International Students and Plagiarism

International Students and Plagiarism: survey findings

Analysis produced for Laura Spilsbury by Heather Watkins, 13 Feb 2014

Introduction

In total, 1749 students completed this online questionnaire into the experiences of international students with issues around plagiarism. Of these, 31 confirmed that they had been subject to an accusation of plagiarism, although several of these had later been found innocent or excused. This analysis draws out some of the main findings from the survey, and each time explores the experiences of those 31 as a sub-set of the main survey. The exceptions are Qs 15-20, which relate solely to the experiences of these 31 students. The main findings and recommendations are then summarised on pp19-22.

Section A: Demographic information

Q1 Stage of study

Out of 1741 respondents:

43.3% were undergraduate students across all stages.

28.2% were postgraduate taught students.

25.2% were postgraduate research students.

56 students gave other answers, mostly stating that they had completed their studies, were doing a Foundation programme, were distance and web-based learners, were exchange students, or were on the CELE course.

This suggests that the survey has captured a good range of experiences from students at different points in their study, and studying via different modes.

Of the 31 who had been accused of plagiarism:

15 (48.4%) were UG intermediate year

4 (12.9%) were UG final year

3 (9.7%) were UG first year

7 (22.6%) were PG taught

2 (6.5%) were PG Research

This is perhaps counter-intuitive, suggesting that it is important not to make assumptions that more advanced students will not experience difficulties in this area.

Q2 Campus

Out of 1749 respondents:

57.7% (1009) were based at University Park

22.7% (397) at Jubilee

7.7% (135) at Sutton Bonington

6.1% (106) at QMC

130 students gave other responses, most of whom (70) were online and distance learning students, a categorisation which can sometimes be forgotten but which may be a key element in communicating with international students. However, the vast majority were based at a UK campus.

Of the 31 who had been accused of plagiarism:

22 (71%) were based at UP

5 (16.1%) at Jubilee

3 (9.7%) at Sutton Bonington

1 (3.2%) at Derby

1(3.2%) said they had no campus, so were presumably distance/online.

Q3Primary department

Answers to this question were spread across every possible department, with the largest percentage being from Nottingham University Business School (10.2%), followed by Education at 6.8% and Biosciences at 6.7%.

Of the 31 students accused of plagiarism:

4 were from Biosciences

4 from Electrical and Electronic Engineering

4 from Mechanical, Materials and Manufacturing Engineering

3 from Nottingham University Business School

3 from Psychology

2 from Architecture & Built Environment

2 from Contemporary Chinese Studies

2 from Film & TV Studies

2 from Pharmacy

1 from Civil Engineering

1 from Economics

1 from Education

1 from English

1 from Health Sciences

These numbers are too small to draw any hard conclusions, however it may suggest that there is a particular need to clarify what constitutes plagiarism for international students in the sciences and engineering disciplines.

Q4 International status

Of 1715 respondents:

72.5% were non-EU international students

25.9% were EU international students.

Of the 31 students accused of plagiarism:

27 (87.1%) were non-EU internationals

4 (12.9%) were EU internationals

This does suggest that concerns about plagiarising are most acute among non-EU international students, although not exclusively so.

Q5 EU origins

Of 443 EU students answering this question, answers were diverse, but the top three home countries were:

12.4% from Germany

10.4% from France

9.7% from Italy

Of the 4 EU internationals who had been accused of plagiarism:

1 was from France

1 was from Cyprus

1 was from Czech Republic

1 did not disclose

Q6 Non-EU origins

Of 1239 students answering this question, again, answers were diverse, but the top three home countries listed were:

22.8% of students were from China

10.7% were from Malaysia

5.5% were from India

Of the 27 non-EU internationals who had been accused of plagiarism:

9 (33%) were from China

5 (18.5%) were from Malaysia

3 (11.1%) were from Hong Kong

3 (11.1%) were from Nigeria

1 (3.7%) was from India

1 (3.7%) was from Pakistan

1 (3.7%) was from Thailand

1 (3.7%) was from UAE

1 (3.7%) was from Mauritius

2 did not disclose

These results are unsurprising, considering UoN’s presence in both China and Malaysia, however, the presence of Nigerian students in the results is interesting. The figures do perhaps highlight the difficulties faced by some international students (including some EU students) in making the transition from a culture where intellectual attribution is treated quite differently to the way it is treated in particularly UK and US academic institutions.

