Barbara Combes Lecturer, School of Information Studies Charles Sturt University Wagga Wagga NSW
[email protected]
The copy and paste culture of the Net Generation: strategies for dealing with plagiarism Abstract
Advances in technology in the late twentieth century have led to widespread changes in the way we consume and utilise information. The advent of a user-friendly World Wide Web has created a global information and communications resource that is being used extensively in education, corporate organisations and the home. A shift in the culture of information usage has been a direct result of these developments. Educational institutions are now seeing a generation of students for whom instantaneous telecommunications and access to information have always been a part of their everyday lives. This paper explores this changing culture of information use and the emergence of electronic plagiarism, and suggests strategies for dealing with plagiarism in tertiary education.
The first phase of the Internet occurred during the late 1980s (Zakon, 2004) and signalled a change in the way we use information. Internet usage during this period was closely aligned with academic institutions and the academic protocols that underpin academic research and publishing. In this community, information shared had value and information products utilised a complex set of citation protocols to add value to each piece of research published. Academics gained recognition from their peers as a reward for sharing information and citation protocols ensured that each new piece of information published had authority and lasting value (Pinchot, 1995). Little has changed today. Academics still use the citation process to add value to their work to build an authoritative body of knowledge. While their work may be expanded or used by others to create new interpretations, concepts and ideas, the intrinsic value of the original work remains intact due to the citation process. In the academic world, the citation
process adds integrity and authority to piece of completed work, ie. it adds value to the informational product (Combes, 2004).
In its early days, academics used the Internet primarily as a conduit for the research community. They worked as collaborative communities and promoted scientific discovery through the free dissemination of information (Stalder & Hirsh, 2002). These early Internet users were also a defined group. Internet users generally required a certain skills set to be able to operate in what was essentially a technical and unfriendly environment. Internet use was limited to like-minded individuals who had a certain level of education and the culture of information use in this environment was distinguished by a complex arrangement of protocols, trust and a sense of community (Coyne, 2001). In this first phase of the Internet, the telephone still represented the most common and user-friendly communications device for the majority of the population.
The second phase of the Internet and information use During the early 1990s advancements in technology not only changed who used the Internet, but how it was being used. During this phase of technological development, the World Wide Web and user-friendly browsers emerged. These new technologies were also based on a vision of peer collaboration and the global sharing of information that characterised the early years of Internet usage (Stalder & Hirsh, 2002; Berners-Lee, 2000). However, the early nineties also heralded the widespread use of graphics-based operating systems such Windows, and sophisticated, user-friendly wordprocessing programs, email and chat (Zakon, 2004). Not only was technology more user-friendly, but it also became more affordable. The original Microsoft/IBM marketing strategy that included the DOS operating system as part of the purchase of a new computer was extended to include these new user-friendly software programs (Bellis, 2004).
The advent of all these developments in a short space of time opened up the Internet via the World Wide Web and email to a global audience (Zakon, 2004; Computer Hope, 2004). For the first time the rapid dissemination of information that allowed users to transgress geographical and time barriers became available to anyone who could afford a computer, a modem and a telephone line. Thus the culture of information usage that dominated the early days of the Internet was set to change as membership to the previously select communities became available to vast numbers of users via user-friendly software and easy access. The phenomenon that is known as the Internet grew at an astounding rate and our capacity to create and disseminate information also increased to a point where information overload and the volume of information has become a major issue for users (Shenk, 1997).
This second phase of the Internet also heralded an unprecedented interest from governments and business, which saw the World Wide Web as a cheap way to expand into the global marketplace unhampered by the traditional restraints of geopolitical and economic boundaries. Governments also perceived the Web as a means of providing instant access to public information, thus cutting back faceto-face service provision and expensive, time consuming print publications. Cash strapped education systems also viewed the Internet as a free resource or virtual library where access to vast stores of ‘free’ information was but a click away (NOIE, 1998). Governments, schools and business began to go online and large amounts of money were spent on infrastructure, hardware and software (Le@rning Federation, 2004; OIE, 2004). During this phase the use of computers in the home, schools and business became more commonplace (Zakon, 2004) and a new generation of users were creating a new culture of information use.
The third phase of the Internet and information use We are now into the third phase of the Internet. This phase is characterised by technological change and convergence. Technology continues to become cheaper, smaller and more powerful. It is also becoming more prevalent, more
mobile and multi-functional. We now have mobile phones that can be used to send email messages, take photographs and store information. Wireless technology continues to develop; laptop computers are smaller, faster and lighter; palm pads are becoming more multifunctional and information storage devices such as CD-ROMs and flash drives allow us to store vast amounts of complex information easily. Desktop computers are single, multifunctional workstations that can be used to create quality print and electronic publications and multimedia presentations; they can be used to connect users for real time videoconferencing, chat and streaming video and they also store vast amounts of information that can be easily manipulated, changed and disseminated to a global audience (Computer Hope, 2004).
