Evaluating an electronic plagiarism detection service: The importance of trust and the difficulty of proving students don't cheat

Evans, Robert John ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7034-5122 2006. Evaluating an electronic plagiarism detection service: The importance of trust and the difficulty of proving students don't cheat. Active Learning in Higher Education 7 (1) , pp. 87-99. 10.1177/1469787406061150

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Plagiarism by students is seen as an increasing problem. The fear is that students will use the internet to obtain analysis, interpretation or even complete assignments and then submit these as their own work. Electronic plagiarism detection services may help to prevent such unfair practice but, in doing so, they create a new problem: certifying the absence of plagiarism. This article reports the results of an evaluation of one such service within an interdisciplinary school of social sciences. The article describes how the system works and the experiences of staff and students in using the service, together with an evaluation of the data generated. The key findings are that the service did identify examples of poor scholarship and unfair practice that had been missed under the usual marking system but that rigorously checking every script for plagiarism was impractical. Trust and student honesty thus remain central to a successful academic system.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Centre for the Study of Knowledge Expertise and Science (KES) Social Sciences (Includes Criminology and Education)
Subjects:	B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BJ Ethics H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General) L Education > LB Theory and practice of education > LB2300 Higher Education
Uncontrolled Keywords:	cut and paste culture; electronic plagiarism detection service; plagiarism; trust
Publisher:	SAGE Publications
ISSN:	1469-7874
Last Modified:	25 Oct 2022 08:39
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/53870

Citation Data

Cited 30 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item