graduate student, you would be strictly punished.” I continued, “One of my colleagues was an associate professor of another university, but she was disciplinarily discharged because she committed plagiarism.” One of them replied, “We will neither go to graduate school nor become a professor.” I asked them, “Do you think shoplifting is good? You stole someone’s idea from Wikipedia, which is the same as shoplifting.” Then, a student asked me why other professors were not strict on this matter as much as me. I was not able to answer the question. I told them, “I want your opinion, not that of Wikipedia. If you want to pass, you should submit another paper, or you will get D.” At this time, many Japanese universities employ a five-point scale evaluation system, from A to E: “A” is 80 percent and above; “B” is 70 percent and above; “C” is 60 percent and above; D is “do not pass;” and E is “not registered.” They submitted another paper, which seemingly was written by themselves. However, the other day, on a word of mouth website about college courses at A University, I found the following post: “Prof. Saito is, I don’t know why, particularly strict about ‘copy and paste.’” Students’ awareness of plagiarism has apparently been raised over years at “a University.” A co-researcher explained in detail the quotation rules and

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

226

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

after that conducted a research project in an education course at “A University” on the topic. Fifteen students attended that day and were presented with a survey about plagiarism. Their responses show mixed sentiments about plagiarism. Ten students state that they are against plagiarism, while four students show their sense of confusion and puzzlement (one student did not answer the questions). Those who are against plagiarism highlight three reasons: the importance of following rules; their respect to authors; and developing their own ideas. The importance of following rules is the strongest among the students—nine of the ten students mentioned this point of view. It includes several perspectives, which are as follows: 1) to protect the norm of copyrights results in protecting their own copyrights; 2) to follow the rules is necessary in order to produce new ideas; 3) to follow the rules is necessary in society; 4) to avoid making troubles for others; 5) to avoid violating others’ rights; and 5) to avoid making mistakes and having trouble. For example, Student A, in his open-ended responses, wrote: I have not learned detailed rules for quotations at all. It is certain that without rules, we could steal other’s ideas as much as we like. Without knowledge of detailed rules for quotations, if we quote someone’s idea, it could bring trouble. Rules are necessary not only for quotations, but also for all things in our society. We should learn those things. After graduating, we should learn from our failures. However, on some occasions, we are not allowed to make mistakes. This is an example of such things.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Two students express that following quotation rules would develop their understanding and promote their own ideas. Student B mentioned: reading references, we can promote our learning and as a result develop our understanding on the paper. . . . Following references, we could further understand its academic background. It is like there is one’s life behind their beliefs.

Student C stated that following the rules for quotations should be crucial, since it shows awareness of the accumulation of knowledge: Forerunners developed their knowledge with reference to that of their forerunners. This is the process in which we cultivated our ideas. Copy and paste might have not worked at all.

Another student also mentioned that following quotation rules shows respect to their forerunners. Student D wrote, “It takes more time to produce

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Plagiarism in Higher Education 227

a book or a paper than I can imagine” therefore, “we should use their ideas carefully.” On the other hand, four students expressed a feeling of puzzlement. All of the four students said that they have not thought that quoting needs to follow detailed rules. Although they assume that following the quotation rules is necessary, they said that they do not know how to quote. Student E wrote frankly, “I have done it in the way of common practice.” However, what “common practice” means is unclear. The student continued, “It is important to write my own opinion, so I have not brought in other’s ideas too much.” This description means he uses quotations but is not familiar with quotation rules. Student F was even more frank and wrote, “I have quoted without paying attention to the rules. . . . Although I’m using quotations, I don’t know how to quote.” This sense of confusion is commonly felt by those who show negative attitudes to plagiarism. They claim that they have not been taught well enough before the education course, while seven students have already learned quotation rules. Student G added a suggestion that:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

high school students should learn them because the percentage of university/ college enrolment is very high. Students are very often asked to write essays and papers. So high school teachers should teach us how to quote thoroughly.

It should be noted that the percentage of university/college enrolment of new graduates of upper secondary school was 54.8 percent in 2017 (MEXT, 2017). Through examining responses from the fifteen students, they assume plagiarism is not good, but they do not know how to quote well enough. This research could jump into how professors should teach quotation rules earlier, more often, and more effectively. However, this is not such a simple issue. In the above research project, two students, F and G, provided interesting comments. F wrote in the last part of his response, “plagiarism in individual assignments should be allowed, saving time and effort.” I understand this response indicates that he would commit plagiarism if writing an assignment consumes too much time and effort. G also wrote in the last part of his response, “I am sure that writing assignments on behalf of someone, and/or asking someone to write assignments is not allowed. However, if I should see such cases, I would not do anything.” Reading these comments, I assumed that students do not take academic misconduct including plagiarism so seriously. Then I recalled an experience. In another education course, I assigned a final report. Sixteen students, among which fourteen students provided responses for the above research, submitted their assignment. Six students committed plagiarism, and four of the six

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

228

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

students took a stand against plagiarism in the above research. They neither put page numbers in their quotations, nor did they even show references anywhere in their essays. They added unclear direct and indirect quotations, too. They committed plagiarism, but they were not aware of it. Moreover, another ten students did not commit plagiarism, although I asked students to read papers and/or books and quote from them. In my point of view, the fact that ten of eighteen student class did not put any quotation in their final assignments is rather shocking. These experiences could lead me to a conclusion while students assume that plagiarism is bad and they do not know well enough to avoid plagiarism, thinking of they could find rules and tips of quotation easily in the internet, they have not spontaneously learned them. This could mean that they do not take assignments so important. They might think of this issue as if academic misconducts including plagiarism were not their problem. Except students like B and C, assignments become just only a tool for their credits, graduation and qualification. This sentiment of distrust reminds me that students often claim that what they learn from school is not applicable after graduation. Social situations like this could be a source of academic misconducts and the more serious problem. I should mention a phenomenon under the tip of iceberg. How are the learning environments in higher education? Are they good enough? Before criticizing and policing students’ academic misconduct and plagiarism, we should ensure educational opportunities for all students. This is a matter of social justice. Since the end of twentieth century, economic disparity oppresses students’ opportunities and undermines the quality of their learning even in OECD countries. Since World War II, teacher education has been completed at four-year universities and junior colleges, through standards regulated by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT). Students who take teaching certificates should take extra credits (over at least 59 credits) in addition to those for bachelor’s degrees. At “A University,” students with financial problems often give up enrolling in teacher education programs. One student left the teacher education program and posted, “I will earn as much money as possible instead,” on Twitter. Another student had a part time job from 6 p.m. to midnight, five days a week, and did not have enough time for assignments. This student also gave up hope of becoming a teacher. Cases like these are often seen every school year. They do not have the time for their paper assignments. Their harsh learning environments could drive them to commit plagiarism. In Japan, while 57.9 percent of high school graduates went on to tertiary education in 2018 (MEXT, 2018), it has traditionally been regarded as a

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Plagiarism in Higher Education 229

“luxury item.” According to OECD, “tuitions fee in bachelor or equivalent level in public institutions are the fourth highest across OECD countries” (OECD, 2018). The tuition increases at the bachelor level between 2005–2016 was 8 percent (OECD, 2018). On the other hand, per capita annual income in Japan peaked around the millennium. The OECD suggests that “the average household net-adjusted disposable income per capita [in Japan] is USD 29,798 a year, lower than the OECD average of USD 33,604 a year” (OECD, n.d.). However, there is little chance to receive enough public financial grants. According to the Japan Student Services Organization (JASSO), while 2,492 students were granted its scholarship in 2017, 1,292,297 students received loan-type scholarship (JASSO, 2018). The loan-type scholarship could drive students into bankruptcy, because upon graduation they would have on average debt of 2,370,000 yen with an interest free loan scholarship (about USD 22,150), or 3,430,000 yen with an interest bearing scholarship (about USD 32,056) (JASSO, 2017). It is not easy for young people to repay that amount after graduation. Tertiary education puts a lot of financial burden on individuals and their families. As an educator, while I do not have any solution personally, I should keep an eye on the fact that, even if they have a motivation to study, students with financial problems simply do not have enough time. Social disparities are now widening. The OECD indicates that “there is a considerable gap between the richest and poorest—the top 20% of the population earn more than six times as much as the bottom 20%” (OECD, n.d.). Without enough financial support for students and their families, I see no fundamental solution for plagiarism.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

The Commercial Foreign Language Industry and its “Agency Problem”: Misconduct Beyond Academia The described cases and scenarios of academic misconduct and the dilemma for both the students and lecturers as described above by my colleagues have been observed by myself as well. In the field of foreign language teaching (with a focus on German) I came also across several forms of plagiarism. One of the more obvious cases was an exam paper tabled in 2013 in a German undergraduate course in Malaysia. One student had obviously copied the “answers” in a free essay format from her best friend who “by chance” was sitting next to her. For me this was in two ways very disappointing. First, the student did not deduce the subjective open answer opportunity in contrast to a rather simple multiple choice or right/false answer scheme, which are very common in Asia. The student let forego one of the great achievements in foreign

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

230

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

language teaching, as modern pedagogy allows learners to apply the newly acquired language in an open discursive form. An individually written essay would have given the student the chance to elaborate her own ideas within the concept of the respective course. Instead, the exam sitter poorly copied the answer from the neighbor. But what made me worry more was the fact that the student did not weigh the chance of being caught by the lecturer as risky enough to stay away from this opportunistic cheating. Did the student really think the lecturer would not read the answers and, hence, simply let her get away with this misconduct? I learned later while discussing the case with a colleague that there are lecturers who do merely cross reading when it comes to essays in exams. Based on the discussion it was for me a relief to understand that not my professional academic appearance in class was the cause of this very open form of plagiarism but rather a general misunderstanding of how a university functions properly. I closed the case by giving zero marks for the essay and explaining the issue to both students. What was missing for me was that there were no compliance guidelines from the faculty side. Thinking back, I would remark that this today is a major issue in all universities with which I have been affiliated. The academic staff and all teaching staff were left alone with many “grey zone” cases of academic misconduct. Only for very big cases of cheating and plagiarism scenarios, strict disciplinary rules were set up. At universities, I experienced most of the instances of academic misconduct during the final semester for students, in particular with regard to the final year research project (i.e., the bachelor’s thesis). Common cheating practices were copying paragraphs and sometimes more than that from publications. As the universities usually provide antiplagiarism software it was fairly easy to trace the original sources and reduce the mark or even to let the students fail their research papers. But in reality, a student never failed. The tools for discovering plagiarism, such as the already above-mentioned Turnitin, are also known to the students. They were very careful and tried to avoid in getting caught plagiarizing. As a benchmark for an acceptable ratio between own text production and quotations, 90 percent versus 10 percent was acceptable in this Malaysian university. The information of the desired ratio at the Japanese university I later worked for was never forwarded to me. The university’s official policies regarding academic misconduct were in every place quite clear, that any form of academic misconduct would have led to severe punishment. Students usually tried to obey those rules as they risked getting into a lot of trouble, especially facing the fear of failing a course or being ex-matriculated. It could be an interesting research question of how plagiarism and academic misconduct correlate with status and ranking of the tertiary institution. Being

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Plagiarism in Higher Education 231

ex-matriculated would have been a full failure of one’s academic career and would entail a poor earning career. The pressure students face in the trend of exam and degree-focused learning is in general questionable and broader as discussed by one of my coauthors in this chapter. Research supports the theory that project oriented and collaborative learning has much more positive impact on the educational achievements (Salnikova et al., forthcoming). For learning languages this approach is also emphasized (Funk et al., 2014). Let us look now beyond academia. The foreign language industry is a growing sector with English at the top of the demand pyramid and many other languages coming close in demand, for example, Chinese, French, Korean, and German. The reasons for learning a language are different and so are the motivations and the pressure one feels. The academic subjects of statistics and pedagogy taught by my coauthors are confined to the “ivory tower” of universities with certain academic goals. Instead, the teaching and learning of foreign languages are also common outside of universities, for example, in commercial language schools and official language and cultural institutions. Outside of universities the learning of foreign languages is in most cases also more functionally oriented, whereas in universities an achievable degree is the driving force. For most university students, studying German for instance, was not the first choice during the enrollment process (Schaar et al., 2015). Both coauthors, like most authors of the current book, have described their experiences and actions regarding discovering forms of plagiarism. From my viewpoint, I would have argued in similar ways by describing ways of precaution and safety measures to avoid any academic misconduct among my students. In universities, lecturers and all other teaching staff care about the learners. If that is not the case as mentioned in the example of cross reading essay exams, it should be changed as soon as possible to avoid a diminishing morality among students and academics. Discussing forms and consequences of cheating should be in universities an integral part of a student learning curve and should not be neglected. The issue of plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct should also be taken seriously in the future. All of this needs to be done to maintain the value of academic degrees. In 2017, I switched “frontiers” and joined the federal foreign language and cultural institute of Germany, Goethe-Institut. As an expatriate in Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia, I am in charge of fostering collaboration with local stakeholders in education among other duties related to German as a foreign language. In my professional role I also conduct market analyses regarding commercial foreign language schools in the country. By fulfilling my duties, I discovered very quickly the phenomenon of a potential “agency problem” among commercial language schools. Many small and medium sized privately

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

232

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

run language schools provide an excellent foreign language teaching program for their clients. Most of their learners are young, enthusiastic graduates who aim for a study program or more recently for dual vocational training in Germany. Due to the high standards, sustainability, and strong governmental and industrial unions’ support, the German system of vocational education is very popular. In 2019, the Indonesian Ministry of Education set up a master plan to provide a framework for more than ten thousand Indonesians aged eighteen to thirty-five to receive language provision on Level A1 to B1 (according to the Common European Framework of Languages), pre-departure training and subsequently vocational education in Germany. Some others learn the language for family reunions and other purposes. The major aim for all is however to pass the exam. To continue with their goals in Germany, different levels of proficiency are required. The learning and preparation for these proficiency levels can be obtained at any language center in the world. The exam itself is much more regulated to ensure a high universal standard. Only a limited number of exam options are available and considered as valid proof and, hence, an option to obtain later the muchdesired study, working, or spouse visa from a German embassy (Adsera and Pytlikova, 2015). It is important to highlight the strict regulation regarding exam providers by the German authorities in light of a potential “agency problem.” The observations during the last two years were quite new. Whereas in universities the major rules are clear for everyone, they are not in the commercial market. As mentioned earlier, only a handful of exams are qualified to be used as an adequate proof of foreign language proficiency (German). These tests are conducted, for instance, by Goethe-Institut, and a few other organizations with their respective test forms (e.g., telc, DSH, ÖSD). Learners register for the exams online. They either trained directly with the institution in which they are taking the exam or with other organizations. In the latter case they are totally unknown to the official exam center. Especially the globally operating Goethe-Institut has intensified the efforts to ensure smooth exams according to its high-quality standards. In discussions with the internal exam department, I became aware of a potential form of cheating, so far unknown to me: the exam impostor. Such cases had long been known to exist, but they were new for me. A recently released movie from Thailand, Bad Genius (2017), deals with this topic. Coming from the university environment, exam impostors would have been easy to filter out as every lecturer or professor knows his or her students. In addition, students usually have to bring their student ID cards to exams, which are checked by the monitoring staff. This already limits the

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Plagiarism in Higher Education 233

opportunities for sending someone else with a fake identity to the exam. But in the commercial foreign language industry, the case is different, as it is no longer the protected world of a college or university campus. To understand the pressures for some exam sitters we have to bear in mind that Indonesia is a developing country where almost 50 percent of the more than 250 million inhabitants are living under extreme economic pressure. For the exam sitters, who are coming from all over the country to take part in the exams, paying expensive flight tickets and accommodation in Jakarta, there is not the question of getting an A or B or just a C to pass like in universities. There is also no way to request from the lecturer an extra assignment to mark up the bad exam result, as was sometimes the case in my university courses. From previous university colleagues I heard of cases in which the dean requested the lecturer to provide the opportunity for extra assignments to help the students to pass the course. This is problematic when the lecturer deems the student to have failed the course. This chapter is not about the dean-lecturer relationship but it points in the direction of how the university concept can lead to misinterpretation by the students, as mentioned earlier. There are many “grey zones.” For language learners with the aim to obtain a certain visa type, it is all about a “Pass” or “Fail” in the exam. This dichotomy leads obviously among exam takers (in a good way) to learn more focused or (in the worst way) to participate in a risky cheating scheme with an exam impostor. Therefore, it is so important to have this selected list of institutional exam providers, which are certified, quality controlled, and accountable to the German authorities. This becomes even more urgent, by looking into a recent phenomenon in Indonesia—the increasing number of commercial agents who try to bring young Indonesians to Europe and Germany in particular. Often, they are offering or rather promising young Indonesians university admission or a contract for dual vocational training. The agents’ ultimate goal is to maximize the number of clients. As there is a high and soaring demand for workers in Germany, the opportunities are fairly good and getting even better for people outside of the European Union to migrate to Germany and participate in the domestic labor market. Despite many problems the young migrants might face, for example, a lack of German proficiency and intercultural training, many for-profit agents lure young Indonesians to Germany without proper preparation (Goethe-Institut, Jakarta, Indonesia provides information and intercultural training for those Indonesians who are planning to migrate to Germany for family reunions). The practical gap also compromises German proficiency as the commercial agents try to bring the Indonesians as quickly as possible to Germany. In certain cases, they provide language training in