The Internet is now ten years old and we are seeing a generation of users across all levels of society for whom instantaneous access to information is a part of everyday life. In this information environment individuals routinely cut, copy and paste and rapidly disseminate information and are encouraged to do so as part of their everyday, routine communication, creation and consumption of information (Combes, 2004). Information use has changed with the developments in technology and the culture of information use that prevailed among the earlier users of the Internet no longer applies (Boyle, 2003). Intellectual property and copyright of information have become contentious issues in a society that has become used to manipulating and disseminating information in an electronic environment. “Intellectual property is now in and on the desktop and is implicated in routine creative, communicative, and just plain consumptive acts that each of us performs every day” (Boyle, 2003). We now have a ‘copy culture’ mentality where the dissemination of information is so pervasive and considered to be a part of everyday, accepted practice, that the idea of original intellectual ownership is becoming blurred and difficult to maintain (Allen, 2003). For the emerging ‘Net Generation’ where instantaneous access to information and the ability to manipulate and share it globally as part of everyday routine usage, shared information ceases to have value as the original integrity of information is
lost in the editing, copying and dissemination process. There is no audit trail on the Internet. Information is subtly transformed and like Chinese whispers, the end product often bears no resemblance to the original in form, context or purpose (Combes, 2004).
For students working with information sources in 2004, particularly electronic or digital sources, there is the added confusion of terminology. The early Internet was characterised by an unwritten code of ethics that depended on academic citation protocols, recognition of intellectual property, collaboration and sharing. During these early years terms such as open source software, freeware, shareware and public domain were coined and had specific meanings for the tight-knit, community of Internet users. For the Net Generation of users however, these terms have been subsumed into the global language of the Internet and are being generally interpreted to mean ‘free’. Public domain is interpreted to mean ‘free to use’ (Combes, 2004). This confusion of terms and meanings, coupled with the changing culture of information use by vast numbers of students and workers, has led to a situation where information that is available on the Internet is often viewed by users as having no copyright reservations. Anyone can use it, manipulate it and claim intellectual ownership. Thus we now see a global culture emerging where the value of information as defined by the original users of the Internet has been undermined. Information is so easily accessible, so widely available and so easily subject to manipulation and further dissemination, that information shared no longer has value or authority/ownership. Students using information from the Internet often plagiarise simply because they have developed a culture of information use that does not associate intellectual property when using this medium.
Plagiarism and the Net Generation For academics and teachers, Internet plagiarism is a major concern, particularly when students do not appear to understand that information has value only when its authority can be verified. While plagiarism in academic circles has always
been a fact of life, the ease with which information can now be copied, manipulated and reproduced has made “the transmission, storage, caching, and, some would claim, even reading” (Boyle, 2003) of material a part of everyday human activity. Allen claims:
… the Internet dramatically facilitates the process of taking the value of the original either without paying, or without acknowledgement. Copying is more than just copyright infringement …. It is a defining, multifaceted feature of Internet behaviour and culture (Allen, 2003).
The changing culture of information use among the Net Generation of students has introduced a new element to the problem of plagiarism for educational institutions. Whereas in the past plagiarism involved a certain amount of intense labour usually from a limited number of print resources, technology and the emerging culture of use amongst the Net Generation facilitates the sophisticated manipulation of information from a large number of electronic sources.
The actual incidence of plagiarism in education and universities is still open to conjecture. However, there is a growing body of evidence that suggests students view information from electronic resources, particularly the Internet, differently from traditional print sources of information. Research conducted by Patrick Scanlon, Associate Professor of Communication at Rochester Institute of Technology, found that “those cutting and pasting were typically in the 25 percent range” with only “six percent of those surveyed indicat[ing] they bought papers online” (Ascribe, 2002). Of greater concern perhaps, was the fact that “50 percent of the students surveyed assumed that plagiarism was widespread and that their peers were cheating, although they themselves were not” (Ascribe, 2002). Scanlon concluded:
“The generation who grew up with the Internet doesn't go to libraries; they are used to cutting and pasting from different Web sites. This
upcoming generation will have an impact on the changing concepts of ownership of text” (Ascribe, 2002).
