Volume 3, Issue 1 (MARCH ISSUE 2022)                   johepal 2022, 3(1): 109-120 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Spruin E. Mitigating the Risk of Contract Cheating in UK Higher Education: A Multi-Level Solution. johepal. 2022; 3 (1) :109-120
URL: http://johepal.com/article-1-190-en.html
Abstract:   (208 Views)
The Higher Education sector in the UK faces a number of issues that pose a potential risk to the overall sustainability of the sector. A challenge that has become a growing concern recently is the increase in academic dishonesty and the fast-evolving use of contract cheating, which presents a serious risk to HE providers and the stakeholders that may subsequently be affected. More recently, while research has begun to focus on initiatives that may help to mitigate the growing concerns of contract cheating, to date, the majority of research has focused on a single initiative, with none being successful in eradicating the issue. The current paper therefore proposes a multi-level solution, targeting the key stakeholders involved in contract cheating – HE providers, students, and employees. By integrating a range of educational, preventative and deterrent initiatives, the proposed solution offers HE providers a more targeted approach to combating the risk that contract cheating poses.
Full-Text [PDF 1499 kb]   (38 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2022/02/25 | Accepted: 2022/03/17 | Published: 2022/03/30

1. Adam, L., Anderson, V., & Spronken-Smith, R. (2017). ‘It’s not fair’: Policy discourses and students’ understandings of plagiarism in a New Zealand university. Higher Education, 74(1), 17-32. [DOI]
2. Amigud, A., & Dawson, P. (2020). The law and the outlaw: Is legal prohibition a viable solution to the contract cheating problem? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(1), 98-108. [DOI]
3. Beckman, T., Lam, H., & Khare, A. (2017). Learning assessment must change in a world of digital “cheats”. In A. Khare, B. Stewart, & R. Schatz (Eds.), Phantom Ex Machina: Digital Disruption’s Role in Business Model Transformation (pp. 211-222). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
4. Bertram-Gallant, T., Binkin, N., & Donohue, M. (2015). Students at risk for being reported for cheating. Journal of Academic Ethics, 13(3), 217-228. [DOI]
5. Bretag, T., & Mahmud, S. (2016). A conceptual framework for implementing exemplary academic integrity policy in Australian higher education. In T. Bretag (Ed.), Handbook of Academic Integrity (pp. 463-480). Singapore: Springer. [DOI]
6. Bretag, T., Harper, R., Burton, M., Ellis, C., Newton, P., van Haeringen, K., Saddiqui, S., & Rozenberg, P. (2019). Contract cheating and assessment design: Exploring the relationship. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(5), 676-691. [DOI]
7. Brimble M. (2016). Why students cheat: An exploration of the motivators of student academic dishonesty in higher education. In T. Bretag (Ed.), Handbook of Academic Integrity (pp. 365-382). Singapore: Springer. [DOI]
8. Bryson, J. M. (2004). What to do when stakeholders matter. Public Management Review, 6(1), 21-53. [DOI]
9. Chapleo, C., & Simms, C. (2010). Stakeholder analysis in higher education: A case study of the University of Portsmouth. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 14(1), 12-20. [DOI]
10. Curtis, G. J., & Clare, J. (2017). How prevalent is contract cheating and to what extent are students repeat offenders? Journal of Academic Ethics, 15(2), 115-124. [DOI]
11. Dawson, P. (2020). The prevention of contract cheating in an online environment. Australian Government: Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). [Article]
12. Dawson, P., & Sutherland-Smith, W. (2019). Can training improve marker accuracy at detecting contract cheating? A multi-disciplinary pre-post study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(5), 715-725. [DOI]
13. Department for Education (2020). Higher education providers: Coronavirus (COVID-19). London, UK: UK Government.
14. Dyer, K. (2010). Challenges of maintaining academic integrity in an age of collaboration, sharing and social networking. In Proceedings of TCC 2010 (pp. 168-195). TCC Hawaii. [Article]
15. Ellis, C., Zucker, I. M., & Randall, D. (2018). The infernal business of contract cheating: Understanding the business processes and models of academic custom writing sites. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 14:1, 1-21. [DOI]
16. Fallon, J., Wellman, N., & Awdry, R. (2012). Now are we all on the same page? Strategies for engaging students. 5th International Plagiarism Conference Proceedings, Newcastle, UK.
17. Fida, R., Tramontano, C., Paciello, M., Ghezzi, V., & Barbarnelli, C. (2018). Understanding the interplay among regulatory self-efficacy, moral disengagement, and academic cheating behaviour during vocational education: A three-wave study. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(3), 725-740. [DOI]
18. Gladwin, T. E. (2018). Educating students and future researchers about academic misconduct and questionable collaboration practices. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 14:10, 1-7. [DOI]