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

234

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

mediocre unlicensed small language schools. When these learners later register for the official exam, the failure rates are very high, sometimes exceeding 50 percent (coauthor’s inquiry at both sides, at agent and exam department). I call this from the commercial agent side an “agency problem.” The term is taken from the principal-agent model, which is usually used in economics and describes a conflict of interest. An agent should prepare the client, in our case the Indonesian individual who is aiming for a smooth transition from Indonesia to Germany and thereafter a meaningful temporary life in the host country, in the very best manner. The conflict occurs when the agent is rather led by greed and trying to bring the candidate as quickly as possible to Germany, despite lacking all required qualifications. The agent is neglecting his duty of care for the learner. The real language ability or proficiency should be considered and achieved. Resitting should be an option before the exam itself. A learner who is clearly not ready to pass the exam should be offered the opportunity to take some extra lessons to avoid the feeling of failure and stress. The pressure is as described very high for the learner. For the worst, sending an exam impostor is the last (supposed) option. The agent itself might turn a blind eye to that possibility. This is where the agency problem comes into consideration again. A commercial agent has in contrast to a university lecturer little incentive to prevent the learners from plotting to cheat on an exam. The agent’s attitudes are not necessarily in the best interest of the learner.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

WHY DO STUDENTS COMMIT PLAGIARISM AND WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT? From the narratives above, we can see multiple reasons to explain why students may commit plagiarism. From the first narrative (American and Japanese universities), we can see that cases of plagiarism may arise from students’ laziness and a lack of ethics. This is perhaps the simplest reason for plagiarism. The second narrative, covering Japanese universities, cites more complex, structural reasons. Students in many universities (presumably not just Japanese universities) are not adequately taught how to quote and cite literature. Additionally, the economic or financial factors of some students cause them to have less time for schoolwork, which can then lead to students taking shortcuts such as plagiarism, just to keep up with other students. This passage also cites the somewhat laxer, “so what?” attitudes toward plagiarism in Japan, which facilitate a greater likelihood of its occurrence. The third narrative provides more support for the lax attitudes toward plagiarism in Japan through the lack of administrative standards to punish

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Plagiarism in Higher Education 235

small, isolated cases of plagiarism and to ensure that all students are allowed the opportunity to pass their courses (even if they are set to fail a course due to plagiarism). From this, it seems like there is little disincentive to cheat. The descriptive example of the student blatantly copying a subjective essay answer from a neighboring student also serves as evidence of laxer attitudes. But the third narrative also presents another structural reason—the motivation of economically disadvantaged students in Southeast Asia to accept the risks of getting caught by cheating in order to pass a course, program, or language proficiency exam because they will not be able to replicate the sunk costs they have paid to sit for the course, program, or exam. Making matters worse are agents for language schools and overseas visa programs who push unprepared students to sit for exams in pursuit of their own financial profit. Here we present the viewpoints of the three authors separately on their conclusions regarding why students cheat and how to address it. According to Philip Streich: Naturally, the reasons for plagiarism discussed above are not mutually exclusive. My own experiences point to the individual-level reason of laziness, but the structural reasons exist alongside the individual-level factors. We want to be clear however that we do not seek to stereotype economically disadvantaged students as being more pliant toward cheating. The vast majority of students that all three of us have taught of any economic class are hard-working and honest. I would like to touch upon the contrast between Eastern and Western attitudes toward plagiarism. We stated that attitudes toward plagiarism are decidedly lax in East Asian universities, perhaps implying that Western attitudes are strict. But we must remember that the incidence of plagiarism is still high in the West. As cited in the introduction, research by McCabe et al. (2012, pp. 62-64) concludes that roughly 36-38 percent of North American undergraduates and as many as 25 percent of North American graduate students have committed plagiarism. Those numbers are high and should be shocking to everyone. If this study were replicated in East Asian universities, how would the results compare? The results of the small survey described in the second narrative above shows that perhaps four out of fourteen (28.6 percent) professed mixed feelings about plagiarism, suggesting that they do not totally oppose it. Though this is only a small sample, that proportion of 28.6 percent does suggest a similarity to the results of McCabe et al. (2012). It is quite possible, even with supposedly stronger, professed attitudes against plagiarism in the West, that students might still commit plagiarism in the same proportion as in the East. Students might profess strict attitudes because they know Western academics have strict attitudes, and they know that’s what we want to hear, but they might still commit plagiarism at the same rate because of the structural and individual-level reasons.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

236

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

To try to stem plagiarism, first we must teach proper citation methods and how to avoid plagiarizing. This ideally should be addressed in an academic writing course in the first year of undergraduate study, but if that type of course is not available, then we can teach these necessary skills in other courses when we pass out and explain term paper or research paper assignments. The students should know these fundamental skills by the time of their second year of study. Second, we must use plagiarism software such as iThenticate or Turnitin (or even Google). My experience with iThenticate is that a few student papers will come up with a score of 30 percent on iThenticate every semester, which usually represents a few unattributed passages in their papers. Currently, for such scores, we tend to inform the students of the plagiarism score, return their papers, and ask them to please fix the papers and resubmit within a few days. Part of the reason for this is educational—we understand the undergraduate students are still learning how to properly cite, so we try to use this as a learning exercise, but with the warning that we will not be so tolerant the next time. The other reason is that the university policy is instant failure of all courses for plagiarism, which I believe to be too harsh when a student is caught with a partial plagiarism score. We should warn our students in the syllabus and near the due date for papers that we use the plagiarism software. In addition to these steps, I suggest that educators try breaking away from the normal means of assessing student performance. One reason for “lazy plagiarism” may be that students get bored repeating the same kind of research assignments over and over, so maybe we should come up with novel assignments that will excite our students and give them the feeling that they are doing something new and/or something that will benefit society. One example of this is creating new Wikipedia sites (or building up existing “stubs”). I have used this assignment successfully in a few classes. With the Wikipedia assignment, students seemingly are more excited and work harder than they do for normal assignments, and they derive a greater sense of pride in their creation since they know it will be seen by people around the world, not just by their professor. A second suggestion is to have students perform written assignments in groups, with each group member receiving the same grade. In group assignments, the students will likely police each other—no one wants to fail the assignment if one group member plagiarizes. For the same reason, students will be less likely to plagiarize because they do not want their classmates to fail if their plagiarism is detected. Moreover, students learn the valuable skill of editing the work of others (a group Wikipedia assignment is great way to teach editing skills). For professors who already use group presentations,

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Plagiarism in Higher Education 237

I strongly suggest adding a written assignment as well, since it is harder to detect plagiarism in verbal presentations. A good group presentation and written assignment must require that all group members contribute in writing the paper, rather than letting the students divide their labor and designate their best writer to write the paper while the others concentrate on the presentation. I am sure that almost all professors who have tried group assignments have encountered cases in which group members complain about one student not pulling their weight. In these situations, one should let the students deal with their group’s problems themselves. It is a useful social skill for students to learn how to manage their own group. Only in extreme cases should the professor get involved and split the group grade up to give the students the grade that more closely matches their contributions. According to Masahiro Saito: In Japan, economic disparity has brought many students into “black baito”—part-time jobs in which they are asked to perform work under harsh working conditions and low wages in the range of ¥761 to ¥985 per hour (it varies between prefectures). According to a recent survey from Osaka University on student life, more than 60 percent of students do not receive scholarship support (there is no information about grants or loans). Of those that do receive scholarships, the modal group of respondents, about 8 percent, receive between ¥30-50,000 per month. A majority, 62.4 percent of the respondents, receive some money from their family (¥30-50,000/month is the highest at 15.1 percent). Then 66 percent have a part time jobs and 19 percent of this group earn only ¥10,000-30,000/ month. Of those that work, 22.7 percent work ten to fifteen hours per week, 13.7 percent work fifteen to twenty hours per week, 5.7 percent work twenty to twenty-five hours, while 2.8 percent work more than twenty-five hours per week. One-quarter of those that work answer that they work to cover tuition and living expenses, and 26.2 percent of those who work answer that their part-time job affects their studies (Osaka University, 2019). Competition-oriented education could be undermining the quality of education, especially higher education, across the globe. Many students face harsh realities in which even though they have a strong motivation to study, their financial situations do not allow them to learn. Many students commit plagiarism as their “temporary measure.” On the other hand, students need at least bachelor’s degrees to get a stable income. Tuition at Japanese universities is high, but public expenses to university students are extremely low. In this situation, students need a part-time jobs, which often leads to harsh working conditions with low wages of less than ¥1,000/hour (USD 9.50/hour). In order to attend classes, they should get day offs, which is often not allowed if a replacement is not found. Such bad learning situations could drive students to commit plagiarism as “a band-aid measure.”

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

238

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

At “A University,” some students claim that they cannot attend school without the income from their part-time jobs. So, should professors expect them to fully and rigorously follow copyright rules? They should or must think how their students will succeed in their careers after university. Preventing plagiarism is a rather less important problem when many students are struggling just to keep up with their workload. If students find stable foundations for their future livelihood—that is, if they are prepared enough for their future career—then plagiarism becomes a problem that can be prioritized. If they are not yet fully prepared for their career after university, then dealing with plagiarism becomes a secondary concern. This situation though would present professors with another problem: double standards in grading. Should professors keep an eye on plagiarism for students without financial problems while being less strict about plagiarism with students with financial problems? About this matter, I have had some discussions with my colleagues, but the university has not yet officially formulated its plagiarism policy, including setting guidelines on how to avoid and deal with plagiarism. Everything depends on individual professors. To avoid this double standard, I have employed multiple grading methods: final essay exam, participation points, group work, and communication cards, upon which students write their thoughts, ideas, and learning (basically whatever they are feeling during the class). For example, class participation accounts for thirty points, communication cards for forty-five points, and the final essay exam is twenty-five points. Writing an essay exam requires a lot of time and energy for students so I ask them to focus on class participation and to take memos about their ideas and those from their fellow students. After class, they put them together and send via email. Then they earn enough points to get their credit along with scores on their final essay exam. I ask students working on independent research projects and/or graduation theses to follow copyright rules strictly. They progress with their work under my close guidance, and therefore there is less opportunity for them to commit plagiarism. I admit that this is not the best. Many of those who worry about their financial situation cannot commit to advanced learning in this way. It is typically students who do not have to work part-time jobs with long hours who take on this workload. Overall, I feel that this way of addressing plagiarism works best as it does not overburden those who face financial pressure. As an educator, it is our professional duty to think of rules and manners in higher education and adjust to the personal context of individual students, for the best interests of our students. According to Raimond Selke: For the case of German language exams in Indonesia, the quality standards of the Goethe-Institut as a major institutional

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Plagiarism in Higher Education 239

exam provider can be seen as a role model for schools and universities. Indeed, there are collaborations with many secondary schools and universities offering German as a foreign language from Medan to Ambon. The introduction of the internationally recognized and reliable Goethe-Zertifikat A2 and B1 exams at local schools and universities are an additional required type of language test to demonstrate the proper A2 or B1 (according to CEFL) foreign language proficiency (in contrast to local teachers’ self-designed exams). This exam is in content as well as in quality an adequate means to maintain a certain standard and to ensure a smooth and safe proceeding. The exam procedure is standardized and follows the highest quality standards. In collaboration with such an international stakeholder (i.e., Goethe-Institut), universities, academic staff, and students can benefit and improve their performances. Therefore, foreign language test centers and issuers of certificates should maintain strict rules regarding test marking schemes and protection against exam impostors. As discussed above, some private language teaching centers and their affiliated agents have a fairly a low motivation in extending the predeparture training of Germany-bound students due to a lack of skills in German. The economic burden for the learners and test takers at official places is also a reason why learners engage in such a risky cheating model like hiring an exam impostor. Currently, the lack of trust in the national Indonesian institutions may also contribute to the low awareness of cheating. I have heard of stories of corrupt teachers in many developing countries. For instance, one of my students in China back in 2007 once told me that his science teacher asked for a high tuition fee for exam preparation classes. Without those extra face-to-face classes, he was likely to fail the exam. Indonesian exam takers in German need to have trust and confidence that German test centers are working according to a standard operational procedure. They need to know that neither cheating by the test taker nor being cheated by the test center is accepted. Buckner and Hodges (2016) typify the indifferent perception of cheating in North African countries as the social construct of “fairness.” In my opinion this misleading concept by the learners can also be applied in Indonesia (Buckner and Hodges, 2016). The problem occurs then later, when these people as vocational trainees move to Germany with inadequate knowledge in language and culture (e.g., rules and norms). A lack of trust in educational institutions is also a relevant structural factor for cheating habits in Indonesia. Universities are heavily underfunded; one of the most eminent problems is the lack of expensive journal subscriptions, such as Scopus. Among the twelve to thirteen national universities with a German foreign language BA program, only one or maybe two currently offer online reading access through Scopus. One might argue that research and

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

240

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

language education are different pairs of shoes. However, I consider the lack of a proper library in a university campus an indicator about the quality of the course program in general. My personal experiences from visiting several campus libraries and with Indonesian students taking language certificate exams lead to the conclusion that there is a low confidence in the educational structure. If structural norms are set low, how do we justify setting ethical norms high? Therefore, improving structural norms can lead also to a higher motivation to follow academic rules. The discussion above about the different universities in the United States and Japan support this argument. My coauthors’ universities have different levels of status—this shows among their students a very different level and attitude concerning academic misconduct. Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world. With over 250 million inhabitants the economic outlook is not so bad. However, schools and universities have a higher output rate than qualified jobs available. The different industrial structure compared with China or India and less opportunities for highly qualified graduates gives young people in Indonesia even less hope before they embark on a university journey. Hence, the number of foreign language learners will likely increase in the future and even more young adults will sit for the essential language certificate.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION Our experiences describe different reasons at different levels of analysis to explain why students may resort to plagiarism. We describe individual-level reasons such as laziness and structural factors related to economics, a lack of instruction on about how to use quotations, and principal-agent relationships in the context of testing agencies. Our discussion in the previous section further expands on the reasons and then details different methods by which educators may address students’ inclinations to plagiarize. In lieu of a traditional, concluding “wrap-up,” we offer the following lesson from Gert Biesta, the well-regarded European pedagogue: Biesta (2013, p. 53) mentions the difference between “being taught by” and “learning” (p. 53). He states that we “refer to experiences where someone showed us something or made us realize something that really entered our being from the outside” (p. 53, emphasis from the original). Learning is, on the other hand, just taking some information from a book and/or the internet. Such information does not enter our being, because it can easily be replaced with more “useful” information. This is the typical social phenomenon in the era of “lifelong learning.” We mean here that this learning is just for earning, not for well-being. The culture of cheating could be a by-product of this era.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Plagiarism in Higher Education 241

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Adsera, A., & Pytlikova, M. (2015). The Role of Language in Shaping International Migration. Economic Journal, 125(586), F49-F81. DOI: 10.1111/ecoj.12231. Biesta, G. (2013). Receiving the Gift of Teaching: From ‘Learning from’ to ‘Being Taught by’. Studies in Philosophy and Education 32(5), 449-461. DOI: 10.1007/ s11217-012-9312-9. Bennett, R. (2005). Factors associated with student plagiarism in a post-1992 university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 137–162. DOI: 10.1080/0260293042000264244. Buckner, E., & Hodges, R. (2016). Cheating or cheated? Surviving secondary exit exams in neoliberal era. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 46(4), 603-623. DOI: 10.1080/03057925.2015.1088379. Cleary, M. (November 27, 2017). Top 10 reasons students plagiarize & what teachers can do about it (with apologies to David Letterman). Phi Delta Kappan, Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://www.kappanonline.org/cleary-top-10-reasonsstudents-plagiarize. Curtis, G., & Popal. R. (2011). An examination of factors related to plagiarism and a five-year follow-up of plagiarism at an Australian university. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 7(1), 30–42. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https:// core.ac.uk/download/pdf/11240319.pdf. Davis, S., Grover, C., Becker, A., & McGregor, L. (1992). Academic dishonesty: Prevalence, determinants, techniques and punishments. Teaching of Psychology, 19, 16–20. DOI: 10.1207/s15328023top1901_3. Diekhoff, G., LaBeff, E., Clark, R., Williams, L., Francis, B., & Haines, V. (1996). College cheating: Ten years later. Research in Higher Education, 37, 487–502. DOI: 10.1007/BF01730111. Funk, H., et al. (2014). Aufgaben, Übungen, Interaktion, Vol. 4. Munchen: KlettLangenscheidt. Haines, V., Diekhoff, G., LaBeff, E., & Clark, R. (1986). College cheating: Immaturity, lack of commitment and the neutralising attitude. Research in Higher Education, 25, 342–354. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://www.jstor.org/ stable/40195757?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. Harding, T., Carpenter, D., Finelli, C., & Passow, H. (2004). Does academic dishonesty relate to unethical behavior in professional practice? An exploratory study. Science and Engineering Ethics, 10, 311–324. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/55268/2004%20 SEE%20WES.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y. Japan Student Services Organization (JASSO) (2018). JASSO Nenpo [The Annual Report of JASSO]. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://www.jasso.go.jp/ about/organization/publication/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2018/12/04/annrep17_1_2.pdf. Japan Student Services Organization (JASSO) (2017). Shougakukin Jigyo eno Rikai wo Fukameteitadakutameni [For Deepening the Understanding the Scholarship Project]. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://www.jasso.go.jp/about/

