Contract cheating is a form of academic dishonesty in which students pay others to complete their coursework. [1] The term was coined in a 2006 study by Thomas Lancaster [2] and the late Robert Clarke (UK), [3] [4] [5] [6] as a more inclusive way to talk about all forms of academic work, as opposed to more outdated terms such as "term paper mill" or "essay mill", which refer to text-based academic outsourcing. In contrast, Lancaster and Clarke are computer scientists who found evidence of students systematically outsourcing coding assignments. Hence, they coined the term "contract cheating" to include all outsourced academic work, regardless of whether it is from text-based or non-text-based disciplines.
The first published material detailing the extent of contract cheating was a study by Robert Clarke and Thomas Lancaster. [4] The study presented three main findings:
A 2007 study examined more than 900 examples of contract cheating by students studying computing subjects. The published results categorised the assignment types (e.g. programming, database, web design, etc.) and were analysed by country. One new concern identified by this study was the number of major projects (both final-year undergraduate and postgraduate) that had been posted on auction sites. [7]
Research interest in contract cheating was significantly increased in the mid-2010s as a consequence of various scandals being reported in the media. For example, in 2014, Australian media exposed the MyMaster website, which provided custom-written assignments to hundreds of students. [8]
In a 2017 meta-analysis of five studies, 3.5% of a total of 1,378 students reported having bought assignments to submit as their own. Of the students who reported engaging in contract cheating, more than 60% admitted to having done so more than once. [9] A larger systematic review of 65 studies from 1978 to 2016 also found that 3.5% of students admitted to engaging in commercial contract cheating. [10] Subsequently, a study of over 14,000 Australian students found that 5.8% of students engaged in one of five behaviours classified as contract cheating, with 2.2% submitting assessments completed by other people. [11] However, a 2021 study argued that anonymous self-report surveys underestimate the extent of contract cheating, and using an incentivized truth-telling methods, it suggested that 7.9% of students buy and submit custom-written assignments while 11.4% submit assignments downloaded from file-sharing sites as their own. [12]
A study was presented at the April 2012 STEM conference involving more than 600 assignments in subject areas ranging from anthropology to theology. [13] There is debate about which subjects are most susceptible to contract cheating, but an overall consensus by several scholars, including Curtis & Clare (2017), [9] Bretag (2017), [14] Lancaster & Clarke (2015) [15] and Eaton (2019), [16] indicates that the following disciplines have the highest incidence:
The commercial aspects of contract cheating were examined in a paper given at the 2013 Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education. This paper analysed the monetary value of contract cheating to the various parties who play roles in the contract cheating process. The main analysis was based on a corpus consisting of 14,438 identified attempts to cheat, collected between March 2005 and July 2012. [17] [18]
Other prominent academic integrity scholars and experts include Tracey Bretag (Australia), [11] [19] [20] Cath Ellis (Australia), [21] [11] [19] and Sarah Elaine Eaton (Canada) [22] [23] [24] [25] and Irene Glendinning (UK). [6]
In 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, increases in contract cheating were identified as being particularly problematic. Test and exam based assessments, which are typically conducted in invigilated halls, took place online as a social distancing measure; without the rigorous monitoring that is typically present in such assignments, opportunities for contract cheating over the Internet arose. [26] [27] [28] [29]
Assessment design strategies may help to prevent contract cheating from occurring. [21] [30] [31] For example, individualized assessments have been shown to be effective against contract cheating. [32]
In addition, some institutions have taken pro-active measures to block access to contract cheating companies websites from campus users. [33] Since August 2022, Australia started blocking access to contract cheating sites nationally. [34] [35]
In July 2007, Lancaster and Clarke proposed a systematic six-stage process that tutors can use to detect students who are contract cheating. [36] Since then, additional research has been conducted with evidence now pointing to training for those who grade academic work being an important aspect of detection. [37] [38] [39]
The quality of solutions to assignments sold by essay mills has been questioned, though other research claims that academic work obtained through the use of an auction site was of sufficient quality to gain satisfactory grades and thus remain undetected by educators. [40] Contract cheating sites often boast that the use of their services is undetectable, [41] however such claims have been refuted by empirical research that shows educators can be effectively trained to detect contract cheating in student work. [41] [42] There are now various resources available to educators to help train them on how to effectively identify contract cheating. [20] [25] [43] [44] [45]
It has been proposed that existing assignment and invigilated assessment data can be systematically analyzed in order to detect patterns of students' performance that may be indicative of contract cheating. [46] At the 2015 Plagiarism Across Europe and Beyond conference, it was demonstrated how collecting analytical data at the time of writing can help in identifying cases of contract cheating. [47] [48]
Although text-matching software is unlikely to detect contract cheating, such tools have shown some success in identifying the source of assignments found on auction sites. [49]
The way higher education institutions across the world address contract cheating is inconsistent. The UK [50] and Australia [51] [52] have developed some of the world's most systematic approaches to addressing contract cheating through policies, quality assurance guidance, and corresponding penalties for students. Meanwhile, research and advocacy are underway in countries such as Canada, [53] [22] to promote better understanding of how universities and colleges can address the issue through policy measures.
