Eğitim Fakültesi Öğretim Üyelerinin Öğrenci İntihaline İlişkin Görüşleri

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 2, 193 - 204, 01.08.2020

Ünal Deniz

https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.19.513584

Cited By: 2

Öz

Etik ihlallerinden biri olarak kabul edilen intihalin, özellikle öğrenciler arasında sık rastlanan bir durum olduğu bilinmektedir. Literatürde öğrenci intihaline yönelik araştırmaların çoğu, öğrenci algılarına dayalı olarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu araştırma ise Türkiye'de üç farklı eğitim fakültesinde görev yapan 18 öğretim üyesinin yükseköğretimde öğrenci intihaline yönelik görüşlerinin incelendiği bir olgubilim çalışmasıdır. Katılımcılar, amaçlı örneklem yöntemlerinden maksimum çeşitlilik örneklem yöntemi ile belirlenmiştir. Araştırmanın verileri, araştırmacı tarafından geliştirilen yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formuyla elde edilmiş ve betimsel analiz, içerik analizi ve sürekli karşılaştırma tekniğiyle çözümlenmiştir. Araştırmada genel olarak üç soruya yanıt aranmıştır. İlk soruda, öğretim üyelerinin öğrenci intihali konusundaki görüşleri ve öğrenci intihalinin nedenleri ele alınmaktadır. İkinci soruda, son yıllarda sayıca önemli bir artış gösteren intihal programlarına yönelik öğretim üyelerinin pedagojik uygulamaları ve deneyimleri üzerinde durulmaktadır. Son soruda, intihalin önlenmesinde karşılaşılan mevcut engeller ve intihalin önlenmesine yönelik çözüm önerileri sunulmaktadır. Belirtilen bu sorularda elde edilen bilgiler ile intihale ilişkin literatürü zenginleştirmek amaçlanmaktadır. Araştırma, öğrenci intihali sorunuyla mücadelede ele alınması gereken bazı noktalara dikkat çekerek, birkaç uygulama önerisiyle sona ermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Etik, intihalin nedenleri, intihalin önlenmesi, öğrenci intihali, öğretim üyesi

Views of Education Faculty Members on Student Plagiarism

Öz

As an ethical violation, plagiarism is known to be common especially among students. Most of the current research in the literature on student plagiarism is based on student perceptions. However, this study is a phenomenological study that analyzes the views of 18 faculty members, who work in three different faculties of education in Turkey, on student plagiarism. The participants were selected to be included in the study by using the maximum variation sampling, which is a purposeful sampling method. The data were gathered by using a semi-structured interview form developed by the researcher and analyzed using descriptive analysis, content analysis, and constant comparison technique. The answers to three primary questions were sought. The first question aimed at revealing faculty members' views on student plagiarism and reasons for the plagiarism. The second question focused on the practices and experiences of faculty members with plagiarism-detection programs, which have significantly increased in recent years. Finally, the third question aimed to identify the current barriers to the prevention of plagiarism, and the recommendations for the prevention of plagiarism. The study is aimed at enriching the plagiarism literature with its data collected to answer the abovementioned questions. The study concludes with some suggestions for practice by drawing attention to some key points in fighting plagiarism.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Causes of plagiarism, ethics, faculty member, prevention of plagiarism, student plagiarism