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

242

Philip Streich, Raimond Selke, and Masahiro Saito

disclosure/sonota/saikenkanrikaishuutou/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2018/04/25/29_1_ sankou_shiryou_9.pdf. Landau, J., Druen, P., & Arcuri, J. (2002). Methods for helping students avoid plagiarism. Teaching of Psychology, 29, 112–115. DOI: 10.1207%2FS15328023TOP 2902_06. Larkham, P., & Manns, S. (2002). Plagiarism and its treatment in higher education. Journal of Further & Higher Education, 26, 339–349. DOI: 10.1080/0309877 022000021748. Naci Kayaoğlu, M., Erbay, Ş., Flitner, C., & Saltaş, D. (2016). Examining students’ perceptions of plagiarism: A cross-cultural study at tertiary level. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 40(5), 682-705, DOI: 10.1080/0309877X.2015.1014320. Maxwell, A., Curtis, G., & Vardanega, L. (2008). Does culture influence understanding and perceived seriousness of plagiarism? International Journal for Educational Integrity, 4, 25–40. DOI: 10.21913/IJEI.v4i2.412. McCabe, D., Butterfield, K., & Trevino, L. (2012). Cheating in college: Why students do it and what educators can do about it. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT) (2018). School Basic Survey (preliminary). Retrieved December 26, 2019 from http://www .mext.go.jp/component/b_menu/other/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2018/12/25/1407449_1 .pdf. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). (2017). School Basic Survey. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from http://www.mext.go.jp/ component/b_menu/other/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2018/02/05/1388639_1.pdf. Newstead, S., Franklyn-Stokes, A., & Armstead, P. (1996). Individual differences in student cheating. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 229–241. DOI: 10 .1037/0022-0663.88.2.229. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2018). Education at a Glance. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://www.oecd.emb-japan .go.jp/files/000398873.pdf. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (n.d.). OECD Better Life Index. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from http://www.oecdbetterlife index.org/countries/japan. Osaka University (2019). 24th Student Life Questionnaire. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://www.osaka-u.ac.jp/en/guide/student/general/survey. Passow, H., Mayhew, M., Finelli, C., Harding, T., & Carpenter, D. (2006). Factors influencing engineering students’ decisions to cheat by type of assessment. Research in Higher Education, 47, 643–684. DOI: 10.1007/s11162-006-9010-y. Salnikova, M., Salnikova, Y., Soroka, M., & Stolyarova, V. (forthcoming). Students’ Independent Learning Activity as an Effective Method of Acquiring Professional Competencies. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 963, 391-399. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-20135-7_39. Sato, M. (March 13, 2015). Todai sounds plagiarism alarm with rare cheating report. Japan Times. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://www.japantimes.co.jp/ news/2015/03/13/national/todai-sounds-plagiarism-alarm-with-rare-cheating-report.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Plagiarism in Higher Education 243

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Schaar, T., Selke, R., Lay Hoon, A., & Ogasa, N. (2015). Bachelor’s Degree in German Studies and Then? The Professional Development of the 2008 BA German Graduates from University Putra Malaysia, GJBSSR, 1(2), 499-509. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://www.academia.edu/34143343/Bachelor_s_Degree_ in_German_Studies_and_Then_The_Professional_Development_of_the_2008_ BA_German_Graduates_from_Universiti_Putra_Malaysia. Stephens, J., Romakin, V., & Yukhymenko, M. (2010). Academic motivation and misconduct in two cultures: A comparative analysis of US and Ukrainian undergraduates. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 6(1), 47–60. DOI: 10.21913/IJEI.v6i1.674. Zobel, J., & Hamilton, M. (2002). Managing student plagiarism in large academic departments. Australian Universities Review, 45, 23–30. Retrieved December 26, 2019 from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242418174_Managing_ Student_Plagiarism_in_Large_Academic_Departments.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter Twelve

Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students as a Problem of Academic Ethics: Interdisciplinary and Intercultural Approach

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova For many years, academia in the United States has been and continues to be concerned with the numerous cases of academic misconduct in the student community. In carrying out their course work, students often commit acts which contradict their institutions’ policy of academic integrity and which entail very strict administrative sanctions. Despite this, the problem of academic dishonesty remains (Wideman, 2008; Aaron, Simmons & Graham-Webb, 2011; Fang, 2012; Montoneri, 2018). A highly comprehensive scientific research project composed of a collection of articles, titled Student Plagiarism in the Virtual World: Problems and Solutions and published in 2008 contains results from such Western countries as the United States, Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, New Zeeland, Sweden, and Belgium. According to the results presented, most of the examined students in their countries were involved in academic dishonesty, specifically, plagiarism. C. Zimitat, one of the authors, provided data of the Center for Academic Integrity about cross-institutional US studies. The data showed that a number of students responsible for academic misconduct had increased three-fold from 1999 to 2005 (p. 10). S. Golunov, defines the situation in the world of higher education as “a global epidemic of student plagiarism” (2010, p. 244). Russian scientists are in solidarity with Western ones. The authors of a series of studies on academic ethics conducted in Russian educational institutions state that “education as a social institution is currently in a deep crisis” (Kicherova & Efimova, 2013, p. 2). These authors state the opinion circulated among Russian specialists in the field of education and expressed at numerous conferences today: “the traditional high quality of education in 245

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

246

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

Russia has sharply decreased in recent years” (p. 2). Following the Western researchers, Russian researchers study the causes of academic fraud in today’s educational institutions of their country (Efimova & Kicherova, 2012; Gerzen, 2013). Perhaps, the problem of academic ethics among university students was never so acute as now. True, education as well as society is different from the past. Before, the best students, the most knowledgeable and responsible, entered universities. Having received a bachelor’s degree, a few exemplary students continued in a master’s programs, for which studying in libraries, conducting research, and writing articles was commonplace. Presently, the academic composition of students in higher educational institutions has changed increasingly. Education has become available to masses. However, this essentially humane reform introduced a side effect: the standards and quality of higher education were lowered. This is just one prime cause affecting academic ethics in today’s colleges and universities. Another issue lies in those changes that have occurred in the last decades with knowledge and attitude towards it in society. Just forty-fifty years ago, the acquisition of knowledge was a laborious affair; it was time-consuming, requiring a big investment of effort and finances. Information for study and scientific work had been quarried from extensive research and resources. This is concerning, first of all, those countries which were less technologically developed, Russia was among them. Authors of this research remember well how they, as graduate students of Lomonosov Moscow State University, were receiving information for their studies and then dissertations, spending days in the libraries, copying pages of texts by hand, and trying to reproduce graphic materials. Moreover, at that time, access to the country’s main library, which had huge unique collections, was not open to everyone. There were no copy machines. Delivery of the books to readers was limited, and far from all editions could be received for viewing. In the second half of the twentieth century, globally, societies entered an era of new information technology. Now, as a result, computers are present in many offices, many classrooms, and even many households; they are the main tools of intellectual work, while the internet is the main tool of communication and distribution of information. Getting information has become commonplace: it is a matter of minutes, at most—hours. A person sits down at a computer, formulates a search query, makes one keystroke, and has the necessary data that s/he can view, study, and analyze. This has changed the landscape of education and is changing human mentality: in the public consciousness as well as in every individual’s consciousness, a new attitude towards information has been developing.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 247

The abundance of various data, the easiness of their receipt, and the emergence of numerous forms of uncontrolled “circulation” of information in the network space has led to the fact that information is increasingly perceived as shared, belonging to everyone. With that comes the feeling of false accessibility and the absence of impunity: it is possible to reach out and take what you need, and there will be no punishment for it—no one will even notice. The piety for the creativity of others, for the work of authorship, laid down in past generations, has been lost in modern youth. As noted by Russian experts in the field of copyright, “taking the Internet resources as a kind of “information folklore” of the digital age . . . generates information infantilism, that is, inability and unwillingness to foresee the consequences of one’s actions in the information field” (Pankeev & Timofeev, 2018). Every coin has two sides: people live with an abundance of information and depreciate it. This is the flip side of progress which adversely affects education and learning. The sphere of learning activities, which is most associated with a decrease in the ethics of students’ work, is the writing of term papers. Traditionally, the knowledge of modern students is tested through written communication. Written works constitutes the largest part of the workload in today’s colleges and universities (with the development of distant training programs, the amount of written work reaches almost 100 percent in the total academic load). According to academic curricula, students of all levels of university programs and all majors, especially in social sciences and humanities, must submit, in addition to regular homework assignments, various writings: essays, review and research papers, and finally diploma theses. All students’ written works must include required cited sources as proof of acquaintance with them. In response to this social request, many US universities have opened resource training centers containing all the necessary information about the correct writing and formatting of the variety of required student’s coursework. These centers have their own virtual representations widely available to everyone who wants to learn in the country and even abroad (Harvard University, n.d.; Monash University, n.d.; North Illinois University, n.d; Penn State, n.d.; Stanford University, n.d.; University of Washington, n.d.; University of Wisconsin, n.d.; Walden University, n.d.). Moreover, the internet search queries for such key concepts as “Rules of borrowing,” “How to Quote and Paraphrase,” or “Common citation errors” allows the reader to find dozens of informative articles and tutorial laboratories (Shashok, 2010; Barbeay, 2018a; 2018b; 2018c; Kirshenbaum, 2018; Walburg, 2018; APA quick citation guide, n.d.). However, despite the abundance of information on the rules of borrowing and citation, many of today’s university students

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

248

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

remain incompetent. As S. Golunov rightly points out, the students’ “written assignments are increasingly turning into an imitation of the learning process” (2010, p. 243). This specific area of educational activity became the object of our research. The choice of cultures (countries) is determined by the three essential factors: a) place of the authors’ residence, b) belongingness of English and Russian languages to one, Indo-European group, and c) similar attitudes towards borrowing of someone else’s ideas/texts and norms of citation behavior as well as understanding of such key concepts as academic ethics, academic dishonesty, and plagiarism in the United States and Russia. The purpose of this chapter is to analyze the most common cases of illiterate and wrongful borrowings of sources which have been committed in university students’ work. The basic tasks of our research consisted of the following: 1) propose a classification of borrowings and common citation errors, 2) represent examples illustrating the most common errors, 3) determine the causes of various violations. It was supposed that citation behavior does not depend on the culture and subject area. Although, it may depend on the students’ level in the structure of the educational institution (bachelor, master’s degree programs).

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

DEFINITION OF BORROWING The concept of borrowing came from the discipline of linguistics, where it is widely used to explain the phenomenon of lexical diffusion (language diffusion). It also helps in pedagogy—for describing the academic behavior of learners in their performance of different kinds of writings. In our work, we are going to use this concept as a basic, generic term. According to Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary, the word borrowing has the following meanings: “to take or receive (something) temporarily and with intent to return” and “to take into possession or use from another source” (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary, 2019, p. 57). In the Cambridge Dictionary, to borrow is “to take something from someone with the intention of giving it back after using it” (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d.). American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (2011) defines it: “to obtain or receive (something) on loan with the promise or understanding of returning it or its equivalent” and “to adopt or use as one’s own.” A similar interpretation is presented by S. I. Ojogov’s Dictionary of Russian Language; here borrowing means “ . . . Take, adopt, assimilate from somewhere . . . ” (1961, p. 200). The Russian definition is translated by Dr. Anna Toom. It is presented in a shortened version because in the original

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 249

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

dictionary article it includes the description of many specific grammatical constructions inherent in the Russian language and incomprehensible to the English-speaking readers. The word has a few synonyms; one of them means “taking with the condition of returning” (p. 208). It is mentioned also that a word, topic, subject, and phenomenon can be borrowed; special attention is paid to borrowings from foreign languages (p. 200). Notably, at least one of the word’s meanings in each source above implies “the intent to return.” When the concept of borrowing is adapted to pedagogy, for students’ academic activities, specifically, academic writing, the facet of the definition of “the intent to return” is essential. In our work, we are not talking about a physical action when what has been taken comes back. Here we deal with abstractions, intangible values, not material ones. Nevertheless, even in the case of borrowing texts, some conditional sign of acknowledgment and respect is expected in relation to the one from whom borrowing was done. For their course work, students often are required to borrow information (facts, ideas) from published sources (books, articles, internet materials) and integrate it into their own writings. This integration must be done carefully, according to the specified rules, in order to avoid plagiarism, which is defined as “the process or practice of using another person’s ideas or work and pretending that it is your own” (Dictionary.Cambridge.org). Proper citing of sources of borrowed information symbolizes an acknowledgment and respect to authors whose ideas and texts are used by the students in their work. Borrowing is an important aspect of students’ academic activities. It stimulates the search for arguments in favor of their ideas, the search for new information, as well as the search for already known discoveries that allow students to assimilate them and not to “reinvent the wheel.” Finally, it teaches students to work with opposite ideas, which gives them an opportunity to better understand their own point of view. Borrowing has a great potential to discipline the mind. BORROWING OF TEXTUAL INFORMATION This rule, when being violated, is clearly mentioned in all definitions of plagiarism. So, it is possible to divide all actions related to the use of information into two main ones. If there is a reference to the original work, then the information is borrowed correctly; if there is no reference, then information is appropriated, stolen. One should not doubt the absolute reliability of such a division, even if there are some exceptions. Proper acknowledgment of sources of borrowed information is a quite sufficient characteristic for understanding whether we are dealing with citation or plagiarism issues. Thus,

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

250

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

ethics, as one of the most important regulators of social behavior, can orient us in the sphere of academic behavior as well. A classification of the students’ borrowings is presented in Figure 12.1. The concept of borrowing is generic. The basis for the classification at the initial level is such an indicator of the ethics of academic behavior as intention. This allows for a dichotomy of borrowing: “ethical in intention” vs. “unethical in intention.” The category of borrowing ethical in intention is represented by quoting and paraphrasing; the category of borrowing unethical in intention—by plagiarism. The basis for the classification at the next level is an implementation of learning activity. Both categories are characterized by a dichotomy: “ethical in implementation” vs. “unethical in implementation.” The category Quoting and Paraphrasing includes two different types of integrating someone else’s ideas and texts into one’s writing with proper references to the sources. An ability to correctly integrate these types of borrowings from other sources into one’s own text is considered one of the fundamental skills of academic writing. Properly citing and acknowledging sources of borrowed information is highly regarded and rewarded. Quotes and paraphrases are different lexical constructs, and conditions, reasons, permissible frequency of the use as well as ways for formatting and integrating each of them into the students’ textual assignments are also different. Quotes and paraphrases are integrated from different sources (books, articles, and internet materials), and these sources should be differently formatted in the bibliography depending on the type of source. Directives for all these and many other important rules of dealing with borrowings are contained in standards, manuals, and in a multitude of materials in the internet. Each major US university has a writing center, and its web page is open to everyone, so, all learners can find all necessary information on how to borrow and make citations.