Q7 First language

1676 students answered this free text question. Again, the results were extremely diverse, but 382 students gave English as their first language, suggesting clearly that this is not only a concern for those for whom English is a second language, a finding which is backed up by the analysis of those accused of plagiarism, below. The other bigger groups were Arabic speakers (121), Cantonese (33), Chinese (267), Mandarin (62), Spanish (84), and German (63).

Of the 31 students who had been accused of plagiarism, their first language was as follows:

8 Chinese

7 English

2 Cantonese

2 Mandarin

2 Igbo

1 Czech

1 French

1 Farsi

1 Greek

1 Hindi

1 Malay

1 Serbian

1 Swedish

1 Thai

1 Urdu

Again, these figures are small, but they reinforce the idea that although Chinese students appear to be a group which is at risk of experiencing problems with plagiarism, no assumptions can be made that other groups, including European language and English speakers, are immune to these problems.

Section B: Knowledge of plagiarism

Q8 Knowledge of referencing systems

Of 1624 people answering this question:

57% had heard of Harvard

15.6% had heard of MLA

11.6% of the Chicago Manual of Style

27% (438 respondents) had not heard of any referencing system

Of the 31 students who had been accused of plagiarism:

12 (38.7%) had heard of Harvard

2 had heard of MLA

2 had heard of the Number system

2 had heard of MHRA

1 had heard of Vancouver

1 had heard of American Psychological System

1 had heard of CSE

14 (45.2%) had not heard of any referencing system at all

These figures, both from the whole survey and the sub-set, suggest that there is lack of information reaching some international students on precisely which referencing system they are supposed to be using, and what this entails.

Q9 Information received

Of 1624 people answering this question:

83% had received some form of information on arrival on what plagiarism is

70.6% had received information on how to reference

44.2% had been told how to use extracts and quotations as evidence

This suggests that certainly most, although not all, international students are receiving information about plagiarism and how to reference (if not the specific system to use – see Q8).

139 students gave other responses and comments, out of which some themes emerge:

29 students said they had received no information at all.

Several students said that had received information, but it was too vague to be useful, for example:

During the induction week, they talked about the penalties for plagiarism. However, no one really told us how to make it RIGHT. (11)

Very vague definition of what plagiarism is. But little practical explanation on how to reference properly. I picked up most in my second year once I started to do course works more often. (140)

We received some information but they weren't detailed enough, we weren't told about all the aspects it was rather just a briefing about what plagiarism is in general and how to reference in general (86)

Where students were given detailed, practical examples of what plagiarism is and is not, they praised this, for example:

We were given very specific examples of plagiarism which were honestly surprising and useful for me. (2)

9 students mentioned having been told how to use Turnitin to check their work before submission.

4 students mentioned Endnote training having been very helpful, but the timing was mentioned as a crucial factor, eg:

I arrived in middle of year and unfortunately suffered a lot till 6 months as endnote training course was not available till then. (116)

We were only given a session on how to reference and use EndNote in 3rd year, I wish it had been earlier! (118)

3 students commented that the information they received tended to be of a “threatening” nature, stressing the number of people caught and the very high penalties.

2 students specifically mentioned having missed this information because they were late arrivals, so again, timing of information just before assignments could well be a factor.

2 students stressed that they had received information fromCELE, Centre for English Language Education, rather than their own department.

