Opinions of Montenegrin University Students and Teachers about Plagiarism and its Prevention

  • Dijana Vučković Faculty of Philosophy, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro
  • Sanja Peković Faculty of Tourism and Hotel Management, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro
  • Rajka Đoković Faculty of Law, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro
  • Marijana Blečić Faculty of Philosophy, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro
  • Jovana Janinović Faculty of Tourism and Hotel Management, University of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1570
Keywords: plagiarism detection, plagiarism punishment, student, university teacher

Abstract

This research paper aims to identify the opinions of university students and teachers about plagiarism and how to prevent it. We employed qualitative techniques, providing three case studies to participants and asking open-ended questions based on these cases. One hundred and forty-five people participated in this study, including bachelor, master, and doctoral students and university teachers. We performed a thematic analysis of the text received from the participants’ responses. The results show that the participants were serious about plagiarism if academic stakeholders commit it; however, they expressed a lenient attitude toward ghostwriters. They also felt there was a need to provide training in academic writing for them to feel confident about their writing and not copy from others. Some awareness sessions on academic integrity should also be conducted.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aaron, L. S., & Roche, C. M. (2013). Stemming the tide of academic dishonesty in higher education: It takes a village. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 42(2), 161–196. https://doi.org/10.2190/ET.42.2.h

Bartlett, T., & Smallwood, S. (2004). Plagiarism: The professor published the student’s words as his own. What’s wrong with that? The Chronicle of Higher Education, 51(17), A8.

Belter, R. W., & du Pre, A. (2009). A Strategy to Reduce Plagiarism in an Undergraduate Course. Teaching of Psychology, 36(4), 257–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280903173165

Bertram Gallant, T. (2016). The ethics pipeline to academic publishing. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 14(1), 24–28. https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-11-2015-0040

Bilic-Zulle, L. Azman, J., Frkovic, V., & Petrovecki, M. (2008). Is there an effective approach to deterring students from plagiarizing? Science and Engineering Ethics, 14(1), 139–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-007-9037-2

Brabazon T. (2015). Turnitin? Turnitoff: The deskilling of information literacy. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 13–32.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Buerger, 2002; Buerger, Geoffrey E. (2002). The owl and the plagiarist: Academic misrepresentation in contemporary education. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Dalhousie University.

Calabrese, R.L., & Roberts, B. (2004). Self-interest and scholarly publication: the dilemma of researchers, reviewers, and editors. The International Journal of Educational Management, 18(6), 335–341. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540410553988

Calvert Evering; L., & Moorman, G. (2012). Rethinking plagiarism in the digital age, Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/JAAL.00100

Comas-Forgas, R., & Sureda-Negre, J. (2010). Academic plagiarism: explanatory factors from students’ perspective. Journal of Academic Ethics, 8(3), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-010-9121-0

Davis, L. (2011). Arresting student plagiarism: Are we investigators or educators? Business Communication Quarterly, 74(2), 160–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/1080569911404053

East, J. (2010). Judging plagiarism: a problem of morality and convention. Higher Education, 59(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9234-9

Ellis, C., Zucker, I.M., & Randall, D. (2018). The infernal business of contract cheating: understanding the business processes and models of academic custom writing sites. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-017-0024-3

ETINED Council of Europe Platform on Ethics, Transparency and Integrity in Education (2018). South-East European project on policies for academic integrity – Volume 5, Council of Europe.

Fishman T. (2009). We know it when we see it is not good enough: toward a standard definition of plagiarism that transcends theft, fraud, and copyright. Paper presented at the 4th Asia Pacific Conference on Educational Integrity, NSW, (4APCEI), 1–5.

Gaber, S. & Tašner, V. (2021). Structural over-determination of education reforms and agency. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 11(2), 77–95. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1107

Glendinning, I. (2016a). Evaluation of Policies for Academic Integrity in Higher Education: An International Perspective. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Coventry University.

Glendinning, I. (2016b). European Perspectives of Academic Integrity. In T. Bretag (Ed.), Handbook of Academic Integrity (pp. 55–74). Springer.

