Plagiarism among Asian students at an Australian

university offshore campus: Is it a cultural issue? A pilot

study

Agustina M. Lahur
Curtin University of Technology, Sarawak Campus, Malaysia
agustina@curtin.edu.my

Abstract: In recent of years, the issue of plagiarism has become a major problem in higher
education institutions with more and more cases being recorded. Tighter academic
regulations and heavier penalties have been implemented without necessarily being
accompanied by a reduction in this form of academic dishonesty.
With the rapid progress in the area of information, communication and technology (ICT),
students can access information at their convenience, at anytime and anywhere. They can
open online journals, access online newspapers, and logon to various websites within split
seconds. However, this does not mean that those with limited access to the latest software are
unlikely to commit plagiarism. The symptom of cut-and-paste culture seems to have spread
rapidly among students, especially in cultures where copyright laws have always been
ignored.
Some students admit that their ignorance and/ or lack of skills in using proper referencing is
the main reason why they are being labeled plagiarist. Some point their fingers to their
inability to master the language of instruction, i.e. English. Others claim that a new learning
culture at university level is the main culprit.
This pilot study aims at investigating whether plagiarism cases committed by Asian learners,
particularly those enrolling at Foundation Program of an Australian university offshore
campus in Malaysia, are purely a genuine mistake, an intentional cheating, a cultural issue or
a language issue. This paper also presents some constructive feedback made by concerned
lecturers. In addition, it provides suggestions to minimize, if not avoid, plagiarism cases in
post-secondary education, in general.
Keywords: Learning culture; Asian learners; academic dishonesty.

Introduction
A nation-wide quality conversation, focusing on academic integrity, was recently conducted
in Australia. Much has been discussed about plagiarism issue and academic dishonesty as well
as its relation to international students and Asian culture and their new learning culture (e.g.
Addison, 2001; Kane, 2002; McMurty, 2001; Rimer, 2003; Dawson, 2004). Much research
has revealed that with the latest development in the area of ICT, students could submit par
excellence assignments consisting super elegant words and advanced information by
obtaining information from other corners of the world instantaneously. Not only that, those
with limited access to the internet can conveniently copy-and-paste from local newspapers or
NON-REFEREED PAPER

textbooks available at libraries. Many software tools, such as HowOriginal.com,

Plagiarism.org, Digital Integrity (www.find-same.com) to name a few, have been developed
and adapted in education institutions in order to combat this academic dishonesty, but it seems
students are always a step ahead.
However, is culture as in new learning culturereally the prime culprit that drives students
to plagiarize? This research will discuss plagiarism cases by Asian learners enrolled in the
Foundation Program of an Australian university offshore campus in Malaysia and investigate
whether the cases are purely a genuine mistake, an intentional cheating, a cultural issue or a
language problem. It also intends to reveal the underlying factors that play crucial roles in
plagiarism cases.
Methodology
This study is based on three years study on students perception of plagiarism issue. It
examines students written products of English units in Semester 2/ July December 2002
(Academic Writing 022/ AW022), Semester 2/ July December 2003 (Academic English
062/ AE062) and Semester 1/ March May 2004 (AE062). Each unit involves two different
groups (one of Commerce stream and one of Engineering stream) and the size of each group
ranges between 25 to 30 students. AE062, which is the new form of AW022, is the
continuation of Academic English 061 (AE061). Students who successfully pass AE061 are
expected to have mastered the English grammar with minimal errors, the basic skills such as
note-taking, paraphrasing, and summarizing, as well as the four language skills, i.e. reading,
writing, listening and reading. Students taking AW022 or AE062 have the same major
assessment, i.e. writing Research Essay of 2,000 words-or-more, where it requires students to
conduct comprehensive research on the selected topic.
The nature of the essay is argumentative where a specific format must be followed and the
topics may vary from technology, environment, as well as current issues; not only in Malaysia
but also other regions in Asia and other continents. Students have to use appropriate
referencing, following the Harvard Reference convention. Each student may write more than
3 drafts showing their writing progress in terms of format, language style, content and
referencing. Each draft will be reviewed by the lecturer; written and oral feedback are given to
highlight the strengths and weaknesses as well as to point out the areas that still need further
improvements. During the conferencing sessions students may ask further clarification from
lecturers. This type of task, which is categorized as continuous class assessment, provides best
opportunities for feedback on what students are learning from the course and also for
reinforcing the teaching by individual positive comments and corrections on the students
performance (Cox, 1994). In this paper, the term referencing includes paraphrasing,
summarizing as well as using proper reference conventions for both in-text and end-of-text
references. The term plagiarism itself covers bad paraphrasing to copying from another
source without acknowledgement.
Plagiarism: is it mainly caused by the new learning culture?
During the drafts submissions, it was found that some students did not do proper referencing.
Some simply plagiarised from online websites or textbooks; others easily obtained online
essays sold by a number of US-based websites and cut a number of relevant sentences. Still
some tried to compile a number of cut-and-paste texts from different sources to be put into a
sentence or a paragraph and turn into a decent draft, hoping that the lecturer would not be able