Figure 12.1.  Classification of Textual Borrowings in Students’ Assignments

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 251

In Russia, with its tendency towards greater centralization of social processes, uniform state standards have been issued as citation format in academic area, and they are widely used in all institutes of higher education in the country (GOST R 7.05–2008). In the United States, on the contrary, there are no uniform—for all cases and for all educational institutions—rules and norms for quoting, citing and formatting bibliographies. Currently, the following citation styles are mostly and widely used—developed by the American Psychological Association (APA), The Modern Language Association of America (MLA), and The Chicago Manual of Style (CMS). Each major US university has a writing center, and its web page is open to everyone, so, all learners can find necessary information on how to borrow and make citations. The subcategory Correct Quoting and Paraphrasing includes ethical borrowings in both intention and implementation. They are carried out competently, in compliance with all the rules dictated by the standards of citations and formatting of the bibliographic apparatus. These cases are unambiguous in terms of their assessment in the educational environment. They are outstanding examples of learning activity. Difficulties in mastering the above rules should not be ignored. Correct quotation and its adequate introduction into one’s text both syntactically and grammatically, is a special kind of written speech, the mastering of which can be likened to the training of a foreign language. Quoting requires a student to have analytical thinking skills and to comprehend information at the meta level. In addition, competent citations attest to the student’s information culture. In modern society, correctly formatted academic written work even becomes an indicator of a student’s personal qualities: his/her moral and ethical attitudes, cognitive advancement, and erudition. The subcategory Incorrect Quoting and Paraphrasing includes borrowings that are ethical in intention and unethical in implementation that is, made in violation of citation standards. This is a vast subcategory including various cases of citation errors, many of which are quite difficult to interpret and evaluate. This subcategory, highlighted in dark gray in Figure 12.1, is illustrated below with a detailed description of its contents (see Basic errors in borrowing texts and citing sources below). Plagiarism in an academic situation is a borrowing that is always unethical both in intention and in implementation. If theoretically a different combination is possible, then on practice we will not find it: with unethical intention there is no ethical implementation. Of all the kinds of unethical academic behavior associated with the violation of the citation rules, Trickery Plagiarism is perhaps the most unlawful. In the Russian Language Explanatory Dictionary, it is described as “intentional, conscious, aggressive, demonstrative” (Ozhegov & Schvedova,

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

252

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

n.d.). It is an over form of plagiarism, and its purpose is to mislead and deceive. One of its types called Appropriation of Authorship in our classification, is appropriation of someone else’s texts, fragmentarily or in a whole, without the crediting of the true authors. Most of the available definitions of plagiarism refer precisely to this type (Cogdell & Aidulis, 2008; Abramova, 2011; Kicherova, et al., 2013). Another type, Manipulation with Citations, is an attempt to hide, disguise the act of appropriation of someone else’s ideas through wrong formatting of the borrowed texts in one’s writing. The borrowing can be represented by a student as paraphrase. If, in addition, it is framed correctly, it may not even attract the professor’s attention. However, verification of the source to which the link is made will disclose a deception—the paraphrasing is nothing but an unquoted quote. It is noteworthy that students appropriating other people’s ideas are aware that they may face academic problems and disciplinary actions. They know this, but nothing stops them. Apparently, in this case, student intentional plagiarism is a manifestation of youth’s tendency to extreme behavior. Naive plagiarism is not aggressive, although it is also quite destructive for the ethical atmosphere of educational institutions. It is less studied and requires a more detailed explanation. Appropriation of someone else’s work without proper attribution often happens due to the immaturity of some members of the student community, their lack of research skills, inability to independently engage in creative activity, and their lack of understanding of the exclusivity of the results of other people’s intellectual labor. One kind of naive plagiarism is Illusion of Authorship after exploring the sources. Many students have a great memory. This important quality may, however, have a flip side. Often, such students lack critical thinking and are unable to develop their own points of view on the subject under the study. After reading several articles, such a student writes his paper, freely setting forth other people’s thoughts and facts in complete confidence that now it is his own knowledge. Another type of naive plagiarism is Fascination by the Author. There are very impressionable individuals among young adults. If, in addition, they do not have verbal abilities, they probably have problems with self-expression. They feel but cannot explain. It is difficult for them to put their thoughts into words; it is difficult to find suitable expressions. After reading someone’s interesting and informative article, it may seem to them that everything that is said in it is very accurate—won’t say better, and that it is exactly what they would like to say themselves. This fascination with other people’s creativity becomes the impetus for appropriation of their ideas.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 253

Basic Errors in Borrowing Texts and Citing Sources The proposed classification is based on the authors’ analysis of a large amount of empirical materials: students’ course writings related to different specializations in the social sciences (pedagogy, journalism) and different educational levels (undergraduate as well as graduate programs). Some cases of violating the standards for citing the sources of information and formatting the bibliographic list were also considered. Their discussion is at the heart of the manual for book editors (Milchin, 2005). The results of the authors’ work on empirical materials are presented in Figure 12.2. Errors in quotations and paraphrases are represented by three categories: Errors in Proportions, Errors in Content, and Errors in Formatting. They are most frequently encountered in students’ academic written works. Errors in textual proportions

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

This category consists of two opposite cases: insufficient vs. excessive citations. The subcategory Insufficient Citing includes cases of ignorance by students to the requirements needed for the number of borrowings for their academic work. The most common causes of this error are the inability to analyze sources of information due to low analytical thinking skills and/

Figure 12.2.  Classification of Basic Errors of Borrowing Other Texts and Citing Sources in Students’ Academic Writings

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

254

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

or lack of skills in finding sources in the traditional and electronic libraries and databases. Typically, errors of this kind are encountered among students informationally incompetent. Insufficient citing is a reliable indicator of the learner’s lack of knowledge pertaining to the literature on a subject. The subcategory Excessive Citing includes cases of abusing the borrowings. This is a tendency for some students to constantly rely on quotes to express their thoughts. They frequently use quotes even when they are inappropriate such as, the presentation of well-known facts and ideas that do not need argumentation. A tendency to inflated number of citations is called “unethical practices” (Academia, n.d.). It is a citation behavior of those unprepared for academic writings. The abundance of quotes and paraphrases is an indicator of their dependence on other people’s ideas and their inability to think critically and creatively while choosing proper ideas that support their own. It should be noted that in some publications “insufficient citing” is understood as low quality quotations and paraphrases, that is, containing deviations from the rules and regulations (Northern Illinois University, n.d.). In our work, the term insufficient as well as excessive is rather a quantitative criterion for evaluating students’ written work from the point of view of citation sufficiency. It is equated to the ratio of the volume of cited material to the total volume of the text. If this ratio is less than one-fifth, then citing is insufficient, and it is more than insufficient the more the fraction approaches “0.” If this ratio is more than one-fifth, then citing is excessive, and it is more than excessive the more the fraction approaches “1.” An analysis of internet sources showed that this figure is typical for American educational institutions: students are required to write papers in which 20 percent of the total volume belongs to citations from sources (How much of my paper, n.d.; Quoting material, 2017). Most often, such a decision is made at the level of the course instructor and without specifying what is included in the concept of “citation sufficiency”—only directed quotes or all kinds of citations. In Russian sources, one can find slightly different data: a quantitative criterion for the sufficient citing is one-third of the total text (Zitaty I sposoby zitirovaniya, n.d.). Errors in Content This category includes the most common and difficult to detect errors. Students make them not only due to poor knowledge of citation rules, but because of the lack of general skills in working on the content of texts. In the process of reading the article, such students do not even think about the need to highlight key paragraphs, key ideas in the text, as well as selective thoughts and phrases that they like and plan to use in their written works.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 255

Errors in content are especially common among foreign students whose native language is not English; there are a lot of such students in US universities (Chen & Ku, 2008). When they retell the thoughts of another author in their own words, it becomes clear that they often misunderstand the meaning of what they read. It is noteworthy that errors in the content can measure the knowledge of not only the student, but also the teacher. Only an erudite, a specialist knowing very well his/her subject and authoritative sources (usually these are basic books and articles offered to students in a particular academic discipline) can make an unmistakable conclusion about the adequacy of the students’ borrowings. When a piece of text is taken out of the source and transferred to a new context, the following two requirements should be met. First, a quote or paraphrase should logically fit into a new context, so that there will be no contradiction of meanings. In other words, quoting should be relevant. Second, a quote inserted in a new context should still adequately reflect the original source. If the first requirement is not met, an error falls in to the subcategory Semantic Inconsistency Between Quote and One’s Text. If a quote inserted into a new context does not correspond or even contradicts the meaning of that context, it sounds unconvincing. It destroys the goal of borrowing as a supportive action and the entire logic of the material’s presentation. If the second requirement is not met, an error falls into the subcategory Distortion of Original Text’s Meaning. This is perhaps the most serious type of semantic errors because a writing individual comes in legal relations with the author of the original text and enters the zone of his/her copyright. Quoting must be accurate. It is forbidden to attribute, even unintentionally, to the author something that s/he did not think and say; this may be perceived as discrediting their work. In our classification, we included the most common errors of this sort which tend to distort the original; there are five of them. Misinterpretation of Original Text. Most often, students give detailed comments that incorrectly interpret the meaning of the original text. We come to this conclusion by analyzing the content of the student’s work. However, such errors may be made even at the level of introductory phrases: “The author X is convinced and declares that . . . ” However, if we turn to the original, we would find out that the author X only made an assumption. Mixture of One’s Text with Retelling of Original Text. This type of error occurs when a student uses both direct and indirect quotes. Indirect quotes, unlike direct ones, do not utilize quotation marks and exact reproduction of the original. The student cannot move away from the original text due to their inadequate vocabulary. Therefore, he expresses something in his own

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

256

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

words at the level of his own understanding and in his stylistic manner, and he quotes something. In such a retelling he often arbitrarily replaces words, phrases, and syntactic constructions, thereby greatly distorting the meaning of the original text. Concrete Statement is Given as Universal. Borrowing a passage from someone’s book or article for their work, students, as a rule, do not read the source completely. The source may contain a detailed explanation of a phenomenon the aspects of which are discussed in various chapters or subsections. However, the student uses the concrete definition of the phenomenon, which seems appropriate for him and which is contained in a certain chapter, losing sight of the fact that s/he is dealing only with a description of a particular aspect, and passes it off as a general statement. Shortened Quote. Students often break off a quote at the point where the statement that they need in meaning ends. However, when reading the whole phrase in the source, you may find that it had a different meaning in its original content. Selective Use of Phrases of Original Text. It may happen that a student takes out separate phrases from the original text which negatively or, on the contrary, positively evaluate certain objects and situations, but introduces them into her/his academic work in relation to objects and situations different from those in the original. The subcategory Inconsistency Between Citation Length and Reason of its Use includes cases where a long quote and/or paraphrase accompanies objects or phenomena that are not relevant to the topic. It also includes cases where for a statement logically sufficient to a paper, for example, “digital media occupy leading positions,” a student brings a page-long citation describing in detail why digital media are leaders and which positions they occupy. There is no need for extensive citations, especially quotes, that do not prove anything, do not argue anything, do not provide any new facts. Citations should be relevant and appropriate. Errors in Formatting Formatting in-text citations and a bibliography requires students to know formal rules and how to follow them. To insert borrowings into a new context accurately, one needs to be highly meticulous. Negligence and carelessness in working with citations and bibliography is an unmistakable indicator of students’ information incompetence and an unconditional factor causing distrust of their work. This category includes three basic types of errors. The subcategory Wrong Incorporation of Quote into One’s Text contains cases that violate the

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 257

principle of historicity of citation. A borrowed quote always contains some supportive idea for the student’s work. The rules for incorporating quotes into a new context are such that their observance allows one to bring into his/ her work a short history of the appearance and development of this idea in the body of knowledge. This enriches the student’s work and makes it more informative. That’s why a quote is not recommended to simply be pasted into a new context. A set of lexical, syntactic, and grammatical rules for the correct incorporation of quotes into a new context has been worked out by specialists: introductory phrases and specific punctuation. The subcategory Changed Grammar, Syntax, and Stylistics of Original Text contains cases that violate the principle of linguistic inviolability of the quote. It is known that, when borrowing texts, students often change the most important linguistic characteristics in them. In English, they are tenses (past, present, future) and moods (indicative and subjunctive) of verbs. In Russian the changes additionally cover conjugation of verbs, as well as the declension of nouns and adjectives. This type of errors usually happens from the student’s innocent desire to adapt the quote to a specific syntactic structure, to embed it in his/her own text that s/he already wrote and does not want to change. The subcategory Violated Rules of Bibliographic Descriptions includes cases that violate the principle of validity of citation. It is important that the information about each source (author’s name, title and year of publication, edition, and page) would be correct. If it becomes necessary to verify the correctness of the cited source, this should be easily done. Lack of knowledge on what data is needed to represent a quote or bibliographic description indicates that the student is unfamiliar with the algorithm for searching information in the sources and electronic databases. Information search is an unusual activity for such a student. An incorrect bibliographic description is not the only indicator of a student’s information illiteracy; academic dishonesty may be hidden behind this. The following scenario is very common. In their work, the students refer to sources that they did not actually use, and they try to hide this, intentionally not including important data in the bibliographic descriptions, according to which the sources can be easily found in the internet, and the adequacy of their citing can be verified. Examples of Errors Example 1 In the Graduate School of Education of Touro College and University System, in the course Patterns of Parenting and Child Care in Relation to Early

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

258

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

Intervention and Education, the second-year graduate students study the topic “Developing Cross-Cultural Competence: Sociocultural Factors.” The genre “Questions-answers” is usual for the students’ homework. In a typical assignment, the question was asked to check students’ understanding of the concept pertaining to cross-cultural competence: “What is the difference between high-context and low-context cultures?” A requirement for this and similar assignments was to integrate at least three materials from published sources (journal articles, internet articles, books, etc.) into one’s writing. A fragment from one of the students’ answers is presented below and illustrating such errors as misplacement of the quotation marks. Dingmans (2010) states, “If you are not aware of the differences between low context and high context communication, you can easily get into trouble when you communicate with someone from another culture” Especially if you come from a low context culture and your conversation partner from a high context culture. It was noticed that “low-context culture people are more rule-oriented and have more traditional relationships,” so that they seem “cold” to highcontext culture people.

Below is the paragraph with the correct punctuation and location of the quotation marks:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Dingmans (2010) states, “If you are not aware of the differences between low context and high context communication, you can easily get into trouble when you communicate with someone from another culture. Especially if you come from a low context culture and your conversation partner from a high context culture.” It was noticed that “low-context culture people are more rule-oriented” and have more traditional relationships, so that they seem “cold” to high-context culture people.

The phrase from “If” to “another culture” is positioned by the student as borrowed from the article by A.M. Dingmans. However, it is shorter than in the original text: the quotation mark which closes the quote should stand after the phrase “high context culture.” From the above fragment, it follows that the thought “Especially if you come from a low context culture and your conversation partner from a high context culture” belongs to the student. In fact, it belongs to A.M. Dingmans. It looks as a classic case of plagiarism: someone’s thought is repeated “word for word,” but it is not enclosed in quotation marks, and, according to the fragment presented, the true author’s remark is not credited to her. In the last sentence, the student’s quote begins with the words “low-context culture people” and ends with the words “more traditional relationship.” However, it is longer than in the original text: the quotation mark which

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 259



closes this quote should appear earlier—after the words “more rule-oriented.” Here, as we see, the student made an error, as a result of which his own words were attributed to the author of the article. It can be deduced that the student’s major problem is lack of knowledge of punctuation rules. Ignoring these rules in a combination with failure to correctly integrate quotations into sentences of his own text, led to a plethora of quotation errors. Repetition of such errors in this homework (and in other course work of this student as well) allowed us to conclude that we are dealing with ordinary illiteracy rather than with a purposeful academic misconduct. Our assumption is confirmed by the fact that the error is also contained in the bibliographic description of the article referred to. It has a wrong website address: the protocol https, an important component of the URL, is missing. Thus, some of the author’s words were found to be outside the quotation marks, and the student’s words were found to be inside the quote. Additionally, it was difficult to find the internet article which the student referred to. Although all this is a consequence of the student’s illiteracy, negligence, and information incompetence, it is also the most serious error of borrowing— intellectual property infringement. The student involuntary misinformed the readers. He unconsciously assigned his thought to another author, whose article he used in his academic work. Despite being unintentional, it does not cease to be plagiarism, and in accordance with the ethical code adopted by Touro College & the University system, it is a subject to disciplinary matters (Touro College & University System, n.d.). We considered the most demonstrative example of how the students’ seemingly innocent errors could easily lead to negative consequences for their academic status.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Example 2 In Touro Graduate School of education, in the same course, the second-year graduate students study the topic “Culturally Relevant Pedagogy.” To check their understanding of this phenomenon, the following question was included into their regular homework: “In which ways can the teacher’s cultural background impact his/her classroom management skills?” Below, one of the student’s answers is presented, which illustrates semantic inconsistency between the quote and the context. Class rules, recognition of positive versus negative behaviors, and development of reward systems are all impacted by educators’ cultural beliefs (Caputo, 2017). The value of schoolwork and the types of schoolwork given by educators also is influenced by their culture (Caputo, 2017). According to Garmon (2004),

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

260

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

“ . . . teacher education programs are endeavoring to find effective ways of raising the multicultural awareness and sensitivity of prospective teachers.”

In the last two lines of the fragment, a borrowed piece of Garmon’s article is represented, and it is formatted according to requirements. However, only the formal requirement is met. Unfortunately, the quotation is misused. Indeed, in the first two sentences of the text, it is said about the influence of the teachers’ beliefs acquired in their native culture on the educational process. Meanwhile, the third one, which contains the misused quote, informs about training programs for prospective specialists to develop their multicultural sensitivity. The quote, important in its essence, does not correspond to the context that was introduced prior to it. It is not needed here, especially since the student addressed the sources three times in this very small piece of the text. This manner of writing looks like the student is strategically hiding either the inability to produce her own ideas or disguising the fact that she has a lack of knowledge on the subject. An analysis of this student’s homework assignments, current as well as past ones, has shown that it is not typical of her to use excessive quotes or paraphrases. However, she often incorporates irrelevant quotes in her writings. Consequently, we cannot say with certainty that her style of quoting/ paraphrasing indicates academic dishonesty. Maybe the student genuinely does not understand—because of her insufficient analytical thinking skills— that the quotation cannot be sometimes contextualized logically. In this case, what looks like a violation of academic ethics is most likely an unintended violation. The viewed example convincingly shows that the conclusion about academically unethical behavior should not be based on one isolated fact, even a reliable one. For a legitimate, adequate conclusion, a few facts and factors must be identified and analyzed in their connection. Finally, the student is unable to format parenthetical citations. First, the same citation is repeated in two consecutive sentences, which is inappropriate. Second, in the case of quoting, information about the source should be placed after quotation marks and include a page of the source where it was found as well as the year. It is a typical case of the student’s illiteracy, carelessness, and academic negligence. Example 3 In the Touro Graduate School of Education, to test the knowledge learned in Child Development and Learning in Cultural Context course, first-year graduate students are assigned a research paper on the topic “Comparative Analysis of Theoretical Approaches to Child Development and Learning.”

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 261

A fragment from one of the papers is presented below in which its authorstudent analyzes the world leading theorists’ ideas regarding the nature of child development. The fragment illustrates excessive and semantically inadequate citations.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Based on Vygotsky, there is truly no such thing as stages of development (Bodrova & Leong, 2007). Instead of that Vygotsky believed that the Zone of Proximal Development, or ZPD, explains child’s development and learning (Vygotsky, 2005). According to Santrock (2000), Erikson believed in stages of development. Although, Erikson and Vygotsky had similar views on self-reflection, and both shared the notion “interactions within a peer group” (Karpov, 2005, p. 210). As Piaget postulates, there are the stages of cognitive development. No stages can be found in behaviorism, and Y. V. Karpov states, “they consider children to be developed rather than to develop” (Karpov, 2014, p. 6).