Some academic institutions consider contract cheating to be among the most serious forms of academic misconduct and penalise culpable students accordingly. In 2010, the Academic Misconduct Benchmarking Research Project (AMBeR) developed a plagiarism tariff in the UK in an attempt to standardise penalties for all forms of academic misconduct. The final report noted that purchase of an assignment should be penalised with the most serious measures available, such as expulsion from the institution, and that many institutions consider contract cheating as a separate form of misconduct altogether because of the seemingly obvious intent associated with it. [54] However, a 2015 UK research study that collected university students' opinions on appropriate penalties for academic misconduct demonstrated that students consistently recommended lenient penalties for plagiarism, and that this effect was most pronounced for contract cheating. [55] [56] [57]
The legal status of these services varies internationally. [58] In 2020, it became illegal for third parties to provide academic work to students in Australia. [59] In New Zealand it is illegal to "advertise or provide third party assistance to cheat", [60] with similar, older laws on the statutes of 17 U.S. states. [61]
In the United Kingdom, the Quality Assurance Agency published a report [62] advocating the use of a legal approach as one way to tackle contract cheating, and suggested that existing fraud laws might be used, since the activities of such services, and their clients, could be reasonably interpreted to fit with definitions of fraud, as they involve false representation and failure to disclose information. A subsequent research project [63] compared the UK fraud laws with the terms and conditions used by contract cheating services and concluded that such services would be unlikely to fall foul of fraud law because the disclaimers, terms and conditions the services provide generally state that any custom written products are to be used only as "study guides" or "revision aids", thereby placing responsibility and intent on the student client. In 2022, the Skills and Post-16 Education Act criminalised the provision of academic cheating services in England and Wales to students submitting work to English institutions—the unusual scope of this law relating to the devolved nature of the education competence in the United Kingdom. [64] Ireland and Austria have also passed similar prohibitions. [64]
Despite this, media stings have shown that companies can be complicit in the inappropriate use of these products. [65] A similar analysis in Lithuania [66] concluded that contract cheating services were unlikely to fall foul of existing laws, although an analysis of Australian [67] law concluded that fraud, as well as forgery and conspiracy, might be legal avenues via which contract cheating could be targeted. All three studies called for the introduction of new legal approaches to tackle contract cheating. Contract cheating is not illegal in Canada. [16]
A follow-up research study proposed new laws, based on the principle of strict liability, to lessen the requirement for prosecutors to demonstrate that contract cheaters intended to help students cheat, instead holding contract cheaters liable for prosecution simply for offering services that could be reasonably interpreted as being used for contract cheating. [68] Scholars have noted that such laws have created a situation where generative AI and large language model providers may be caught within the scope of these criminal offences, particularly in England and Wales and in Australia. [64]
More broadly, despite the apparent potential of a legal challenge to contract cheating companies, prosecutions are currently rare, largely because of the limitations of existing laws. In addition, the simple act of outlawing a service would not necessarily reduce demand for it; the aforementioned research studies all call for a holistic, multi-pronged approach to tackling contract cheating.[ citation needed ]
International students, or foreign students, are students who undertake all or part of their tertiary education in a country other than their own.
Coursework is work performed by students or trainees for the purpose of learning. Coursework may be specified and assigned by teachers, or by learning guides in self-taught courses. Coursework can encompass a wide range of activities, including practice, experimentation, research, and writing. In the case of students at universities, high schools and middle schools, coursework is often graded and the scores are combined with those of separately assessed exams to determine overall course scores. In contrast to exams, students may be allotted several days or weeks to complete coursework, and are often allowed to use text books, notes, and the Internet for research.
Electronic assessment, also known as digital assessment, e-assessment, online assessment or computer-based assessment, is the use of information technology in assessment such as educational assessment, health assessment, psychiatric assessment, and psychological assessment. This covers a wide range of activities ranging from the use of a word processor for assignments to on-screen testing. Specific types of e-assessment include multiple choice, online/electronic submission, computerized adaptive testing such as the Frankfurt Adaptive Concentration Test, and computerized classification testing.
Academic dishonesty, academic misconduct, academic fraud and academic integrity are related concepts that refer to various actions on the part of students that go against the expected norms of a school, university or other learning institution. Definitions of academic misconduct are usually outlined in institutional policies. Therefore, academic dishonesty consists of many different categories of behaviour, as opposed to being a singular concept.
Turnitin is an Internet-based similarity detection service run by the American company Turnitin, LLC, a subsidiary of Advance Publications.