NON-REFEREED PAPER

to notice. Online resources, such as 15000Papers.com, T.O.P. Thousands of Papers

(www.termpapers-on-file.com), FindArticles.com (www.findarticles.com) and
Essayworld.com are some of the most frequently visited sites by students.
From this research, it is found that students with good academic performance in AE units
(marks between 60-100) tend to have the correct referencing, while those with weak English
tend to plagiarise.
Between Week 7 to 14, or during conferencing sessions, when a student was suspected to
have plagiarized a certain portion of information from some sources, a number of questions
would be asked. Some questions may sound silly but they were basically trying to gather
information what makes the students plagiarize. For example:
Is it (paragraph X) your own words?
Have you actually done this research to 200 respondents in Malaysia and Singapore?
(This question was given to a student whose essay gave the impression that he had
conducted a very extensive research in Malaysia and Singapore)
Did you conduct the research in U.S. by your own? (This question is also addressed to
students who have provided massive information about particular development in the U.S.
without including a single reference).
If the student admitted that s/he had accidentally done cut-and-paste, further questions were
asked:
What makes you forgot to paraphrase/ summarize?
Why you didnt paraphrase this part?
Why you did not use proper referencing?
Based on the seven weeks discussion, none of the students seemed to have a genuine
intention to cheat. The main reasons why they did not paraphrase/ summarize properly was
primarily due to their transition to the new learning culture at post-secondary level. This study
also finds other contributing factors such as (1) their poor English and their misunderstanding
of the concept of referencing and (2) their ignorance to the assessments/ units requirements.
Transition to the new learning culture

In many schools in Asia, teacher-centre method is dominant in classrooms activities. Teachers

who belong to the traditional school of thought still believe in the effectiveness of students
copying or extracting the whole sentence(s) or paragraph(s) from certain textbooks as this is
to show that the particular information is important. Students who are used to that learning
culture would find the new learning culture at post secondary school a challenge because this
is contradicting with what they have been taught and have been learning for the last 5 to 10
years. Having been exposed to this kind of classroom discourse for over 10 over years, it is
sometimes very hard for the students to change (see Chan, 2001; Watkins and Biggs, 2001).
Some students coming from Chinese-medium high schools pointed out that:
[in high school] we were not allowed to change the words from the textbooks...
our teachers always want[ed] us to use exactly the same words as [the ones] in
textbooks.
... especially for exams, if we changed the words, [our] teachers will penalize our marks.
In 2002, another small-scale study was conducted and it was found that if one observes Asian
high school classrooms, the activities are very much exam oriented. The exam questions will
be basically on what the teachers wrote on the board. There is little expectation for students to

NON-REFEREED PAPER

synthesize or apply their knowledge. As a result, students are very good at memorizing and
reciting facts, but unaccustomed to express ideas of their own (Lahur, 2002).
A number of students involved in the current research admitted that they have to struggle with
the new learning culture they experience in the post-secondary level. They stated that the
education system in high school was more flexible and the idea of academic misconduct, i.e.
plagiarism, was not even discussed in that level. They were aware of the regulations that
cheating is part of academic dishonesty. Obviously, the new environment and culture have
required a corresponding paradigm shift among students and lecturers. Thus, what the
lecturers and students need is actually a transition time in between where they can adapt
themselves to the new classroom culture. Chan (2001) further explains that learning should
not be seen as the accretion of bits of information. Rather, it involves meaning making and
knowledge transformation as learners construct their new and revised understandings
integrating new information with the existing prior knowledge.
Other contributing factors: Students poor English and misconception of referencing

