Advertisement

Academic Writing for Higher Learning Institution Students: Implications from User Needs Analysis for a Specific Plagiarism Module in e-Learning Platform

  • Hafizhah Suzana HussienEmail author
  • Fariza Khalid
  • Supyan Hussin
  • Dini Farhana Baharuddin
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11870)

Abstract

Academic writing is a benchmark in most academic institution towards maintaining academic excellence among graduate students. However, to avoid plagiarism was found to be one of the most challenging tasks in academic writing among graduates in the digital era. A deeper understanding of plagiarism would be an important addition to students’ competencies in academic writing. This study aimed to develop a one-stop e-learning platform that is able to assist graduate students in addressing their knowledge and understanding towards plagiarism. ICCEE instructional design method was used in developing the proposed platform. Need analysis was the first step approached in the development process. A survey was conducted among 440 post-graduate students using self-designed questionnaire. The outcome of the survey was quantitatively analyzed using descriptive technique. Results show that majority of the respondents have general knowledge about plagiarism. Even though most respondents agreed plagiarism is a serious matter, their attitude shows the opposite. This may be because they have never taken any specific course related to plagiarism nor used any plagiarism detection tool. The respondents also stated the need for a specific online course on plagiarism in the form of Massive Open Online Course (MOOC). This information about students’ need can be a guide in developing the one-stop e-learning platform to understand about plagiarism.

Keywords

Needs analysis Knowledge and attitude Plagiarism Academic writing Students 

References

  1. 1.
    Yamano, P.H.: Cyberethics in the elementary classroom: teaching the responsible use of technology. Dissertation (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bouman, K.: A phenomenological investigation of college students’ construction and representation of plagiarism. Indiana Univ. Pennsylvania Knowl Repos @ IUP, vol. 397, pp. 12–21 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kymberley, K., Bennett, L.S., Behrendt, J.L.B.: Instructor perceptions of plagiarism: are we finding common ground? Teach. Psychol. 1/2 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top3301
  4. 4.
    Karim, N.S.A., Zamzuri, N.H.A., Nor, Y.M.: Exploring the relationship between internet ethics in university students and the big five model of personality. 1–2 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Katavić, V.: Five-year report of Croatian Medical Journal’s Research Integrity Editor - policy, policing, or policing policy. Croat. Med. J. 47, 220–227 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guy, J., Curtis, L.V.: Is plagiarism changing over time? A 10-year time-lag study with three points of measurement. Br. J. Psychiatry 112, 211–212 (1966).  https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.112.483.211-aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cummings, R., Maddux, C.D., Harlow, S., Dyas, L.: Academic misconduct in undergraduate teacher education students and its relationship to their principled moral reasoning. J. Instr. Psychol. 29, 286–296 (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Selwyn, N.: “Not necessarily a bad thing…”: a study of online plagiarism amongst undergraduate students. Assess Eval. High. Educ. 33, 465–479 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701563104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Aasheim, C.L., Rutner, P.S., Lixin Li, S.R.W.: Plagiarism and programming: a survey of student attitudes. Br. J. Psychiatry 3, 297–313 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.112.483.211-aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Evans, R.: Evaluating an electronic plagiarism detection service: the importance of trust and the difficulty of proving students don’t cheat. Act. Learn. High Educ. 7, 87–99 (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787406061150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chuda, D., Navrat, P., Kovacova, B., Humay, P.: The issue of (software) plagiarism: a student view. IEEE Trans. Educ. 55, 22–28 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2011.2112768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mohd Isa, P., Jusoff, K., Abu Samah, S.A.: Sustenance of values and ethics in the Malaysian higher education e-learning drive. Asian Soc. Sci. 4, 115–121 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v4n6p115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hart, M., Friesner, T.: Plagiarism and poor academic practice – a threat to the extension of e-learning in higher education? (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen, L.L.: Pedagogically effective online instructional design model, vol. 6, pp. 1551–1554 (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cooper, D.R., Schindler, P.: Business Research Methods (1998)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Krejcie, R.V., Morgan, D.W.: Determining sample size for research activities. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 30, 607–610 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hafizhah Suzana Hussien
    • 1
    Email author
  • Fariza Khalid
    • 1
  • Supyan Hussin
    • 1
  • Dini Farhana Baharuddin
    • 2
  1. 1.Universiti Kebangsaan MalaysiaBangiMalaysia
  2. 2.Universiti Sains Islam MalaysiaNilaiMalaysia

Personalised recommendations