Kaynakça

• Ahmad, U. K., Mansourizadeh, K., & Ai, G. K. M. (2012). None-native university students’ perception of plagiarism. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 3(1), 39–48.
• Akakandelwa, A., Jain, P., & Wamundila, S. (2013). Academic dishonesty: A comparative study of students of library and information science in Botswana and Zambia. Journal of Information Ethics, 22(2), 141–154.
• Baruchson-Arbib, S., & Yaari, E. (2004). Printed versus Internet plagiarism: A study of students’ perception. International Journal of Information Ethics, 1(6), 29–35.
• Batane, T. (2010). Turning to Turnitin to fight plagiarism among university students. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(2), 1–12.
• Belter, R. W., & du Pré, A. (2009). A strategy to reduce plagiarism in an undergraduate course. Teaching of Psychology, 36(4), 257–261.
• Bratton, V. K., & Strittmatter, C. (2014). Plagiarism awareness among students: Assessing integration of ethics theory into library instruction. College &Research Libraries, 75(5), 736–752.
• Brown, B. S., & Weible, R. (2006). Changes in academic dishonesty among MIS majors between 1999 and 2004. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 18(1), 116–134.
• Carroll, J. (2009). Plagiarism as a threat to learning: An educational response. In G. Joughin (Ed.), Assessment, learning and judgement in higher education (pp. 115–131). Berlin: Springer.
• Chao, C., Wilhelm, W., & Neureuther, B. (2009). A study of electronic detection and pedagocical approaches for reducing plagiarism. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 5(1), 31–42.
• Click, A. B. (2014). Taking something that is not your right: Egyptian students’ perceptions of academic integrity. Libri, 64(2), 109–123.
• Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Davis, M., & Carroll, J. (2009). Formative feedback within plagiarism education: Is there a role for text-matching software? International Journal for Educational Integrity, 5(2), 58–70.
• Davis, S. F., Grover, C. A., Becker, A. H., & McGregor, L. N. (1992). Academic dishonesty: Prevalence, determinants, techniques, and punishments. Teaching of Psychology, 19(1), 16–20.
• De Jager, K., & Brown, C. (2010). The tangled web: Investigating academics’ views of plagiarism at the University of Cape Town. Studies in Higher Education, 35(5), 513–528.
• Devlin, M., & Gray, K. (2007). In their own words: A qualitative study of the reasons Australian univeristy students palgiarize. Higher Education & Development, 26(2), 181–198.
• DeVoss, D., & Rosati, A. C. (2002). “It wasn’t me, was it?” Plagiarism and the Web. Computers and Composition, 19(2), 191–203.
• Emerson, L. (2008). Plagiarism, a Turnitin trial, and an experience of cultural disorientation. In C. Eisner, & M. Vicinus (Eds.), Originality, imitation, and plagiarism: Teaching writing in the digital age (pp. 183–194). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
• Erkaya, O. R. (2009). Plagiarism by Turkish students: Causes and solutions. Asian EFL Journal, 11(2), 86–103.
• Evering, L. C., & Moorman, G. (2012). Rethinking plagiarism in the digital age. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56(1), 35–44.
• Flint, A., Clegg, S., & Macdonald, R. (2006). Exploring staff perceptions of student plagiarism. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 30(2), 145–156.
• Gourlay, L., & Deane, J. (2012). Loss, responsibility, blame? Staff discourses of student plagiarism. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 49(1), 19–29.
• Gu, Q., & Brooks, J. (2008). Beyond the accusation of plagiarism. System, 36(3), 337–352.
• Haggis, T., & Pouget, M. (2002). Trying to be motivated: Perspectives on learning from younger students accessing higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 7(3), 323–336.
• Hosny, M., & Fatima, S. (2014). Attitude of students towards cheating and plagiarism: University case study. Journal of Applied Sciences, 14(8), 748– 757.
• Howard, R. M. (2001). Forget about policing plagiarism: Just teach! The Chronicle of Higher Education, 11(16), 46–49.
• Hrasky, S., & Kronenberg, D. (2011). Curriculum redesign as a faculty-centred approach to plagiarism reduction. In Educational integrity: Culture and values. Paper presented at the 5th Asia Pacific conference on Educational Integrity. 21.12.2017 tarihinde <http://www.apcei.catl.uwa.edu.au/procs/hrasky.pdf> adresinden erişildi.
• Javaeed, A., Khan, A. S., Khan, S. H., & Ghauri, S. K. (2019). Perceptions of plagiarism among undergraduate medical students in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 35(2), 532–536.
• Kenny, D. (2007). Student plagiarism and professional practice. Nurse Education Today, 27(1), 14–18.
• Köse, O., & Arıkan, A. (2011). Reducing plagiarism by using online software: An experimental study. Contemporary Online Language Education Journal, 1, 122–129.
• Leask, B. (2006). Plagiarism, cultural diversity and metaphor – implications for academic staff development. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(2), 183–199.
• Ledwith, A., & Risquez, A. (2008). Using anti-plagiarism software to promote academic honesty in the context of peer reviewed assignments. Studies in Higher Education, 33(4), 371–384.
• Li, Y. (2015). Academic staff's perspectives upon student plagiarism: A case study at a university in Hong Kong. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 35(1), 14–26.
• Macdonald, R., & Carroll, J. (2006). Plagiarism – a complex issue requiring a holistic institutional approach. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(2), 233–245.
• Mahmood, Z. (2009). Students’ understanding of plagiarism and collusion and recommendations for academics. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Applications, 8(6), 1348–1358.
• McCabe, D. L., Feghali, T., & Abdallah, H. (2008). Academic dishonesty in the Middle East: Individual and contextual factors. Research in Higher Education, 49(5), 451–467.