It is not surprising to find that those whose marks fall between 60100 could cope and
managed to paraphrase and summarize properly. The errors they had are considered trivial.
They could digest the meaning of their readings and reference accordingly. Those whose
marks fall below 60 would tend to fall into the cut-and-paste trap. Many simply substituted
a few keywords with synonyms:
Table 1: Samples substituting keywords or a few words with synonyms
Original text 1
...we are witnessing the uneven development, the marginalization of localities and the unequal
distribution of employment opportunities that are part of the dynamics of the global city ...
Revised text 1
...people are witnessing the imbalanced development, the marginalization of localities and the
imbalanced distribution of job opportunities that are part of the dynamics of the big city ...
Original text 2
... conventional policies seem powerless to deal with these issues of social cohesion.
Economic growth alone will not bridge the chasm separating the haves and the have-nots in
todays labor market...
Revised text 2
... traditional policies do not have power to deal with these issues of social cohesion.
Economic growth alone will not bridge the chasm which separates those who are rich and
those who are poor in todays labor market...

These students have very shallow understanding about referencing where they consider
changing a few keywords may save them from committing plagiarism.
In relation to the above factor, another aspect that contributes to plagiarism is students
misconception about referencing. They assumed once they wrote down the authors name,
they did not have to paraphrase or summarize the whole original sentences or paragraphs
without using quotation marks, giving the impression that those are their own words or ideas.
It is found that the majority of students in this study provided fairly honest feedback and
showed that they did not have genuine intention to plagiarize. Their responses vary, such as:

NON-REFEREED PAPER

Do I have to paraphrase all these [sentences]?

I thought if I put the authors name, then I dont have to paraphrase and it will be fine.
I thought we only have to change the keywords.

From their drafts, it can be seen that they had put efforts to find relevant articles or do
research in order to support their arguments, data, or evidences in their essay. Sheard et al.
(2003), however, argue that regardless whether it is intentional or not, harms the educational
environment and most importantly in most cases it also harms the cheating student who has
avoided a learning experience and learning outcome.
Students ignorance to the units requirements

It is obvious that some students only try to reach the minimum standard stated in the Unit
Outline. They simply submitted the drafts; no matter how well or how bad the drafts were as
long as they met the minimum requirements of the unit. The followings are typical excuses
they provided:
I didnt have time to paraphrase all these sentences.
I dont care, as long as I submit [the draft] on time, you [the lecturer] will still give me
mark.
How many marks will be penalized if I dont use proper referencing? Never mind, I think
I still get marks for other sections such as grammar and [essay] structure.
Students attitude towards this academic matter perhaps relates to the study undertaken in
early 2002 where a small-scale research project involving 96 Foundation Studies students of
the offshore campus was conducted (Nurtjahja & Lahur, 2002). The results of this research
show that almost half of the respondents (46.8%) claimed that they wanted to perform well in
their assessments and/ or assignments simply because they wanted to get good mark
irrespective what methods or strategies they used. While another 38.54% of respondents
revealed that they just followed and fulfilled the requirements stated on the Unit Outline. Only
13.5% of the respondents felt the importance of doing assessments and/ or assignments
properly. This finding can be well supported by the nature of education system in Malaysia.
The Malaysian public also gives too much emphasis on the grades (SPM or Malaysian
Certificate of Education/ STPM or Malaysian Higher School Certificate results equals to
Year 11 and Year 12 respectively) rather than the quality of the students or the process of
teaching learning activities that the students had gone through. This can be seen in mass
media coverage when results for high school graduates are released. This perhaps can best
explain the nature of learning culture in Asian regions which places more value on the grades
and results rather than the learning process itself. In addition to that, Lahur (2002) explains
that school system has shaped the students conception that the aim of pursuing education is to
get good grades and certificate. This is a factor in why students are less interested to learn to
seek for meaning and application of the knowledge they have learnt as the reward system of
public acknowledgement of achievement reinforces rote learning.
Some students state that the some parts of the objectives or requirements stated at the Unit
Outline are not clear to them. However, as claimed by Jones et al. (1997), even if the
objectives for the course are clear to the students, students perceptions may be influenced by
their own personal agenda rather than the lecturers or the course objectives. Students
perceptions about a unit is very much influenced by their motivation. Lightbown and Spada
(2000) explain that teachers have less influence, if any, over students intrinsic motivation for
learning a second language in this case is English language- as they come from different

