DETERMINING STUDENT TEACHERS’ RATES OF PLAGIARISM DURING THE DISTANCE EDUCATION AND INVESTIGATING POSSIBLE REASONS FOR PLAGIARISM

Year 2022, , 210 - 236, 01.01.2022

Huseyin Bayram Fatih Tıkman

https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.1050398

Cited By: 1

Abstract

This study examined the plagiarism rates of student teachers (hereafter students) during the distance education process and investigated the reasons for plagiarising. Qualitative dominant sequential exploratory design was used. The sample consisted of students studying at two different universities in Turkey. The study group was determined in two stages as a quantitative sample and a qualitative participant group. To select the quantitative sample, the maximum diversity sampling was used, while the criterion sampling method was utilized for the qualitative participant group. The data were collected in two stages as quantitative and qualitative in accordance with the nature of the mixed-methods research. In the first stage, the assignments prepared by students were included in the plagiarism program and their similarity rates were determined. All assignments were coded according to the names of the students who prepared them. Then, the assignments with the highest and lowest rate of plagiarism were identified. In the next stage, qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interviews conducted with the students who prepared the aforementioned assignments. The interview questions were prepared to obtain in-depth information about why they plagiarized or did not plagiarize. Content analysis was applied to analyse the data, and meaningful findings were found. The findings were collected under five headings. According to the results, those with high plagiarism stated their reasons for plagiarism as their economic and social conditions were not suitable for research. On the other hand, those with low plagiarism considered plagiarism as an action such as stealing and being unfair.

Keywords

Covid-19 outbreak, distance education, plagiarism, student teachers.

References

• Adam, L. (2016). Student Perspectives on Plagiarism. T. Bretag (Ed.), In Handbook of academic integrity (pp. 519-533). Springer.
• Al Ahdab, S. (2020). Knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) towards pandemic COVID-19 among Syrians. BMC Public Health 21, 296 https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-27859/v1
• Ali, I. (2020). The COVID-19 Pandemic: Making sense of rumor and fear: Op-Ed. Medical Anthropology, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1080/01459740.2020.1745481
• Anderson, I. (2009). Avoiding plagiarism in academic writing. Nursing Standard (through 2013), 23(18), 35. https://doi.org/10.7748/ns.23.18.35.s51
• Armstrong, M. B. (1993). Ethics and professionalism in accounting education: A sample course. Journal of Accounting Education, 11(1), 77-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/0748-5751(93)90019-f Athabascau University, 2020. Doctor of Education in Distance Education. Retrieved October 20, 2020 from https://www.athabascau.ca/syllabi/edde/edde802.php
• Avarogullari, M. (2016). Sosyal bilgiler ogretmen adaylarinin goruslerine gore intihalin sebepleri. Journal of Turkish Studies.11(3), 293-293. https://doi.org/10.7827/turkishstudies.9458
• Bamford, J., & Sergiou, K. (2005). International students and plagiarism: An analysis of the reasons for plagiarism among international foundation students. Investigations in University Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 17-22. Retrieved February 10, 2021 from http://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/173/
• Batane, T. (2010). Turning to Turnitin to fight plagiarism among university students. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(2), 1-12. Retrieved February 02, 2021 from https://www.jstor.org/stable/ pdf/jeductechsoci.13.2.1.pdf
• Bedford, J., Enria, D., Giesecke, J., Heymann, D. L., Ihekweazu, C., Kobinger, G., ... & Ungchusak, K. (2020). COVID-19: towards controlling of a pandemic. The Lancet, 395(10229), 1015-1018. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30673-5
• Benzer, S & Kara, F. (2020) The determinants of the youth unemployment in graduate students’ views on scientific research and publication ethics. Cankiri Karatekin University Journal of Institute of Social Sciences, 11(1), 288-308. Retrieved February 11, 2021 from http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/ pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=f70f9e03-5c92-4b02-8392-596e91aa78e6%40pdc-v-sessmgr06
• Boon, H. (2011). Raising the bar: Ethics education for quality teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(7), 76-93. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2011v36n7.2
• Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Buyukozturk, S. (2011). Handbook of data analysis for social sciences. Ankara: Pegem Academy Publishing.
• Byrne, M. (2001). Sampling for qualitative research. AORN Journal, 73(2), 494-494. https://doi. org/10.1016/s0001-2092(06)61990-x
• Chandrasinghe, P. C., Siriwardana, R. S., Kumarage, S. K., Gunathilake, B., Weerasuriya, A., Munasinghe, N. M., ... & Fernando, R. F. (2020). Adapting surgical services at a tertiary care unit amidst the COVID19 pandemic: a Sri Lankan perspective. Sri Lanka Journal of Surgery, 38(1), 42-45. https://doi.org/10.4038/sljs.v38i1.8689
• Chandrasoma, R., C. Thompson, and A. Pennycook. 2004. ‘Beyond plagiarism: Transgressive and nontransgressive intertextuality. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 3(3), 171–93. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327701jlie0303_1
• Chapman, K. J., Davis, R., Toy, D. and Wright, L. (2004). Academic integrity in the business school environment: I’ll get by with a little help from my friends. Journal of Marketing Education, 26(3), 236-249. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475304268779
• Colon, A. (2001). Avoid the pitfalls of plagiarism. Writer, 114(1), 8. [Google Scholar]
• Coyne, I. T. (1997). Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling; Merging or clear boundaries? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26 (3), 623-630. https://doi. org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1997.t01-25-00999.x