Two first-year students’ strategies for writing from sources: Patchwriting or plagiarism?

Li, Yongyan; Casanave, Christine Pearson

doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2012.03.002

Cited by 134 publications

(110 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is in line with the findings of research done in other EFL/ESL contexts (e.g. Howard et al 2010, Li and Casanave 2012, Liao and Tseng 2010, Pecorari 2003. Excellent plagiarism definitions were provided, such as the following:…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…Publications that emerge from contexts other than the North-American one underline the need to explore local scenarios as culture and the immediate educational setting may change the way plagiarism is viewed and practiced. Studies also point out that the mere knowledge of the plagiarism policies does not help student in avoiding pitfalls of intentional or unintentional plagiarism, often due to paraphrasing problems that need time and practice to improve (Pecorari 2003, Howard et al 2010, Liao and Tseng 2010, Li and Casanave 2012.…”

Section: Plagiarism Angles − Causes Ways and The Efl Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why Do Students Plagiarize? Efl Undergraduates’ Views on the Reasons Behind Plagiarism

Doró

2014

Romanian Journal of English Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Plagiarism Angles − Causes Ways and The Efl Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Do Students Plagiarize? Efl Undergraduates’ Views on the Reasons Behind Plagiarism

Doró

2014

Romanian Journal of English Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…1 and 2 appear more like patchwriting rather than paraphrasing. Li and Casanave (2012) argue that patchwriting is an indication that the student is a novice writer still learning how to write and understand the "complexities of appropriate textual borrowing" (Li & Casanave, 2012, p.177) although their study was confined to L2 students submitting assessment material in English. They further argue that deeming text as patchwriting does not attract the same negative connotations of plagiarism nor would it attract the same penalties.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Internet based paraphrasing tools: Original work, patchwriting or facilitated plagiarism?

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A casual comment by a student alerted the authors to the existence and prevalence of Internet-based paraphrasing tools. A subsequent quick Google search highlighted the broad range and availability of online paraphrasing tools which offer free 'services' to paraphrase large sections of text ranging from sentences, paragraphs, whole articles, book chapters or previously written assignments. The ease of access to online paraphrasing tools provides the potential for students to submit work they have not directly written themselves, or in the case of academics and other authors, to rewrite previously published materials to sidestep self-plagiarism. Students placing trust in online paraphrasing tools as an easy way of complying with the requirement for originality in submissions are at risk in terms of the quality of the output generated and possibly of not achieving the learning outcomes as they may not fully understand the information they have compiled. There are further risks relating to the legitimacy of the outputs in terms of academic integrity and plagiarism. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the existence, development, use and detection of use of Internet based paraphrasing tools. To demonstrate the dangers in using paraphrasing tools an experiment was conducted using some easily accessible Internet-based paraphrasing tools to process part of an existing publication. Two sites are compared to demonstrate the types of differences that exist in the quality of the output from certain paraphrasing algorithms, and the present poor performance of online originality checking services such as Turnitin® to identify and link material processed via machine based paraphrasing tools. The implications for student skills in paraphrasing, academic integrity and the clues to assist staff in identifying the use of online paraphrasing tools are discussed.

show abstract

“…(The Hong Kong Polytechnic University: About plagiarism and how to avoid it: Hot tips for PolyU students, 2008, p. 2 in Li & Casanave, 2012): "Plagiarism is passing off someone else's work or ideas as your own to gain some benefit. For students, 'benefit' may mean trying to get a better grade or mark, or meeting a deadline so marks are not lost.…”

Section: Simple Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Unethical Behavior of the Students of the Czech University of Life Sciences

Dömeová¹,

Jindrová²

2013

IES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cheating can be viewed as a major educational problem with a broad social concern. The unethical behaviour of students can crucially influence their qualification, future employment and manners in their professional carrier. The contribution investigates the unethical behaviour of the students of the University of Life Sciences in Prague. The goal is to examine if the students would act unethically in an examination tests and in proceeding their assignments. The inquiry investigation based on self-assessments confirmed that the unethical behaviour is quite frequent, more frequent is the exam cheating. The responders do not feel that their behaviour is immoral, they are rather afraid of penalization. The reaction of the teachers and the university is necessary. It is essential to study the reasons of unethical behaviour to apply rectifying measures effectively.Keywords: unethical behaviour, university students, exam cheating behaviours, assignment cheating behaviour IntroductionThe unethical behaviour, exam cheating, and illegal collaboration on assignments including plagiarism are very frequent (Center for Academic Integrity, 1999 ). It is important to deal with the methods and frequency of such behaviour and also with the way it is perceived by the academia.The cheating during the studies leads to the disarray of the goals of the study. The students will not acquire the intended knowledge and skills, further more they adopt inappropriate working methods and immoral attitude to their duties. It is important for lecturers to show students how to establish their own effective learning strategies (Nguyen, 2010).The students continue to apply the improper working procedures in their future jobs what can cause the real economical damages as well as an injury of the employees' reputation (Smith et al., 2002).The students´ attitude to the study influences also the evaluation of the courses, teachers and the whole faculties and universities. It was proved (Jindrová et. al, 2013) that the students with a procrastinating attitude to the study duties are much more critical towards the teachers, the study materials, etc.The university's good name, reputation and competitiveness might be influenced as well. If the unethical behaviour is not systematically and persistently chased and penalized, the university can gain a reputation of a place where everybody obtains certificate without work. The goal-directed students with good study potential are then not interested in such an institution. Finally, the immoral behaviour of the students harms the work of the teachers and managers of the school.

show abstract

Two first-year students’ strategies for writing from sources: Patchwriting or plagiarism?

Cited by 134 publications

References 35 publications

Why Do Students Plagiarize? Efl Undergraduates’ Views on the Reasons Behind Plagiarism

Why Do Students Plagiarize? Efl Undergraduates’ Views on the Reasons Behind Plagiarism

Using Internet based paraphrasing tools: Original work, patchwriting or facilitated plagiarism?

Unethical Behavior of the Students of the Czech University of Life Sciences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About