NON-REFEREED PAPER

backgrounds and have different life experiences. All of which have contributed to their
attitudes and perceptions toward learning.
Feedback from lecturers
Feedback from lecturers teaching AE062 was obtained in order to provide balance opinion on
the issue and to see the problem from their point of views:
One lecturer stated that most of her students follow the instruction [to use proper
referencing], but there are always cases where a number of students invented their own
referencing convention.
Others explained that some students appear to be stubborn thinking that their drafts were the
most correct one. Suggestions had been made, but the students refuse to make necessary
revisions.
Another lecturer pointed out that some students have poor time management: the task
[Research Essay] was given from Week 7 and they were expected to submit the final draft by
Week 14 or 15. This means students have more than ample time to write drafts and ask for
help, if they need. But some notorious students would submit similar drafts; only changed a
few words. The students submitted the papers for the sake of submitting, with less
consideration on the quality. This is well supported by Brown (1995) and Love (1997, cited in
Sheard et al., 2003, p.94) in which they claimed the most commonly stated graduate
students reasons for unethical behavior were to get high degree, laziness or time pressure.
Jones et al. (1997) also add that in many cases, students have short-term needs; these needs
may not match the teachers long-term concerns. The unit has provided ample opportunity for
students to improve their skills, i.e. writing skills, and the lecturers have tried their best to
accommodate students concerns. Students are given the opportunity not only to interact with
the lecturers but also their peers. Chan (2001) explains that interactions among students is
beneficial for students positive progress and development. The collaboration processes of
articulation, conflict and meaning negotiation provide scaffolding effects to foster students
understanding.
Most of the lecturers, however, agreed that there is still a gap between the education system in
lower level or secondary level as opposed to post-secondary level. Students poor language is
another prominent factor. Some weak students may have good understanding about the
concept of referencing; unfortunately, they did not have the ability and skills to produce
adequate paraphrasing or summarizing. Lecturers perspectives match with the analysis of this
study whereby cultural issue in this case related to students new learning culture at postsecondary levelis considered a strong reason, but blame cannot be put solely on students.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The findings of this study, which covers three years observation, indicate that there are some
factors affecting students to plagiarize and new learning culture or university culture is
considered as the prime factor. Other factors include (1) students poor mastery in English and
their misunderstanding about the concept and conventions of referencing and plagiarism and
(2) students ignorance of the units requirements.

