Contract cheating and blackmail: a risky business?

Yorke, Jonathan; Sefcik, Lesley; Veeran-Colton, Terisha

doi:10.1080/03075079.2020.1730313

Cited by 55 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 13 , 17 , 20 At the beginning of the course, they were required to complete the university's mandatory academic integrity program. 21 They learnt from this program that the cheating is an unethical behaviour and it may have potential consequences. For example, the contract cheating providers can blackmail them.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of academic integrity of online open book assessments implemented in an undergraduate medical radiation science course during COVID-19 pandemic

2020

Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Online open book assessment has been a common alternative to a traditional invigilated test or examination during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, its unsupervised nature increases ease of cheating, which is an academic integrity concern. This study's purpose was to evaluate the integrity of two online open book assessments with different formats (1. Tightly time restricted - 50 min for mid-semester and 2. Take home - any 4 h within a 24-h window for end of semester) implemented in a radiologic pathology unit of a Bachelor of Science (Medical Radiation Science) course during the pandemic. Methods This was a retrospective study involving a review and analysis of existing information related to the integrity of the two radiologic pathology assessments. Three integrity evaluation approaches were employed. The first approach was to review all the Turnitin plagiarism detection software reports with use of ‘seven-words-in-a-row’ criterion to identify any potential collusion. The second approach was to search for highly irrelevant assessment answers during marking for detection of other cheating types. Examples of highly irrelevant answers included those not addressing question requirements and stating patients' clinical information not from given patient histories. The third approach was an assessment score statistical analysis through descriptive and inferential statistics to identify any abnormal patterns that might suggest cheating occurred. An abnormal pattern example was high assessment scores. The descriptive statistics used were minimum, maximum, range, first quartile, median, third quartile, interquartile range, mean, standard deviation, fail and full mark rates. T-test was employed to compare mean scores between the two assessments in this year (2020), between the two assessments in the last year (2019), between the two mid-semester assessments in 2019 and 2020, and between this and last years' end of semester assessments. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results No cheating evidence was found in all Turnitin reports and assessment answers. The mean scores of the end of semester assessments in 2019 (88.2%) and 2020 (90.9%) were similar (p = 0.098). However, the mean score of the online open book mid-semester assessment in 2020 (62.8%) was statistically significantly lower than that of the traditional invigilated mid-semester assessment in 2019 (71.8%) with p < 0.0001. Conclusion This study shows the use of the online open book assessments with tight time restrictions and the take home formats in the radiologic pathology unit did not have any academic integrity issues. Apparently, the strict assessment time limit played an important role in maintaining their integrity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the contract cheating providers can blackmail them. 4 , 13 , 20 , 21 , 22 Furthermore, they might have concerns about quality of the works completed within 24 h by the cheating providers. 7 Besides, they might not know the cheating approaches for the online open book assessment that were hard to be detected.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of academic integrity of online open book assessments implemented in an undergraduate medical radiation science course during COVID-19 pandemic

2020

Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If contract cheating opportunities are growing as a result of Covid-19, there are other risks to consider. Yorke et al (2020) have warned how students are at risk of blackmail, both during their course and following its completion. They have also shown that most students are unaware of the risks of using contract cheating providers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contract cheating by STEM students through a file sharing website: a Covid-19 pandemic perspective

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Students are using file sharing sites to breach academic integrity in light of the Covid-19 pandemic. This paper analyses the use of one such site, Chegg, which offers “homework help” and other academic services to students. Chegg is often presented as a file sharing site in the academic literature, but that is just one of many ways in which it can be used. As this paper demonstrates, Chegg can and is used for contract cheating This is despite the apparent existence of an Honour Code on Chegg which asks students not to breach academic integrity. With pandemic led safety considerations leading to increased online teaching and assessment, the paper analyses data relating to how Chegg is used by students in five STEM subjects, namely Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Physics and Chemistry. The results show that students are using Chegg to request exam style questions. They demonstrate that contract cheating requests can be put live and answered within the short duration of an examination. The number of student requests posted for these five subjects increased by 196.25% comparing the time period April 2019 to August 2019 with the period April 2020 to August 2020. This increase corresponds with the time when many courses moved to be delivered and assessed online. The growing number of requests indicates that students are using Chegg for assessment and exam help frequently and in a way that is not considered permissible by universities. The paper concludes by recommending that academic institutions put interventions in place to minimise the risk to educational standards posed by sites such as Chegg, particularly since increased online teaching and assessment may continue after the pandemic.

show abstract

“…The essay mill has the student's contact details and can continue to market to them. Students can be required to continue to buy or they risk being blackmailed, an area which most students appear unaware of (Yorke et al 2020). Writers disgruntled with the essay mill they work for can often figure out student contact details and their institution and may try and extort money from them directly or inform the educational institution of their impropriety.…”

Section: The Operation Of a Typical Essay Millmentioning

confidence: 99%

Essay mills and other contract cheating services: to buy or not to buy and the consequences of students changing their minds

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Very few parts of the world have legislation that prohibits the operation or the promotion of contract cheating services. This means that commercial companies providing such services can formally register and operate in most countries. If a student enters into an agreement with a contract cheating provider, what rights do they have to change their mind and what are the risks if they choose to do so? This paper examines the question through legal, institutional and societal lenses, showing that although a student has the consumer rights to withdraw from a contract with an essay mill, they may also be putting their future at risk by doing so. Contract cheating providers are now embedded within many institutions, using sharp practices to connect with vulnerable customers, but are also perfectly placed to blackmail students or threaten to report them to their institution if they ask to cancel their order. The paper argues that, while not condoning the practice of contract cheating, supportive processes need to be in place to help students at risk as part of standard institutional duty of care. This must be backed up by institutional policy that considers academic integrity as a core value for all.

show abstract

Contract cheating and blackmail: a risky business?

Cited by 55 publications

References 25 publications

Evaluation of academic integrity of online open book assessments implemented in an undergraduate medical radiation science course during COVID-19 pandemic

Evaluation of academic integrity of online open book assessments implemented in an undergraduate medical radiation science course during COVID-19 pandemic

Contract cheating by STEM students through a file sharing website: a Covid-19 pandemic perspective

Essay mills and other contract cheating services: to buy or not to buy and the consequences of students changing their minds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About