UCL REGISTRY AND ACADEMIC SERVICES APPENDIX 42 PLAGIARISM This advice has been brought together in the form of guidance notes for Faculties and/or Departments/ Divisions when dealing with the plagiarism and suspected plagiarism. It gives a definition of plagiarism; gives some explanation of why students plagiarise; provides hints on how to detect and prevent plagiarism; and sets out the College procedures for dealing with plagiarism. The Academic Committee recognised the need for more information about plagiarism to be compiled and established a Working Group on Plagiarism in 2003 to review UCL’s current policies and procedures in respect of plagiarism, to consider services which are available for the prevention of plagiarism, to liaise as appropriate with the UCL Board of Examiners Examinations Irregularities Panel, and to make recommendations on these matters to the Academic Committee. It was seen as timely to do this because of the increased number of potential cases of plagiarism; the devolvement of some irregularities to be handled within Departments/ Divisions and the need for greater dissemination of best practice in the light of a review of recent case history. This document sets out regulations, procedures and guidelines in respect of plagiarism, and includes examples of best practice from within UCL. Departmental/Faculty Requirements Departments and Faculties are required to implement UCL’s rules and regulations on breaches of the examination regulations, including plagiarism. It is their duty to ensure that students are aware of what constitutes plagiarism and how to avoid it; to assist in preventing plagiarism and ensuring that once suspected, it is handled appropriately and according to the correct procedures. This document sets out best practice in these areas. 1. What is Plagiarism? The current UCL definition of plagiarism, and the general advice given to students about it, is as follows, as published in the Student Handbook and elsewhere: “Plagiarism is defined as the presentation of another person's thoughts or words or artefacts or software as though they were a student's own. Any quotation from the published or unpublished works of other persons must, therefore, be clearly identified as such by being placed inside quotation marks, and students should identify their sources as accurately and fully as possible. A series of short quotations from several different sources, if not clearly identified as such, constitutes plagiarism just as much as does a single unacknowledged long quotation from a single source. Equally, if a student summarises another person's ideas, judgements, figures, software or diagrams, a reference to that person in the text must be made and the work referred to must be included in the bibliography.” “Self-plagiarism is defined as the presentation of the student’s own thoughts or words or artefacts or software where it has been previously submitted for the award of credit or the completion of a course-unit or module. Any quotation from the student’s own published or unpublished works must, therefore, be clearly identified as such by being placed inside quotation marks, and students should identify their sources as accurately and fully as possible. A series of short quotations from several different sources, if not clearly identified as such, constitutes plagiarism just as much as does a single unacknowledged long quotation from a single source. Equally, if it is a summary of the student’s own ideas, judgements, figures, software or diagrams, a reference in the text must be made and the work referred to must be included in the bibliography.” When issuing its advice to students as to what constitutes plagiarism, each Department/ Division should quote the full UCL definition given above, and augment it, as appropriate, with specific local examples drawn from its own discipline, ensuring that the full range of possibilities in this area is covered. UCL’s definition of plagiarism also includes the following: “Recourse to the services of 'ghost-writing' agencies (for example in the preparation of essays or reports) or of outside word-processing agencies which offer correction/improvement of English is strictly forbidden, and students who make use of the services of such agencies render themselves liable for an academic penalty.” “Use of unacknowledged information downloaded from the internet also constitutes plagiarism.” “Where part of an examination consists of 'take away' papers, essays or other work written in a student's own time, or a coursework assessment, the work submitted must be the candidate's own.” “Departments/ Division give specific advice about non-originality, plagiarism and the use of material by others, and students must make themselves aware of such departmental/ divisional guidelines and abide by them. For some assessments it is also illicit to reproduce material which a student has used in other work/assessment for the course or programmes concerned. Students should make themselves aware of their Department's/ Division’s rules on this 'self-plagiarism'. If in doubt, students should consult their Personal Tutor or another appropriate teacher.” In addition to the above, and according to the nature of the discipline concerned, other forms of plagiarism may occur, for example in laboratory-based science subjects, including the plagiarism of chemical samples, spectra, experimental data, computer outputs, etc. Students should also be advised that: “Failure to observe any of the provisions of this policy or of approved departmental guidelines constitutes an examination offence under UCL and University Regulations. Examination offences will normally be treated as cheating or irregularities under the Regulations in respect of Examination Irregularities. Under these Regulations students found to have committed an offence may be excluded from all further examinations of UCL or the University or of both.” 2. Why do students plagiarise? Plagiarism may be intentional or unintentional. The list below is not exhaustive but contains the most commonly encountered reasons: On the whole, unintentional: Misunderstanding about citation Over-reliance on the original source material Following practices encouraged or accepted in previous educational experience or culture Not fully understanding when group work ceases and individual work begins Compensating for poor English language skills Poor note-taking practice On the whole, intentional: Leaving the work to the last minute and taking the easy option Needing to succeed Sheer panic Thinking that it is easy to get away with it Having problems with the workload