Your search found 789 results.

Descriptors:
Higher Education; Academic Freedom; Foreign Countries; Educational Change; Plagiarism; Clergy; Universities; Doctoral Dissertations; Public Officials; Deception; Role; Educational Attainment; Doctoral Degrees; Supervision

Abstract:
Rarely do political scandal and academe collide so publicly as they have now, in Europe. In February, Germany's education minister stepped down after Heinrich Heine University, in Dusseldorf, revoked her doctorate because her thesis lifted passages from other sources without proper attribution. Her departure came after scandals over plagiarized work took down a German defense minister, the president of Hungary, and a Romanian education minister. But it is the storied German university system, not politics, that has suffered the real body blows. The front-page news has shaken higher education in Germany, where, in addition to the two former federal ministers, several other national and local political figures have been accused of academic fraud. The incidents have left many wondering: Is there something rotten at the heart of German academe, the esteemed heir of Humboldt and Hegel? For two centuries, the German university as envisioned by the 19th-century philosopher Wilhelm von Humboldt has been the model for research institutions in Europe, the United States, and beyond. Humboldt's notions of academic freedom, the autonomy of the university, and placing scientific pursuit at the heart of higher education continue to carry weight today. But his legacy in Germany may be growing somewhat tarnished. In Germany academic titles play a role in politics far greater than they do in the United States. Doctoral and other titles, sometimes as many as three or four, are prominently displayed on the business cards, door plaques, and letterheads of politicians. Some call it posturing--a modern-day "nobleman's title"--while others defend it as a meaningful distinction based on merit. Whether one is impressed by the degree or not, the Ph.D. has become a facet of the German resume that lures ambitious politicians and professionals who have no intention of entering academe. That has led to a proliferation of Ph.D.'s--roughly 25,000 a year awarded since 2000, more per capita than any other country in the world, according to the Federal Statistical Office of Germany. By comparison, American universities award 50,000 doctorates a year, but in a country with a population four times as large as Germany's. Germany's output of Ph.D. recipients probably won't slow down, but the plagiarism cases have shined a spotlight on academe's time-honored methods for supervising and awarding doctorates, especially to candidates who are not full-time academics. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Writing for Publication; Early Childhood Education; Educational Research; Publishing Industry; Publications; Ethics; Plagiarism

Abstract:
This article provides practical strategies for beginning scholars to assist in writing for professional publications. Specific strategies include awareness/understanding of publication requirements of institutions, types of manuscripts, creating time and space for writing, knowing publication outlets in the field, ethics/plagiarism, the manuscript submission and evaluation process, and ideas for turning rejected articles into accepted ones. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
University Presses; Intellectual Property; College Faculty; Faculty Publishing; Philosophy; Plagiarism; Biographies

Abstract:
Mark Anderson, a professor of philosophy at Belmont University, publishes an account of Nietzsche's life and work. He remembered liking "Friedrich Nietzsche" (Overlook Press, 2005), by the late independent scholar Curtis Cate, so he started rereading that one. But then he had second thoughts. After all, "Friedrich Nietzsche: A Philosophical Biography" (Cambridge University Press, 2010), by Julian Young, was newer, and, what's more, Mr. Young was a philosopher, with a chair at Wake Forest University. To make up his mind, Mr. Anderson ended up reading chapter by chapter in the Young volume, alternating with the corresponding chapters in Cate. That choice would wind up causing Mr. Young and the Cambridge press considerable embarrassment. Reading the more recent book, Mr. Anderson found that Mr. Young had borrowed Cate's words without acknowledgment. Mr. Young responded very briefly at first, saying he was "grateful" to Mr. Anderson for pointing out those lapses. But the dispute recently re-erupted after Mr. Young, in part at Cambridge's prompting, responded a second time, in a piece posted online and scheduled for publication this fall. His response and the episode in general raise provocative questions about how thoroughly university presses can or should vet their books before publication--and, more broadly, what counts as intellectual property in a life story. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
College Faculty; Educational Technology; Federal Aid; Grants; Periodicals; Web Based Instruction; Plagiarism; Computer Software; Program Proposals; Proposal Writing; Research Proposals; Public Agencies; Citations (References)