• McCabe, D. L., & Trevino, L. K. (1997). Individual and contextual influences on academic dishonesty: A multicampus investigation. Research in Higher Education, 38(3), 379–396.
• McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics &Behaviour, 11(3), 219–232.
• Mojeiko, V., & Rudkouski, P. (2019). Plagiarism among Belarusian students: Contributory factors, consequences, and solutions. Analytical Paper 14. 27 Kasım 2019 tarihinde <https://belarusdigest.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Rudkouski-Mojeiko-Plagiarism-Paper.pdf> adresinden erişildi.
• Moon, J. (2005). Plagiarism in higher education: an integrated approach: Workshop handout. 1 Aralık 2019 tarihinde <https://hhs.hud.ac.uk/w2/ltsu/plagiarism_folder/plagiarism_workshop.pdf> adresinden erişildi.
• Park, C. (2003). In other (people’s) words: Plagiarism by university students – literature and lessons. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(5), 471–488.
• Patton, M. Q. (2014). Nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri. M. Bütün, & S. B. Demir (Çev. Ed.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Pecorari, D. (2001). Plagiarism and international students: How the English-speaking university responds. In D. Belcher, & A. Hirvela (Eds.), Linking literacies: Perspectives on L2 reading-writing connections (pp. 229–245). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
• Pennycook, A. (1996). Borrowing other’s words: Text, ownership, memory, and plagiarism. TESOL Quarterly, 30(2), 201–230.
• Perry, B. (2010). Exploring academic misconduct: Some insights into student behaviour. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(2), 97–108.
• Ramzan, M., Munir, M. A., Siddique, N., & Asif, M. (2012). Awareness about plagiarism amongst university students in Pakistan. Higher Education, 64(1), 73–84.
• Rawwas, M. Y., Al-Khatib, J. A., & Vitell, S. J. (2004). Academic dishonesty: A cross-cultural comparison of US and Chinese marketing students. Journal of Marketing Education, 26(1), 89–100.
• Roig, M. (2001). Plagiarism and paraphrasing criteria of college and university professors. Ethics & Behavior, 11(3), 307–323.
• Savage, S. (2004). Staff and student responses to a trial of Turnitin plagiarism detection software. Proceedings of the Australian Universities Quality Forum 2004: Quality in a time of change. Melbourne: AUQA Occasional Publication. 30 Kasım 2019 tarihinde <https://citl.indiana.edu/files/pdf/savage.pdf> adresinden erişildi.
• Sisti, D. A. (2007). How do high school students justify Internet plagiarism? Ethics & Behavior, 17(3), 215–231.
• Sowden, C. (2005). Plagiarism and the culture of multilingual students in higher education abroad. ELT Journal, 59(3), 226–233.
• Stapleton, P. (2012). Gauging the effectiveness of anti-plagiarism software: An empirical study of second language graduate writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(2), 125–133.
• Sterngold, A. (2004). Confronting plagiarism: How conventional teaching invites cyber-cheating. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 36(3), 16–21.
• Sutherland-Smith, W. (2008). Plagiarism, the Internet, and student learning: Improving academic integrity. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Szabo, A., & Underwood, J. (2004). Cybercheats: Is information and communication technology fuelling academic dishonesty? Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(2), 180–199.
• TDK (2011). Türkçe sözlük. Ankara: TDK Yayınları.
• Teodorescu, D., & Andrei, T. (2009). Faculty and peer influences on academic integrity: College cheating in Romania. Higher Education, 57(3), 267–282.
• Toprak, Z. (2016). Türkiye’de akademik yazı: İntihal ve özgünlük. Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi, 34(2), 1–12.
• TÜBİTAK (2018). Bilimsel dergilere gönderilen makalelerde dikkat edilmesi gereken noktalar. 9 Mart 2018 tarihinde <http://journals.tubitak.gov.tr/genel/brosur.pdf> adresinden erişildi.
• Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Bilim Etiği Komitesi (2002). Bilimsel araştırmada etik ve sorunları. Ankara: Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Yayınları.
• Uçak, N. Ö., & Birinci, H. G. (2008). Bilimsel etik ve intihal. Türk Kütüphaneciliği, 22(2), 187–204.
• Uçak, N. Ö., & Ünal, Y. (2015). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Bilgi ve Belge Yönetimi Bölümü öğrencilerinin akademik sahtekârlık ve intihal konusundaki görüşleri. In U. Al, & Z. Taşkın (Eds.), Prof. Dr. İrfan Çakın’a armağan içinde (s. 251–264). Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Bilgi ve Belge Yönetimi Bölümü.
• Ünal, Y., & Uçak, N. Ö. (2017). Farklı eğitim ve kültürlerdeki üniversite öğrencilerinin intihal ve kopyaya ilişkin görüş ve davranışları. Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 34(1), 177–194.
• Vieyra, M., & Weaver, K. (2016). The prevalence and quality of source attribution in middle and high school science papers. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, 83. 13 Aralık 2017 tarihinde <http://istl.org/16winter/refereed2.html> adresinden erişildi.
• Walker, A. L. (2008). Preventing unintentional plagiarism: A method for strengthening paraphrasing skills. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35(4), 387–396.
• Williams, B. T. (2007). Trust, betrayal, and authorship: Plagiarism and how we perceive students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(4), 350–354.
• Woessner, M. C. (2004). Beating the house: How inadequate penalties for cheating make plagiarism an excellent gamble. PS: Political Science and Politics, 37(2), 313–320.
• Yavuz, L., Alıca, T., & Merdivan, F. (2013). Fikir ve sanat eserleri kanunu yorumu. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Yıldırım, Z. (2018). Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi araştırma görevlilerinin intihal algısı. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara.
• Zimerman, M. (2012). Plagiarism and international students in academic libraries. New Library World, 113(5/6), 290–299.