About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

27 J. Crim. Just. Educ. 1 (2016)

handle is hein.journals/jcrimjed27 and id is 1 raw text is: Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 2016 Vol. 27, No. 1, 1 18, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10511253.2015.1064982 Student Academic Dishonesty: The Potential for Situational Prevention Tarah Hodgkinson, Hugh Curtis, David MacAlister and Graham Farrell Approximately one-half to three-quarters of university students commit some form of cheating, plagiarism, or collusion. Typical university responses are policy statements containing definitions plus punishment procedures. This paper collates a portfolio of strategies and tactics that seek to design- out, deter, and discourage academic misconduct. It finds many routine tac- tics exist, from silence and the use of large halts for major exams, to restrictions on electronic devices. Others are less consistently adopted, such as splitting lengthy exams in two to discourage washroom-visits where cheating takes place. The portfolio of tactics is framed in the context of crime opportunity theory and the 25 techniques of situational crime preven- tion. It is proposed that more consistent application of tactics focusing on environmental design, curricular design, and class management offer signifi- cant potential for reducing misconduct. Future research should seek to evaluate and enhance such interventions. Introduction University student academic dishonesty (or misconduct) is the act of misleading or deceiving others into believing that academic work is original and independent, when in fact the work belongs to someone else (Davis, Drinan, & Gallant, 2009; Marsh, 2007). It is a widespread concern, and probably fair to say that it is a problem at all universities across the world. At least half, and perhaps as many as three-quarters, of university students in the United States have been found to engage in academic dishonesty at least once in their undergraduate careers (Christensen-Hughes t McCabe, 2006; Yee t MacKown, 2009). Similarly, 61% of Swedish university students admitted to copying written material without sourcing, 40% admitted to fabricating a bibliography, 31% admitted using an essay bank (online paper mill), and 9% admitted using crib notes or cheat sheets during examinations (Trost, 2009). Sampling three universities, Lim and See (2001) found that 89.8% of Singaporean students reported paraphrasing material without sourcing, 76.4% reported working in groups on individual Routiedge Taylor&FranisGrop (D 2015 Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most