Abstract:
It is not news that software exists to check undergraduate papers for plagiarism. What is less well known is that some federal grant agencies are using technology to detect plagiarism in grant proposals. That variety of research misconduct is a growing problem, according to federal experts. The National Science Foundation, in its most recent "Agency Financial Report," said allegations of plagiarism and data fabrication in grant proposals and reports had more than tripled during the previous 10 years. Agencies take such misconduct seriously because their reputations are on the line when they finance the research. They can and will impose penalties that could derail one's career. It is important for scholars to understand that copying information or text from someone else's grant proposal is considered plagiarism--just as if the document copied had been published in a scholarly journal--whether or not that proposal received money. And it is not just young scholars who need to take that lesson to heart. Plagiarism in grant proposals is happening among academics at all levels of experience, from assistant professors to seasoned full professors. Some faculty members are simply unaware that the practice constitutes research misconduct. In this article, the author presents some key points that may seem obvious to composition instructors but apparently are not obvious to faculty members writing grant proposals: (1) Do not forget to use quotation marks when copying text verbatim from a source. Many researchers neglect to insert quote marks when electronically copying portions of an electronic document into one of their own files, and then lose track of which words are their own; (2) Paraphrasing means restating a concept in one's own words. Just changing a few words does not qualify. Also, be sure to cite the original source of the idea; (3) Carelessness and time constraints do not excuse plagiarism. Leave enough time to review the proposal before submission to ensure a paragraph has not been pasted in without attribution. If students are assisting with proposal preparation, leave enough time to review their work as well; and (4) Additional guidance on avoiding plagiarism is plentiful. Universities that receive federal money must provide grantees with training in the responsible conduct of research. Take advantage of the training, which may consist of Web tutorials or workshops. The Web sites of university research-compliance offices also contain useful advice on plagiarism. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Information Literacy; Library Instruction; Academic Libraries; Library Science; Librarians; Surveys; Information Retrieval; Information Utilization; Metadata; Databases; Intellectual Property; Plagiarism; Citations (References); Internet; Search Engines; Student Attitudes; College Students

Abstract:
Librarians regularly encounter students who struggle to understand and apply information literacy concepts. A qualitative survey administered to information literacy practitioners asked about troublesome content and analyzed results using the threshold concepts pedagogical framework first described by Jan Meyer and Ray Land. A threshold concept transforms the learner's view of content and helps integrate previously learned material; threshold concepts are portals that, once traversed, bring insight into how to think and act like a practitioner within a discipline. This project uses the data collected to propose seven threshold concepts for information literacy. (Contains 3 figures and 25 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Writing Skills; Ethics; Plagiarism; Educational Technology; Internet; Computer Uses in Education; Research Skills; Prevention; Copyrights; Integrity; School Culture; Teacher Role; Undergraduate Study

Abstract:
Plagiarism is a complex issue in need of reexamination. A common misconception is there is consensus on what constitute plagiarism, and general agreement that engaging in plagiarism and other forms of academic dishonesty is a major breech of ethics. There seems to be little concern for differentiating degrees of seriousness; the intentional copying of large amounts of text without acknowledgement is often viewed the same as failing to properly cite sources. Furthermore, instruction that addresses issues related to plagiarism is rare. In this article, the authors explore the issue in relation to the ever-changing digital environment, and provide one specific example of explicit instruction that engages students in copying information from the Internet, rewriting or paraphrasing, then citing appropriately. Knowing students will utilize technology for writing and research, instruction should aim at demystifying the concept of plagiarism while at the same time improving students' research and writing skills. (Contains 2 figures, 1 resource and 5 online resources.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Online Courses; Ethical Instruction; Plagiarism; Information Literacy; Library Instruction; Undergraduate Students; Academic Libraries

