共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
AbstractContract cheating providers exist as businesses with a single shared intention, to profit on a student’s inability to fulfil academic requirements for themselves. For contract cheating providers to make money, the correct market conditions are required. First, providers need to be able to offer the expertise that students request. Second, students need to be financially able to pay for specialist support across a diverse range of different areas. If students are unable to meet the price or require expertise that providers do not offer, the transaction is not going to be completed. Therefore, an examination of the demand-side of the contract cheating process in terms of subject matter expertise and the price of offers is important. The research presented in this paper is based on the analysis of 1579 Twitter messages (tweets) that contract cheating providers engaged with. The study aims to examine price variation and the type of assignments students seek to outsource. For typical requests such as essay writing, students are shown to be willing to pay $33.32 per 1000 words. Some services carry a premium, particularly where a student wishes to hire an impersonator to take an examination for them. The student demand for paid help is seen to be highest in the mathematics field, suggesting that students feel under-equipped and under-supported in this area. The paper concludes by discussing further implications of this research and strategies for the minimisation of contract cheating. 相似文献
2.
Cath Ellis Karen van Haeringen Rowena Harper Tracey Bretag Ian Zucker Scott McBride 《高等教育研究与发展》2020,39(3):454-469
ABSTRACTContract cheating occurs when a student outsources their assessment to a third party, regardless of the third party’s relationship with the student, or whether money is exchanged. In higher education, there is a widespread belief that assessment design is a solution to the problem of contract cheating and that authentic assessment tasks are particularly effective. This research analysed two datasets – 221 assignment orders placed on academic custom writing websites and 198 assessment tasks in which contract cheating was detected – to investigate if authentic assessment can assure academic integrity. The authenticity of assessments was determined using five factors derived from the literature: frequency, fidelity, complexity, real-world impact and feed forward. Our analysis found that assessment tasks with no, some, or all of the five authenticity factors are routinely outsourced by students. 相似文献
3.
Phillip Dawson Wendy Sutherland-Smith Mark Ricksen 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》2020,45(4):473-482
AbstractContract cheating happens when students outsource their assessed work to a third party. One approach that has been suggested for improving contract cheating detection is comparing students’ assignment submissions with their previous work, the rationale being that changes in style may indicate a piece of work has been written by somebody else. This approach is time consuming, but recent advances in machine learning and natural language processing suggest that it may be well suited to computerization. We trialed an early alpha version of Turnitin’s Authorship Investigate tool, which compares students’ submissions against their previous work. Twenty-four experienced markers from five units of study were asked to make decisions about the presence of contract cheating in bundles of 20 student assignments, which included 14 legitimate assignments and six purchased from contract cheating sites. We asked markers to determine if each assignment was contract cheating, then provided them with an Authorship Investigate report and let them change their decision. Marker accuracy at detecting contract cheating increased significantly, from 48% to 59% after using the report, with no significant difference in false positives. These findings suggest that software may be an effective component of institutional strategies to address contract cheating. 相似文献
4.
This study examines student responses to the question, “What circumstances, if any, could make cheating justified?” It then
assesses how well those responses can be classified by existing theories and categories that emerge from a qualitative analysis
of the data. Results show considerable support for techniques of neutralization, partial support for the accounts perspective,
and further insights from emergent categories. Reasons offered by students as justifications for cheating serve both rational
decision making and post-hoc rationalizations. Policies designed to promote academic integrity must address both of those.
The rational decision making view suggests an implicit contract between instructor and student that offers opportunities for
reducing cheating by clarifying expectations for students and by designing courses that live up to the instructor’s side of
that contract. The rationalizing view reinforces the need for consistent enforcement of clear standards. 相似文献
5.
Christine Slade Susan Rowland Dominic McGrath 《International Journal for Academic Development》2019,24(1):21-34
Contract cheating presents an existential threat to university assessment integrity and, therefore, to the reputations of universities and their graduates. We report on two workshops, with academic development participants who collaboratively addressed assessment identity verification through problem identification and solution creation. As facilitators, we iteratively reflected on the workshop processes to design and refine subsequent offerings. The corresponding research sought to increase sectoral collaboration and evidence student authorship in assessment. This work provides one approach to developing practice-driven resources and insights for academic developers to encourage others to collaboratively address complex problems that are difficult to resolve, like contract cheating. 相似文献
6.
Tracey Bretag Rowena Harper Kiata Rundle Philip M. Newton Cath Ellis Sonia 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》2020,45(1):125-139
AbstractThis article reports on one aspect of a nationally funded research project on contract cheating in Australian higher education. The project explored students' and educators’ experiences of contract cheating, and the contextual factors that may influence it. This article reports the key findings from non-university higher education providers (NUHEPs). It compares survey responses from 961 students and 91 educators at four NUHEPs with previously reported findings from eight universities (14,086 students and 1,147 staff). NUHEP and university students report engaging in contract cheating in similar ways. However, while NUHEP educators spend more time teaching academic literacies and discussing contract cheating, NUHEP students are 12 times more likely than university students to report use of a professional academic writing service. Both NUHEP and university educators require systematic professional development regarding the relationship between the teaching and learning environment and students’ contract cheating behaviour. NUHEPs need to be cognisant of students’ vulnerability to commercial contract cheating services, and ensure they have access to timely academic and social support. 相似文献
7.
