Suchergebnisse

A significant amount of research has been undertaken in response to high levels of student plagiarism in higher education institutions (HEI). New models have emerged over the last decade for strategies and systems for detection, penalties and mitigation, based on deeper understanding of the underlying reasons behind student plagiarism. Most research has been initiated by academics from English speaking countries, particularly from the UK, North America and Australia. When the proposal for the Impact of Policies for Plagiarism in Higher Education across Europe (IPPHEAE ) project was developed during 2009 very little research had been conducted about the policies for academic integrity adopted by HEIs in the majority of countries in Europe. IPPHEAE, funded by the European Commission (2010–2013), included a comparative study of policies and procedures in place in HEIs across 27 European Union (EU) member states for handling aspects of academic integrity, focusing specifically on bachelor and master's levels. The survey instruments were on online questionnaires, student focus groups, structured interviews and analysis of documentary evidence, designed with a view to capture a range of quantitative and qualitative responses from different perspectives. Almost 5,000 responses were captured for the survey, mainly from online questionnaires, made available in 14 languages. Different questions were asked of students, teaching staff and senior managers, to determine how well institutional procedures were understood, to what extent they were operating as intended and whether there was consistency of outcomes within and between institutions. Interviews with researchers and people associated with national bodies and agencies responsible for higher education (HE) quality or academic integrity explored broader perspectives on issues such as national policies and how responses to plagiarism aligned with policies for quality and standards. This paper presents results from the survey that focus specifically on institutional policies, highlighting examples of good practice and also areas of concern. The findings suggest that different approaches should be adopted according to the maturity of existing policies and systems in all the countries surveyed, to promote more effective assurance of quality, standards and academic integrity.

Abstract: Very few parts of the world have legislation that prohibits the operation or the promotion of contract cheating services. This means that commercial companies providing such services can formally register and operate in most countries. If a student enters into an agreement with a contract cheating provider, what rights do they have to change their mind and what are the risks if they choose to do so? This paper examines the question through legal, institutional and societal lenses, showing that although a student has the consumer rights to withdraw from a contract with an essay mill, they may also be putting their future at risk by doing so. Contract cheating providers are now embedded within many institutions, using sharp practices to connect with vulnerable customers, but are also perfectly placed to blackmail students or threaten to report them to their institution if they ask to cancel their order. The paper argues that, while not condoning the practice of contract cheating, supportive processes need to be in place to help students at risk as part of standard institutional duty of care. This must be backed up by institutional policy that considers academic integrity as a core value for all.

This paper discusses research on contract cheating undertaken with students across six countries in South East Europe. The research was conducted as part of the South East European Project on Policies for Academic Integrity (SEEPPAI) and supported by a grant from the Council of Europe. Thirteen focus groups were held in which students discussed their experiences with contract cheating and wider issues of educational corruption. The trends identified showed that students knew how to gain contract cheating assistance in both coursework and examinations. Some students were themselves working as academic ghostwriters. Despite pockets of good practice being evident, there was the suggestion of a wider culture of corruption, with claims that some teaching staff were willing to take financial incentives to guarantee grades to students.The findings demonstrate that contract cheating represents a threat to academic integrity in countries where this had not previously been documented. ; Cet article examine la recherche sur le plagiat à contrat des étudiants de six pays d'Europe du Sud-Est. La recherche a été menée dans le cadre du projet PESEPIU (Projet d'Europe du Sud-Est sur les politiques d'intégrité universitaire) et a bénéficié d'un financement du Conseil de l'Europe. Treize groupes de discussion ont été organisés au cours desquels les étudiants ont discuté de leurs expériences en matière de plagiat et de problèmes plus vastes de corruption dans le domaine de l'éducation. Les tendances identifiées ont montré que les étudiants savaient comment obtenir une assistance pour tricher à la fois dans leurs cours et pour leurs examens. Certains étudiants travaillaient eux-mêmes en tant qu'écrivains anonymes. Bien que des exemples de bonnes pratiques soient évidents, les résultats démontrent que certains enseignants étaient prêts à accepter des incitations financières pour garantir de bonnes notes aux étudiants. Les résultats démontrent que le plagiat représente une menace pour l'intégrité universitaire dans des pays où cela n'avait pas été documenté auparavant.

A clear understanding of terminology is crucial in any academic field. When it is clear that complex interdisciplinary concepts are interpreted differently depending on the academic field, geographical setting or cultural values, it is time to take action. Given this, the Glossary for Academic Integrity, newly developed by the European Network for Academic Integrity project, served as the basis for compiling a comprehensive taxonomy of terms related to academic integrity. Following a rigorous coding exercise, the taxonomy was partitioned into three constituent components – Integrity, Misconduct and Neutral terms. A review of relevant literature sources is included, and the strengths and weaknesses of existing taxonomies are discussed in relation to this new offering. During the creation of these artefacts the authors identified and resolved many differences between their individual interpretative understandings of concepts/terms and the viewpoints of others. It is anticipated that the freely-available glossary and taxonomy will be explored and valued by researchers, teachers, students and the general public alike.