Academic Dishonesty – Annotated Bibliography

Adam, L. R. (2015). Understanding the connection among impulsiveness, personal efficacy, and academic motivation to college cheating. College Student Journal, 50(5), 110-139.

The paper elaborates on a study that involved undergraduate students that aimed at discovering personal features that would have a potential correlation with cheating. The investigation attempted to evaluate self-control vs. impulsiveness among people as they accomplished their goals. The results of the study indicated that the more students engaged in behaviors of academic dishonesty, the more they were likely to view it as a normal and positive behavior.

Chapman, N. (2013). Practical approaches to decrease dishonesty in online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 11(7), 188-215.

The author aimed at elaborating on the methods that can help in reducing cases of student cheating especially in online courses. The four practical approaches that were suggested are: a) modify the process that students use to turn in their written assignments; b) ensure distant students get the information; c) establishment of non-consecutive chapter assortment of queries; and d) change the process of administering exams.

Collins, S., & Byron, J. (2015). Academic integrity in web based distance education. TechTrends, 29(9), 39-51.

The article elaborates on the cheating frequencies both in traditional as well as online classes and presents suggestions for preventing academic dishonesty. Some of the suggested strategies include open book assessments, and use of essay questions instead of multiple choice formats. The author, also, suggested the use of project as a form assessment to help students relate the subject with their life experiences.

Dan, S. (2012). Turnitin: the student perspective on using plagiarism detection software. Active Learning in Higher Education, 10(9), 165-191.

The authors examined the views of postgraduate students about the use of a plagiarism software known as Turnitin. According to the study, the students showed positive views in regard to their experiences with Turnitin. Besides, 80% of them preferred getting their feedback via Turnitin.

Daniel S., & Kennedy, K. (2012). Academic dishonesty and distance learning: students and faculty views. College Student Journal, 30(3), 200-215.

The researchers examined the views of faculties and students regarding the relationship that exists between distance learning and cheating. In the study, various issues were highlighted such as methodology, rate and form of cheating. A few questionnaires were availed to both the faculty and the students. The findings of the study indicated that female and male members of the faculty who had been actively involved in teaching online courses gave 50-50% opinion regarding whether delivery of courses via electronic means was the reason for the increased academic dishonesty. The results indicate that there was little variation in the perception of the faculty and students. However, both agree that students can cheat with much ease in online classes.

David, D., & Kenneth, C. (2013). Plagiarism by adult learners online: a case study in detection and remediation. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(3), 11-19.

This research particularly focused on the degree of internet plagiarism as considered in five provinces of virtual or distance learning in the period starting from July 2003 to June to 2004. The authors were interested in presenting the results about survey of the prevalence, detection and remediation of plagiarism among adult online students. The main focus was on word-for-word copying of the work of another author, and plagiarism that arises from copy-and-paste scenarios. According to the findings of the study, coping from internet resources is the main plagiarism type that many students could have the tendency of involvement.

Frank, A. (2013). New systems keep a close eye on online students at home. The Education Digest, 79(9), 59-80.

This article elaborates on the new technologies that a few colleges and universities have tried to implement as ways of preventing the likelihood of cheating in online setting. Some of the measures being implemented include advanced technologies such as web cameras for recording students as they take exams, devices for identifying fingerprints to identify the identity of the user, and typing speed recognition software. The study indicates that most of these colleges and universities have reluctant to embrace these technologies of their high cost.

Gabriel, B. J., & Braumoeller, B. (2013). Actions do speak louder than words: deterring plagiarism with the use of plagiarism detection software: Political Science and Politics, 29(9), 830-853.

The article was presented by two university professors teaching in different universities who jointly undertook a plagiarism study that involved political science students. During their investigation, the researchers used Essay Verification Engine (EVE) to detect plagiarism instances. Their experience with the software indicated that EVE was not accurate at identifying the percentage of plagiarism present in a paper.

Harrison, S., Wiseley, P., & Stuber-McEwen, D. (2014). Point, click, and cheat: frequency and type of academic dishonesty in the virtual classroom. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 11(2).

In this article, the author aimed at exploring the regularity of academic dishonesty that were self-reported in a virtual classroom environment. Besides, the study, also, examined the various forms of cheating in traditional and online classes in order to compare the situation in both environments. The findings indicated that students learning in traditional classes were more attempted to cheating than those involved in online courses.

Kenneth, J., Nowell, C., & Grijalva, T. (2012). Academic honesty and online courses. College Student Journal, 45(6), 145-155.

The authors utilized a random response information methodological approach to test the similarity between the college students’ attributes who like cheating in the traditional classroom environment and college students’ attributes who have a liking for cheating in online classes. The findings of the study indicated that the both settings of learning lacked significant difference as pertains cheating prevalence in traditional vs. online classes.

Lawrence J., & Harmon, O. (2012). Are online exams and invitation to cheat? The Journal of Economic Education, 41(7), 99-111.