The first sentence of the quote shows an error of content named distortion of the original text. Vygotsky’s theory is incorrectly interpreted by the student. Like many other theoreticians of his time, Leo Vygotsky did support the doctrine of in-stage development. The stages of child development proposed by him are described in one of the reading materials provided for the course—in the book by Karpov (2005). Obviously, the student did not read that book attentively. Additionally, the first sentence is inappropriately constructed. Since the student did not borrow from Vygotsky’s original work, he should not use the phrase “based on Vygotsky.” The phrase “Based on Bodrova and Leong” is more adequate in this case. Also, he forgot to (or intentionally did not) indicate the page number in the book where the authors, according to him, discuss Vygotsky’s point of view on the stages of child development. The student’s paraphrase requires verification. There are very serious doubts that the authors Bodrova and Leong could write this. Obviously, we are dealing with misinformation. The second sentence which starts with “Instead of that” and the third one which starts with “Although, Erikson” illustrate another error of content: inconsistency of these paraphrases’ meaning to the context. If the idea of staged development is discussed in the fragment, then statements about selfawareness and the zone of proximal development are irrelevant here; they logically do not fit this fragment’s content. Additionally, there is an error in formatting in the second sentence: information in parentheses is incomplete—the page number is missing. The same error in citing sources made twice is not an accident: it indicates student’s carelessness and ignorance (in the best case). The sixth sentence which starts with the words “No stages can be found” consists of two parts: the first one is the student’s own expression and the

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

262

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

second one is the quote from Y. Karpov’s book. Both parts are true, but they are not causally related. The quote is inappropriate and inconsistent to the content of the sentence which it is integrated into. This is a very instructive example because almost all serious citation errors have been contained in it. First, textual proportions were violated; it is a case of excessive citations. Second, there were several errors in content: the student has attributed her own idea to the authors whose book she used as reference; it was a wrong idea distorted the theory of prominent psychologist Leo Vygotsky. Third, the quote was not used appropriately—it did not fit into the context of the sentence and fragment. Finally, the errors in formatting were made: the page numbers, from which borrowings were made, are missing in two out of five citations, and this makes citation validation difficult. The only acceptable citation is present in the sentence which starts with the words “According to Santrock”: both the paraphrase of Santrock’s idea and reference entry are correct. Without any doubt, this fragment is an example of a low academic ethics. It is reflected in both lack of subject knowledge and lack of skills to format paraphrases and citations. Moreover, excessive citations and insufficient information about references are two indicators allowing us to state the fact of academic dishonesty. The purpose of borrowing is to apply the other authors’ ideas as an argument for supporting one’s own assumptions, results, and conclusions. In the example shown above, the sources were needed rather for replacing what the student was not able to formulate on her own. The citations hide her lack of the subject knowledge and compensate for her inability to think and express herself adequately. The excessive borrowings perform the function of “decorating” her research paper. In the example given, the expressions are verbose and confused; the essence is not visible beyond the abundance of words. A different answer to the same question is illustrated below. It is brief, clear, and to the point. This passage consists of well formulated paraphrases and correctly formatted intext citations. L. Vygotsky, J. Piaget, and E. Erikson developed the idea of child development in stages. The difference was that Piaget studied the stages of cognitive development, Erikson—the stages of psychosocial basic attitudes, and Vygotsky—the stages of child development in the unity of emotional, social, motivational and cognitive functions (Piaget, 1972; Karpov, 2005; McLeod, 2013). As for the behaviorist authors B. Skinner and A. Bandura, they worked in a different scientific paradigm, studying the phenomenon of learning, both psycho-physiological and social (Bandura, 1971; Karpov, 2014).

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 263

Example 4

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

In Lomonosov Moscow State University, the undergraduate student journalists of the fifth year, whose specialty is theory and methods of editing, are required to write graduate qualification work (GQW) or a graduate thesis. In the hierarchy of educational assignments, the GQW is the highest-level written work. It must meet high standards in terms of its content, literacy, and formatting (Vypusknaya kvalifikazionnaya rabota, 2015). A fragment from one of the students’ GQW is illustrated in Figure 12.3. The footnotes and the bibliographical description of the source mentioned in the fragment are presented accordingly to Russian standards. At first glance, this small fragment of the text may seem quite neutral. However, it contains the most serious and, unfortunately, the most typical flaws. Here, we see so-called indirect quotation, that is, the thought from the source is not brought literally, is not in exact accordance with the original text, which allows for the absence of the quotation marks. As it follows from the requirements for the bibliographic apparatus of scholarly work, indirect quotations are not drawn up in the form of paginal footnotes, as it is shown in the example above. They should be presented as references: enclosed in square brackets showing the source’s number which it has in the list of references. It should be like this: [24]. However, this violation may be treated

Figure 12.3.  Example of Misinterpreting of Borrowed Text and Incorrect Formatting of Reference

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

264

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

condescendingly because the student honestly referred to the work from which she took some scientific observation. The second sentence begins with the words “Kachkaeva speaks,” which is inappropriate regarding written work. The use of the present tense is also inappropriate. This remark can be also considered unimportant criticism from the professor, but, in our opinion, graduate-journalists should be more attentive to the meaning of words. A description of the source is given in the paginal footnotes. The #1 footnote has an error: the authors of the work are not listed in it. This error automatically spreads to the #2 footnote. The student’s carelessness in compiling the bibliographic description became a cause of unethical borrowing. It is not Kachkaeva, the author of only one of the sections and the editor of the book, who discusses the concepts presented in the fragment. This can be easily noted by checking the pages referenced by the student. It is the other, equally competent specialist I. Kiriya. Moreover, in the original text, these concepts are given in his interpretation of (and, accordingly, with reference to) the other scholar—Ithiel De Sola Pool. It was Dr. Ithiel De Sola Pool, a well-known American scientist and professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who proposed concepts which the student became interested in. In Dr. Pool’s book, blurring boundaries is a phenomenon related only to convergence. This means that the student misinterpreted the meaning of the original text. It is a case of a double error—an error in error—which can be classified as both intentional as well as unintentional plagiarism. The reasons for this may be inattention and/or lack of knowledge of citation rules. But most likely we have a case of ordinary negligence: the student did not wish to delve into the meaning of the quoted source and arrange the textual borrowing properly. Nevertheless, this error can lead to a serious misinformation of the readers (supervisor, opponents, students) and inevitably promote a “snowball effect.” The error will be propagated further by the students who utilize this GT as a source for their coursework. Example 5 Let’s consider a fragment from another GT also produced by a fifth-year undergraduate student-journalist. In this fragment, illustrated in Figure 12.4, misrepresentation of the borrowed text’s meaning and copyright infringement takes place. The fragment has two thoughts: one (the editor performs managerial functions now) belongs to the student, meanwhile the other (the editor is engaged in marketing now)—to some specialist whose work is quoted. The student’s text and the quoted text are neither syntactically nor semantically related to

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 265

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Figure 12.4.  Example of Misrepresentation of Borrowed Text and Copyright Infringement

each other—management and economics are not the same thing. The quote is “glued” to the text and exists by itself, without the student’s comments and interpretations (at least, at the primitive level—with the use of phrases “it is rightfully noted” or “it has already been found”). This example is noteworthy because the specialist to whom the student refers is the author of the current section of the book, which makes it possible to accurately diagnose the distortion of the original text’s meaning in the interests of the student. In her textbook Basics of Editing (2014), Dr. N. Inshakova interprets the emergence of new functions to the detriment of traditional ones not as an advanced innovation, but as an inevitable and dubious phenomenon which rather destroys the editorial profession. There is one more error. The student has issued the abbreviated footnote Ibid, permitted by the rules, but it should follow the publication of the quoted expert. In this case, the statement became owned by another author, since it follows immediately after his work. When creating this footnote, it was necessary to give a full description of the source from which the phrase was borrowed. The indicated error in the bibliographic description of the source was made, most likely, through inattentiveness or negligence. However, it led to a copyright infringement of the specialist whose textbook was quoted by the student in her GT. Example 6 In Lomonosov Moscow State University, the undergraduate students of the fourth year studying features editing advertising texts and public relations are required to do midterm qualification work (MQW). A fragment from one of the students’ MQW is shown in Figure 12.5. In this fragment, the footnote is included and formatted accordingly to the Russian standards.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

266

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Figure 12.5.  Example of Excessive Quotation and Violated Uniformity Principle

It may seem to be a model of correct, ethical borrowing. Indeed, all necessary elements are present here: the author and the name of the work are indicated, the footnote is framed with an exact description of the source, the quotation is entered using the “Chekalova asserts” phrase-marker where the verb is neutral and appropriate. However, this is an unnecessary and excessive quotation which content is immediately repeated by the student herself. The quote does not bring anything new. This quote is unnecessary and only serves the purpose of increasing the amount of student’s text. To validate this point, one must pay closer attention to the source. The reference is from insignificant research—it does not belong to a well-known scientist, or a bright practitioner, or a faculty member of the journalism department to refer to which is considered a good manner. Let’s analyze one more citation error. (It is so frequently done that it is impossible not to point it out.) When referring to the authors of quotations, students often neglect to designate their status and/or violate the principle of uniformity in their presentation which is important in formatting of their academic work. Some authors are called by their names. The other ones are assigned a neutral and impersonal title like “researcher.” (Moreover, this “researcher” may be a famous scientist as well as a graduate student.) Yet some others are provided an indication of citizenship (“American author X” and “Russian author Y”). Without any logic, the authors whose texts are borrowed may be evaluated by students as “the famous experts.” Additionally, sometimes students give the author’s initials, even abbreviate them, in other cases they use only the last name, as in the given example below.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 267



Recommendations for the elimination of these shortcomings are straightforward. It is necessary to unify the notation, preferably limit them to last name and initials. It is strongly recommended to use impersonal grammar constructions (“it is noticed,” “as it was found”), since from the description it becomes immediately clear who is the author. An exception should be made only in those cases when emphasizing the author’s status is important in the interests of the student’s work. Example 7 Above we analyzed variations of ethical borrowing, that is, quotations and citations in which various errors and violations took place. In this example, a different case is presented. The fragment was taken from a writing of an undergraduate student-journalist of the fifth year. This student of Moscow University specialized in theory and methods of editng and prepared his GQW on the topic of “TV journalism.” The fragment below illustrates unethical borrowing of another author’s text (plagiarism). The reference citation is presented in accordance with the Russian standards:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

The morning show on television has been shaped into a specific informationrich interactive program, containing various headings, having information and entertainment elements, as well as considering the specifics of the “morning” audience [18].

The fragment looks like an indirect quote (i.e., retelling in your own words the thoughts of the original source), which is included in the list of references under the number 18. If you were to cross-check this list, you will see that the source under this number has nothing to do with the topic discussed in the represented fragment. It is a textbook by a famous linguist M.P. Senkevich (1994) on the stylistics of television and radio texts. As it turned out, there were other sources that did not correspond to the content of the text fragments in which they were mentioned. It is not just an inattentiveness or negligence. It is an intentional action—an example of an obvious deception. The student simply created the appearance of the active use of publications: he scattered references throughout the GT, not paying attention to the correspondence of the sources to the content of the fragments. The reviewer of this graduation thesis submitted the fragment into the Yandex search system, which immediately produced the result: the text with minimal variations was used many times in Midterm Qualification Works at various educational institutions. We see this as typical and deliberate

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

268

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

plagiarism indicating an aggressive violation of academic ethics; additionally, it points out the student’s moral immaturity and his very low self-esteem because the material intended for the midterm qualification work was used by him for his GT.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

DISCUSSION We systematized and described the types of borrowing of textual information. The citation errors were analyzed in order to prevent future occurrences in the learning activities of university students. We do not promise to develop a model classification, because the number of the types of borrowing errors is very large. Only the most common quotation and paraphrasing errors are included in our classification. All the errors described in this work are manifestations of academically unethical behavior, starting with ignorance and negligence unacceptable at the level of university programs and ending with various types of deception including plagiarism, its extreme form. It has been shown that it is not always easy to determine the cause of a student’s citation errors because the citation behavior is a complex phenomenon. A famous aphorism says: “The style is the man himself” (George-Louis Leclerc, n.d.). A similar dictum, “Our style bewrays us” belongs to Robert Burton (1577-1640), an English scholar. So, in the citation style, as in any other activity, a person is manifested as a whole—in the set of his features, needs and attitudes. The errors of content that distort the meaning of borrowed texts are considered academically unethical. But even the errors in formatting, harmless at first glance, can be a serious violation of academic ethics. It would seem, what is reprehensible about the fact that a student changed the syntax of a quoted passage? Could this really hurt the academic community? It turns out that it is possible because the changes in borrowed texts—lexical, syntactic, grammatical—often distort the author’s thought or the point of view. This is already disinformation, probably, even discreditation, and therefore, entering to territory protected by copyright. The interests of the academic community are also affected, although not directly. Citation rules and standards are created to ensure an orderly and organized written speech. They provide written culture and facilitate written communication in learning activities, and they should be respected. Ignoring them in the student community is a manifestation of asocial tendency. Inattention and neglect of them, of course, testify to the cognitive and social immaturity of students.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 269

In one of her previous studies of orientation in a virtual classroom, Dr. Toom found that online students were extremely inattentive to administrative rules created for distance education programs (Toom, 2016). This was expressed by the fact that most of the investigated students, despite the requirements, did not read and did not know the administrative policy of the college/university, nor the administrative requirements of their online course. This phenomenon received a name “virtual anarchism.” It is noteworthy that in the distance programs as well as in the traditional classroom, in the administrative as well as in the academic aspect of their learning activity, today’s students often neglect to adhere to the established rules. When analyzing the causes of the citation errors in our students’ work, we became convinced that the problems of academic ethics are closely related to other problems of modern university students and, first of which is, cognitive ones. Many of today’s university students lack skills in working with the meanings of textual information. Some students read inattentively and poorly. This prevents them from complete assimilation of the semantic aspect of textual information. We have shown this in the previous studies (Toom, 2015; Toom & Inshakova, 2019). Our results are supported by the other researchers (Howard, 1995; Kicherova & Efimova, 2013). Individuals with a low proficiency of written speech are also found quite often even among graduate students. Despite of all their diplomas, the basics of grammar, syntax, and punctuation rules have remained far below their educational achievements. The quoting as well as paraphrasing is a painstaking activity, requiring knowledge of special rules and strict adherence to them by learners. It would be successful only due to an individual’s accuracy, attentiveness, and diligence, which are necessary prerequisites for productive learning. Analytical thinking skills also play an important role in developing of cultural written speech. However, many young adults have insufficiently developed skills to analyze and synthesize information—this was also supported by the results of the above joint study of the authors. Similar results were received by the other specialists as well (Pecorari, 2003; Maddox, 2008). The citation errors may also be the result of information incompetence. Young people, computer literate from an early age, do not have the necessary information culture, one of the indisputable indicators of which is the knowledge of ethical standards for working with information. “Informationally infantile” students come to educational institutions and seem to graduate from them in the same status; it is damaging the future society (Inshakova, 2017). The citation errors may also be a consequence of young people lacking timemanagement skills. A professor of the Berlin Higher School of Economics

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

270

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

and Technology, an expert in combating plagiarism, Debora Weber-Wulff expressed the same point of view in her interview to a Russian journalist (“A hunter for plagiarism: three to five words are enough,” 2009). Apparently, the problem is universal: students in many countries, even very technologically advanced, do not know how to organize their activities; they are constantly short of time for thoughtful independent work. Hence, the inaccuracy in the performance of homework assignments and errors in citation occur. These errors, as we have seen from numerous examples, often look (and turn out to be) wrongfully borrowed. So, it would seem, an innocuous student activity in writing a study paper can result in a violation of someone else’s copyright. To date, the best-studied form of academic dishonesty is an open and aggressive type of unethical borrowing, that is, plagiarism. However, in our research, the main attention is paid to unintentional or accidental plagiarism and its various cases. When quoting and paraphrasing, students make errors many of which may be perceived as academic dishonesty. Even a banal carelessness and elementary illiteracy may look as fraud. We have seen from students’ work that not only missing but also misplacement of quotation marks could be qualified as plagiarism. We became convinced that misquotations as well as wrong reference entries might be the same time interpreted as student’s inattentiveness, or ignorance, or as an attempt to deceive a professor in order to hide her lack of knowledge. Possibly, in many cases the whole conglomerate of the above causes (and some other causes) determines a student’s unethical citation behavior. One must admit that it is sometimes impossible to state with certainty what kind of academic dishonesty the student’s citation errors display and if it is a dishonesty at all. Perhaps it was the very reason for an appearance of the term “unintentional plagiarism” in the work of researchers and practitioners (Decoo, 2008; McGowan, 2008; Maddox, 2008; Cook, 2010). In this regard, more tolerance has been appearing towards unethical academic behavior. Yu. Chekhovich, the head of the Russian “Antiplagiarism” project, considers that students’ infractions, specifically copying, happen rather because of their dependent and immature thinking (Plagium vulgaris, 2011). A similar tendency exists in the American educational environment. The heading of one of the articles in the newspaper The Chronicle of Higher Education speaks for itself: “Academic Integrity and Student Plagiarism: A Question of Education, Not Ethics” (Blum, 2009). The matter is that this is a question of ethics as well. We should not confuse reasons and actions. Any unethical behavior remains a violation of academic integrity. Whatever the reason for the violation, it deserves disciplinary actions.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 271