Copying others is easier than original work Sensing that the teacher will not mind and/or notice 3. How to prevent plagiarism? It is important to ensure that students have been given full details at the start of their course/programme of study about how to undertake any work that they are carrying out on their own, particularly if it counts towards the assessment of a module or course. They should understand what plagiarism means in general and specifically in terms of the subject area they are covering. Listed below are a few key areas that should be covered: Information on the definition of plagiarism and how it relates to the piece of work set Procedures for dealing with possible cases of plagiarism should be drawn to their attention A dedicated session aimed at programme level, at least, in line with UCL policy, should be given, ideally at the start of session, though allowance should be made for later starters and part-time students A dedicated session at module level should be given, which highlights additional requirements for a given module, remembering that there may be students taking the module from outside the Department/ Division who will not be aware of discipline-specific requirements Written guidelines should be issued to all students, either hard copy or online, prior to submission of the piece of work In these, the scope of the work should be made clear, including: when group work ends and individual work starts; how and when to reference; how and when to quote; how best to deal with note-taking. The matter of citation is important as there are differing practices in citing sources across disciplines As part of the delivery of the module, if possible examples of plagiarism occur in drafts or practice essays etc., students should be advised accordingly and a log should be made that such advice has been given Details of submission should be clear, including the date for submission and where the work should be handed in Students should complete a cover sheet for all assessed work which should include the following: signed confirmation by the student that it is their own unaided work and that he/she has read and understood guidelines on plagiarism; the date of signature; a stamp showing date of receipt It will help to prevent plagiarism if students are set original and different assignments each session, as students have and will gain access to previous sessions’ work from other students. It is also highly recommended that submission is made in electronic form as well as hard copy as this may aid the method of detection. 4. How to detect plagiarism? If plagiarism is suspected in any piece of work, whether assessed or non-assessed, submitted by a student, it must always be investigated. In some recent cases that have come before the Examinations Irregularities Panel, students have claimed that they have always done their work in this way, and have never encountered any problems or difficulties before. It is essential that good practice in this area is instilled in students at the earliest opportunity, as timely identification of any malpractice can prevent more serious problems occurring later on in a student’s career. Given the extremely diverse areas where plagiarism can occur and the differences between the various disciplines, it is not possible to give a fully comprehensive list of all indications that a piece of work may be plagiarised, either in part or in full. UCL is using the JISC plagiarism service, which utilises Turn-It-In, to assist with the identification of possible plagiarism. For further information, please go to www.ucl.ac.uk/registry/uclstaff/plagiarism, or contact Dr Bob Muid on extension 31399 or at r.muid@ucl.ac.uk. For those who do not use this service, there are some typical signs that could indicate that a student’s work may be plagiarised. These include: Internal differences within the body of the work in, for example, style, spelling, punctuation, use of fonts, italics, language, grammar and construction. The work submitted is of a (much) higher standard or a different nature (e.g. in terms of linguistic expression) than one would normally have expected to receive from a particular student. Internal inconsistencies in references in either the main body of the text or bibliography, or in both. This can also include any significant omission of a particular source or sources which one would otherwise normally expect to find cited. Statements that are unsupported by the remainder of the text, e.g. “as we can see from the table above” where there is no table. The work submitted is either partly or largely irrelevant to the task set, or is generally of a poor quality in relation to what has actually been asked for, though is competent enough in it. Referencing which appears inadequate or flimsy in relation to the detail of what is being said. Any “instinctive familiarity” with the material in the assessed work on the part of the assessor (i.e. the “I’m pretty sure I’ve seen this somewhere else before” feeling that one sometimes gets!). Marked similarities between the work of two or more students. This can either be within the same cohort, or could be between students from different year groups. If plagiarism is suspected, then a useful starting point in trying to identify it is to undertake some spot checks on the references. Frequently, students will include some references to works they have consulted and used, but not do this consistently and in full, e.g. they may well “cite” the odd sentence or conclusion correctly, but not make any adequate reference to other, substantial parts of the works they have been using verbatim. A quick scan of the works in question should reveal whether or not they have been plagiarised. Another typical scenario is that students will make reference to one or more works along the way, but not to the actual work or works that they have been using. An indication that this might be the case is when there would appear to be some significant omissions in the references or bibliography, e.g. a “major” monograph on the subject appears not to have been consulted. In such cases, it is always worthwhile consulting these to see whether the student has, in fact, been using them. Should these checks not produce any hard evidence, but you are still unsure whether or not plagiarism has occurred, it is helpful to consult a colleague who is familiar with the subject matter in question; he or she may well have some knowledge of the source or sources in question. Finally, there is a growing tendency for students to use the internet in the preparation of their work, and some are unable