THREAD: Why is it hard to detect 1 in 10 students who ever engage in #contractcheating? Problem 1: Students in a 3-year degree may do 75 assessments. 1 in 10 students outsourcing one of those is 1 in 750 assignments. Needle meet haystack.
2/ #contractcheating by way of custom ghost-writing creates work that will not usually get flagged for potential plagiarism by text-matching software.
3/ #contractcheating where students submit assignments from file-sharing sites may not get flagged for potential plagiarism by text-matching software, because files are inaccessible to text-matching software and/or shared as images rather than text.
4/ most academics don't know the major signs and signals that would suggest an assessment may be the result of #contractcheating
5/ that's probably worse for casual and sessional tutors and TAs who do most of the marking.
6/ in under-funded and massified higher education systems markers are sometimes not paid for enough time to mark assessments, let alone forensically examine them for signs of #contractcheating
7/ some academics and universities believe that #contractcheating must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt rather than on the balance of probabilities.
8/ in a massified higher education system some teachers will not have the opportunity to know their students well enough in class to recognize #contractcheating work that is beyond the student's capabilities.
9/ some good resources for academics, markers, and people in academic development to inform themselves about #contractcheating can be found here: teqsa.gov.au/contract-cheat…
10/ the 1 in 10 (rough) figure that started this thread comes from here: doi.org/10.1080/030750…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
