Eliminating The Successor To Plagiarism? Identifying The Usage Of Contract Cheating Sites

Clarke, R & Lancaster, T (2006). Eliminating The Successor To Plagiarism? Identifying The Usage Of Contract Cheating Sites; 2nd Plagiarism: Prevention, Practice and Policy Conference 2006 – organised by JISC Plagiarism Advisory Service, Newcastle, UK, June 2006.

The paper identifies a growing problem, referred to as contract cheating, considered to be the successor to pure plagiarism. Contract cheating is defined as the submission of work by students for academic credit which the students have paid contractors to write for them. The usage of one particular site, RentACoder, known to be used for contract cheating is manually monitored. RentACoder is a site where computer solutions are written to contract for legitimate uses but can also be used for students to cheat. An exhaustive study shows that 12.3% of bid requests placed on RentACoder are identified as contract cheating. The primary study reported in the paper quantifies and discusses these contract cheaters. Out of 236 identified contract cheaters only 8.1% of these have made only a single bid request. Over half of the 236 cheaters have previously requested between two and seven pieces of work. The paper argues that this shows that this form of cheating is becoming habitual. The primary study identifies that as well as the usual types of individual students using the services of RentACoder non-originality agencies also appear to be working as subcontractors offering to complete student assignments. This adds an extra layer of complexity to methods of tracking cheating students. The paper concludes by advising that more automated detection techniques are needed and advises that assessments and academic policies need to be redesigned to remove the potential for contract cheating to be committed.

Eliminating The Successor To Plagiarism? Identifying The Usage Of Contract Cheating Sites

Cyber-Pseudepigraphy A New Challenge for Higher Education Policy and Management

Here is an early paper which covers issues related to contract cheating, although here it is known as cyber-pseudepigraphy. The paper was originally published in the Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management in 2004.

Cyber-pseudepigraphy: A New Challenge for Higher Education Policy and Management

The paper focuses on five issues related to students using the Internet to have work written for them which they can then submit.

The first is that this type of fraud is common. This is backed up by the data on contract cheating, although no attempt to quantify it was made at this point.

The second is that this “poses a significant challenge to public confidence in institutions of higher education”. Again, that is the same problem posed by any type of academic integrity if left unchecked.

Third, the paper notes the possible unfairness to students if their peers get away with cheating. This is one of the issues that I have always raised, where those students who do legitimately do their own work shouldn’t be penalised compared to others.

Fourth, the paper defines this as a problem of character. I take this as meaning that the students see no advantage in the learning process or reason to develop skills for themselves. That’s a valid criticism of many types of education and is again something that needs to be integral to every course so that students see the value of their studies.

Finally, the paper recommends that universities take urgent action. A suggestion is made for universities to revert back to examinations to ensure academic integrity.

The paper presents an interesting read when looking at contract cheating from the policy angle and indeed many of the same issues are still valid today. In particular, getting every student to feel so engaged with their course that they have no reason to wish to cheat has to be one of the main targets of higher education.

A copy of the original e-print version of the paper is available.

More information about the final version is available on the publisher website.