An essay mill is a business that allows customers to commission an original piece of writing on a particular topic so that they may commit academic fraud. Customers provide the company with specific information about the essay, including number of pages, general topic, and a time frame to work within. The customer is charged a certain amount per page. A similar concept is the essay bank, a company from which students can purchase prewritten but less expensive essays on various topics, at higher risk of being caught. Both forms of business are under varying legal restraints in some jurisdictions.
Plagiarism detection or content similarity detection is the process of locating instances of plagiarism or copyright infringement within a work or document. The widespread use of computers and the advent of the Internet have made it easier to plagiarize the work of others.
Tertiary education in Australia is formal education beyond high school in Australia, consisting of both government and private institutions and divided into two sectors; Higher Education and Vocational Education and Training (VET) provided by government-owned TAFEs & private Registered Training Organisations (RTO). Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF), the Australian national education policy, classifies tertiary qualification into 10 levels: level 1 to 4 vocational certificates ; level 5 & 6 undergraduate diploma and advanced diploma; level 6 associate degree; level 7 bachelor degree, level 8 bachelor honours degree & graduate certificates and graduate diplomas; level 9 for master's degree; and level 10 PhD. Most universities are government owned and mostly self-regulated. For other institutes there are two national regulators for tertiary education for registration, recognition and quality assurance of both the "provider institutes" as well as the "individual courses" provided by the providers. Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) regulates institutes which provide education from level 5 or above. Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA) regulates institutes which provide education from level 1 to level 6.
The Bedford Handbook is a guide written by Diana Hacker, now in its eleventh edition, that provides basic explanations of proper English grammar, composition, citation, and textual analysis. The guide includes a number of sample texts and illustrations throughout its sections. It also covers the concept of plagiarism.
Plagiarism is the fraudulent representation of another person's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions as one's own original work. Although precise definitions vary depending on the institution, in many countries and cultures plagiarism is considered a violation of academic integrity and journalistic ethics, as well as social norms around learning, teaching, research, fairness, respect, and responsibility. As such, a person or entity that is determined to have committed plagiarism is often subject to various punishments or sanctions, such as suspension, expulsion from school or work, fines, imprisonment, and other penalties.
Duplicate content is a term used in the field of search engine optimization to describe content that appears on more than one web page. The duplicate content can be substantial parts of the content within or across domains and can be either exactly duplicate or closely similar. When multiple pages contain essentially the same content, search engines such as Google and Bing can penalize or cease displaying the copying site in any relevant search results.
Chegg, Inc., is an American education technology company based in Santa Clara, California. It provides homework help, digital and physical textbook rentals, textbooks, online tutoring, and other student services.
Academic integrity is the moral code or ethical policy of academia. The term was popularized by Rutgers University professor Donald McCabe who is considered to be the "grandfather of academic integrity". Other prominent academic integrity scholars and advocates include Tracey Bretag (Australia), Cath Ellis (Australia), Sarah Elaine Eaton (Canada), Thomas Lancaster (UK), Tomáš Foltýnek, and Tricia Bertram Gallant (USA). Academic integrity supports the enactment of educational values through behaviours such as the avoidance of cheating, plagiarism, and contract cheating, as well as the maintenance of academic standards; honesty and rigor in research and academic publishing.
Continuous assessment is a form of educational examination that evaluates a student's progress throughout a prescribed course. It is often used as an alternative to the final examination system. Proponents of continuous assessment argue that the approach allows tracking of progress and has a chance of offering students more support, guidance, and opportunities to improve during the course or programme.
Ed Dante is the pseudonym of Dave Tomar, a freelance writer living in Philadelphia, USA. The writer ignited controversy in the North American academic community when his article The Shadow Scholar appeared in 2010 in The Chronicle of Higher Education.
The Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) is Australia's independent national quality assurance and regulatory agency for higher education.
Kenny Sahr is an Israeli technology executive. He has served as VP Marketing at Sodyo and RadView Software. He was the founder of the Internet's first free homework and term paper website - SchoolSucks.com. He is a regular contributor to The Times of Israel.
In research, a paper mill is a "profit oriented, unofficial and potentially illegal organisation that produce and sell fraudulent manuscripts that seem to resemble genuine research."
"Ungrading" is a set of practices described by author Jesse Stommel as "raising an eyebrow at grades as a systemic practice, distinct from simply 'not grading'. Ungrading argues that the current assessment practices in education undermine work, rather than supporting learning and collaboration.
Since OpenAI's public release of ChatGPT in November 2022, the chatbot and its peers have been at the source of intense discussion within education, with many schools and universities taking hostile stances towards usage of large language models, while others have embraced the use of the tools in assignments. The usage of ChatGPT has inspired many to foresee a potential paradigm shift in education, with oral exams being proposed to assure that it cannot be used in tests.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(help)