Research conducted by Donald McCabe from Rutgers University looked at plagiarism as reported by high school students. Forty-eight percent of these students admitted to at least one instance each of both traditional and Webbased plagiarism, while six percent admitted to copying whole papers from the Internet. McCabe suggests that these results are indicative of a different culture of information usage among students, who also seem “to have a different perspective on collaborative work” (Tyre, 2001).
Other educationalists also compare the accessibility of information on the Internet with the “take away”, consumerism that characterises Western culture (Laird, 2001). The same information may appear on the Internet in a variety of places, under different banners and even authors. Authority and the original author are often difficult to determine or not available on websites. This is particularly true of news articles which may appear under a registered online newspaper as well as on a number of personal sites, weblogs, newsgroups, chat rooms and webzines, as information is picked up and disseminated across the Internet. How students use information gathered from the Internet and their tendency to plagiarise appears to go beyond laziness and an intention to deliberately copy, although there will always be cases where plagiarism has been premeditated.
This research, while not extensive does indicate that there has been a cultural shift in the social use of information. Ryan reported that even though students were routinely taught citation protocols and ethics, they still continued to plagiarise mainly from electronic resources. Even after students had been heavily penalised the previous year and more emphasis was placed on teaching students about plagiarism, they still continued to plagiarise the following year and plead ignorance (Ryan 1998). These students appear to view information taken
from Internet sources quite differently to more traditional print resources. This shift in the culture of information use is a result of the technology itself and the widespread uptake of the Internet by business and education. It is also important that we understand how this changing culture of information use has evolved and how our students use technology in order to implement successful strategies to combat plagiarism effectively in education.
Strategies for combating plagiarism A number of strategies have proved effective in combating Internet plagiarism. An electronic solution is the use of special search engines such as Eve2 (CaNexus, 2004 ) which search the Web and complete an analysis and report on the content of assignments. Phrases and sentences that have been copied directly from the Internet are traced, and highlighted in a printed report. Websites where the information is available are also recorded along with the percentage of the assignment that has been plagiarised. A problem with these electronic solutions is the fact that these search engines can only search the public Web and cannot provide information on excerpts that have been copied from articles accessed through commercial library databases that require authentic access by the student or sites that are accessed through the Hidden Web.
Another electronic solution is provided by such companies as Turn It In (iParadigms, 2004). Students submit their assignments online which is then analysed and compared to other assignments submitted to the database. A report is generated detailing the amount of information that has been plagiarised from other assignments. The submitted assignment then becomes part of the database. While Turn It In does allow educators to check students’ work against other assignments, there have been successful court cases against universities and colleges submitting student work on copyright grounds. The student must give permission for their work to be retained in the database. (Grinberg, 2004) While useful, neither solution is definitive.
Practical strategies for dealing with plagiarism are more concerned with best teaching and learning practice and how educators assess students. Assessment items should be reviewed annually and altered from year to year. They should be transparent, ie. students should have a clear understanding of what is required and how the item will be graded. Good assessments should be authentic, openended and reflect workplace practice. They should be challenging students to apply theory to relevant workplace contexts, rather than being a regurgitation of content. Good assessments challenge and encourage students to use higher order thinking and problem-solving (Harris, 2002, Johnson, 2004). Good assessments also require students to use a range of resource formats and authoritative sources. It is very difficult for students to plagiarise authentic assessments.
Another strategy, particularly when dealing with online students, is to incorporate the use of discussion forums or bulletin boards into workshops and even assignments. This requirement provides the educator with samples of student writing and another form of assessment, while allowing students to participate in moderated peer learning. Educators can also ask students to complete metacognitive reflection exercises during workshops. Students have opportunities to practise higher order thinking skills and educators have access to further samples of student writing (Harris, 2002, Johnson, 2004). In this way, educators can build up a profile of student work that may be used for comparative purposes when marking assessments where plagiarism is an issue.
Students also need to have access to information about plagiarism and up-todate reference guides for their particular institution. They should be constantly reminded, not only of consequences, but also the citation protocols, expectations and the mechanics of what constitutes academic plagiarism. Students need to be actively taught information literacy skills so they can evaluate the authority of their information sources, be able to actively deconstruct and make meaning from the information and reconstruct it to create their own understandings in their
own words. Educators need to focus on the value of information being used by students and how the citation process adds value to a piece of work. We need to return to the original philosophy of the academic citation process and the notion that information shared has added value only when its authority is recognised (Combes, 2004).
