Journal of Academic Development and Education JADE Issue 8 | Page 56

56 | JADE
HIGHLIGHT #2 | 57
REFLECTIONS ON AN ISSUE OF STUDENT DIVERSITY:
UNINTENTIONAL PLAGIARISM AMONG INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS
DR. HEIDI R. FULLER
With careful design, however, it seems that this can be achieved
via an inclusive approach to academic writing development; by
providing guidance to all students about how to formulate written
arguments in an objective way; by explaining our expectations
about attribution and referencing from the outset; by providing clear
and timely formative feedback; and by using specific examples to
illustrate key concepts. By explaining and discussing these points
with the master’s student described above, I was able to allay her
concerns about referencing (the final outcome was pleasing too;
she passed the module with a high grade). I now take a much more
inclusive and proactive role in plagiarism prevention by embedding
the pedagogical approach to academic writing development within
a series of dissertation writing workshops.
Academic literacy and plagiarism
In addition to incomplete paraphrasing, another form of plagiarism
can arise from the use of a writing strategy termed “patch writing”,
which Howard (1993) defined as “copying from a source text and then
deleting some words, altering grammatical structures, or plugging
in one-for-one synonym-substitutes”. This strategy is thought to be
synonymous with the novice writer who may be able to assimilate
information but who hasn’t yet developed techniques to express the
concepts in their own words (Pecorari, 2003). This raises a particular
issue of diversity for international students for whom English is
their second language, as some may lack the confidence and/or
competence with their English language skills to express ideas in
their own words. Subsequently, such students would be at a much
higher risk of defaulting to patch writing, and potentially falling prey
to accusations of plagiarism. Indeed, there are references to this issue
in the literature (e.g. Howard, 2000), and I understand that we have
encountered several instances of plagiarism in our own department
that were attributed to this cause. In this case, it would usually be
necessary to look beyond an inclusive pedagogical solution, towards
one that offered a reasonable adjustment to teaching and support,
to address this issue.
At Keele University, such adjustments would typically take the
form of individual tutorial sessions via the English Language Unit,
and would sometimes include additional support with academic
writing, including plagiarism awareness, referencing, vocabulary
and grammar. This approach, however, would typically be generic
in that it would lack subject specific content. It is generally noted
that, whilst students usually find this somewhat useful, they will
commonly return to the subject tutor for more specific guidance
(e.g. Gorska, 2013). In response to this conundrum, Divan et al.
(2015) suggest that an academic writing development programme
that is embedded early on within the subject discipline might be the
solution (indeed, their report suggests a reduced rate of plagiarism
among their international students following this intervention). To
this end, we have recently developed, and are running a trial, of a
similar programme within one of the Master’s degree programmes
in Postgraduate Medicine. The programme is open to all students
and involves them undertaking a short, (non-assessed, optional)
online module, when they first enrol, that is supported by an online
resource containing study skills material, and involves submission
of a short literature review for formative feedback. This process not
only permits the formative use of Turnitin for developing plagiarism
awareness (a “top tip” suggested by the HEA, 2014), but it also
enables the tutor to provide formative feedback that addresses the
individual needs of UK and international students on the programme.
Ultimately, it is hoped that this proactive approach will not only help
to develop academic literacy but will also result in reduced numbers
of international students inadvertently falling prey to allegations of
plagiarism. It also has the potential to be used as a remedial tool,
later on in the programme, should a student find themselves referred
for academic misconduct for plagiarism.
Conclusions
There is a strong suggestion from the literature and my own
observations described above, that an early pedagogical approach
to academic writing might offer an inclusive solution for plagiarism
prevention, particularly for international students with differing
cultural expectations and/or linguistic requirements. Until the
incident arose with the master’s student that I described above, I had
never considered how culture could impact on a student’s perception
of plagiarism. It is possible that other colleagues do not either; at
least not until an incident of plagiarism arises and is referred to the
academic conduct officer. Should we (do we?), as a University, offer
staff development training for prevention of plagiarism, that includes
an element of cultural awareness?
Acknowledgments
This article has been adapted from an assignment that was
completed in part fulfilment of the Keele Certificate in Teaching and
Learning in Higher Education (TLHEP). I am grateful to the TLHEP
course tutors and colleagues for helpful discussions on the topic.