to resist the temptation to download and import large sections of material into their work, passing it off as their own. There is now a wide range of scientific and other articles and journals available in this way, as well as a large number of sites “offering” ready-made essays to students on just about every topic imaginable. The fact that it is possible to import such material without having first to type it out has made this form of plagiarism increasingly “popular”, and many of the cases of plagiarism that we now deal with are of this type. Just as it is a straightforward task for students to copy in this way, so it is also a relatively easy task to detect it through search-engines, and in particular “Google”. To undertake a “Google” search, you should first identify some key phrases within the body of the text you are investigating which seem, to you, perhaps not to be entirely of the student’s own making. These can be: phrases that you suspect are beyond the linguistic competence of the student; phrases which are “unusual” or which “stand out”; “dense” technical concepts not fully explained; etc. You should then search for these in “Google” [www.google.com]; the site contains useful tips on how to conduct searches, and you will find these by clicking on “Advanced Search”. It is always helpful, however, to confine the nature of the search by putting the text you are seeking in quotation marks; this means that Google will only look for that set of words in that particular combination. For example, try checking the phrase “for light with a Gaussian spectral profile” – you will easily discover its source! On occasion, a “Google” search may not initially yield conclusively positive results, yet just the odd phrase or two. It is, however, worth bearing in mind that plagiarism is itself increasing rife on the internet, and it can pay to be persistent! A recent search undertaken on an essay about Ibsen’s The Doll’s House (it is worth looking in “Google” for “Doll’s House essays”, by the way) revealed that at least three sources had been plagiarising odd sentences from each other, but eventually “Google” located the “original” source of all of these three, and the source that the student had plagiarised about 90% of her essay from. Interestingly (and not untypically), the student cited only one of the “minor” websites in her bibliography, but not the one from which her essay was largely taken. 5. Building the case When you are satisfied that there is a possible case of plagiarism to be considered, you should undertake the following steps: Collate all the information gathered so far, indicating the areas of possible plagiarism in the student’s work. Determine whether the case is of a minor nature to be handled by the course/module organiser or whether it is of a more serious nature. See UCL's Procedure in Respect of a Breach of the Examination Regulations for further information. However, it is always helpful to consult the Chair of the Board of Examiners. If it has not been done already, inform the Chair of the Board of Examiners as early as possible if the case is likely to be of a more serious nature. The Chair of the Board of Examiners will either consult other examiners responsible for examining the work or ask you to do so. The Chair of the Board of Examiners should ask you and the other examiners to continue to mark the work as normal (ie as if it has not been plagiarised and assign a provisional mark to it. At the same time, s/he should ask you to offer advice on the extent of the plagiarism (in terms of percentage and severity), and whether, in your opinion, it was intentional or unintentional. You should also note what mark should be given to the unplagiarised parts of the work. The Chair of the Board of Examiners, in consultation with the examiners, should consider whether to follow the option of interviewing the student, where the origins of the work are unclear and there is still some uncertainty concerning the originality of the submitted work. This is allowable within the Examination Regulations. A decision has to be made as to whether there is enough evidence to indicate possible plagiarism. The case must now be clearly set out which will involve printing out the plagiarised source(s) and indicating the areas of plagiarism by cross-referencing the work, and will include completion of the form as specified in UCL's Procedure in Respect of a Breach of the Examination Regulations. The case must then be referred to the Chair of the Board of Examiners, who will deal with it according to UCL's Procedure in Respect of a Breach of the Examination Regulations. Where work is suspected, the original should be retained until the case has been finally determined. Care should be taken when considering at what point a student should be informed of the allegation. Factors to be taken into account are the timing of the detection vis-à-vis examination period or deadlines for significant assessed work. In addition, early detection and early indication to the student might assist in preventing further cases of plagiarism, particularly where it might be unintentional. 6. Dealing with the case On receipt of a fully documented case of plagiarism, the Chair should consult UCL's Procedure in Respect of a Breach of the Examination Regulations. In accordance with these, s/he should determine whether the case can be dealt with internally or should be referred to the Examination Irregularities Panel. In all instances, the Chair of the Board of Examiners should keep a record of all proven cases of plagiarism (and any penalty imposed) within the Board’s remit and report on them, as appropriate to the Director of Registry and Academic Services, in accordance with UCL's Procedure in Respect of a Breach of the Examination Regulations. This will be particularly important in those instances where a student has plagiarised on more than one occasion, which will determine whether the matter has to be referred to the Central Examination Irregularities Panel or not, and for the assessment of the level of the penalty. 7. Further reading It is essential that you consult UCL's Procedure in Respect of a Breach of the Examination Regulations, which can be found at http://www.ucl.ac.uk/Registry/UCLStaff/Pink_Book/EIregs/index.shtml Other useful websites include: www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/assessinglearning/03/plagMain.html www.study-skills.net for Peter Levin’s “Beat the Witch-hunt! Peter Levin’s Guide to Avoiding and Rebutting Accusations of Plagiarism, for Conscientious Students www.tla.ed.ac.uk/services/LTforums/archive/reasons.pdf