Explore the vast range of titles available.

Academic integrity is a cornerstone of education systems, yet the rise of contract cheating poses significant challenges for higher education institutions. Current approaches to managing contract cheating often lack the comprehensive structure needed to address the complexities of modern cheating methods. The primary objective of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of the proposed Three-Tier Framework (TTF), designed in our previous study to combat contract cheating. The proposed framework comprises three tiers: awareness, monitoring, and evaluation. It engages stakeholders within the system and encourages a proactive and collaborative stance against contract cheating while reinforcing a culture of academic honesty. The evaluation focuses on three key aspects: the clarity of the framework’s functions and objectives, the potential challenges in implementing the proposed monitoring process, and the perceived limitations in detecting and mitigating contract cheating through this framework. Supervised and unsupervised assignments are considered, excluding the option of e-proctoring, as some students encountered difficulties setting up necessary tools and software for online exams. Survey results reveal a broad consensus among respondents, who expressed strong confidence in the clarity and effectiveness of the framework and its monitoring procedures. These positive perceptions were consistent across respondents, regardless of their prior experience or familiarity with contract cheating. Although the overall feedback was positive, concerns were raised regarding implementing the framework in current educational settings. Specific challenges cited include tight timelines and the increased workload associated with the new procedures, emphasising a need for additional guidance, training, and institutional support to ensure effective adoption. The proposed framework incorporates an instructor dashboard designed to streamline academic workflow and simplify the monitoring process introduced in this framework. The survey results confirm that the framework can be adopted to address the unique needs of academics and diverse educational environments; however further research is needed to explore its applicability across the broader higher education community.

While there is growing awareness of the existence and activities of Academic Custom Writing websites, which form a small part of the contract cheating industry, how they work remains poorly understood. Very little research has been done on these sites, probably because it has been assumed that it is impossible to see behind their firewalls and password protection. We have found that, with some close scrutiny, it is indeed possible to find some 'cracks' in these sites through which we can look to gain insights into the business processes that operate within them. We have reverse engineered the business processes that operate within some of these sites. From this we have also been able to identify three different business models that are supported by these sites. Our analysis supports important findings about how these sites operate that can be used to inform future strategies to detect and deter contract cheating. [Author abstract]

Detecting contract cheating in written submissions can be difficult beyond direct plagiarism detectable via technology. Successfully identifying potential cases of contract cheating in written work such as essays and reports is largely dependent on the experience of assessors and knowledge of student. It is further dependent on their familiarity with the patterns and clues evident in sections of body text and reference materials to identify irregularities. Consequently, some knowledge of what the patterns and clues look like is required. This paper documents how to identify some of the patterns and clues observed in essay and report submissions. Effective assessment design with specific contextual requirements make irregularities easier to detect and interpret. The irregularities identified were confirmed as instances of contract cheating through conversations held with postgraduate students. An essential element of the conversations was the evidence presented for discussion. Irregularities were noted on a pro-forma specifically developed for this purpose. Patterns identified include misrepresented bibliographic data, inappropriate references, irrelevant material and generalised text that did not address the assessment question or grading criteria. The validated patterns formed the basis of identifying potential instances of contract cheating in later submissions. Timely conversations with students before the end of semester are essential to determining whether the patterns and clues link to poor knowledge of academic writing conventions or classified as contract cheating necessitating the application of appropriate penalties under institutional policies and procedures. [Author abstract]

When considering a paradigm shift in higher education, it is imperative to focus on removing obstacles against maintaining integrity in academia. One such obstacle is contract cheating sites that have mushroomed disproportionately during the 18 months of emergency distance learning threatening graduate quality and university reputations (McKie, Essay mills targeting students as pandemic crisis shifts HE online, 2020). It was sharply brought to focus in 2015 due to a mass-scale scandal involving 16 universities and more than 1000 students leading to a subsequent law making such services illegal in Australia. Contract cheating is a mushrooming industry that is constantly targeting often unsuspecting students under the guise of legitimate help. Moreover, these services in turn began black mailing students after delivering services (Draper et al., Int J Educ Integr 17:13, 2021). It is therefore vital to explore the existence and number of such websites that target students in UAE, sometimes using university logos to show legitimacy to understand the extent of the problem. This is primarily because an accurate measure of the extent does not currently exist (Newton, Front Educ 3:67, 2018). Curtis et al. (Stud High Educ. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2021.1972093, 2021) have reported on self-reported cases from students which can be varied and often under-reported. This study is an attempt at using Boolean search technique to count unique and organic websites that have manifested. Coded analysis was used to collate the websites and count the total number of searches. For a total of 34 unique and organic websites, 29 showed a z score higher than the mean value 2.94, at standard deviation of 1.89, positing that the probability of appearance of these 29 websites across different search engines, different browsers and across separate search keywords was significant. This demonstrates the aggressive nature of these sites and their considerable efforts to offer a service that is harmful and detrimental to the students and education sector. This study is a milestone towards developing a nation-wide understanding of contract cheating in the UAE. It is also positioned as a proposal for higher education sustainability in the nation to look to ban services that offer to write assignments for students with or without a fee as a top-down approach to tackling the issue.