1 student commented that as a distance learner, they were required to undertake an online tutorial and then submit a formative assessment for initial feedback, which appears to represent good practice.

Of the 31 students who had been accused of plagiarism, the percentages receiving information were very similar:

25 (80.6%) had received information about what plagiarism is

22 (71%) had received information on how to reference

13 (41.9%) had received information on how to use extracts and quotations as evidence

7 (22.6%) had been made aware of workshops on referencing

1 said they had received nothing

1 said they received “Student handbook at the beginning of the course which I could no longer find

after the first term”

1 said “we received some information but they weren't detailed enough, we weren't told about all the aspects it was rather just a briefing about what plagiarism is in general and how to reference in general”

1 said “I arrived late so didn't get a chance to know what the conditions were.”

1 said they received information about “How to avoid it and penalties”

Again, these comments suggest that while most students (not all) receive information on plagiarism and referencing, some of this information is not detailed and concrete enough (eg, giving examples), and some is being missed by late starters, which suggests reminders would be useful at the point of assessment.

Q10 Means of receiving information

Of 1624 respondents:

50.9% received this information in the module handbook

41.8% in class from a lecturer

38.2% as part of departmental induction

19.2% received it as part of the welcome programme for international students

159 students added other comments, including:

29 students received this information via the CELE course.

1 student commented again on the threatening nature of some of the communication: ‘The lecture wasn't very helpful as it appeared to scare off the students rather than helping them avoid plagiarism.’ (100)

1 student again commented on the disadvantage experienced by late starters: ‘I would say I suffered and couldn't find proper guidelines for that. They should be made clear or at least available in some lecture form or ppt at a place where latecomers or those who missed welcome week can also benefit … I am so badly aware of plagiarism.’ (131)

Of the 31 students who had been accused of plagiarism:

20 (64.5%) had this information in a section of the module handbook

18 (58.1%) had received information in class from a lecturer

12 (38.7%) internet guides on referencing or plagiarism

9 (29%) had received a printed guide on plagiarism

7 (22.6%) had received information during induction

3 (9.7%) had received a printed guide on referencing

2 (6.5%) received information during the welcome programme for international students

1 said they received information in a coursework guide

These results appear to suggest that most international students are receiving information on plagiarism and referencing in one form or another, however, there are issues with consistency in how this information is delivered. There are examples of good practice (the CELE courses), but elsewhere there are issues with information being delivered in a negative rather than supportive way, and being timed too early so it is missed by late starters.

Q11 Understanding of plagiarism

Of 1624 respondents:

96.7% said they understood what it was.

Only 3.3% said they did not understand it.

Of the 31 students who had been accused of plagiarism:

29 (93.5%) said they understood what it was

2 (6.5%) said they did not

These results clearly show that a substantial majority of students feel they understand what plagiarism is, so if they are experiencing difficulties with it, this is not usually because they lack understanding of the concept. These findings are reinforced by Q12, below.

Q12 What is plagiarism?

1516 students gave their own free text responses to this question. On the whole, they reinforce the picture above, and possibly counter to some expectations, that most international students actually have a very good understanding of the concept of plagiarism itself.

The vast majority of answers identified, many of them very articulately, that plagiarism consisted of one or more of the following factors, the most common being listed first:

Passing of someone’s work as your own – words or ideas
Copying without acknowledgement
Not referencing correctly
Breaching copyright/intellectual property theft
May be intentional or unintentional
Something illegal or criminal
Cheating

Of the 31 students who had been accused of plagiarism, 29 replied, and their responses largely reflect those of the larger set, as follows:

16 saidpresenting someone’s work as your own
5 said it was not referencing other people’s work fully
5 stated that it was copying someone else’s work directly
1 stated that ‘I only understood what plagiarism was after I was penalized for it. Simplydefined by the school manual as the representation of someone's work asone's own. Only to later find it is much much more than that.’