One of the causes for the described cases of unintentional plagiarism is the information incompetence of students. If this fact is ignored, the problem of information incompetence will develop into a separate serious ethical problem. Such a possible outcome is all the sadder because it is about the state of affairs in journalism and pedagogy, which are, perhaps, the most “informational” among social sciences and humanity specialties. Therefore, the training of students in the rules of citation should become a mandatory component of all courses within modern university programs. Intentional, overt plagiarism is one of the most serious legal problems of today’s higher education. In our work, we have touched on this topic but did not study it in depth. However, an acquaintance with even some aspects of this phenomenon in modern universities allows us to make an assumption about its nature. Apparently, well-known protest of young people against the norms and limitations developed by society tends to spread and “migrate” from everyday life and social relations to the field of intellectual activity. At least this approach allows us to partly explain the scope of plagiarism in the students’ community discovered by researchers from many countries, including the United States and Russia. The authors believe that the results of their study, in particular, their classification of the main citation errors, can be used by college and university professors in the development of methodological and other teaching aids to help students. A sufficiently detailed description of the most typical “problem zones” of citation clearly shows how to avoid and prevent the main drawbacks of borrowing in learning activities.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION This chapter is devoted to analysis of the most common cases of illiterate and wrongful borrowings of sources which have been committed in university students’ work. The authors proposed a conceptual apparatus that allows such analysis. “Ethics” is chosen as a basic concept for the systematization of textual borrowings and a reliable initial criterion for dividing students’ actions on the use of other authors’ texts in their written course assignments. The study of a learning activity, as well as an activity in general, is impossible in isolation from its motivation and operational composition. Therefore, the classification of borrowings of other people’s texts based on concepts such as intention and implementation seem to be the most appropriate and productive. Borrowings of someone else’s texts that are ethical in intention and unethical

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

272

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

in implementation, that is, made in violation of citation standards, were the major object of the study in this work. The tasks set in this work were accomplished:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

• First, a classification of the common citation errors was proposed. Major categories of errors are described in it: errors in proportions, in content, and in formatting. Their major subcategories have errors often caused by shortcomings in academic ethics: negligence and dishonesty including plagiarism both intentional and unintentional. Even illiteracy and ignorance, when they result from laziness and unconcern and cause citation errors, can be considered a form of unethical citation behavior. • Second, a variety of examples illustrating these types of errors were present. • Third, these examples were analyzed in detail and their causes in students’ work were determined and explained. According to our assumptions, the errors in quoting and paraphrasing depend neither on the subject area nor on the culture (country). These hypotheses were confirmed. Both journalists and educators make the same errors—in content and formatting. In New York as well as in Moscow, university students often submit their written homework violating the rule of the citation sufficiency, and time by time they plagiarize intentionally as well as unintentionally. The causes of erroneous citation behavior are also similar. We can state that, despite linguistic differences between English and Russian, the problems associated with borrowings in students’ learning works are universal. Additionally, our empirical data shows that the students’ citation behavior is independent of their academic status (belongingness to bachelor’s vs. master’s programs). Although, it is natural to expect the opposite. The fact that graduate students continue to make the errors specific to the undergraduate ones, allows us to assume that, probably, no learning takes place in the studying process. Nonetheless, this testifies to the quality of education. The topic of our study that related to the university students’ citation errors seems to be local for the learning activity of students. However, the results of the analysis of these errors led to discussion of some very serious aspects of the issue. Such questions have been raised as modern students’ cognitive competence, their information culture level, and the legal aspects of the learning activity. The proposed classification of errors and their detailed descriptions will help students better orient themselves in unfamiliar activities and develop the necessary skills for proper citing. It will be useful for teachers to control the

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 273

activities of students associated with borrowing other people’s texts for their educational work. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This research received no grants from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or non-for-profit organizations. Authors would like to thank Dr. Andrei Toom, a professor of mathematics, and Mrs. Mary Patrovic, a professor of English, for their encouragement and some editorial work performed on our text.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Aaron, L., Simmons, P., & Graham-Webb, D. (2011). Academic dishonesty and unprofessional behavior. Radiologic Technology, 83(2). 133-40. PMID: 22106388. Abramova, N. Yu. (2011). Problema plagiata v nauchnyh rabotah [The issue of plagiarism in research paper]. Journal of Scientific periodicals: Problems and solutions, 2(2), 25-28. Academia (n.d.). Is there such thing as too many references for one paper? Retrieved on December 12, 2019 from https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13570/ is-there-such-thing-as-too-many-references-for-one-paper. American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (2011). Borrowed. Fifth Edition. Retrieved January 13, 2020 from https://www.thefreedictionary.com/ borrowed. APA quick citation guide (n.d.). Penn State University Libraries. Retrieved on December 1, 2019 from https://guides.libraries.psu.edu/apaquickguide/overview. A hunter for plagiarism: three to five words are enough (2009). Retrieved on December 1, 2019 from https://www.dw.com/ru/a-4155748. Barbeau, E. (July 20, 2018a). 4 Types of plagiarism you may not know about. Retrieved on December 29, 2019 from http://www.citethisforme.com/blog/2018/07/20/4 -types-plagiarism-may-not-know. Barbeau, E. (July 27, 2018b). Prevent plagiarism in 5 easy steps. Retrieved on December 29, 2019 from http://www.citethisforme.com/blog/2018/07/27/prevent -plagiarism-5-easy-steps-2. Barbeau, E. (August 3, 2018c). 5 Common citation mistakes. Retrieved on December 29, 2019 from http://www.citethisforme.com/blog/2018/08/03/5-common-citation -mistakes. Blum, S. D. (February 20, 2009). Academic Integrity and Student Plagiarism: A Question of Education, Not Ethics. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved on December 1, 2019 from http://chronicle.com/article/Academic-IntegrityStudent/ 32323.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

274

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

Cambridge Dictionary (n.d.). Borrow. Retrieved on December 24, 2019 from https:// dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/borrow. Cambridge Dictionary (n.d.). Plagiarism. Retrieved on December 24, 2019 from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/plagiarism. Chen, T., & Ku, N.-K. T. (2008). EFL students: Factors Contributing to Online Plagiarism. In Tim S. Roberts (Ed.), Student plagiarism in an online world: Problems and solutions (pp. 77-91). Hershey, NY: Information Science Reference. ISBN: 978-1-59904-801-7. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-801-7.ch006. Cogdell, B., & Aidulis, D. (2008). Dealing with Plagiarism as an Ethical Issue. In Tim S. Roberts (Ed.), Student plagiarism in an online world: Problems and solutions (pp. 38-59). Hershey, NY: Information Science Reference. ISBN: 978-1-59904801-7. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-801-7.ch004. Cook, A. (2010). Avoiding Unintentional Plagiarism. Retrieved on December 24, 2019 from https://waldenwritingcenter.blogspot.com/2010/07/avoiding-unintentional -plagiarism.html. Decoo, W. (2008). Substantial, verbatim, unattributed, misleading: Applying criteria to assess textual plagiarism. In Tim S. Roberts (Ed.), Student plagiarism in an online world: Problems and solutions (pp. 228-243). Hershey, NY: Information Science Reference. ISBN: 978-1-59904-801-7. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-801-7. ch015. Efimova, G. Z., & Kicherova, M. N. (2011). Analiz prichin akademicheskogo moschennichestva i ih klassifikaziya [An analysis of reasons of the academic fraud and their classification]. Internet-journal Naukovedenie, 1(6). Retrieved on December 24, 2019 from http://naukovedenie.ru/PDF/24pvn412.pdf. Fang, B. (September 5, 2012). Addressing academic dishonesty in the age of ubiquitous technology. Retrieved on December 24, 2019 from https://er.educause.edu/ articles/2012/9/addressing-academic-dishonesty-in-the-age-of-ubiquitous-technology. George-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon (n.d.). Quotes. Retrieved December 17, 2019 from https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/437367.Georges_Louis_ Leclerc_Comte_de_Buffon. Gerzen, S. M. (2013). Mery predotvrascheniya akademicheskogo moschennichestva (iz opyta zarubezhnyh vuzov) [Measures of prevention of the academic fraud (from experience of foreign higher education institutions)]. Internet-journal Naukovedenie, 4, 1-9. eISSN: 2223-5167. Golunov, S. V. (2010). Studencheskiy plagiat kak vyzov sisteme vysschego obrazovzniya v Rossii I za rubezhom [Student plagiarism as a challenge for higher education system in Russia and abroad]. Education issues, 3, 243-257. Harvard University (n.d.). Harvard Guide to Using Sources. Retrieved on December 1, 2019 from https://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu/. Howard, R. M. (1995). Plagiarism, authorships and the academic death penalty. College English, 57, 788-805. DOI: 10.2307/378403. How much of my paper can be quotes? (n.d.). Retrieved on December 1, 2019 from http://en.writecheck.com/blog/2013/01/16/writing-tip-20-how-much-of-my-papercan-be-quotes/.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 275

Inshakova, N. G. (2017). Informazionno-analiticheskie navyki studentov universiteta [Informational and Analytical Skills of University Students]. Alma mater. High School Bulletin, 8, 58-64. Kicherova, M. N., & Efimova, G. Z. (2013). Informazionnoe obschestvo i problema akademicheskoi nedobrosovestnosti [The information society and problems of academic dishonesty]. Vestnik evraziyskoi nauki, 4(17), 1-6. eISSN: 2223-5167. Kicherova, M. N., Kyrov, D. N., Smykova, P. H., & Pilipushko, S. A. (2013). Plagiat v studencheskih rabotah: analiz suschnosti problemy [Plagiarism in student papers: an analysis of the essence of the problem]. Internet-journal Naukovedenie, 4, 1-8. Kirshenbaum, M. (2018, December 26). Beware these common citation mistakes. Retrieved December 27, 2019 from https://www.citationmachine.net/resources/ beware-these-common-citation-mistakes/. Maddox, T. T. (2008). Plagiarism and community college. In Tim S. Roberts (Ed.), Student plagiarism in an online world: Problems and solutions (pp. 124-143). Hershey, NY: Information Science Reference. ISBN: 978-1-59904-801-7. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-801-7.ch009. McGovan, U. (2008). International students: A conceptual framework for dealing with unintentional plagiarism. In Tim S. Roberts (Ed.), Student plagiarism in an online world: Problems and solutions (pp. 92-122). Hershey, NY: Information Science Reference. ISBN: 978-1-59904-801-7. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-801-7.ch007. Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary (2019). Borrowing (p. 57). Springfield, Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. Milchin, A. E. (2005). Metodika redaktirovaniya teksta [Text editing technique]. Москва: Логос [Moscow: Logos]. Monash University (n.d.). Research and writing for assignments. Retrieved on December 24, 2019 from https://www.monash.edu/rlo/research-writing-assignments/ writing/paraphrasing-summarising-and-quoting. Montoneri, B. (2018). Plagiarism and Ethical Issues: A Literature Review on Academic Misconduct. In S. R. Nair, & J. M. Saiz-Alvarez (Eds.), Ethics, Entrepreneurship, and Governance in Higher Education (Chapter 1, pp. 1-25). USA: IGI Global. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-5837-8.ch001. Northern Illinois University (n.d.). Insufficient Citation and Paraphrase. Retrieved on December 24, 2019 from https://www.niu.edu/academic-integrity/faculty/ committing/examples/insufficient-citation-of-paraphrase.shtml. Ozhogov, S. I. (1961). Slovar russkogo yazyika [Dictionary of Russian language]. Moscow: State publishing house of foreign and national dictionaries. Ozhegov, S. I., Schvedova, N. (n.d.). Тоlkovyi slovar russkogo yazyika [The Russian Language Explanatory Dictionary]. Retrieved on December 24, 2019 from https:// classes.ru/all-russian/russian-dictionary-Ozhegov-term-36552.htm. Pankeev, I. A., & Timofeev, A. A. (2018). Nauchnoe issledovanie v aspekte deontologii [Scientific work in the aspect of deontology]. Scientific and technical information. Ser. 1. Organization and methodology of information work, 1(2). Pecorari, D. (2003). Good and original: Plagiarism and patchwriting in academic second language writing. Journal of second language writing, 12, 317-345.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

276

Anna Toom and Natalia Inshakova

Penn State (n.d.). Writing center. Retrieved on December 1, 2019 from https://great valley.psu.edu/writing-center. Plagium vulgaris: как predotvratit plagiat v nauke [Plagium vulgaris: how to prevent plagiarism in science]. (2011). Retrieved on December 24, 2019 from http://press mia.ru/pressclub/20110131/328762171.html. Quoting material (June 7, 2017). Retrieved on December 2, 2019 from https://www .plagiarism.org/article/quoting-material. Stanford University (2012). What is Plagiarism? Retrieved on December 1, 2019 from https://communitystandards.stanford.edu/policies-and-guidance/what -plagiarism. Toom, A. (2015). Teaching Leo Vygotsky’s Theory with the Use of Literature and Informational Technology. In: Academic research of SSaH2015 (pp. 60-76). Prague, Czech Republic: Czech Technical University. Toom, A. (2016). A Study of Students’ Representations of Their Virtual Classroom. Journal of Modern Education Review, 6(8), 507-519. DOI: 10.15341/jmer(21557993)/08.06.2016/001. Toom, A., & Inshakova, N. (2018). Skills of Analyzing and Synthesizing Textual Information in University Students: Intercultural and Interdisciplinary Approach. Paper presented at the Asian Conference on Education, 47-59. Touro College & University System. (n.d.). The Touro code of conduct for students. Retrieved on December 1, 2019 from https://www.touro.edu/students/policies/ code-of-conduct/. Touro College & University System. (n.d.). Academic integrity policy. Retrieved on December 1, 2019 from http://www.touro.edu/students/policies/academic -integrity/. University of Washington—Bothell. (n.d.). Writing and communication center. Retrieved on December 30, 2019 from https://www.uwb.edu/wacc/what-we-do/ resources/citingsources/apa/apareferences. University of Wisconsin—Madison. (n.d.). Writing center. Retrieved on December 1, 2019 from https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook-2/assignments/quoting%20sources/. USAWriters.org. (n.d.). Common citation mistakes you should avoid in essays and research papers. Retrieved on December 1, 2019 from https://usawriters.org/ knowledge_base/common_citation_mistakes_you_should_avoid_in_essays_and_ research_papers. Vypusknaya kvalifikazionnaya rabota bakalavra po napravleniyu podgotovki “Zhurnalistika”: metodicheskoe posobie (2015) [Graduate qualification work of the bachelor in direction to preparation for “Journalism”: a methodological manual]. Moscow: Journalism department, Lomonosov Moscow State University. Walburg, E. (January 2, 2018). Five common mistakes in APA style—and how you can fix them. Retrieved on December 29, 2019 from https://www.cornerstone.edu/ blogs/lifelong-learning-matters/post/five-common-mistakes-in-apa-styleand-how -you-can-fix-them. Walden University. (n.d.). Writing center. Retrieved on December 24, 2019 from https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/apa/citations.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



Failure to Observe the Rules of Citation by University Students 277

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Wideman, M.A. (2008). Academic dishonesty in postsecondary education: A literature review. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 2(1), 1-9. Zimitat, C. (2008). A student perspective of plagiarism. In Tim S. Roberts (Ed.), Student plagiarism in an online world: Problems and solutions (pp. 10-22). Hershey, NY: Information Science Reference. ISBN: 978-1-59904-801-7. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-801-7.ch002. Zitaty i sposoby zitirovaniya (n.d.) [Quotes and citation methods]. Retrieved on December 12, 2019 from http://www.nado5.ru/e-book/citaty-i-sposoby-citirovaniya.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Chapter Thirteen

“‘Plager-’ what?!” Asian Perspectives on Plagiarism

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Daniel Velasco

Academic dishonesty, also known as academic misconduct, is not a new concept to academia. Forms of academic dishonesty happen in all levels of educational institutions, and in a variety of ways. Academic misconduct can manifest in relatively simplistic ways, such as stealing answers from a classmate’s test or asking another person to write an essay for you, as well as in modern ways, such as copy-and-pasting information from internet websites or buying an essay from so-called essay mills, which boast alluring claims of quick production of work that is guaranteed to be “100% free from plagiarism, [and] meet[s] the grade you order, or you get your money back” (Usborne, 2017). One of the most common forms of academic dishonesty is plagiarism. While this chapter is one of many in a textbook on the topic of academic dishonesty, there are surely many definitions already given of terms such as academic misconduct, academic dishonesty, cheating, and specific examples, such as plagiarism. Since the focus of this chapter is on plagiarism, and for the sake of completeness, a simple definition of plagiarize will be given. Merriam-Webster (n.d.) defines plagiarize as “to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own: use (another’s production) without crediting the source” or “to commit literary theft: present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.” Plagiarism has become such an enormous issue in academia that many educational institutions list it in their student handbooks and course syllabi. The Chicago School of Professional Psychology (2019), for example, highlights the seriousness of cheating, plagiarism, and fabrication in a document titled “Student Rights and Responsibilities”: “Academic dishonesty violates one of the most basic ethical principles in an academic community 279

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

280

Daniel Velasco

and will result in sanctions imposed under the school’s disciplinary system.” Although technological advancements have produced programs, such as Turnitin, that detect plagiarism, the important point to note is that it is the responsibility of the student to ensure quality and honesty in every academic assignment. Surely, most, if not all, educational institutions in Western countries, such as the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia, stress the importance of academic integrity, and support severe consequences if a student commits academic fraud. However, the same cannot be said for Eastern countries, specifically in Asian countries. This is not to say that educational institutions lack information on academic misconduct, but the impression, collected from the review of literature and from a survey given to university students in Japan, is that it is not viewed so seriously as in Western countries. This chapter is an attempt to shed some light on what students know about plagiarism, but not to focus attention on what is lacking, but rather begin a discussion on what can be done to support student awareness of academic dishonesty in order to improve the integrity of the written work that is being produced. This discussion should be held among faculty, of course, but also between faculty and students, and this chapter will hopefully be used in classrooms to educate students on plagiarism rather than become another paper “read only by their authors, reviewers and editors or never cited by other authors” (Montoneri, 2018, p. 2).