Ison, D. C. (2015). The influence of the internet on plagiarism among doctoral dissertations: An empirical study. Journal of Academic Ethics, 13(2), 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-015-9233-7

Kodelja Z. (2019). Is machine learning real learning? Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 9(3), 11–23. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.709

Lancaster, T. (2019). Social media enabled contract cheating. Canadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity, 2(2), 7–24. https://doi.org/10.11575/cpai.v2i2.68053

Martin, D. E. (2011). Culture and unethical conduct: Understanding the impact of individualism and collectivism on actual plagiarism. Management Learning, 43(3), 261–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507611428119

McLeod, S. H. (1992). Responding to plagiarism: The role of the WPA. Writing Program Administration, 15(3), 7-16.

Peković, S., Janinović, J., & VuÄković, D. (2021). Intégrité académique à l’Université du Monténégro: Cheminement vers la certification. In M. Bergadaà, & P. Peixoto (Eds.), L’Urgence de L’Intégrité Académique (pp. 332–352). EMS, Editions Management and Societe.

P., T. (2023, June 8) Ponovo pregledani sumnjivi testovi: Većina maturanata položila, neki sa visokim ocjenama. [Suspicious tests revisited. Most of the graduates passed, some with high grades]. Vijesti. https://www.vijesti.me/vijesti/drustvo/660245

Rosenberg, M. (2011). Principled autonomy and plagiarism. Journal of Academic Ethics, 9(1), 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-011-9132-5

Shahghasemi, E., & Akhavan, M. (2015). Confessions of academic ghost authors: the Iranian experience. SAGE Open, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015572262

Sivasubramaniam, S., Kostelidou, K., & Ramachandran, S. (2016). A close encounter with ghostwriters: an initial exploration study on background, strategies and attitudes of independent essay providers. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-016-0007-9

Tauginienė, L., Gaižauskaitė, I., Glendinning, I., Kravjar, J., Ojsteršek, M., Ribeiro, L., Odiņeca, T., Marino, F., Cosentino, M., & Sivasubramaniam, S. (2018). Glossary for academic integrity. ENAI Report 3G. http://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/wpcontent/uploads/2018/02/GLOSSARY_final.pdf

Tauginienė, L., Gaižauskaitė, I., Razi, S., Glendinning, I., Sivasubramaniam, S., Marino, F., Cosentino, M., Anohina-Naumeca, A., & Kravjar, J. (2019). Enhancing the taxonomies relating to academic integrity and misconduct. Journal of Academic Ethics, 17(4), 345–361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-019-09342-4

Thomas, D. (2017). Factors that explain academic dishonesty among university students in Thailand. Ethics & Behavior, 27(2), 140–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2015.1131160

Thurmond, B. radley H. (2010). Student plagiarism and the use of a plagiarism detection tool by community college faculty. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Indiana State University.

Univerzitet Crne Gore. [University of Montenegro]. (2019a). Criteria for academic and scientific promotion. http://www.ucg.ac.me/skladiste/blog_3/objava_42/fajlovi/Nova%20mjerila.pdf

Univerzitet Crne Gore. [University of Montenegro]. (2019b). Online courses on academic integrity at the University of Montenegro. https://www.akademskiintegritet.ucg.ac.me/

Uzun, A. M., & Kilis, S. (2020). Investigating antecedents of plagiarism using extended theory of planned behaviour. Computers & Education, 144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103700

VuÄković, D., Mićanović, V., & Novović, T. (2023). Teacher Education in Montenegro: The Current State, Challenges, and Future Perspectives. In M. Kowalczuk-WalÄ™dziak, R. A. Valeeva, M. Sablić, M., & Menter, I. (Eds), The Palgrave Handbook of Teacher Education in Central and Eastern Europe (295–330). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

VuÄković, D., Peković, S., BleÄić, M., & Äoković, R. (2020). Attitudes towards cheating behaviour during assessing students’ performance: student and teacher perspectives. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 16(13). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-020-00065-3

Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage.

Published
2023-09-29
How to Cite
VučkovićD., Peković, S., ĐokovićR., BlečićM., & Janinović, J. (2023). Opinions of Montenegrin University Students and Teachers about Plagiarism and its Prevention. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 13(3), 155-183. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1570
Issue
Vol 13 No 3 (2023): Teaching Research Integrity
Section
FOCUS

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
  2. The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
  3. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  4. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.