Student proposals to prevent academic plagiarism

  1. Violeta Cebrián-Robles 1
  2. Manuela Raposo-Rivas 1
  3. Francisco José Ruiz Rey 2
  4. Manuel Cebrián-de-la-Serna 2
  1. 1 Universidade de Vigo
    info

    Universidade de Vigo

    Vigo, España

    ROR https://ror.org/05rdf8595

  2. 2 Universidad de Málaga
    info

    Universidad de Málaga

    Málaga, España

    ROR https://ror.org/036b2ww28

Revista:
IJERI: International journal of Educational Research and Innovation

ISSN: 2386-4303

Ano de publicación: 2021

Número: 16

Páxinas: 223-235

Tipo: Artigo

DOI: 10.46661/IJERI.6154 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso aberto editor

Outras publicacións en: IJERI: International journal of Educational Research and Innovation

Resumo

The digital transformation of the production of works in the university world offers us many advantages as well as obligatory precautions in the institutions to avoid dishonest practices. There are many studies in the literature on academic plagiarism, but on few occasions those most interested in the solution are asked, such as the students themselves, the vast majority of whom obtain their degrees through hard work and who are most affected by these bad practices. The research design was non-experimental of cross-sectional type with a questionnaire and reliability of Cronbach's Alpha 0.775, obtaining data from 823 students from 10 institutions and 3 different Latin American countries on the solutions they see as most effective, their knowledge of the preventive measures of their institutions and how competent they see themselves at an individual level to avoid it. The research design analyzes quantitative and qualitative data... The students' main solutions consist of three types, a formative preventive first, a punitive second and a totally lax third. Showing higher self-perception in terms of competence to deal with plagiarism in higher grades.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Adam, L., Anderson, V., & Spronken-Smith, R. (2017). “It”s not fair’: policy discourses and students’ understandings of plagiarism in a New Zealand university. Higher Education, 74(1), 17–32. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10734-016-0025-9
  • Amiri, F., & Razmjoo, S. A. (2016). On Iranian EFL Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Plagiarism. Journal of Academic Ethics, 14(2), 115–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-015-9245-3
  • Bretag, T. (Ed.). (2016). Handbook of Academic Integrity. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-098-8
  • Cabero-Almenara, J., Guillén-Gámez, F.F., Ruiz-Palmero, J. & Palacios-Rodríguez, A.,. (2021). Digital competence of higher education professor according to DigCompEdu. Statistical research methods with ANOVA between fields of knowledge in different age ranges. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10476-5
  • Carretero, S., Vuorikari, V. And Punie, Y. (2018). DigComp 2.1: the digital competence framework for citizens with eight proficiency levels and examples of use. EU. https://op.europa.eu/s/pDOB
  • Cebrián-Robles, V., & Raposo-Rivas M y Sarmiento-Campos J. (2016). ¿Ética o prácticas deshonestas? El plagio en las titulaciones de Educación. Revista Educación, 374, 161–182. https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2016-374-330
  • Cebrián-Robles, V., Raposo-Rivas, M., Cebrián-de-la-Serna, M., & Sarmiento-Campos, J. A. (2018). Percepción sobre el plagio académico de estudiantes universitarios españoles. Educación XX1, 21(2). https://doi.org/10.5944/educxx1.20062
  • Comas-Forgas, R., & Sureda-Negre, J. (2010). Academic Plagiarism: Explanatory Factors from Students’ Perspective. Journal of Academic Ethics, 8(3), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-010-9121-0
  • Ehrich, J., Howard, S. J., Mu, C., & Bokosmaty, S. (2014). A comparison of Chinese and Australian university students’ attitudes towards plagiarism. Studies in Higher Education, 0(0), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.927850
  • Gallego-Arrufat, M.-J., Torres-Hernández, N., & Pessoa, T. (2019). Competencia de futuros docentes en el área de seguridad digital. Comunicar: Revista Científica de Comunicación y Educación, 27(61), 57–67. https://doi.org/10.3916/C61-2019-05
  • Gasparyan, A. Y., Nurmashev, B., Seksenbayev, B., Trukhachev, V. I., Kostyukova, E. I., & Kitas, G. D. (2017). Plagiarism in the Context of Education and Evolving Detection Strategies. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 32(8), 1220–1227. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2017.32.8.1220
  • Kaktiņš, L. (2018). Contract cheating advertisements: what they tell us about international students’ attitudes to academic integrity. Ethics and Education, 13(2), 268–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449642.2017.1412178
  • López-Puga, J. (2014). Análisis y reducción del plagio en la universidad. European Journal of Education and Psychology, 7(2), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.30552/ejep.v7i2.102
  • Redecker, C. (2017). Marco europeo para la competencia digital de los educadores. DigCompEdu. Comisión Europea. https://acortar.link/wU3qRH
  • Sureda-Negre, J., Comas-Forgas, R., & Oliver-Trobat, M.-F. (2015). Plagio académico entre alumnado de secundaria y bachillerato: Diferencias en cuanto al género y la procrastinación. Comunicar, 22(44), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.3916/C44-2015-11
  • Sureda-Negre, J., Cerdá-Navarro, A., Calvo-Sastre, A. y Comas-Forgas, R., (2019). Las conductas fraudulentas del alumnado universitario español en las evaluaciones: valoración de su gravedad y propuestas de sanciones a partir de un panel de expertos. Revista de Investigación Educativa, vol. 38, núm. 1, pp. 201–219. http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/rie.358781
  • Walker, C., & White, M. (2014). Police, design, plan and manage: developing a framework for integrating staff roles and institutional policies into a plagiarism prevention strategy. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 36(6), 674–687. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2014.957895
  • Zrnec, A., & Lavbič, D. (2017). Social network aided plagiarism detection. British Journal of Educational Technology: Journal of the Council for Educational Technology, 48(1), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12345
Fonte de datos: Dialnet