Different Approaches to Addressing Academic Plagiarism - Literature review Example

Different Approaches to Addressing Academic Plagiarism: A Necessity Introduction Plagiarism is one of the issues that most schools, specifically universities, strictly deal with by using concrete and definite policies. It is an act of academic dishonesty that is addressed by penalties which usually involve giving of failing marks and in more serious cases, expulsion from the academe. (“How to Recognize the Penalties for Plagiarizing,” 2008) It is pertinent to note though that the similarity of approaches in dealing with academic plagiarism somehow disregards the fact that each case is unique in itself—that is, each student who commits this form of dishonesty has their own reason of doing so, and the act itself is likewise by surrounded by circumstances different from others. This paper discusses plagiarism by means of citing the various reasons, why this act is being committed by students. It further argues that given the diverse reasons, it is necessary and proper for universities to apply varied approaches in addressing each case. Concomitant to this is the importance of having faculty members who are proactive in determining and probing the causes of plagiarism, and who are also willing to perform their roles in dealing with each concerned student. Background Hexham (2005) defines plagiarism as “…the deliberate attempt to deceive the reader through the appropriation and representation as ones own the work and words of others.” It was further mentioned in the article that academic plagiarism happens when more than four words are extracted from a source, without using quotation marks and proper reference, and when the material is composed mainly of continuous paraphrasing without the insertion of any original argument or addition of new material. Given this, Hexham (2005) likewise enumerates the different types of plagiarism, which are concisely discussed below: (1.) Straight Plagiarism—Occurs when minor changes, like deletion or addition of words, capitalization and sentence structure changes , are done. Such changes, albeit “minor,” can still make a certain work appear as if it is “original.” (2.) Citing the original author without quotation marks or references—occurs when the writer acknowledges the real author and copies the original text without using quotation marks or proper references. (3.) Simple Plagiarism Using Footnotes—even though reference is given, plagiarism can still occur when quotation marks are not used and when little changes are made from the source so as to make the new material appear original. (4.) Complex Plagiarism Using Footnotes—this kind of plagiarism is less noticeable because the appearance of the original work is altered by means of many re-wording and paraphrasing, but still, the contents are the same. This type makes use of reference without properly using quotation marks. (5.) Plagiarism with Hanging Quotations—this happens when a writer uses quotation marks, and continues to quote even though the quotation marks are already closed. (6.) Paraphrasing as Plagiarism—this type of plagiarism is harder to prove because it is characterized of either paraphrasing without citing the original source or continuous paraphrasing and citing of sources, but no insertion of original argument, insights and/ or discussions. (7.) “Self-Plagiarism”—refers to the type of plagiarism wherein an author “recycles” his old works and pass such as new ones. These various types of plagiarism also have different indications, that is why Hexham mentions that great care must be practiced in determining whether a writer plagiarizes or not so that innocent persons would not be unjustly accused of something that is the result of factors other than deliberate cheating. (Hexham, 2005) Given this, the following delves deeper into the different range of reasons why students commit plagiarism. Identified Reasons Why Students Commit Plagiarism Devlin and Gray (2007) mentioned in their study that there are a broad range of possible reasons why academic plagiarism is being committed by students. Using a qualitative method and having 56 students as participants, they have identified 8 categories of reasons for plagiarism. The first category is termed as inadequate admission. This criterion refers to situations wherein universities accept students to a certain course when in fact, such students do not possess the necessary qualifications to succeed in the endeavor. This lack of defined standards of admission usually results to inevitable difficulties experienced by students, in terms of comprehension, application of theories, etc. thereby “forcing” them to commit plagiarism just to pass the course. (Devlin & Gray, 2007) The second category, as identified by Devlin and Gray, is poor understanding of plagiarism. This is especially true because although the reasons of the existence of plagiarism are often cited, that is, to protect the interests of the original authors and publishers, etc., there is really no standard and consistent definition of the concept itself. (McDonnell) Aside from this, the various definitions of the concept do not address the issue of intent (McDonnell), and such meanings are rooted from different points-of-view, situations, expectations and understanding. (Gerhardt, 2006)It can therefore be deduced that “poor understanding” cannot be solely faulted against the students because the diverse meanings of plagiarism make it a very vague concept. Poor understanding of plagiarism can also be attributed to the fact that different students came from different backgrounds, countries and culture and hence, they have different interpretations of the concept itself. For instance, many cultures in Asia, Middle East, Africa and First