Academic Honesty / Plagiarism How

Academic Honesty / Plagiarism

How serious is the matter of plagiarism on college and university campuses? What are the moral standards that are being violated by students that cheat? How do students perceive the issue of plagiarism, and what punishment do they believe is appropriate for those caught using others' work without attribution? This paper uses peer-reviewed, scholarly sources to delve into those and other issues regarding academic honesty.

"Plagiarism means knowingly presenting the work or property of another person as one's own, without appropriate acknowledgment or referencing"

(definition from a "large, multi-campus Australian university" -- Yeo, 2007, p. 200)

Shelly Yeo conducted a survey of first year science and engineering students, exploring the views of these students vis-a-vis what they perceive as plagiarism. Published in the journal Higher Education Research & Development, Yeo's article clearly points to the fact that plagiarism is "…not a universally understood or accepted concept in academia" (Yeo, 2007, p. 200). Yeo presents six examples of plagiarism, including: a) word-for-word copying; b) close paraphrasing without attribution; c) using another person's ideas, research, or work without acknowledgement; d) submitting someone else's work as if it were the student's; e) copying computer files with no indication of their origin; and f) "falsely representing" collaborative work as though it was the work of an individual (Yeo, 200).

Why explore this topic? Yeo claims that academic dishonesty is widespread "and appears to be increasing." Indeed, on page 201 Yeo asserts that "Results reporting in excess of 50% of undergraduate students admitting cheating are common." Why do students plagiarize? First of all, in general students don't see plagiarism as a "particularly serious misdemeanor," Yeo explains (201). Secondly, there are several excuses they make for cheating, and Yeo has broken it down into six generalizations, worthy of reporting here. She finds that students plagiarize: a) because they didn't have time to do their own work (poor time management skills); b) because they perceive that their rewards for being hones will be "insufficient"; c) when their curricula is jam-packed; d) for fear of getting a poor grade, or that they will disappoint others; e) because they "can get away with it"; or f) because they simply wish to "defy authority" (201).

The prevailing view from the 30 first year science and engineering students Yeo surveyed is that there were only two actions that absolutely constitute plagiarism; one is "copying an assignment" and the other is "Internet cut and paste" (212). When it comes to collusion on a project in science, and turning in the same exact results, Yeo reports that students don't regard that as serious because "the right answer" is more important than presenting the argument as to how it was achieved (212). In any event, they were just "working together," not cheating.

Meanwhile, author Julianne East presents plagiarism as a moral issue and makes the case that those who are "making judgments about plagiarism" should take time to reflect on this issue: are their actions a violation of social values and morality, or are they just part of the convention? (East, 2010, p. 69). Clearly East believes that plagiarism is a moral issue, and reports evidence that "over 70% of students admit to some form of cheating" (70). One of the problems East sees it that because cheating is "assumed to be universally understood" it is not well defined to students just coming in to the university experience. Students will "declare that cheating is immoral," but on the other hand they do not always "perceive plagiarism as a serious misdemeanor" (East, 71). Students tend to view success as far more important than "avoiding plagiarism," East continues. Part of the thrust for this cavalier attitude is that students' benefits are "beyond the university" and they see themselves needing to graduate and move on, East continues.

What type of student is most likely to plagiarize? East contends that if this were known, it could help universities weed out those cheaters. But while there is "little agreement" in that regard, some studies suggest students with "high grades" might plagiarize to keep that grade point up. Others suggest students with low grades would more likely cheat, and still others believe postgraduates are "less likely to cheat because they are motivated to learn" (East, 72). The author suggests that faculty needs to make decisions and judgment about what is to be done to students caught plagiarizing, and moreover, far more attention should be paid to the morality of cheating and plagiarizing as students enroll in universities. Ethical codes should be taught to students, East believes, and albeit it is not a university's responsibility to judge morality, and yet "maintaining and supporting academic integrity is in a university's interests" (80).