Course Modality and Student Perceptions of Plagiarism

Audience Level: 
All
Session Time Slot(s): 
Institutional Level: 
Higher Ed
Abstract: 

In this increasingly digital age, student plagiarism is rampant. This session will review the results of research comparing online and face-to-face student perceptions of plagiarism. In an interactive session including experience and resource sharing, attendees will learn about current research on plagiarism and free and effective plagiarism prevention technological tools.

Extended Abstract: 

In this increasingly digital age, student plagiarism is rampant. Plagiarism is an ongoing problem in higher education that can have potentially devastating consequences for students and the institutions in which they are enrolled (International Center for Academic Integrity, 2015).  Roughly half of college students admit to plagiarizing using content found online, directly copying and pasting the work of others (Bolkan, 2006; McCabe, Trevino, & Butterfield, 2002).  Students plagiarize content from a myriad of sources – wikis, blogs, online journals, newspaper articles, as well as purchase papers on demand from the more than 100 online essay web sites (Taleb, 2004). Digital technology and social media have greatly changed the landscape of how knowledge is acquired and disseminated; thus, students must be explicitly taught digital literacy skills and how to correctly utilize information they find online (Evering & Moorman, 2012).

Previous research on this topic suggested that student perceptions of plagiarism differ between various factors such as subject major and year in school (Chen & Chou, 2017; Childers & Bruton, 2016; He & Lei, 2015). When considered together, the findings of several studies also suggested that student perceptions of plagiarism differ between public and private institutions.  However, there has been little research to date regarding perceptions of plagiarism of students in online versus face-to-face courses. Students with different course modalities have demonstrated significant differences on a number of characteristics, including learning preferences and academic strengths; thus, their perceptions of plagiarism may well differ too (Fendler, Ruff, & Shrikhande, 2016; Paula, Mary, & Michelle, 2014; Sungkyoo, Jongdae, Kyung Loo, & Sehwan, 2009).

The current study will compare the perceptions of plagiarism between students in online and face-to-face course modalities. Subjects will complete a version of the Revised Attitudes Toward Plagiarism Questionnaire (Howard, Ehrich, & Walton, 2014). Subjects will also be asked to answer demographic questions, discuss the types of resources they have received regarding plagiarism and the development of the skills necessary to prevent it, and identify the types of these resources they would like to receive or have be available. Ratings of each statement will be compared to determine if statistically significant differences exist between students completing online courses and students completing face-to-face courses.

Study results will lend additional insight to differences between online and face-to-face students, as well as the possible role of course modality in perceptions of plagiarism. These findings will be used to assess plagiarism resources that are currently in use, helping to identify opportunities for improvement.  Universities could also apply these findings to tailor the resources provided to students to prevent plagiarism, as well as the resources provided to build writing skills. By comparing student responses regarding the types of resources they have received with the types of resources they would like to see, universities can identify cases in which student preferences are not being met and gain insight into more effective solutions.

Session attendees will learn about current research on plagiarism and plagiarism prevention. To promote an interactive session and information sharing, session attendees will be encouraged to share their own experiences with student plagiarism and what techniques have proven effective for prevention, both at the course and institutional level. In addition to study results, tools for detecting plagiarism will be discussed, as will effective prevention techniques. A number of games and computer simulations focused on plagiarism prevention will be shared and demonstrated. Session attendees will leave this presentation with additional knowledge about plagiarism prevention, and several free and effective technological tools that they can utilize with their students.

References

Bolkan, J.V. (2006). Avoid the Plague: Tips and Tricks for Preventing and Detecting Plagiarism. Learning and Leading with Technology, 33(6), 10-13.

Chen, Y., & Chou, C. (2017). Are we on the same page? College students’ and faculty's perceptions of student plagiarism in Taiwan. Ethics and Behavior, 27(1), 53-73.

Childers, D., & Bruton, S. (2016). Should it be plagiarism? Student perceptions of complex citation issues. Journal of Academic Ethics, 14(1), 1-17. doi: 10.1007/s10805-015-9250-6.

DeLong, D. (2012). Propensity toward unintentional plagiarism. Global Education Journal, 4, 136-154.

Evering, L.C. & Moorman, G. (2012). Rethinking Plagiarism in the Digital Age. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 56, 35-44.

Fendler, R. J., Ruff, C., & Shrikhande, M. (2016). Evaluating Characteristics of Top and Bottom Performance: Online versus In-Class. American Journal Of Distance Education, 30(2), 109-120.

He, G., & Lei, J. (2015). Chinese university students’ perceptions of plagiarism. Ethics and Behavior, 25(3), 233-255.

Howard, S. J., Ehrich, J. F. & Walton, R. (2014). Measuring students' perceptions of plagiarism: Modification and Rasch validation of a plagiarism attitude scale. Journal of Applied Measurement, 15 (4), 372-393.

International Center for Academic Integrity. (2015). Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.academicintegrity.org/icai/integrity-3.php

McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics and Behavior, 11(3), 219-232.

McCabe, D.L., Trevino, L.K., & Butterfield, K.D. (2002). Honor codes and other contextual influences on academic integrity: A replication and extension to modified honor code settings. Research in Higher Education, 43, 357-378.

Paula, T., Mary, O., & Michelle, J. (2014). Student Characteristics and Achievement in Online and On-Campus FCS Courses. Journal Of Human Sciences And Extension, Vol 2, Iss 2, Pp 93-99 (2014), (2), 93.

Sungkyoo, H., Jongdae, J., Kyung Joo, L., & Sehwan, Y. (2009). Differential effects of student characteristics on performance: Online vis-à-vis offline accounting courses. Academy Of Entrepreneurship Journal, 15(2), 83-91.

Talab, R. (2004). A student online plagiarism guide: Detection and prevention resources (and copyright implications!). TechTrends, 48(6), 15-18.

Conference Session: 
Concurrent Session 10
Conference Track: 
Research
Session Type: 
Education Session
Intended Audience: 
Administrators
Faculty
Students
Training Professionals
Researchers