El impacto del diseño de actividades en el plagio de Internet en educación superior

  1. Gómez-Espinosa, María 1
  2. Francisco, Virginia 2
  3. Moreno-Ger, Pablo 2
  1. 1 Universidad Internacional de La Rioja
    info

    Universidad Internacional de La Rioja

    Logroño, España

    ROR https://ror.org/029gnnp81

  2. 2 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

Journal:
Comunicar: Revista Científica de Comunicación y Educación

ISSN: 1134-3478

Year of publication: 2016

Issue Title: Ética y plagio en la comunicación científica

Issue: 48

Pages: 39-48

Type: Article

DOI: 10.3916/C48-2016-04 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Comunicar: Revista Científica de Comunicación y Educación

Abstract

In this work we aim to gain a better understanding of the nature of plagiarism in Higher Education. We analyse a set of different activities in an online university-level course, aiming to understand which tasks lead more naturally to plagiarism. This analysis concludes that the activities that have a lower rate of plagiarism are activities that encourage involvement, originality and creativity. Subsequently, we reformulate the task that presented the highest rate of plagiarism, taking into account the conclusions of the previous analysis and trying to maintain their relative effort and educational impact. We then compare the newly designed activities with their original counterparts to measure whether there is a significant reduction in plagiarism. The results are clear and show a significant drop in the percentages of plagiarism. In addition, we performed an additional validation to ensure that both groups were, in fact comparable. We found that both groups displayed similar plagiarism attitudes in other exercises that were not reformulated. This study shows that it is possible to reduce the incidence of plagiarism by designing activities in such a way that prompts students to propose their own ideas using information available on the Internet as a vehicle for their solutions rather than as solutions in themselves.

Bibliographic References

  • Ashworth, P., Bannister, P., & Thorne, P. (1997). Guilty in whose Eyes? University Students’ Perceptions of Cheating and Plagiarism in Academic Work and Assessment. Studies in Higher Education, 22(2), 187-203. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079712331381034
  • Atkins, T., & Nelson, G. (2001). Plagiarism and the Internet: Turning the Tables. English Journal, 90(4), 101-104. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/821911
  • Bretag, T. (2013). Challenges in Addressing Plagiarism in Education. PLoS. Medicine, 10(12), e1001574. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602930301677
  • Chen, Y. & Chou, C. (2014). Why and Who Agree on Copy-and-Paste? Taiwan College Students’ Perceptions of Cyber-Plagiarism. In J. Viteli, & M. Leikomaa (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2014 (pp. 937-943). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). (https://goo.gl/Zo4q5e) (2016-08-03).
  • Clegg, S., & Flint, A. (2006). More Heat than Light: Plagiarism in its Appearing. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27(3), 373-387. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01425690600750585
  • Comas, R., Sureda, J., & Oliver, M. (2011). Prácticas de citación y plagio académico en la elaboración textual del alumnado universitario. Teoría de la Educación: Educación y Cultura en la Sociedad de la Información, 12 (1), 359-385. (http://goo.gl/Xl9JMX) (2016-08-03).
  • Culwin, F., & Lancaster, T. (2001). Plagiarism Issues for Higher Education. VINE, 31(2), 36-41. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03055720010804005
  • DeVoss, D., & Rosati, A.C. (2002). It wasn’t me, was it? Plagiarism and the Web. Computers and Composition, 19(2), 191-203. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S8755-4615(02)00112-3
  • Eddy, M. (2013). German Politician Faces Plagiarism Accusations. The New York Times. (http://goo.gl/GTDUju) (2016-08-03).
  • Ellery, K. (2008). Undergraduate Plagiarism: a Pedagogical Perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 507-516. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602930701698918
  • Eret, E., & Gokmenoglu, T. (2010). Plagiarism in Higher Education: A Case Study with Prospective Academicians. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3.303-3.307. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.505
  • Eret, E., & Ok, A. (2014). Internet Plagiarism in Higher Education: Tendencies, Triggering Factors and Reasons among Teacher Candidates. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(8), 1.002-1.016. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.880776
  • Gómez, J., Salazar, I., & Vargas, P. (2012). Factors Explaining Student Plagiarism: an Empirical Test in a Spanish University, ICERI2012 Proceedings, 2.724-2.730.
  • Hart, M., & Friesner, T. (2004). Plagiarism and Poor Academic Practice – A Threat to the Extension of e-learning in Higher Education. Electronic Journal on E-Learning, 2(1), 89-96. (http://goo.gl/zqu78L) (2016-01-08)
  • Heckler, N., & Forde, D. (2015). The Role of Cultural Values in Plagiarism in Higher Education. Journal of Academic Ethics, 13(1), 61-75. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10805-014-9221-3
  • Hussein, N., Rusdi, S.D., & Mohamad, S.S. (2016). Academic Dishonesty among Business Students: A Descriptive Study of Plagiarism Behavior. In Y.C. Fook, K.G. Sidhu, S. Narasuman, L.L. Fong, & B.S. Abdul-Rahman (Eds.), 7th International Conference on University Learning and Teaching (InCULT 2014) Post-Proceedings: Educate to Innovate (pp. 639-648). Springer Singapore. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-664-5_50
  • Kauffman, Y., & Young, M.F. (2015). Digital Plagiarism: An Experimental Study of the Effect of Instructional Goals and Copy-and-Paste Affordance. Computers & Education, 83, 44-56. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.12.016
  • Moore, R. (2007). Understanding ‘Internet Plagiarism’. Computers and Composition, 24, 3-15. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2006.12.005
  • Newton, P. (2015). Academic Integrity: a Quantitative Study of Confidence and Understanding in Students at the Start of their Higher Education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1-16. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1024199
  • Perry, B. (2010). Exploring Academic Misconduct: Some Insights into Student Behaviour. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(2), 97-108. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1469787410365657
  • Six Degres (2008). Los usos de Internet en la educación superior: ‘De la documentación al plagio’. Survey by Six Dregres, Compilatio.net and Sphinx Development. (http://goo.gl/avllYX) (2016-08-03).
  • Sureda, J., Comas, R., & Oliver, M.F. (2015). Academic Plagiarism among Secondary and High School Students: Differences in Gender and Procrastination. [Plagio académico entre alumnado de Secundaria y Bachillerato: diferencias en cuanto al género y la procrastinación]. Comunicar, 22(44), 103-111. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3916/C44-2015-11
  • Vallejo, M. (2011). Trabajos escritos: el problema del plagio. Escribir para aprender, tareas para hacer en casa. Guatemala: Universidad Rafael Landívar. (http://goo.gl/lfTRzf) (2016-08-03).
  • Walker, J. (2010). Measuring Plagiarism: Researching what Students do, not what they Say they do. Studies in Higher Education, 35(1), 41-59. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075070902912994
Data source: Dialnet