8.
The purpose of this research was to examine student perceptions of academic integrity among faculty and peers at a sample
of public universities in Romania. The study explores the factors that influence academic dishonesty among college students
and compares the relative importance of faculty influences and peer influences on students’ intent to cheat. The study differs
from the existing literature on academic integrity in that it examines the degree to which student cheating in college is
influenced by the quality and relevance of instruction and the academic dishonesty of instructors and peers. 相似文献
9.
Investigation of academic dishonesty has increased markedly in the past two decades; however, the body of research offers inconclusive evidence for many variables. This study examines faculty and student perceptions of in‐class and out‐of‐class cheating behaviours and provides contextual evidence for the prevalence of assessment practices used. Faculty and students differed only slightly in their attitudes toward collegiate cheating and their views on possible reasons for it. We found that the prevalence of teaching and assessment types used in student grading is significantly correlated with perceptions of out‐of‐class cheating, but not with out‐of‐class cheating behaviours. Students with less experience in out‐of‐class assessment display a less ethical attitude toward out‐of‐class cheating. 相似文献
10.
Academic dishonesty has been an important issue. However, only few researches had been done in Asian countries, especially
a nationwide study. A sample of 2,068 college students throughout Taiwan was selected and surveyed on four domains of academic
dishonesty, including: cheating on test, cheating on assignment, plagiarism, and falsifying documents. The major findings
of this study were: (1) the prevalence rate for all types of dishonesty behaviors among college students in Taiwan was 61.72%;
(2) the top five most practiced academic dishonesty behaviors in Taiwan are provided paper or assignment for another student,
gave prohibited help to others on their assignment, copied others’ assignments, passed answers to other students, and copied
from other students; (3) students’ attitudes correlated with behaviors in all four domains of academic dishonesty; (4) females
reported less acceptable to and behaved less academic dishonesty behaviors than males; and (5) freshmen had more dishonest
practices than other class ranks. 相似文献
11.
Susan Rowland Christine Slade Kai-Sheng Wong Brooke Whiting 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》2018,43(4):652-665
Academic integrity is important to universities and students must abide by codes of academic conduct around assessment. Students are, however, subject to multiple pressures around assessment, some of which can push them to cheat. Modern contract cheating websites are the fronts for sophisticated, commercial operations that offer individually written assessment items for a fee; to combat their use we need a better understanding of the tools they use to persuade students to become customers. In this study we examined the persuasive features of 11 highly-visible contract cheating websites and mapped these features to a previously used persuasiveness framework. We find that contract-cheating websites use a variety of credibility, interactive and informative features designed to persuade students to use their services. In addition, the sites offer low-cost, customisable products available in very short timeframes. We suggest ways in which educators can encourage academic integrity by talking with their students about how the websites promulgate their ‘just turn to us’ message. 相似文献
12.
Phillip Dawson Wendy Sutherland-Smith 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》2018,43(2):286-293
Contract cheating is the purchasing of custom-made university assignments with the intention of submitting them. Websites providing contract cheating services often claim this form of cheating is undetectable, and no published research has examined this claim. This paper documents a pilot study where markers were paid to mark a mixture of real student work and contract cheating assignments, to establish their accuracy at detecting contract cheating. Seven experienced markers individually blind marked the same bundle of 20 second-year psychology assignments, which included 6 that were purchased from contract cheating websites. Sensitivity analyses showed markers detected contract cheating 62% of the time. Specificity analyses showed markers correctly identified real student work 96% of the time. Our results contrast with contract cheating sites’ claims that contract cheating is undetectable. However, they should be taken with caution as they are from one course unit in one discipline. 相似文献
13.
Josie Ransome 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》2018,43(1):126-137
A substantial proportion of university students report committing plagiarism and related forms of misconduct. An academic integrity-focused approach to addressing plagiarism emphasises the promotion of positive values alongside education of staff and students about good, and bad, practice in writing, studying and assessment design. The concept was developed many years ago and is seen as desirable, yet it is not clear whether academic integrity features prominently in the education of academics themselves. We analysed source texts for postgraduate certificates in higher education (or equivalent) at UK universities. Overall, academic integrity was poorly addressed in these texts, and the language used (‘cheating’, ‘plagiarism’) was not reflective of an academic integrity-based approach. Newer issues, such as the purchasing of custom written assignments (contract cheating), were barely addressed. We conclude that the concept of academic integrity needs to be integrated into mainstream discourse around teaching in UK higher education. 相似文献
14.
This study examined how community college students (n = 650) vary by generation and other characteristics in their evaluation of academic activities as cheating. A Likert-type instrument was developed based on the literature, pilot tested, and subjected to factor analysis. Results of MANOVA found no difference by generation in the evaluation of cheating related to exams/papers. However, significant differences did exist among generations in the evaluation of activities of fabrication, taking shortcuts, and making excuses, with Millennials rating activities less strongly as cheating than others. Perceptions of cheating did not vary as a function of other student characteristics. Implications for practice include the provision of clear definitions of allowed and disallowed activities in each course and the stimulation of interdisciplinary dialogue regarding the enhancement of academic integrity. 相似文献
15.