Q13 The consequences of plagiarism

Of 1565 responses:

82.3% said they understood the consequences

17.7% said they did not understand the consequences

Of the 31 students who had been accused of plagiarism:

27 (87.1%) said they understood the consequences

4 (12.9%) said they did not understand

These figures suggest that students on the whole are slightly less confident that they understand the consequences of plagiarism than they are plagiarism itself. These results are borne out by the very varied responses to Q14 below.

Q14 What are the consequences of plagiarism?

1263 students gave free text responses to this question. These were extremely varied, from a basic understanding that it would incur an academic penalty of some severity, to a much more nuanced understanding that it entailed a loss of trust and academic reputation. The different responses are summarised here:

Warning, followed by expulsion
Failure in assignment/module/course
Suspension
Zero mark
Penalty on mark
Having an academic offence on your record
Loss of trust
Legal prosecution
Loss of reputation for honesty
Loss of academic career
Prohibition from publishing in certain journals
Investigation by a panel
Resubmission of work

Only a relatively small number of students (less than 15) said that they were not sure of the consequences.

Of the 31 students who had been accused of plagiarism, 27 replied to this question:

14 students thought it would lead to a zero mark for either the coursework or the module.
10 thought it would lead to a warning followed by expulsion
9 thought it would lead to marks being deducted
3 thought it would lead to you failing the course
3 mentioned a loss of integrity or trust
1 thought it would lead to suspension
1 mentioned the use of a disciplinary committee

These results suggest that although most students have some idea of what the consequences might be, these are very variable, and sometimes almost too severe. It therefore indicates that it might be beneficial for any information on plagiarism to contain a clear statement of the possible consequences (from the Quality Manual), which is explanatory rather than threatening, and which includes a more nuanced consideration of academic reputation. However, these do need to be consistently enforced. One student commented that they thought the consequences would be:

Not much at all as I reported one of my own students for plagiarism and they were still allowed to continue their course without any serious consequences. (110)

Section C: Experiences of plagiarism

Q15 Have you ever beenaccused of plagiarism at UoN?

Of 1529 respondents:

1498 (98%) had never been accused of plagiarism.

31 (2%) had been accused.

These results immediately appear to suggest that in factthe number of international students who experience an accusation of plagiarism is not particularly substantial. However, their experiences are still valuable for highlighting where the experiences of international students can be improved, in preventing suspected cases of plagiarism arising, in dealing with suspicions when they do arise, and in enhancing the students’ academic experience generally.

Q16 Why were you accused?

Of the 31 students accused of plagiarism, 30 answered, as follows:

7 (22.6%) did not use quotation marks

7 (22.6%) used too much of someone else’s material

6 (19.4%) did not use full referencing

5 (16.1%) copied and pasted text from internet sources

3 (9.7%) did not really understand why they had been accused of plagiarism

1 (3.2%) repeated a lecture word for word

14 gave other reasons, as follows:

2 had allowed a friend to copy coursework

3 said someone had copied their work, either without their knowledge or permission

2 had had issues with referencing

1 said they had been instructed to usethe wrong referencing system

2 said they were not good at rewording or producing their own structure

1 had been accused of collusion

1 had been found to have similar answers to another student in numerical coursework

1 did not understand what plagiarism was

These comments are interesting, as they indicate that 7 of the 31 students accused had actually been accused of collusion or working too closely with a colleague, rather than plagiarism from published sources. At least 4 of these were also blameless, as the fault lay with colleagues or with miscommunication from academic staff.

Q17 Did you receive support afterwards?

Of 31 respondents, 30 replied:

16 (53.3%) did receive support

14 (45.2%) did not receive support

This is a surprisingly high percentage of students who received no support after being accused of plagiarism, and suggests that referral procedures for students being investigated could be enhanced to ensure they are clear on what will happen next. This is particularly important as the figures from Q16 indicate that many of them may not have intentionally plagiarised, and while the enquiry is pending, may find the process distressing.