The data that the authors used in this study came from two distance learning or online courses in economic field to approximate an approach that can help in predicting examination scores from student characteristics’ independent variables. The researchers did not proctor the final exam in one course while in the other course, they proctored the final exam. The results of the study generally indicated that administering online exams in an environment that is proctored may assist in addressing issues surrounding academic dishonesty in the case of online courses.

Lupton, R., Bronson, E., Apgar, C. (2012). Creating a campus culture of integrity: comparing the perspective of full and part-time faculty. Journal of Higher Education, 77(6), 123-150.

Authors in this study were interested in investigating the roles that part-time and full faculty have in establishing a culture of integrity in the campus. Post-hoc Chi-square analysis was combined with analysis of variance (ANOVA) to investigate relationship between students, both faculty, part-time and full-time. The findings of the study indicated that both faculties were less likely than students to exercise lenience in their views towards certain behaviors.

Malcolm, J., & Muhammad, S. (2012). Embedding plagiarism detection in the assessment process. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 12(10), 30-49.

The article was interested in examining the application of program for plagiarism detection technology as a formative assessment and evaluation to minimize plagiarism instances in students’ written assignments. The study conclusively indicates that software tools are essential tools for formative assessments especially where students are able to obtain feedback.

Martin, A., & Mian, S. (2013). Internet plagiarism: A teacher’s combat guide. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education 1(3), 49-86.

This article elaborates on the meaning of plagiarism, pinpoints the major indications of plagiarism and many essential approaches that can be embraced to prevent plagiarism. The authors identify various steps to follow while evaluating the work of a student for plagiarism such as paper writing using paste approach, alterations in formatting styles and writing patterns. The authors, also, elaborate on some of the services for plagiarism detection, which are available for commercial use although they do not provide much details about challenges that arise from using such services.

Peter, A. (2013). Student dishonesty and faculty responsibility. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(5), 255-265.

This article focusses on the mechanisms and causes that allow existence of academic dishonesty in an academic environment. The arguments that the author considers encompass deliberate ignorance of academic dishonesty as it occurs, normative expectations, consequentialism position, and unavoidable action. The arguments of the author collectively indicate that the faculty that permits dishonesty should take moral responsibility for the actions of the students.

Robert, N. (2014). Cheating in online student assessment: beyond plagiarism. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 9(5), 22-33.

The article particularly focusses on ways of preventing plagiarism while less consideration was given to various other issues that associate with academic dishonesty in regard to online assessment. The author dwelled on the forms of problems that are likely to occur and the strategies that educators should embrace to avoid them.

Samuel, J., & Watson, G. (2011). Cheating in a digital age: do students cheat more in online courses? Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12(1).

In this article, investigators studied the academic dishonesty level that prevails both in online and live course. The study involved 635 graduate and undergraduate students studying in Appalachia who provided the information. The instrument that was used in the study (Academic Dishonesty Assessment) aimed at determining the particular behaviors of dishonesty students knew about in reference to online and face-to-face courses. The most interesting outcome in the study was that most students admitted to having found cheating in usual classroom environment as compared to online situations.

Simon, M. (2012). Perceptions of academic honesty in online vs. face-to-face classrooms. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 7(5), 180-186.

The article focused on two main research questions: 1) are there any differences in perceptions of other student’ behavior regarding the course type between traditional classroom and online approach? ; and 2) are there any variations in the views of students’ integrity regarding their personal behavior in reference to course type? The findings for the two research questions; however, did not to show any substantial variation between learners registered in traditional vs. online courses in regard to academic dishonesty.

Stephen, A. (2014). Confronting plagiarism: how conventional cheating invites cyber-cheating. Change, 35(3), 11-20.

The article discusses the significance of a paradigm shift regarding teaching and learning as a way of preventing plagiarism in the current world. The author emphasizes the need for a guided, interactive and hands-on process that involves the instructor taking an active role of guiding students through research. Furthermore, the author highlights plagiarism prevention strategies, which are essentially developing the writing and research skills of students and diminish most of the incentives that lure students into teaching. The article, also, advocates for adoption of conventional teaching methods by instructors as a way of sealing loopholes that encourage plagiarism.

Wycliffe, S. (2013). Contemporary strategies of teaching. International Journal of Educational management 12(1), 215-238.

In this article, the researcher points out various fundamental approaches of teaching that can assist in encouraging academic honesty in a learning environment: 1) continuously observing the work of students; 2) creating a culture of honesty; 3) one-on-one discussion with leaners about their work; and 4) continuous review of their work. The article is essential in the sense that it provides information about pedagogical approaches in a classroom environment to prevent the likelihood of cheating by students. The guidelines enable creation of an environment that will have students less motivated to cheat.

Share with your friends

Liked this paper? Hire one of our writers to write a unique hiqh quality for you! Order Unique Answer Now

Leave a Reply