Guilty In Whose Eyes?

The Chasm Between Student and Faculty Perceptions of Academic Dishonesty:
Strategies to Bridge the Gap


©2004 DavidJulian.com*

10 AM – 3 PM
Friday, April 29, 2005
Johnson Community Room
Eastern Connecticut State University

Co-sponsored by the Center for Educational Excellence and the Academic Affairs Committee
Eastern Connecticut State University

While academic dishonesty has long been an issue for academe, our 21st Century electronic environment has made it very easy for students to succumb to plagiarism and more difficult than ever for faculty to prevent and detect. Even when we suspect that a student has submitted a plagiarized paper, how do we “prove” the plagiarism and what are the consequences of academic dishonesty? Research by Donald McCabe, The Center for Academic Integrity at Rutgers, demonstrates that promoting a culture of academic integrity on campus can reduce the plagiarism epidemic. This program will focus on bridging the gap between faculty and student perceptions as well as what is required to build a culture of academic integrity.

Using sample student analyses of online paper mill web sites, student survey responses, and existing scholarship on plagiarism, authorship, and intellectual property, Kelly Ritter, Associate Professor of English and Composition Program Coordinator, Southern Connecticut State University, will examine how the consumerist rhetoric of the online paper mills construes academic writing as a commodity for sale, and why such rhetoric appeals to students, whose cultural disconnect from the academic system of authorship increasingly leads them to patronize these sites. Ritter will also address how faculty course design and student-professor interaction can mitigate this dilemma.

Susan Herzog, Information Literacy Librarian, Eastern Connecticut State University, will demonstrate Turnitin, the industry leader in anti-plagiarism software, and examine its pros and cons. Herzog will also preview a web page for the program which will provide useful resources for all who attend.

Marie T. Saddlemire, Doctor of Philosophy Candidate in Higher Education Administration, Bowling Green State University, will summarize the results of a qualitative research initiative involving faculty participants from a mid-sized, public university. The faculty shared information about their knowledge of, personal and professional experiences with, and communication about academic dishonesty. Analysis led to the emergence of four major themes: the definition and nature of academic dishonesty, shaping influences, values and beliefs, and proactive and reactive responses to academic dishonesty. The results indicated that faculty perceptions and decision-making are strongly influenced by their personal value systems. Emphasis will be placed on the role that faculty socialization plays in faculty understanding of, and response to, issues related to academic dishonesty. Implications for practice will be discussed, including the ways in which faculty can be authentic while responding consistently to cheating incidents.

Handouts

Bibliography on Plagiarism, Cheating & Academic Integrity
Susan Herzog
Information Literacy Librarian
Eastern Connecticut State University

The Economics of Authorship: Online Paper Mills, Student Writers, and First-Year Composition
Dr. Kelly Ritter
Southern Connecticut State University
Associate Professor of English
Composition Program Coordinator

PowerPoints

Faculty Perceptions of Undergraduate Academic Dishonesty
Marie Saddlemire
Doctor of Philosophy Candidate in Higher Education Administration
Bowling Green State University

Turnitin Pros & Cons
Susan Herzog
Information Literacy Librarian
Eastern Connecticut State University

Web Resources

Bedford/St. Martins Technotes
Nick Carbone
Director of New Media
Bedford/St. Martin's

The Center for Academic Integrity

The Chronicle of Higher Education

Plagiarism

Defining and Avoiding Plagiarism: The WPA Statement on Best Practices
Council of Writing Program Administrators, January, 2003
"This statement responds to the growing educational concerns about plagiarism in four ways: by defining plagiarism; by suggesting some of the causes of plagiarism; by proposing a set of respon­sibilities (for students, teachers, and administrators) to address the problem of plagiarism; and by recommending a set of practices for teaching and learning that can significantly reduce the likeli­hood of plagiarism. The statement is intended to provide helpful suggestions and clarifications so that instructors, administrators, and students can work together more effectively in support of excellence in teaching and learning."

Plagiarism: A Guide for ECSU Students & Faculty
Susan Herzog
Information Literacy Librarian
Eastern Connecticut State University

Purdue University Online Writing Lab

Turnitin

Combating Plagiarism
CQ Researcher
September 19, 2003
Volume 13, Number 32
Includes "Should Educators Use Commercial Services to Combat Plagiarism": Yes by John Barrie, President, Turnitin.com and No by Rebecca Moore Howard, Associate Professore of Writing and Rhetoric, Syracuse University.

Cornell & Turnitin

Turnitin.com at IUPUI

Plagiarism: Policy Against Cheating Or Policy For Learning?
By Brian Martin
School of Social Sciences, Media and Communication, University of Wollongong, NSW
"Compulsory use of plagiarism-detection software, specifically turnitin.com, is proposed for introduction at the University of Wollongong in 2004. The pros and cons of this are canvassed. ...Using plagiarism-detection software can readily pinpoint only word-for-word plagiarism, and only some instances of it. There are four main rationales for using plagiarism-detection software: deterring and detecting cheating; fostering learning of proper acknowledgement practice; building
institutional reputation; and treating students fairly. None of these provides a strong case for
compulsory use of the software. There are some serious negative effects of compulsory
checking, especially reduced trust.
Plagiarism-detection software potentially can play a valuable contribution if it is used voluntarily by students, on a case-by-case basis by teachers and as part of a wider process of learning proper acknowledgement practice."

Student Wins Battle Against Plagiarism-Detection Requirement
By Emanuella Grinberg
Court TV
January 21, 2004
CNN.com Law Center

Turnitin.com
Meggan Clark
Regional Sales Manager
Higher Education - Eastern Division
iParadigms, LLC - developers of Turnitin
1624 Franklin Street, 7th Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
P:510-287-9720 x223
F:510-444-1952

"The Web's Plagiarism Police"
An online service claims it can identify purloined papers. So why'd it nail my thesis?
By Andy Dehnart
Salon
June 14, 1999

* Used with artist's permission.

Page created and maintained by Susan Herzog, Eastern Connecticut State University.
Last update: 4/29/05. Broken links or suggestions? Please
e-mail Susan.