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

ASIAN ATTITUDES TOWARD PLAGIARISM Plagiarism attitudes across different cultures have been researched extensively, and the ground that has been covered is far beyond the reach of this brief chapter. Generally speaking, Western countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, stress the importance of academic integrity and punish those who commit acts like data falsification and plagiarism; Eastern countries, most notably China, have been shown to be more relaxed about issues such as cheating and plagiarism due to collectivism and an emphasis on group support and conformity. A few notable studies will be mentioned. Many studies on Eastern attitudes toward plagiarism have been primarily focused on China, noting the widespread but generally accepted or ignored acts of plagiarism that may be based on Chinese culture, tradition, and values in educational institutions (Mu, 2010; Hu and Lei, 2012; Ehrich, Howard, Mu, and Bokosmaty, 2016). Ako (2011) explains:

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

“‘Plager-’ what?!” Asian Perspectives on Plagiarism 281



The concept of plagiarism—called “piao qie” [剽窃] in Chinese—does exist in China, but [. . .] it isn’t systematically defined or vigorously condemned in academia. This is in contrast to the U.S., where rules against plagiarism are typically directly addressed in the education system and are often included in course syllabi.

The most insightful part of Ako’s (2011) article was a quote from Jing Li, assistant director of the Asia Pacific Rim International Study Experience at the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education regarding plagiarism in China:

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

It was not really taught, and no one really mentioned it to us. . . . [We] were asked for our opinion and to look for articles, and then we were confused—all the articles were like, you copy me, [I] copy you, and then you integrate. We didn’t know how to do research, even though we were encouraged to do independent thinking.

While this chapter does not attempt to answer why plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct are not priorities in certain countries in Asia, comments such as these allow deeper insight into the sources of problems that educators may currently face in their classrooms. Universities in every country try every year to increase the number of students in their programs, and in cases such as Japan, that is dealing with a decreasing and aging population, the need for an international presence within the country is almost a necessity for survival. The implication, of course, is that countries like Japan will begin to “lower the bar” by accepting almost any potential student who expresses a desire to study there, and this will create more issues regarding academic misconduct, particularly when students from a variety of countries are together in one class. This notion of the multinational classroom, and the problems that come with it, leads to the next section. While previous research findings are important for the field of education and education research, the goal of this chapter is to focus attention on current attitudes of Asian students attending university. THE STUDY Method In order to establish the significance of and current attitudes toward plagiarism in certain Asian countries, as well as the urgency of educating and supporting students during the writing process, a survey was made that inquired about university students’ knowledge of plagiarism.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Daniel Velasco

282

Participants A total of 287 university students from Japan, China, South Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Vietnam, and Russia attending two universities located in Saitama, Japan, and Tokyo, Japan, were recruited for this brief study on students’ knowledge of plagiarism. At the time the survey was given, all participants were first-year students attending classes where the main language of instruction was English. The English level of the students was intermediate, between Common European Framework Reference for Languages (CEFR) B1 (Intermediate English) and B2 (Upper-Intermediate) levels. Table 13.1 shows the participant information from the university in Saitama, Japan. This university is a middle-tier university, not known for rigorous academic programs and highly-motivated students. Table 13.2 shows the participant information from the university in Tokyo, Japan. This university is one of the top-ranked universities in Japan, and is well-known for its rigorous academic programs, research achievements, and highly ambitious students. Table 13.1.  Participant Information—Saitama (n = 91) Number of Participants

Nationality

Gender

University Location

51 36  2  2

Japanese Japanese Chinese South Korean

M F M F

Saitama Saitama Saitama Saitama

Table 13.2.  Participant Information—Tokyo (n = 196)

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Number of Participants 67 86  3  9  7  5  2  1  4  3  5  1  1  2

Nationality Japanese Japanese Chinese Chinese South Korean South Korean Indonesian Indonesian Malaysian Filipino Singaporean Vietnamese Vietnamese Russian

Gender

University Location

M F M F M F M F F F F M F F

Tokyo Tokyo Tokyo Tokyo Tokyo Tokyo Tokyo Tokyo Tokyo Tokyo Tokyo Tokyo Tokyo Tokyo

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



“‘Plager-’ what?!” Asian Perspectives on Plagiarism 283

Survey The survey was given to the students in January 2019, and contained five questions. The students were instructed to answer the questions as honestly as possible using the knowledge that they currently possess (in other words, without using a dictionary or other resource). The students were not given the topic (plagiarism) before seeing the survey, and detailed information was given as to the importance of honest responses. The survey contained five questions (see appendix for complete survey). The first question simply asked the students if they knew the meaning of plagiarism. Question 2 was a bit more challenging, as it asked those students who responded “yes” to Question 1 to write a definition of plagiarism in their own words (note: those who answered “no” did not know the meaning simply had to write “I don’t know”). The third question asked students to measure how important was the concept of plagiarism to them and the fourth question asked how important they thought plagiarism was to their university. The final question, Question 5, asked the students to name the place or class where they first learned about the concept of plagiarism. Results

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

The results for Question 1 from both the Saitama and Tokyo participants can be seen in Figures 13.1 and 13.2. When asked if they knew the meaning of plagiarism, 86 percent (n = 78) of students from Saitama stated they did not know the meaning, while 14 percent (n = 13) stated that they did. For students who knew the word, they were asked to write a definition in their own words (Question 2). However, of those fourteen responses, only ten students

Figure 13.1.  Results for Question 1 from Saitama Participants

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

284

Daniel Velasco

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Figure 13.2.  Results for Question 1 from Tokyo participants

were able to correctly define the word. Most responses included phrases like “stealing ideas without mentioning the person’s name” or “taking credit for someone else’s word or ideas.” For the Tokyo students attending the more academically rigorous university, the percentage of those who knew the meaning of plagiarism increased dramatically, with 64 percent (n = 123) stating they knew the meaning and 37 percent admitting to not knowing the meaning. Out of 123 students, 118 were able to write the actual meaning of the word plagiarism (Question 2). Typical responses were “stealing someone’s expressions,” “copying from the internet,” and “using another person’s ideas without mention.” Question 3 asked participants to measure how important plagiarism was to them (“Extremely important,” Somewhat important,” or “Not at all important”). It should be noted that students were able to respond to this question regardless of their answer to the first question. For the Saitama participants, 81 percent stated plagiarism was not at all important; 13 percent stated plagiarism was somewhat important; and 6 percent stated it was extremely important to them. These results were not surprising considering the percentage of students who did not know the meaning of the word plagiarism. For the Tokyo participants, 41 percent stated plagiarism was extremely important to them; 36 percent stated plagiarism was somewhat important; and 23 percent stated it was extremely important to them. Again, these results were not surprising considering the percentage of students who knew the meaning of the word plagiarism. Similar to Question 3, Question 4 asked students to measure how important they thought plagiarism was to their universities. The responses were

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



“‘Plager-’ what?!” Asian Perspectives on Plagiarism 285

intriguing for the Saitama participants, for although a high number of them did not know what the meaning of plagiarism was, they seemed to understand that this was an area of great importance. 76 percent agreed that plagiarism was extremely important to their university; 13 percent felt that it was somewhat important; and only 11 percent stated plagiarism was not at all important to the university. For the Tokyo participants, 59 percent responded that plagiarism was extremely important to their university; 22 percent answered it was somewhat important; and 19 percent stated it was not important at all. The distribution was very similar to the responses given in Question 3. The last question, Question 5, asked students where they first learned about the concept of plagiarism. Not including the students who did not know the meaning, both groups reported learning about plagiarism in a high school class (9 percent), a university class (85 percent), or from a textbook (6 percent). No other answers were given aside from these three.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

DISCUSSION Originally, the data collected from both universities was going to be combined in order to provide a general overview of university students’ understanding of academic misconduct, particularly plagiarism. However, once collected, an interesting trend appeared: the higher-tiered university that focused on academic programs rather than sports contained a relatively high number of students who actually knew the meaning of the word plagiarism. In contrast, the university that placed more emphasis on sports programs yielded an incredibly high number of students who did not know the meaning. Given these numbers, it is not surprising that around 80 percent of students in the Saitama group felt plagiarism was not important; on the other hand, around the same percentage of students in the Tokyo group felt it was extremely or somewhat important. Lastly, both groups had similar results (around 80 percent) regarding the importance of plagiarism to their educational institution. In an interesting research study comparison, Teeter (2015) conducted a study in Kyoto University in which attitudes toward plagiarism were explored. The results yielded opposite results to this study, as Teeter (2015) claims her students “displayed a complex awareness of the educational and societal issues that frame occurrences of plagiarism and a desire to receive effective training in academic writing techniques, similar to their native English-speaking counterparts” (p. 95). An argument could be made that the students were more aware of academic misconduct due to the extremely high level of academic programs, as well as the worldwide reputation of Kyoto University. Certainly, the students in this study who were enrolled in the

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

286

Daniel Velasco

school in Tokyo with a similar reputation (although admittedly not a worldwide one) made similar efforts to understand academic requirements in order to maintain that reputation. So, what does all this mean to the average faculty member and first-year university student in Japan or another country in East Asia? It means that there is a lot of work to be done regarding educating both faculty and students on the importance of plagiarism—what it is exactly, what steps should be taken to avoid it, and what technology is available to detect it. This leads us to our action plan, or suggestions on possible ways to incorporate plagiarism education into Asian educational programs and institutions. The underlying message in this chapter is not that schools in East Asian countries are ignoring plagiarism, but much more needs to be done to support faculty and student writing efforts in order to minimize academic misconduct. Printing the various types of academic misconduct in student manuals is standard procedure, but schools must also include them in course syllabi. Not only that, instructors must be required to review academic misconduct with their students, and even go so far as having them sign a separate form or the bottom of their syllabus acknowledging their understanding of academic misconduct and the repercussions of such offenses. Another step schools can take is holding mandatory seminars or workshops that review academic misconduct, and steps to avoid committing an offense. One way to present this in a positive way is to teach writing styles, such as the APA style (American Psychological Association), MLA style (Modern Language Association), or other styles adopted by the institution. One last point to consider is how aligned the faculty of a department is regarding the specific meaning of academic dishonesty, the tools used for detecting plagiarism, and the punishments for each offense. One study revealed that attitudes among faculty members toward plagiarism varied, “reflecting a non-uniform perception of what constitutes an offense” (Vassileva & Chankova, 2019). Departments must ensure that faculty members and staff share a profound understanding of what academic dishonesty means and what happens to students if they are caught. If the students see that the teachers are aligned and consistent, then there will be a higher chance that they will take academic dishonesty seriously, and think twice before committing an offense. CONCLUSION When American actor Ashton Kutcher was on Saturday Night Live during the early 2000s, he performed in a skit titled “Plagiarism” (Saturday Night Live, 2003). In the skit, a high school teacher is returning final term papers to

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



“‘Plager-’ what?!” Asian Perspectives on Plagiarism 287

a classroom full of students who all decided to take short cuts by committing varying acts of blatantly obvious plagiarism. The students’ mistakes ranged from forgetting to delete website URLs from their documents to buying essays from essay mill websites to, as in Ashton’s case, printing his essay (which turned out to be his brother’s essay from when he was in high school) directly from his Hotmail email account. With every plagiarism attempt the teacher uncovered, the students were dumbfounded, amazed that he could recognize their plagiariztic acts. One astonished student even asked, “Are you psychic?!” (Saturday Night Live, 2003). After being caught, Ashton’s character, believing his plan was foolproof, angrily shouts, “Where did I go wrong?” While the skit is a humorous presentation of obvious academic forgery, it offers some insight into a real and very serious issue among young students: many of them either don’t know what plagiarism really means or they don’t understand the ramifications of their academic misconduct. Too often, when asked about the meaning of plagiarism, the response from many students is, “‘Plager-’ what?!” With appropriate support from the university, a focused and united faculty, the incorporation of antiplagiarism programs like Turnitin, and an educational program that includes mandatory multilanguage training on all forms of academic misconduct (preferably before the semester begins, and included on all syllabi and reviewed on the first day of every course) and the punishments for committing acts such as plagiarism, reducing plagiarism in all educational institutions, from junior high school to graduate school, will be an achievable goal rather than an out-of-reach dream.

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Ako, J. (2011). Unraveling Plagiarism in China. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from http://uschina.usc.edu/article@usct-unraveling_plagiarism_in_china_16527.aspx .html. Dahl, S. (2007). Turnitin: The student perspective on using plagiarism detection software. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8(2), 173-191. DOI: 10.1177/ 1469787407074110. Ehrich, J., Howard, S. J., Mu, C., & Bokosmaty, S. (2016). A comparison of Chinese and Australian university students’ attitudes towards plagiarism. Studies in Higher Education, 41(2), 231-246. Hu, G., & Lei, J. (2012). Investigating Chinese university students’ knowledge of and attitudes toward plagiarism from an integrated perspective. Language Learning, 62(3), 813–850. Montoneri, B. (2018). Plagiarism and Ethical Issues: A Literature Review on Academic Misconduct. In S. R. Nair, & J. M. Saiz-Alvarez (Eds.), Ethics, Entrepre-

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

288

Daniel Velasco

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

neurship, and Governance in Higher Education (Chapter 1, pp. 1-25). USA: IGI Global. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-5837-8.ch001. Mu, C. (2010). “I only cited some of his words”: The dilemma of EFL students and their perceptions of plagiarism in academic writing. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 7(4), 103–132. Merriam-Webster (n.d.). Plagiarize. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from https://www .merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plagiarize. Teeter, J. (2015). Deconstructing Attitudes toward Plagiarism of Japanese Undergraduates in EFL Academic Writing Classes. English Language Teaching, 8(1). DOI: 10.5539/elt.v8n1p95. The Chicago School of Professional Psychology (2019). Student Rights and Responsibilities: Statement of Academic Integrity. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from http://catalog.thechicagoschool.edu/content.php?catoid=32&navoid=1276. Saturday Night Live (2003). Plagiarism. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDxN4c_CmpI. Usborne, S. (2017). Essays for sale: the booming online industry in writing academic work to order. Retrieved December 13, 2019 from https://www.theguardian.com/ education/2017/mar/04/essays-for-sale-the-booming-online-industry-in-writing -academic-work-to-order. Vassileva, I., & Chankova, M. (2019). Attitudes toward Plagiarism in Academia. English Studies at NBU, 5(1), 135-163. DOI: 10.33919/esnbu.19.1.7.

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Appendix A Further Reading for Chapter 13

SURVEY Respond to these questions without using a dictionary, smartphone application or the internet to find the answer. There are no “correct” answers, so please respond honestly. 辞書、スマートフォンアプリ、またはインターネットを使用せずに これらの質問に答えてください。 「正しい」答えはありませんの で、正直に答えてください。 Q1 Do you know the meaning of the word plagiarism?