With a definition that is evolving, a serious component of the contract cheating issue involves individuals paying a third-party to complete assessment items for them and then submitting this work as if it were their own. The issue of contract cheating poses a significant problem for tertiary institutions. The research literature conducted to date has addressed contract cheating, yet few papers discuss theory-based prevention strategies, and even fewer still evaluate the impact of theory-based prevention strategies. This paper discusses a case study of contract cheating that was identified in a business simulation operating in a capstone unit at a large Australian university. The problem is outlined, the theory-based intervention is explained, and the impact on the contract cheating problem is quantified. Building on a platform provided by criminological theory and crime prevention practice, the Unit Coordinator systematically adjusted a large number of assessment elements to ensure contract cheating was less likely. Importantly, this intervention was effective but also did not disadvantage students who were not engaging in contract cheating. Overall, this paper connects criminological theory and crime/problem prevention practice with academic misconduct issues with the intent of demonstrating there is potential to minimise the opportunity for contract cheating by altering the opportunity structures for assessment items. Crucially, this can be done without impeding genuine student efforts and does not depend on apprehension and conviction. [Author abstract]

Building on what is known about the non-random nature of crime problems and the explanatory capacity of opportunity theories of crime, this study explores the utility of using existing university administrative data to detect unusual patterns of performance consistent with a student having engaged in contract cheating (paying a third-party to produce unsupervised work on their behalf). Results from an Australian university were analysed (N = 3798 results, N = 1459 students). Performances on unsupervised and supervised assessment items were converted to percentages and percentage point differences analysed at the academic discipline-, unit-, and student-level, looking for non-random patterns of unusually large differences. Non-random, unusual patterns, consistent with contract cheating, were found at the academic discipline-, unit-, and student-level, with approximately 2.1% of students producing multiple unusual patterns. These findings suggest it may be possible to use existing administrative data to identify assessment items that provide suitable opportunities for contract cheating. This approach could be used in conjunction with targeted problem- prevention strategies (based on situational crime prevention) to reduce the vulnerability of academic assessment items to contract cheating. This approach is worthy of additional research as it has the potential to help academic institutions around the world manage contract cheating; a problem that currently threatens the validity and integrity of tertiary qualifications. [Author abstract, ed]

In this paper we cast light on one form of dishonest behaviour in academia – contract cheating services. We examine how an agreement between a student and a contract cheating services provider is viewed from ethical and legal perspectives. For this purpose we carried out an analysis of contract cheating services as an agreement which, in Lithuania, is currently facing the challenge of implementing laws regarding contract cheating services as a violation of academic ethics. Taking into consideration recent jurisprudence, together with social media articles, we conclude that while any agreement for contract cheating services is severely criticized in terms of ethics, the courts either do not regard this type of agreement as a violation of legal norms, or they inadequately apply legal remedies when such an agreement is deemed to be void.

Students are using file sharing sites to breach academic integrity in light of the Covid-19 pandemic. This paper analyses the use of one such site, Chegg, which offers “homework help” and other academic services to students. Chegg is often presented as a file sharing site in the academic literature, but that is just one of many ways in which it can be used. As this paper demonstrates, Chegg can and is used for contract cheating This is despite the apparent existence of an Honour Code on Chegg which asks students not to breach academic integrity. With pandemic led safety considerations leading to increased online teaching and assessment, the paper analyses data relating to how Chegg is used by students in five STEM subjects, namely Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Physics and Chemistry. The results show that students are using Chegg to request exam style questions. They demonstrate that contract cheating requests can be put live and answered within the short duration of an examination. The number of student requests posted for these five subjects increased by 196.25% comparing the time period April 2019 to August 2019 with the period April 2020 to August 2020. This increase corresponds with the time when many courses moved to be delivered and assessed online. The growing number of requests indicates that students are using Chegg for assessment and exam help frequently and in a way that is not considered permissible by universities. The paper concludes by recommending that academic institutions put interventions in place to minimise the risk to educational standards posed by sites such as Chegg, particularly since increased online teaching and assessment may continue after the pandemic.

Contract cheating, or plagiarism via paid ghostwriting, is a significant academic ethical issue, especially as reliable methods for its prevention and detection in students’ assignments remain elusive. Contract cheating in academic assessment has been the subject of much recent debate and concern. Although some scandals have attracted substantial media attention, little is known about the likely prevalence of contract cheating by students for their university assignments. Although rates of contract cheating tend to be low, criminological theories suggest that people who employ ghostwriters for their assignments are likely to re-offend, and little is known about re-offence rates in this form of academic misconduct. We combined previously-collected datasets ( N  = 1378) and conducted additional, and previously-unreported, analyses on self-report measures of contract cheating prevalence. We found that few students (3.5%), on aggregate, ever engaged in contract cheating but this varied substantially among samples (from 0.3% to 7.9%). Of those who ever engaged in contract cheating, 62.5% did so more than once. The data also suggested that engagement in contract cheating is influenced by opportunity. These figures may help policy makers, and researchers who are creating contract cheating detection methods, to estimate base rates of contract cheating and the likelihood of re-offence.

Due to COVID-19, universities with limited expertise with the digital environment had to rapidly transition to online teaching and assessment. This transition did not create a new problem but has offered more opportunities for contract cheating and diversified the types of such services. While universities and lecturers were adjusting to the new teaching styles and developing new assessment methods, opportunistic contract cheating providers have been offering $50 COVID-19 discounts and students securing the services of commercial online tutors to take their online exams or to take advantage of real-time assistance from ‘pros’ while sitting examinations. The article contributes to the discourse on contract cheating by reporting on an investigation of the scope and scale of the growing problems related to academic integrity exacerbated by an urgent transition to online assessments during the COVID-19 pandemic. The dark reality is the illegal services are developing at a faster pace than the systems required to curb them, as demonstrated by the results. The all-penetrating issues indicate systemic failures on a global scale that cannot be addressed by an individual academic or university acting alone. Multi-level solutions including academics, universities and the global community are essential. Future research must focus on developing a model of collaboration to address this problem on several levels, taking into account (1) individual academics, (2) universities, (3) countries and (4) international communities.