《College Teaching》2013,61(1):171-176
Abstract. This article reviews the empirical evidence on college student cheating and places it in a context that combines economic theories of benefit/cost analysis and unobservable behavior with social network analysis of how widespread rule breaking can develop in an organization. The implications are that students cheat because the benefit/cost tradeoff favors cheating; that the problem of unobservable behavior can be substantially mitigated by promoting academic integrity as the social norm; and that many factors that have contributed to the development of more and stronger relationships between college students have helped to promote cheating. The article makes ten specific recommendations for educators. 相似文献
16.
Karen Ellery 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》2008,33(6):607-617
Since the emergence of the electronic era, plagiarism has become an increasingly prevalent problem at tertiary institutions. This study investigated the role electronic sources of information played in influencing plagiarism in an essay assignment in a first‐year geography module at the University of KwaZulu‐Natal in South Africa. Despite explicit instruction in tutorials on academic writing, referencing and plagiarism, a quarter of students still plagiarised in their essay, with the majority having done so off the Internet. A survey questionnaire and interviews revealed that not only did the school writing experience prepare students poorly for academic writing discourses, but also highlighted that student ignorance with regard to acknowledgement of electronic sources, a pervasive perception of difference between electronic and print sources, as well as the availability of the copy‐and‐paste facility which reinforces the product view of writing, all contributed towards electronic‐source plagiarism. Active instructional engagement with electronic‐source material, and open dialogue on ownership of knowledge as well as on moral and ethical issues with students, are recommended as strategies to overcome such plagiarism. 相似文献
17.
The past several decades of research has produced many important insights into prevalence and correlates of academic dishonesty. While these studies have offered important contributions to our understanding of such cheating, we are in need of research that allows us to hear what students have to say about it. This paper begins to fill the relative void of student voices by presenting results from individual interviews with a sample of adolescents who acknowledge cheating despite believing that is wrong to do so. Specifically, the present investigation uses a multi‐case research design to explore the phenomenon of belief–behaviour incongruity, as it relates to academic dishonesty, among a demographically and academically diverse group of high school students. Four distinct cases of BBI are presented, each representing a complex configuration of psychological, social, cultural and situational factors: unable, under‐interested, under pressure and unrepentant. Educational implications and suggestion for further research are discussed. 相似文献
18.
Wendy Sutherland-Smith Kevin Dullaghan 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》2019,44(8):1148-1162
AbstractContract cheating sites advertise that they provide high quality, undetectable, bespoke work delivered in a timely manner to students purchasing their assignments. This paper tests contract cheating sites’ promises about the products they sell. We built on previous reported research examining contract cheating sites’ persuasive features which were mapped into three major dimensions. In this study, we explore how those dimensions are realised in practice. By purchasing 54 assignments from 18 different contract cheating sites across a range of disciplines, we found contract cheating sites’ promises flawed. Many sites do not deliver assignments on time, or at all; they provide variable quality assignments (including fail grade work), and do not necessarily respond rapidly to user queries. When markers graded work, 52% of cheated tasks failed to meet the university pass standard. Furthermore, many contract cheating sites retain the right to share personal details with third parties under their privacy clauses and require levels of personal identification that leave users vulnerable. Students need to be aware that contract cheating sites’ slick advertising is not necessarily borne out in reality. Universities can draw on this study’s findings for student awareness and deterrence campaigns pointing out the risks of using contract cheating sites. 相似文献
19.
Arden Miller Carol Shoptaugh Jessica Wooldridge 《Journal of Experimental Education》2013,81(2):169-184
The authors investigated the relations among reasons students gave for why they would not cheat in response to a cheating vignette, self-reported cheating, and the extent to which students take responsibility for promoting academic integrity. The authors surveyed 1,086 graduate and undergraduate students. Students who said they would not cheat because of punitive consequences were more likely to report that they cheated in classes and took less responsibility for promoting academic integrity. Students whose reasons related to the value of learning, personal character, and/or it being simply not right reported less cheating and took more responsibility for academic integrity. Academic-integrity responsibility correlated with less cheating. Results are discussed in terms of the effectiveness of punishment and the significance of internalizing integrity standards. 相似文献
20.
Melisa J. Wallace 《Educational studies》2014,40(2):233-236
Contract cheating is the process whereby students auction off the opportunity for others to complete assignments for them. It is an apparently widespread yet under-researched problem. One suggested strategy to prevent contract cheating is to shorten the turnaround time between the release of assignment details and the submission date, thus making it difficult for students to make arrangements with contractors. Here, we outline some characteristics of the current market for contract cheating and demonstrate that short turnaround times are unlikely to prevent contract cheating because requested turnaround times for university-level assignments completed via contract cheating are already short (average 5?days). In addition, for every contractor awarded a job, there are an average of 10 others offering to complete it within the specified time suggesting that there is abundant excess capacity in the market. 相似文献