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

YES

NO

Q2 If you answered YES, write the meaning of plagiarism (in your own words, not using a dictionary!) *If you answered NO, write “I don’t know” _____________________________________________________________ Q3 How important is plagiarism to you? Extremely important

Somewhat important

Not at all important

289

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

290

Appendix A

Q4 How important is plagiarism to your school? Extremely important

Somewhat important

Not at all important

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Q5 Where did you learn about plagiarism (e.g., in a high school writing class, in a school document, etc.)? _____________________________________________________________

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Index

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Page references for figures are italicized. Academic: Academic dishonesty, 2, 17–18, 24, 27–31, 35–36, 37–38, 39–40, 44–45, 54, 245, 260, 270, 279; Academic ethics, 245–246, 248, 260, 262, 268, 272; Academic hoaxes, ix, xiv, 167–168, 176, 178– 179, 183; Academic skills, 29–30, 45, 62, 72 Allegory of the cave, 168–169 Australia, 17, 24, 56, 112, 145–148, 151–152, 154, 245, 280

EFL teachers, 47–49, 58–60, 62, 300

Badge, 90–97, 99–103

Japan, 24, 37, 47, 49, 57–59, 65–69, 75, 78–80, 219, 222–225, 229, 237, 282 Japanese students, 36, 49, 53, 54–55, 71, 73, 77, 81, 83, 224, 282

Canada, 48–49, 95, 97, 112, 126 Cheating, 2, 27–28, 31, 43, 136, 230– 232, 239; Contract cheating, xiii, 17 Collusion, 2–5, 10, 15, 16–19, 36, 115, 116–117 Computer-generated papers, ix, xiv, 168, 178, 185 Contractor, 160–162 Copyright, 39, 49, 118, 212, 238, 247, 255, 264, 265, 268, 270 Critical thinking, 71–72, 82–83, 123, 168–169, 171, 183, 185, 252

Fake news, x, xiv, 167–168, 170–178, 184–185, 186 Germany, xv, 173, 181, 231–234, 239 Goethe-Institut, 231–233, 238–239 IntegrityMatters, 89–90, 93, 95, 97–98, 99, 103 iThenticate, 68, 76, 184, 236

Paraphrasing, 4, 10–13, 19, 24, 26, 47, 71–74, 82, 112, 114, 119, 139, 140, 141–142, 250, 269 Plagiarism, 2–5, 11, 15, 18, 35, 39, 48, 51–53, 58–62, 67–68, 88, 113–115, 116, 117, 125–126, 139–140, 199– 203, 206–207, 209–213, 217–219, 234–236, 251–252, 270, 279–286; Anti-plagiarism software, 60, 230, 291

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

292

Index

287; Cultural differences towards, 49, 58, 62, 136, 142; Self-plagiarism, 3, 116, 117, 125–126, 128 Plato, x, xiv, 168–170, 173 Quoting, 12, 24, 71, 112, 113–114, 208, 227, 250–251, 255, 260, 269–270, 272 Rural areas, 145–152, 154, 162–163 Russia, 186, 246, 248, 251, 271, 282

United States, 70, 112, 177, 186, 217, 219, 245, 280 Writing, xii, 3, 23, 30, 32–33, 38, 40–43, 45, 48, 52, 55–57, 61–62, 71–73, 120, 153, 238

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

SCIgen, 178–182, 184

Tokyo, 225, 282, 283, 284, 285 Truth, 1, 42, 168–170, 172–177, 184, 185–186; Post-truth, 171, 176 Turnitin, 2–3, 5, 7–8, 9, 16–18, 68, 120, 200–203, 208, 212, 236, 280

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

About the Editor

Dr. Bernard Montoneri earned his PhD (African, Arab, and Asian Words; History, Languages, Literature), his BA in Chinese, and his Diploma of Indian Studies from the University of Provence, Aix-Marseille I, France. He has taught literature (European, French, Children, American, and British) and languages (French, English, and Italian) for more than two decades. He has studied nine languages, including Sanskrit, and has obtained eight university diplomas. He was, from August 1, 2017 to January 30, 2020, an associate professor in the Department of European Languages and Cultures at the National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan. Beginning February 1, 2020, Bernard Montoneri became an independent reseacher based in Taiwan. His research interests include French literature, children’s literature, translation studies, French and English writing, automated scoring systems, teaching and learning evaluation, data envelopment analysis, networking and teaching methods. He is a reviewer for top academic journals and has obtained more than twenty teaching and research grants. He has close to sixty publications, including journal papers, conferences papers, and books. He was the cofounder and editor in chief of the IAFOR Journal of Education until December 31, 2017. Bernard edited twelve issues of the journal. He was also a guest editor for the IAFOR Journal of Language Learning and he is now the editor in chief of the Journal of Literature and Librarianship. The latest issue was published on December 24, 2019.

293

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved. Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

About the Contributors

Dr. Denise De Souza completed her doctoral degree at the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University (NTU) Singapore and subsequently taught academic literacies for three years at the Language and Communication Centre in NTU. She is currently a postdoctoral fellow at Torrens University Australia. She has peer-reviewed manuscripts for the International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Journal of Education Policy, Evaluation (Sage Journals), the Asian Journal of Social Psychology, Pedagogies: An International Journal, the IAFOR Journal of Education, and the IAFOR Journal of Language Learning. To date, she has been involved in a range of education-related research, and has worked independently and collaboratively with local and internationally-based researchers to examine and understand change, resistance to change and the role of evidence in informing change. Her areas of research include conducting evaluations, evidence synthesis, reviews, interventions, and exploring the application of Critical Realism and Realist Social Theory in field practice. E-mail: [email protected] Ms. Brenda Lee is a learning adviser at Macquarie University where she facilitates workshops and consultations on academic writing and literacies for undergraduate and postgraduate students, and assists academics in embedding academic literacies within their units. In her role, she also develops digital resources and e-learning modules. She completed her master of education (English specialization) at the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. She previously taught academic literacies for four years at the National University of Singapore. Her research 295

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

296

About the Contributors

interests include academic literacies, higher education, digital literacy, educational technologies and English language teaching and learning. E-mail: [email protected] Dr. Andrew Leichsenring is an associate professor at Tamagawa University, Japan. He has been an educator for twenty-three years, working in Australia, Japan, and South Korea during that time. He holds a doctor of philosophy in teacher education from Queensland University of Technology and an Australian primary school teaching licence. He also obtained a master of education from Queensland University of Technology, a graduate diploma in teaching and learning from Charles Darwin University, a bachelor of international business from Griffith University, and a bachelor of arts from The University of Queensland. In addition to his editorial work with several publishers, he has widely published his research on various aspects of teaching and learning. His research interests include: L2 English language education, learner identity development, professional teacher identity development, and speaking and listening assessment. E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Dr. Yoshihiko Yamamoto is currently teaching English at Shizuoka University and has lived in both Australia and New Zealand for more than ten years. He holds a PhD (education), University of Canberra, a MA in TESOL, University of Canberra, and a BA in education and linguistics, Victoria University of Wellington. His research areas are discourse analysis (gender talk), sociolinguistics (gender stereotypes), and applied linguistics (in general). E-mail: [email protected] Dr. Paola Cavaliere is an associate professor of Japanese Studies and associate director of the Human Sciences Undergraduate Degree Program at Osaka University, School of Human Sciences. She holds a double graduate degree in East Asian studies (University of Sheffield, UK) and law (Tohoku University, Japan). She teaches both undergraduate general education subjects such as academic writing, international education, comparative education, and qualitative research methods, and discipline-specific courses at the graduate level. Her research interest focuses on gender in contemporary Japanese religious civil society and she is currently researching on women’s roles and practices in faith-based volunteer groups contributing to postdisaster activities. E-mail: [email protected]

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



About the Contributors 297

Alice Schmidt Hanbidge MSW, RSW, PhD, is an associate professor, Renison University College, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. Hanbidge combines her twenty-plus years of extensive social work applied practices of community health within an academic setting to effectively contribute to the advancement of knowledge, research, and program delivery. Key research areas include advancing technology in the teaching of social work, learning with mobile devices, online learning practices, and furthering field education in social work. Dr. Hanbidge coordinated several mobile learning projects; the Integrity Matters project won the International E-Learning Association Mobile Learning Award (2018) and Canadian Network for Innovation in Education Award (2019). E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Tony Tin, BA, BEd, MA, MLS, is the director of Library and Information Services, Renison University College, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. His recent mobile academic integrity app project has won an international E-learning Award in 2018 and Canadian Network for Innovation in Education Award in 2019. He attained his master of library and information sciences from University of Alberta, master of arts in history from McGill University, bachelor of arts in history from McGill University, and bachelor of education from University of Alberta. His research interests include mobile libraries, academic integrity, digital libraries, repository development, and digital preservation. E-mail: [email protected] Ms. Georgina Zaharuk is a language instructor at the English Language Institute, Renison University College, Waterloo, Ontario. With a foundation in social work and business, Georgina has pursued a passion to contribute to language development in an effort to cultivate a community of knowledge sharing across cultures and professional disciplines. She is currently a candidate in the Professional Masters of Education at Queen’s University. E-mail: [email protected] Herbert Tsang, P. Eng, PhD professor of computing science and mathematics at Trinity Western University, Langley, British Columbia, Canada. He directs the Applied Research Lab and his research focus is on applying computational technologies to solve real-world problems. His research interest is in computational intelligence, bioinformatics, mobile computing, and scientific visualization. Currently, Dr. Tsang is a senior member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), a senior member of the

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

298

About the Contributors

Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and registered professional engineer with Engineers and Geoscientists of BC. E-mail: [email protected] Dr. Anthony Fenton holds a doctorate of philosophy in comparative and international education. He is an adjunct professor in the faculty of global and interdisciplinary studies at Hosei University in Tokyo, Japan. He has written and presented on various phenomena that impact global dynamics and internationalizing Japanese universities. His research interests include management, student mobility, and corruption and quality assurance in higher education. Anthony has related experience as a reviewer and copy editor with the Canadian Journal for New Scholars in Education and as a reviewer for the International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Cynthia Gralla holds a PhD in comparative literature from the University of California, Berkeley, and teaches literature and writing at the University of Victoria and Royal Roads University. She is the author of The Floating World: A Novel (Ballantine) and The Demimonde in Japanese Literature. E-mail: [email protected] Professor Beena Giridharan is the deputy pro vice chancellor at Curtin University, Sarawak, Malaysia. In her role, she reports to the pro vice chancellor, and provides academic, financial, strategic, and administrative leadership to Curtin Sarawak, with a particular focus on academic operational efficiency. Prior to taking on this position, she was the dean for learning and teaching at Curtin University, Sarawak from 2011 to 2016. She attained a doctoral degree in applied linguistics and education from Curtin University, Western Australia. She has a first class master’s degree in English language and literature and a first class bachelor’s degree in science. Her research and academic interests include vocabulary acquisition in ESL, educational administration and leadership; higher education practices, transnational education, work-integrated learning, and ethnolinguistic studies in indigenous communities. As a member of an OLT (Office of Learning and Teaching, Australia) funded project entitled “Learning without Borders” she has investigated leadership roles in Trans-National Education (TNE) and internationalization of the curriculum. Beena has been a fellow of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA) since 2006. She mentors aspiring HERDSA fellows and is a panel assessor for HERDSA fellowship portfolios. She won the 2006 Carrick Australian Award for University Teaching, and

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



About the Contributors 299

the 2006 Curtin University, Australia, Excellence in Teaching and Innovation award. Recently, she won a prestigious Curtin Academy Fellowship 2019. Beena Giridharan was a visiting professor at the Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, between 2007 and 2008. She is a reviewer and a member of the editorial board of the IAFOR Journal of Education, and a reviewer for a number of international journals in higher education. Her publications include a book on Vocabulary Acquisition Patterns in Adult Tertiary (ESL) Learners (2013), an international handbook on transnational education, leadership in transnational education and internationalization of the curriculum, several book chapters, and publications in journals and refereed conferences. She is often invited as a keynote speaker and a plenary speaker at a number of higher education conferences regionally and internationally. E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Jillian Marchant, is a PhD candidate with the School of Education at James Cook University. She holds a master’s degree in public administration, from Flinders University as well as an honor’s degree in psychology from University of Queensland. Jillian is a long-term resident of Australian rural areas. She enjoys contributing to her local community through assisting groups and associations as well as by offering assistance to her academic community through her editing roles. Jillian appreciates the opportunity to support and be inspired by students both locally and afar as they navigate their tertiary education courses to completion. Her research interests include understanding the role of people’s course knowledge in their well-being as well as that of their communities. E-mail: [email protected] Dr. Najwa Saba ‘Ayon is a full-time associate professor in the College of Arts and Sciences at Rafik Hariri University, Lebanon. She is the chairperson of the English Department, the advisor of the English Language Program, and the coordinator of all academic English, communication, and intensive English courses in the college. Dr. Saba ‘Ayon has a BA in English Language, a teaching diploma in TEFL, as well as an MA in TEFL from the American University of Beirut, Lebanon, and a doctorate of education (EdD) from the University of Sussex, UK. She has substantial experience teaching English as a foreign language (EFL). Besides teaching English courses, she has taught elective courses, namely Fundamentals of Education, Intercultural Communication, and Public Speaking. Moreover, Dr. Saba ‘Ayon has published and presented in national and international conferences on plagiarism, flipped learning, intercultural communication, student motivation, collaborative

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

300

About the Contributors

learning in ESP courses, as well as EFL teachers’ conceptions of teaching and their practice. She is interested in teacher training and development, ESP, intercultural communication, and preparation of professional communicators. Recently, Dr. Saba ‘Ayon served as an editor for Sage Open and a senior reviewer of abstracts in The IAFOR International Conference on Education— Dubai 2017 and 2018. She is a reviewer for IAFOR Journal of Education, for IAFOR Journal of Language, and for Scientific Publishing Research. Dr. Saba ‘Ayon was recognized for her teaching strategies; in fact, she received the university’s Teaching Effectiveness Award in 2016. E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Dr. Philip Streich is currently serving as associate professor at Osaka University, where he teaches and conducts research on East Asian politics and international relations. Dr. Streich has authored The Ever-Changing SinoJapanese Rivalry (2019) and has coauthored a collection of unusual episodes from international relations entitled Weird IR: Deviant Cases in International Relations. He has been teaching since 2015 at Osaka University. Dr. Streich has also taught at Haverford College, Pomona College, and Rutgers University. He earned his PhD in political science from Rutgers University in 2010. E-mail: [email protected] Dr. Raimond Selke has worked as lecturer, senior lecturer, and associate professor in different Asian countries (China, Malaysia and Japan). He previously served as associate professor at the Graduate School of Language and Culture at Osaka University. Since October 2017 Raimond Selke is working for the Goethe-Institut Jakarta, where he is in charge of further developing collaboration between local Indonesian and German stakeholders in education and fostering the status of German as a foreign language in Indonesia. As Course Expert, he ensures smooth teaching, learning and quality improvement for more than 150,000 school students and more than 1,500 teachers related to German foreign language. Beginning September 2020, he will be on parental leave. E-mail: [email protected] Mr. Masahiro Saito is a teacher educator. He taught social studies in secondary schools before working for the teacher education program at Asahikawa University. He joined Asahikawa University in 2005. Since then, he has dedicated himself to support his students to cultivate cognitive growth as future teachers. He was promoted to associate professor in 2011 and now is the head of teacher education program. His research interests are as follows: self-study

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington



About the Contributors 301

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

of teacher education practices [s-step]; cognitive growth of student teachers through reflection; social equity and education. E-mail: [email protected] Dr. Anna Toom is an associate professor of psychology in the Graduate School of Education at Touro College & University System, USA. She earned a MS in computer science from the Moscow Institute of Radio Engineering, Electronics and Automation in 1972 and a MS in psychology from Moscow State University in 1978, both in Russia. In 1991, she attained her PhD in psychology from Moscow State University of Management, Russia. After graduation, for twelve years, she worked as a university researcher and taught psychology from time to time. In the United States, teaching became her main vocation. In 2011, Dr. Toom left the traditional classroom to devote her teaching and research to online education. She says, “I didn’t take online courses as a student because information technology was far less advanced then. Eventually, however, I became a pioneer of online education in New York City. I have been designing, developing and teaching online psychology courses for about twenty years.” As a psychologist, Dr. Toom belongs to the scientific school of the renowned Lev Vygotsky. As an educator, she is an expert at the integrative education made famous by the philosopher and educator John Dewey. Dr. Toom’s pedagogical interests focus on creating new ways to teach online psychology courses—with the use of the fictions and film arts. Her primary scientific interest concerns learning in the virtual environment which is based on informational technologies. For many years she studied online students’ learning motivation and their cognitive adjustment to the virtual classroom. Now, she studies online students’ cognitive and information competence in operating with textual information. Within forty years of her research activity, Dr. Toom has published forty-two articles in the fields of social, general, industrial, and educational psychology in refereed journals and conference proceedings, in English, Russian, and Spanish. E-mail: [email protected] Dr. Natalia Inshakova is associate professor in the Department of Journalism in Moscow State University, Russia. In 1969, she earned a MS in librarian science from the Moscow State Institute of Culture. In 1977, she attained her PhD in philology from Moscow State University. After graduation, for fifty years, Natalia worked, first, as an editor in the journal of Scientific and Technical Libraries of USSR and then, in such leading Moscow publishing companies as Book Chamber International, ACT, Astrel, and Fact. She has

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington

302

About the Contributors

edited more than eighty books of various genres: popular science, fiction, children’s, and reference. Since 1992, Dr. Inshakova has been working in the journalism department of Moscow State University where her responsibility includes teaching such courses as Basics of Editing Media Texts, Editor’s Work on the Language and Style of Advertising Works, and Developing the Concept of Book Publishing. Her research interests develop in a few directions: theory and practice of editing, features of editing translated literature, and features of editing advertising and PR-materials. Dr. Inshakova is an author of more than 130 publications which include articles, monographs, and two textbooks, all devoted to book publishing and editing issues. E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright © 2020. Lexington Books. All rights reserved.

Dr. Daniel Velasco, PhD, earned his BA in English and French from UCLA, his MEd from National University, his MA in psychology from Antioch University, and his PhD in international psychology from The Chicago School of Professional Psychology. Dr. Velasco currently resides in Tokyo, Japan, where he is a professor and mental health therapist. In addition to teaching and counseling, he also conducts research and provides intercultural training to businesses and organizations. He is part of the Refugee Mental Health Resource Network (RMHRN), which provides pro bono counseling and other services to refugees, immigrants and internally displaced people (IDPs), and is an active member in many organizations, including the Japanese Psychological Association (JPA), the American Psychological Association (APA), the International Council of Psychologists (ICP), the International Mental Health Professionals Japan (IMHPJ), the Society for Intercultural Education, Training, and Research (SIETAR), and the Global Organisation for Humanitarian Work Psychology (GOHWP). E-mail: [email protected]

Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism : Case Studies from Universities around the World, edited by Bernard Montoneri, Lexington