NON-REFEREED PAPER

It is suggested that topics chosen for Research Essay assessment should focus more on local
context, i.e. Malaysia, or Sarawak. For example, issues about massive open burning in
Sarawak, the controversy of implementing National Service to senior high school graduates in
Malaysia, the problems with using English as a medium of instruction in Maths and Science
units in lower education level (elementary, primary and secondary schools) and the issue of
inequality between bumiputera (locals or Melayu) versus non-bumiputera (those from
Chinese and Indian descendants or non-Melayu descendants). With this, students will have to
use their knowledge to construct their arguments and to analyze them. Issues covering other
countries or continents can be easily found in internet and students can simply cut and paste
without spending quality efforts to construct their essays. Another alternative is to provide
common topic(s) for the whole group so that it can limit the students creativity in terms of
borrowing last terms essay from their seniors, searching and cutting-and-pasting information
from the internet as well as purchasing online essays available on the net.
It is also recommended that challenges need to be within students reach. If challenges are too
easy, students will seek more difficult ones; if too difficult, they may abandon their efforts.
Intrinsic motivation will suffer when individuals cannot exercise self-determination. They
want to feel responsible for their actions and free to make choices. Unfortunately, in many
classrooms students have few choices about what to do and when and how to do it (Pintrich &
Schunk, 1996).
A number of lecturers also voiced out that students in this case the Foundation Studies
students- should be made aware that referencing is needed not only in English-related
subjects, but also in other units, such as Business Management and Media Studies, and other
units offered at degree program, namely Business Communication, Law, Marketing,
Marketing Research, Engineering Communication. This way they will see the significance of
studying proper referencing and hopefully will put more efforts. Students should have more
responsibility on their own actions; however, academics across the university must also be
consistent when implementing and enforcing plagiarism policy. Plagiarism issues must be
seen as a serious matter, and cannot be separated from teaching-learning activities.
References
Addison, P.A. (2001). Academic misconduct, definitions, legal issues, and management. In A. Herrmann and
M.M. Kulski (eds), Expanding Horizons in Teaching and Learning. Proceedings of the 10th Annual Teaching
Learning Forum, 7-9 February 2001. Perth: Curtin University of Technology. Retrieved April 8, 2004, from
http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2001/addison2.html
Biggs, J and Watkins D. (2001). Insights into Teaching the Chinese Learner. In Watkins, D & Biggs, J (eds)
Teaching the Chinese Learners: Psychological and pedagogical perspectives. The University of Hong Kong:
Comparative Education Research Centre. pp. 277-300
Brown, B. (1995). The academic ethics of graduate business students: A survey. Journal of Education for
Business, 70(3), 151-156.
Chan, C. (2001). Promoting Learning and Understanding through Constructivist Approaches for Chinese
Learners. In Watkins, D & Biggs, J. (eds) Teaching the Chinese Learners: Psychological and pedagogical
perspectives. The University of Hong Kong: Comparative Research Centre. pp. 181-203
Cox, B. (1994). Practical Pointers for University Teachers. London: Kogan Page.
Dawson, J. (2004) Plagiarism: whats really going on? In J. Hobson (ed.) Seeking Educational Excellence.
Perth: Murdoch University.
Jones, M, Siraj-Blatchford, HN, and Ashcroft, K (1997). Researching into Student Learning and Support in
Colleges and Universities, London: Kogan Page Limited.
Kane, M. 2002. Can tech detect college cheaters? Retrieved: April 30, 2004, from
http://www.zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-876788.html

NON-REFEREED PAPER

Lahur, A. (2002). Independent learning for reluctant learners: A pilot study at Foundation Studies Program
CSM. Proceedings of the International conference on Higher Education for the 21st Century, 24-26 September
2004. Miri-Sarawak: Curtin university of Technology.
Lightbown P.M. and Spada, N. (2000). How Languages are Learned (2nd ed). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Love, P.G. (1997). The meaning and mediated nature of cheating and plagiarism among graduate students in
college of education. Paper presented at the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Alburqueue,
New Mexico.
McMurty, K. (2001). E-cheating combating a 21st century challenge. Retrieved: April 30, 2004, from
http://www.thejournal.com/magazine/vault/A3724.cfm
Nurthahja, O. and Lahur, A. (2002). Students responses to lecturers feedback: problems and suggestions. In
Focusing on the Student. Proceedings of the 11th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, 5-6 February 2002.
Perth: Edith Cowan University. Retrieved April 8, 2004, from
http://cea.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2002/nurtjahja.html
Pintrich, P.R. & Schunk, D.H. (1996). Motivation education: theory, research, and application. 1996. New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Rimer, S. (2003). A Campus Fad Thats Being Copied. Retrieved: April 30, 2004, from
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/03/education/03CHEA.html?th
Sheard, J., Markham, S. & Dick, M. (2003). Investigating Differences in Cheating Behaviours of IT
Undergraduate and Graduate Students: the maturity and motivation factors. In Higher Education Research &
Development, Vol. 22, No. 1. pp. 91-108.

NON-REFEREED PAPER