A baseline strategy for educators when dealing with plagiarism is the inclusion of two major criteria in all assessment items. Firstly, students must demonstrate the depth and breadth of their research by using intext references. If the content being discussed cannot be deemed ‘common knowledge’ (ie. does your grandmother know this), then it must be referenced. Secondly, students must demonstrate their understandings by writing in their own words. Only when these two criteria have been upheld, can the assessment piece be deemed to have added value. If these two criteria are included in all assessment pieces, the issue of whether a student has plagiarised becomes much simpler, particularly for students who have a different culture of information use.
Conclusion Educator’s today need to look closely at how students use information and technology, the changes in the culture of information use that have occurred over the last ten years and how this will continue to evolve as the technology advances. Remonstrating with today’s students, delivering lectures on ethics and accusing them of criminal intent is ineffective and has little relevance to a generation of users who have a different culture of information usage. We need to provide best practice in the assessment aspects of our teaching and learning programs. This includes using a variety of assessment types, authentic assessments and the building of student profiles. All these strategies will assist educators to provide assessment items that are transparent and relevant.
A major strategy to help combat plagiarism is the inclusion of the original notions that underpin the citation process. Information shared only has value when it also
has authority via the citation process. When students understand that their work has added value only when it demonstrates depth and breadth through the citation process and that explanations in their own words demonstrate their understandings, then perhaps plagiarism will be better understood by, and less prevalent, amongst the Net Generation.
References Allen, M. (2003). Dematerialised data and human desire: the Internet and copy culture. Perth, Western Australia: Curtin University of Technology. Ascribe. (2003). Is everyone doing it? RIT professor studies online cheating on college campuses. Ascribe Higher Education News Service, Jan 29 2003. Bellis, M. (2004). Inventors of the modern computer. Retrieved August 13, 2004, from http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa033099.htm Berners-Lee, T. (2000). Weaving the Web: The original design and ultimate destiny of the World Wide Web by its inventor. New York: HarperCollins Publishers. Boyle, J. (2003). The second enclosure movement and the construction of the public domain. Law and Contemporary Problems, Winter-Spring, p 33. CaNexus. (2004). Eve2 Essay Verification Engine. Retrieved on 13 August 2004 from http://www.canexus.com/eve/ Combes, B. (2004). The culture of information usage, plagiarism and the emerging Net Generation. paper presented and published in Research…, Reform…, Realise the potential! proceedings of the Australian Computers in Education Conference (ACEC) 2004, July, Adelaide, South Australia. Computer Hope. (2004). Operating systems. Retrieved 13 August, 2004, from http://www.computerhope.com/os.htm Coyne, R. (2001). Digital Consumption: From the market direct to the home. Paper presented at the Cultural Usability Seminar at UIAH Media Lab. Retrieved 13 August, 2003, from http://www.mlab.uiah.fi/culturalusability/papers/Coyne_paper.html Grinberg, E. (2004). Student wins battle against plagiarism-detection requirement, Law Center CNN.com. Retrieved on 13 August 2004 from http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/21/ctv.plagiarism/ Harris, R. (2002). Anti-Plagiarism Strategies for Research Papers, Virtual Salt. Retrieved on 13 August 2004 from http://www.virtualsalt.com/antiplag.htm iParadigms. (2004). Turnitin. Retrieved on 13 August 2004 from http://www.turnitin.com/static/home.html Johnson, D. (2004). Plagiarism-proofing assignments, Delta Kappan. Retrieved on 13 August 2004 from http://www.doug-johnson.com/dougwri/LPP.html
Laird, E. (2001). Internet plagiarism: We all pay the price. The Chronicle of Higher Education. 47 (44). Department of Communications Information Technology and the Arts (DCITA) (1998). A strategic framework for the information economy. Retrieved 13 August, 2004, from http://www2.dcita.gov.au/ie/framework Pinchot, G. (1995). The Gift Economy, In Context. Retrieved 13 August 2004, from http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC41/PinchotG.htm Ryan, J. (1998). Student plagiarism in an online world. ASEE Prism, 8 (4). Stalder, F & Hirsh, J. (2002). Open Source Intelligence, First Monday. Retrieved 13 August, 2004, from http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_6/stalder/ Schools Online Curriculum Content Initiative (SOCCI). (2004). The Le@rning Federation. Retrieved 13 August, 2004, from http://www.thelearningfederation.edu.au/tlf/newcms/d2.asp Shenk, D. (1997). Data Smog: Surviving the Information Glut. Abacus: London. Tyre, T. (2001). Their cheatin' hearts: high numbers for Web-assisted plagiarism are disquieting, and so are the reasons, but remedies do exist, District Administration, 37 (10). Zakon, R. (2004). Hobbes Internet Timeline v7. Retrieved 13 August, 2004, from http://www.zakon.org/robert/internet/timeline/
