启发英语学生对学术写作中抄袭行为的理解

Pub Date : 2018-09-26 DOI:10.32601/EJAL.464115
Irina Rets, Ali İlya
{"title":"启发英语学生对学术写作中抄袭行为的理解","authors":"Irina Rets, Ali İlya","doi":"10.32601/EJAL.464115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Given that the term ‘plagiarism’ is open to multiple interpretations, resulting in confusion among students and teachers alike, research that investigates the current state of empirical evidence and sheds light on students’ ability to define and detect this notion has important pedagogical implications. This study examines undergraduate English Language Teaching (ELT) students’ understanding of plagiarism in academic writing through qualitative data collection methods. After the focus group filled in the open-ended questionnaire, they were exposed to two sets of texts each containing an original, a plagiarized and non-plagiarized copy. The copy in the first set featured mainly word-for-word plagiarism while the copy in the second set was plagiarized in terms of illicit paraphrasing. The students were asked to identify whether there is any plagiarism in each copy and assess the texts regarding their acceptability in the format of an interview and think-aloud protocols. The results of the open-ended questionnaire and interviews were compared revealing that although all the students were able to define plagiarism correctly, most of them failed to identify it in the written text. The study also uncovered discrepancies in how the students view the aforementioned types of plagiarism.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Eliciting ELT Students’ Understanding of Plagiarism in Academic Writing\",\"authors\":\"Irina Rets, Ali İlya\",\"doi\":\"10.32601/EJAL.464115\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Given that the term ‘plagiarism’ is open to multiple interpretations, resulting in confusion among students and teachers alike, research that investigates the current state of empirical evidence and sheds light on students’ ability to define and detect this notion has important pedagogical implications. This study examines undergraduate English Language Teaching (ELT) students’ understanding of plagiarism in academic writing through qualitative data collection methods. After the focus group filled in the open-ended questionnaire, they were exposed to two sets of texts each containing an original, a plagiarized and non-plagiarized copy. The copy in the first set featured mainly word-for-word plagiarism while the copy in the second set was plagiarized in terms of illicit paraphrasing. The students were asked to identify whether there is any plagiarism in each copy and assess the texts regarding their acceptability in the format of an interview and think-aloud protocols. The results of the open-ended questionnaire and interviews were compared revealing that although all the students were able to define plagiarism correctly, most of them failed to identify it in the written text. The study also uncovered discrepancies in how the students view the aforementioned types of plagiarism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32601/EJAL.464115\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32601/EJAL.464115","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

鉴于“剽窃”一词有多种解释,导致学生和教师之间的困惑,调查经验证据的现状并揭示学生定义和检测这一概念的能力的研究具有重要的教学意义。本研究采用定性数据收集的方法,考察了英语教学(ELT)本科生对学术写作抄袭的理解。焦点小组填写开放式问卷后,他们接触到两组文本,每组包含一份原件、一份抄袭和一份非抄袭副本。第一套的副本主要是逐字逐句的抄袭,而第二套的副本则是非法转述的抄袭。学生们被要求确定每份副本中是否存在抄袭行为,并以采访的形式评估文本的可接受性,并大声思考。对开放式问卷和访谈的结果进行了比较,结果表明,尽管所有学生都能正确定义抄袭,但大多数学生未能在书面文本中识别出抄袭。这项研究还发现,学生们对上述抄袭行为的看法存在差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享
查看原文
Eliciting ELT Students’ Understanding of Plagiarism in Academic Writing
Given that the term ‘plagiarism’ is open to multiple interpretations, resulting in confusion among students and teachers alike, research that investigates the current state of empirical evidence and sheds light on students’ ability to define and detect this notion has important pedagogical implications. This study examines undergraduate English Language Teaching (ELT) students’ understanding of plagiarism in academic writing through qualitative data collection methods. After the focus group filled in the open-ended questionnaire, they were exposed to two sets of texts each containing an original, a plagiarized and non-plagiarized copy. The copy in the first set featured mainly word-for-word plagiarism while the copy in the second set was plagiarized in terms of illicit paraphrasing. The students were asked to identify whether there is any plagiarism in each copy and assess the texts regarding their acceptability in the format of an interview and think-aloud protocols. The results of the open-ended questionnaire and interviews were compared revealing that although all the students were able to define plagiarism correctly, most of them failed to identify it in the written text. The study also uncovered discrepancies in how the students view the aforementioned types of plagiarism.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信