19. Guerrero-Dib, J. G., Portales, L., & Heredia-Escorza, Y. (2020). Impact of academic integrity on workplace ethical behaviour. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 16:2, 1-18. [DOI]
20. Hatfield, L. J., & Wise, V. L. (2015). A Guide to Becoming a Scholarly Practitioner in Student Affairs. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus Publishing, LLC.
21. Hill, G., Mason, J., & Dunn, A. (2021). Contract cheating: An increasing challenge for global academic community arising from COVID-19. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 16:24. [DOI]
22. International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI). (2021). The fundamental values of academic integrity. [Article]
23. Kettunen, J. (2014). The stakeholder map in higher education. Society, Education and Psychology, 78, 34-38.
24. Lancaster, T. (2020). Commercial contract cheating provisions through micro-outsourcing web sites. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 16:4, 1-14. [DOI]
25. Lancaster, T., & Clarke, R. (2014). An observational analysis of the range and extent of contract cheating from online courses found on agency websites. Eighth International Conference on Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems, Birmingham, UK. [DOI]
26. Lancaster, T., & Cotarlan, C. (2021). Contract cheating by STEM students through a file sharing website: A Covid-19 pandemic perspective. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 17:3, 1-16. [DOI]
27. Mainardes, E., Raposo, M., & Alves, H. (2012). Public university students’ expectations: An empirical study based on the stakeholders theory. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Science, 35, 173-196.
28. Marić, I. (2013). Stakeholder analysis of higher education institutions. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems, 11(2), 217-226.
29. Morris, E. J. (2018). Academic integrity matters: Five considerations for addressing contract cheating. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 14:15, 1-12. [DOI]
30. Newton, P. M. (2018). How common is commercial contract cheating in higher education and is it increasing? A systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 3, 67, 1-18. [DOI]
31. Office for Students (2018). Securing student success: Regulatory framework for higher education in England. Available online at https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/publications/securing-student-success-regulatory-framework-for-higher-education-in-england/ [Article]
32. QAA (2018). The UK quality code for higher education. Available online at https://www.qaa.ac.uk/quality-code [Article]
33. QAA (2020). Contracting to cheat in higher education: How to address essay mills and contract cheating (2nd ed.). [Article]
34. Rowley, T. J. (1997). Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influences. The Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 887-910. [DOI]
35. Seeland, J., Stoesz, B. M., & Vogt, L. (2020). Preventing online shopping for completed assessments: Protecting students by blocking access to contract cheating websites on institutional networks. Canadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity, 3(1), 55-69. [DOI]
36. Slabá, M. (2015). Stakeholder groups of public and private universities in the Czech Republic –Identification, categorization and prioritization. Review of Economic Perspectives, 15(3), 305-326. [DOI]
37. Slade, C., Rowland, S., & McGrath, D. (2019). Talking about contract cheating: Facilitating a forum for collaborative development of assessment practices to combat student dishonesty. International Journal for Academic Development, 24(1), 21-34. [DOI]
38. Smith, L. W. (2000). Stakeholder analysis: A pivotal practice of successful projects. Paper presented at Project Management Institute Annual Seminars & Symposium, Houston, TX. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
39. Stoesz, B. M., Eaton, S. E., Miron, J., & Thacker, E. J. (2019). Academic integrity and contract cheating policy analysis of colleges in Ontario, Canada. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 15:4, 1-18. [DOI]
40. Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). (2017). Good practice note: Addressing contract cheating to safeguard academic integrity. Available online at https://www.teqsa.gov.au/latest-news/publications/good-practice-note-addressing-contract-cheating-safeguard-academic [Article]
41. Thacker, E. J., Clark, A., & Ridgley, A. (2020). Applying a holistic approach to contract cheating: A Canadian response. Canadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity, 3(1), 70-82. [DOI]
42. Yorke, J., Sefcik, L., and Veeran-Colton, T. (2022). Contract cheating and blackmail: A risky business?. Studies in Higher Education, 47(1), 53-66. [DOI]

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2022 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Higher Education Policy And Leadership Studies

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb