当前位置: X-MOL 学术Journal of Academic Ethics › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
“There must be Someone’s Name Under Every Bit of Text, Even if it is Unimportant or Incorrect”: Plagiarism as a Learning Strategy
Journal of Academic Ethics Pub Date : 2021-06-17 , DOI: 10.1007/s10805-021-09419-z
Beata Bielska 1 , Mateusz Rutkowski 1
Affiliation  

The article offers analyses of the phenomenon of copying (plagiarism) in higher education. The analyses were based on a quantitative survey using questionnaires, conducted in 2019 at one of the Polish universities. Plagiarism is discussed here both as an element of the learning process and a subject of public practices. The article presents students’ definitions of plagiarism, their strategies for unclear or difficult situations, their experiences with plagiarism and their opinions on how serious and widespread this phenomenon is. Focusing on the non-plagiarism norm, that is the rule that students are not allowed to plagiarize, and in order to redefine it we have determined two strategies adopted by students. The first is withdrawing in fear of making a mistake (omitting the norm), which means not using referencing in unclear situations, e.g. when the data about the source of information are absent. The second is reducing the scope of the norm applicability (limiting the norm), characterized by the fact that there are areas where the non-plagiarism norm must be observed more closely and those where it is not so important, e.g. respondents classify works as credit-level and diploma-level texts, as in the credit-level work they “can” sometimes plagiarize since the detection rate is poor and consequences are not severe. The presented results are particularly significant for interpreting plagiarism in an international context (no uniform definition of plagiarism) and for policies aimed at limiting the scale of the phenomenon (plagiarism detection systems1).



中文翻译:

“每一段文字下都必须有人的名字,即使它不重要或不正确”:剽窃作为一种学习策略

本文对高等教育中的抄袭(剽窃)现象进行了分析。这些分析基于使用问卷进行的定量调查,该调查于 2019 年在波兰的一所大学进行。这里讨论的剽窃既是学习过程的一个要素,也是公共实践的一个主题。文章介绍了学生对剽窃的定义、他们在不清楚或困难情况下的策略、他们对剽窃的经历以及他们对这种现象的严重性和普遍性的看法。着眼于非抄袭规范,即不允许学生抄袭的规则,为了重新定义它,我们确定了学生采用的两种策略。第一种是因害怕犯错而退出(省略规范),这意味着在不明确的情况下不使用引用,例如 当缺少有关信息来源的数据时。二是缩小规范适用范围(limiting the norm),其特点是有些领域非抄袭规范必须更加严格遵守,有些领域则不那么重要,例如受访者将作品归类为信用-级别和文凭级别的文本,因为在学分级别的工作中,他们“可以”有时抄袭,因为检测率很低且后果并不严重。所呈现的结果对于在国际背景下解释剽窃(剽窃没有统一的定义)和旨在限制现象规模的政策(剽窃检测系统)特别重要 其特点是在某些领域必须更密切地遵守非剽窃规范,而在某些领域则不那么重要,例如受访者将作品分为学分级和文凭级文本,因为在学分级作品中他们“能”有时会抄袭,因为检出率低,后果不严重。所呈现的结果对于在国际背景下解释剽窃(剽窃没有统一的定义)和旨在限制现象规模的政策(剽窃检测系统)特别重要 其特点是在某些领域必须更密切地遵守非剽窃规范,而在某些领域则不那么重要,例如受访者将作品分为学分级和文凭级文本,因为在学分级作品中他们“能”有时会抄袭,因为检出率低,后果不严重。所呈现的结果对于在国际背景下解释剽窃(剽窃没有统一的定义)和旨在限制现象规模的政策(剽窃检测系统)特别重要 就像在信用级别的工作中一样,他们有时“可以”剽窃,因为检测率很低而且后果并不严重。所呈现的结果对于在国际背景下解释剽窃(剽窃没有统一的定义)和旨在限制现象规模的政策(剽窃检测系统)特别重要 就像在信用级别的工作中一样,他们有时“可以”剽窃,因为检测率很低而且后果并不严重。所呈现的结果对于在国际背景下解释剽窃(剽窃没有统一的定义)和旨在限制现象规模的政策(剽窃检测系统)特别重要1 ).

更新日期:2021-06-17
down
wechat
bug