Nation perceive that knowledge is the property of the entire society and not just of an individual; in Italy, people perceive that one way of showing respect to the original authors is by copying their works—these and many other more are concrete examples of how varied the cultures are and how these affect interpretations and understanding of the concept of plagiarism. (McDonnell) The third category has to do with students’ poor academic skills, which could specifically be translated to poor time management, research, writing and/or referencing skills (Devlin & Gray, 2007) Discussing these further, poor time management could result to accumulation of work loads, entailing the students to plagiarize so as to meet deadlines. Lack of research skills, on the other hand, may cause students to plagiarize simply because they do not know what to do; poor writing skills may be linked to poor integration of source materials, thereby entailing the students to plagiarize. Finally, poor referencing skills may be attributed to the fact that different disciplines require different citation styles, thereby causing confusion on the part of the students. (“Reasons for Plagiarism”) The next category has to do with teaching-learning issues. It is being claimed that the so-called “conventional teaching methods” somehow encourage cheating—an example cited are the assignments that are given to students that would commonly require them to really research. Given this and the aforementioned poor skills evident in students, plus the fact that teachers are not usually proactive enough in extending guidance and assistance, most students would really choose to just plagiarize their works. (Devlin & Gray, 2007) The next categories can be considered as reasons why students deliberately cheat. Students plagiarize because they are lazy to apply the proper and more rigorous referencing works; some plagiarize because the act itself gives them a sense of pride and fulfillment, while some do the act because they are pressured—either by time, by stress, by family and societal standards and norms. (Devlin & Gray) The last identified category is the cost of education. This could be interpreted in several ways: first, students do not have resources to obtain materials that will serve as guides in doing research; second, more fortunate students have the money and resources to hire people who could do the researching and writing for them; and third, some students plagiarize because they could not afford to fail a subject which they have paid with significant amount. (Devlin & Gray) How to Address Plagiarism As discussed above, different students have different reasons of committing plagiarism. This connotes the necessity to deal and address each case individually so as to really touch the root cause of each. “Customizing” approaches in dealing with acts of academic plagiarism entails not just a “stop-gap” measure, but a way of instilling in each student, and in the university as a whole, a culture of academic honesty. Ways of doing these would be for the universities to be aware of the various reasons of plagiarism, learn how to identify such and set examples of each. Investigative committees, who will be primarily responsible in probing the different reasons of students, could be formed. Teachers should likewise be proactive in delving deeper into the situations that prompted their respective students to plagiarize. As Porter (2005) concisely states, “Recognize that plagiarism is complicated. It is a topic that needs to be taught (not simple knowledge that can be assumed).” Conclusion To reiterate the discussions above, although Hexham was able to define plagiarism and identify several types of it, these are still just among the many definitions of said concept, making it a very vague one. Its vagueness entails “poor understanding” on the part of students, that, when coupled with any other reasons such as the ones mentioned above, would really entail them to plagiarize. This fact should be recognized by universities, because doing so, as Devlin & Gray (2005) states it, “...may be helpful to other universities seeking to engage with the reasons for plagiarism as a basis for planning approaches to minimizing or marginalizing its occurrence-- among students across the spectrum, from those who are unprepared, through those who have bad habits or poor teachers, to those with different values.” References: Devlin, M. & Gray, K. (2007, June 2) “In their own words: a qualitative study of the reasons Australian university students plagiarize.” Higher Education Research & Development, Vol. 26, No. 2, 181-198. Gerhardt, D. (2006) “Plagiarism in Cyberspace: Learning the Rules of Recycling Content With a View Towards Nurturing Academic Trust in an Electronic World.” Retrieved 04 September 2008 from http://law.richmond.edu/jolt/v12i3/article10.pdf. Hexham, I. (2005) “Academic Plagiarism Defined.” University of Cargary. Retrieved 04 September 2008 from http://www.ucalgary.ca/~hexham/study/plag.html “How to Recognize the Penalties for Plagiarizing.” (2008, February 26) Retrieved 04 September 2008 from http://www.answerbag.com/articles/How-to- Recognize-the-Penalties-for-Plagiarizing/5c6bb882-2c8d-9912-1b6b-20ae5c5f7632 McDonell, K. “Academic Plagiarism Rules and ESL Learning-- Mutually Exclusive Concepts?” American University. Retrieved 04 September 2008 from http://www.american.edu/tesol/wpmcdonnell.pdf. Porter, J. (2005, August 21) “Discourage Plagiarism by Promoting Academic Honesty: A Proactive Approach for Teachers.” Retrieved 04 September 2008 from http://kairos.wide.msu.edu/porter/teach_plagiarism.pdf “Reasons for Plagiarism.” University of Alabama in Huntsville. Retrieved 04 September 2008 from http://www.uah.edu/writing/Word_files/fac_preventing_plag2.doc. . Read More