Plagiarism

The interesting debate on this topic in deliberations-forum was initiated by Andy Lloyd, Cardiff University,

Andy's Message

Dear Colleagues,

Well-documented changes in the HE environment, and the accompanying increased use and availability of IT systems have led many in the sector to comment that there is now a greater risk of plagiarism in course-assessments than ever before. While I would argue that a holistic re-evaluation of assessment strategies, and the increased use of diverse and more innovative assessment methods can reduce this risk, the problem is not one that should be ignored. Prevention must be considered preferable to cure, but I also feel that incidences of plagiarism can be first difficult to spot, and secondly difficult to prove.

I would therefore like to hear from anybody who either has, or is in the process of developing systems through which plagiarism can be detected. Given that so much student work is now submitted in computer-readable formats, I would particularly welcome information on IT based systems, and on any that claim to be able to identify content drawn from the web.

Should I receive enough replies, I shall post an appropriate summary to the list.

Andy Lloyd, Learning Policy Support Officer,
Academic Registry, Cardiff University
Email: LlyodA@Cardiff.ac.uk

Andy's Summary

Given that I (foolishly) promised to summarise any replies I received to a message sent to the list concerning plagiarism, I have now attempted to do this. The summary can thus be found below. My original message was partly a request for information on systems that aid the detection of plagiarism. The resultant discussion however tended to focus more on definitions of plagiarism and an acknowledged need to consider this problem in the context of assessment strategies. My thanks to all who contributed to what became an interesting and thought-provoking discussion. Apologies if I have in any way misrepresented the views of any of the participants. You can rest assured that if I have, it was completely unintentional. If anybody would like to work further on this, could I please ask that they contact me directly (i.e. not via the list). As a matter of interest, does this summary constitute plagiarism - on second thoughts - don't answer that one :-)

On systems that may detect plagiarism

Phil Davies (University of Glamorgan) described a computerised peer assessment system for students to mark each other's essays.

Perry Share (Institute of Technology, Sligo, Ireland) and others pointed to Glatt Plagiarism Services

Mark Atlay (University of Luton) referred to CFL Software Development, who have "developed a program that allows you to select a number of related texts and set a threshold for lexical vocabulary similarity above which you think you might be suspicious".

But while such systems are often viewed with justifiable scepticism Paul Kleiman (LIPA) noted that "I'm pretty sure that plagiarism is on the increase (which may explain a year-on-year increase in the standard of written work!) and that markers may not have the skills nor, certainly, the time to pursue it."

On definitions of plagiarism

Perry Share argued that we should consider the need "to redefine and reward plagiarism" and to encourage students to realise how ubiquitous plagiarism is in modern (and indeed all) cultures. "We could cetainly discuss with students whether Madonna's version of 'American Pie' is plagiarism or not? Or what Andy Warhol did with soup labels. Or to what extent Pleasantville is a rip-off The Truman Show or vice versa?

Leesa Doughney (Victoria University of Technology), argued that "We need to think more about plagiarism. We insist our students do not plagiarise, yet much of what occurs in the workplace requires 'highly developed' plagiarism skills". Leesa further noted that "Students need skills in working collaboratively in this way... [and that]... Differing cultural approaches exist. My Vietnamese students would look at me in amazement when I demanded they not only write an essay in a way totally foreign to their conception of an essay, but also insist that they cite the 'experts'. In their view, a learned person should be able to identify the experts, their words and ideas. To have to have this pointed out signified lack of knowledge". Leesa's message concluded "While I tend to be ruthless in stamping out plagiarism and fanatical about referencing I still obtained some satisfaction if the student had at least done it well. It meant they understood enough about the topic and important sources to attempt to seamlessly meld this into their work. The bigger worry was those students who plagiarised components that bore little or no relationship to the topic, or who were clumsy about its incorporation into their work, thereby demonstrating inadequate writing skills. I think it is important that students be able to write a traditional essay. I also think it is important that they develop skills which in some environments is called plagiarism, yet in others is called collaborative, politically astute practices."

Perry Share then took up Leesa's baton arguing that "plagiarism is not as negatively viewed in the 'real world' as it is within the structures of tertiary education... [concluding that]... the first thing is to clarify why we see it as a problem... [and that]... we need to provide variety in our assessment, as Bill does with his viva. In one sense this is 'checking up' on students, but it is of course an additional way of assessing them, that some of them may well prefer to the more traditional written form."

This led Paul Kleiman to conclude that "perhaps obviously, context is all, and what is acceptable in one context is not acceptable in another." Geoff Olive (Wilmington College) then explored the difference between plagiarism and cheating by asking "Why do we set written assignments, essays, dissertations, etc., that are open to possible plagiarism?", concluding that "If we suspect a student of plagiarism, does it really matter, as the objective is to get the student to read, understand, and learn the subject material?"

Feixia Yu (University of Central Lancashire), widened the discussion, by asking "If a student copies very large chunks of his old essay for one course and submits the not-so-new essay for another course, is it plagiarism? Perry Share replied that this happens often, and that it is plagiarism, further noting "Academics do a lot of this sort of plagiarism too: how often do we see the same material recycled through journal articles and books, often many many times!" Geoff Olive however noted that "So long as it was not plagiarised in the first instance, why keep re-inventing the wheel?"

Dave Farthing (University of Glamorgan) concluded the discussion arguing that "I believe it helpful to consider plagiarism as a sliding scale, not just a yes/no judgement", and went on to give examples of situations that may or may not be classed as plagiarism.

Hugh Jones (City University) added that "Perhaps a useful approach would be to ask the student her/himself to identify the originality of otherwise of the essay?"

On plagiarism and assessment

After discussing the generic problem of plagiarism, Paul Kleiman was moved to ask "Is it time to herald the death of the traditional essay?"

Perry Share replied that this might be the "central issue as regards plagiarism. To what extent is it a 'crime' and why do we see it as such? Should we continue even to worry about it?" He pointed to examples in which the use of others material is commonplace, concluding that "we need to examine the reasons for our fear of plagiarism."

Phil Race further argued that "The most skilled plagiarists will always avoid detection, and it's the ones who are not so good at it that we capture and punish. What an incentive to be a really skilled plagiarist? it is time to rethink our assessment strategies, and (when we want to try to) measure individuals' achievement by means which aren't affected by plagiarism."

Bill Brooke (Coventry University) added that "I am less than happy with the notion that plagiarism is an acceptable academic activity... I have instituted a system where I can viva any student who's work I think is copied. I agree that this means the best may get away with it but comparisons with class performance usually is a good indicator. In the viva I have asked those students who I have suspected to explain parts of the text, I have found students repeatedly using words in essays they do not understand, expounding ideas that they can not explain."

Glynis Cousin (Coventry University) agreed with Bill, saying that "weak students plagiarise because they have a low ownership of ideas/ways of relating to material, etc

Cecilia Lowe (Bilkent University) agreed with Geoff Olive (see above) commenting that "asking students to relate theory to reality or a current event is invaluable in this regard. This type of task also takes students beyond the level of mere regurgitation of facts and theory to a level where they are using the theory in a meaningful way... [and concluded that] ... The main point is that plagiarism is always easy when all you are being asked to do is regurgitate - and in that way we are to blame for setting our students up - how can we censor them when we have set them a 'plagiarism' task?"

Readers' Comments

For full text, see deliberations-forum archive - March/April 2000.