Abstract:
Intentional and unintentional plagiarism cases occur frequently and present unique pedagogical challenges for librarians, who often are deemed responsible for ensuring that undergraduates gain a solid understanding of academic integrity issues via information literacy instruction. This article describes the process by which faculty from the Oakland University Libraries and the Oakland University Writing Center developed an online, self-directed academic integrity course aimed at reducing plagiarism on campus. Prior to this course, the library offered a substantially shorter web-based plagiarism tutorial, which was used in course instruction and the Cite Right Program, the writing center's intervention for academic dishonesty. A recent assessment of this tool revealed that it no longer addressed the needs of the campus community. To address its gaps, the library and the writing center collaborated on more substantial content, which is detailed herein. (Contains 1 table and 3 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Plagiarism; Measures (Individuals); English (Second Language); Foreign Countries; Undergraduate Students; Second Language Learning; Student Attitudes; Questionnaires; Self Evaluation (Individuals); Qualitative Research; Statistical Analysis; Predictor Variables; Writing (Composition); Knowledge Level

Abstract:
This article reports on a mixed-methods study of Chinese university students' knowledge of and attitudes toward plagiarism in English academic writing. A sample of 270 undergraduates from two Chinese universities rated three short English passages under different conditions, provided open-ended responses to justify their ratings, and completed a written questionnaire. The rating tasks were designed to determine their ability to recognize two forms of intertextuality (i.e., unacknowledged copying and paraphrasing) generally regarded as plagiarism in Anglo-American academia. The questionnaire was administered to collect self-appraisals of competence in source use and to assess declarative knowledge of intertextual practices that match typical Anglo-American definitions of blatant and subtle plagiarism. Qualitative and quantitative analyses revealed that a minority of the students recognized the two forms of plagiarism and generally took a punitive attitude toward the detected cases of plagiarism. Further quantitative analyses found that discipline, self-reported competence in referencing, and knowledge of subtle plagiarism were consistently significant predictors of successful plagiarism detection. These findings raise questions about some culturally based interpretations of plagiarism and point to the need to take a nuanced approach to plagiarism in L2 writing. (Contains 6 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Plagiarism; Intellectual Property; Computer Literacy; Internet; College Students; Computer Uses in Education; Legal Problems; Student Rights; Familiarity

Abstract:
The rapid development of the Internet along with increasing computer literacy has made it easy and tempting for digital natives to copy-paste someone's work. Plagiarism is now a burning issue in education, industry and even in the research community. In this study, the authors concentrate on plagiarism detection with particular focus on the technical and legal sides of it. Usually, schools outsource plagiarism detection as it is a very resource-demanding procedure. Outsourcing of plagiarism detection may lead to intellectual property (IP) protection charges from the students (Bennett, 2009). This colloquium paper proposes an improved way to build a Plagiarism Detection Service (PDS) allowing the school use applicable IP policy and yet allow the PDS to maintain an acceptable search quality. The proposed framework is based on the idea that only a limited amount of information from the student submission is required to locate potentially similar documents on the Web. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Plagiarism; Graduate Students; Knowledge Level; Questionnaires; Foreign Countries

Abstract:
Research is an original and systematic investigation undertaken to discover new facts and information about a phenomenon. However a variety of empirical and ethical issues are on the rise in academia, especially plagiarism is quickly becoming part of global educational and research culture. More and more students and researchers are turning to the Internet for cooked solutions and shortcuts for writing assignments, research papers and thesis. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the seriousness of plagiarism amongst graduate and post graduate students of Pakistan. It also explores the university students' level of awareness of plagiarism. A total of 365 graduate and post graduate students of randomly selected public and private sector universities participated in this exploratory empirical study. A self-reported questionnaire survey was used for collection of primary data. Findings revealed that there was a low level of awareness about plagiarism and university plagiarism policies and processes amongst the students. Findings also revealed that many respondents did not understand what plagiarism is? A significant number of students have fairly admitted that they have intentionally plagiarized written materials. Based on the findings of the study this paper puts forward recommendations to create awareness amongst the students regarding plagiarism, plagiarism policies and provides statistical evidences for formulation of policies and guidelines to combat plagiarism in institutions of higher learning in Pakistan. Furthermore, the paper submits recommendations to minimize the plagiarism based on the authors' experiences. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website