格格党

手机浏览器扫描二维码访问

Appendix 3（第2页）

&ithisstudywere27esestudentsaudentsenrolledinalargepubliiversityiedStates.Ofthe27esepartits，16weremalesand11werefemales;19werefreshmen，sixweresophomoresandtwowerejuniesrangedfrom18to21，withanaverageageof19.1.TheydifferentmajorsinputerSgineering，PhysiagemeiveStudies，AathematidEics.ExceptforfivestudeheirhighschooledutheUS，alloftheother22fiheirhighsa.Amongthe17Ameripartits，tenweremalesandseveehreeweresophomoresandfourwerejuniors.Similarlytotheesepartits，theiragesrangedfrom18to21withanaverageageof18.9years.AllofthemfiheirhighstheUS.Theirmajorsingineering，Biology，Chemistry，Elemeion，HospitalityandTemes，andEidwerethereforealsodiverse.Adetailedprofileofthepartitsissho

&its’profile

2.2Data

Datawerecollectedbyusiioerviews.ThequestioedfromDeckert（1993）aal.（2008），edthreeparts.Thefirstpartaskedforstudents’demographiation，whicludedtheirage，gender，yearinsajor，nationality，andtheplacewheretheyfiheirhighschooledu.Thesedpartiionsaskingforstudeeduandingofplagiarism，previousinstruplagiarism，andattitudestiarism.Thelastpartincluded10daskedstudentstojudgewhetherthesecaseswereplagiarismaheiracceptability.Thesemi-struterviewswereusedtoeliationfromstudentswithregardtotheirpersofandattitudestiarism.

&hequestioributedtothepartits，apilotstudywasductedwithfiveesestudentsandfourAmerits，ehesameuotesttheapplicabilityofthei.Basedosofthepilotstudyaiospartigiudy，modifiadetiionnaire.

&udyrevealedthatstudentshadsuffitprofiEnglishtoallowthequestioobeadministerediobothpopulations.Fortheesepartits，thequestionnairewasadministeredinasingleclassperiod（50miyearpositioudeheeriodtofinishthesurvey，butmostofthestudentsfihinhalfanhour.FortheAmeripartits，thequestionnairewasadministeredviaemail.Altogethertheresearcherdistributedthequestioo30esestudentsaudehequestionnaireswerehandedin，27eseresponsesand17Ameriseswerefoundtobevalidandstitutedthequestioaforthisstudy.

SixesestudentsandfourAmeritspartitheinterviews.gstudents’oralprofiterviewwasduglish，too.However，ineesepartitshaddifficultyexpressingthemselvesiheyweretoldtofeelfreetocode-switEnglishaerviewswerealldutheresearcher’sofficewithaquieteablef.Alltheinterviewswererecordedwiththetoftheierviewswiththeesestudentslastedfrom15to20minutes，whiletheiheAmeritslastedforabout10miheversationwithesestudeoutheiraboutplagiarismandtheinflueneselisherenotdiscussedartits.

2.3Dataanalysis

&udeothequestioaiheywerefirstgpseudonymssothatlatertheiransatchedwiththequestionnaireresponses.

&s’respohequestionswithyesorheirdemographiatioioaspreadsheetinwhichthestudents’answerswereahroughmathematicalcal;students’judgmentsofcasesofplagiarismwerethe.StudeotheopeioypedintoaWorddot.Theinterviewregsweretraegorizedbasedohemesfoundis’respohequestioheiions，andtheresearchquestions.

&sandDis

Thissereportstheresultsofdataanalysistoaddressthethreeresearchquestioions3.1aheahefirstresearchquestion—“Doesestudentshaveaderstandiionofplagiarism?Ifnot，whatistheheirmisuaiohestudeedknowledgeofplagiarismandtheirpreviousinstruplagiarism.Se3.2discussestheofesestudeion3.3discussesthesedresearchquestion—dAmerits’persofplagiarism—byexaminingtheirrespoheteoplagiarismwiththeassistaablesthatsummarizetheresultsaaileddissfollowiables.Fiion3.4providestheahethirdresearchquestioitudestiarism—thrthepartits’ahequestioherplagiarismisamoralissueaherplagiarismshouldbetolerated.

3.1Studeedknowledgeofplagiarism

Thissereportsstudents’knowledgeofplagiarisminthreeareas:studehewiarismaion，previousinstrureplagiarism，as’self-repreeofplagiarism.Table2summarizestheoverallresults，whileadetailedreportofresultsanddissisinthefollowiions.

&udeedknowledgeofplagiarism

3.1.1Studeionsofplagiarism

AsshowninTable2，wheheykhewiarism，allpartits，Ameridesealike，claimedthattheydid.AlltheAmeritsrovideaionofplagiarismsuchas“usingothers’wordsasone’sown.”

However，someesepartits，rovideadefinitionofplagiarism，revealedtheirmisuanding.Forexample，somestudentsanswered，“gothers’examlagiarismandifyoudidthat，youwouldgetzerooudentC11）.Thisihisrespo’smisuandingofplagiarismasg，whichmayhavebeehesimilarityofesetranslatiiarism“Chaoxi，Piaoqie”

aing“Chaoxi，Zuobi”

ying）beingapplicabletobothwords.Despitetheexistenisuanding，mostesestudentscouldrelateplagiarismtogothers’words.Inparingthesefindi’s（1993），anadvanesestudents’kermplagiarismisobservedoverthepastt

WhatisalsalthoughnotshowableisthatthedefinitionsprovidedbyesestudeheirhighschooledutheUSwereveryclosetothedefinitionsprovidedbyAmeritsandweremoreaccuratethaheresestudentsasshowninthefollolagiarismreferstotheathatoher’sarticles，oreveheirownworks”

（Studentd“Plagiarismisthatyoutakeotherpeople’swordsasyourowhisresultistwiththefindingsfromSong-Turner（2008），whofound“theloswereimmersediraliaionaleheclosertheirdefinitioowardstheWesternview”

（p.42）.ThisiheiheWesternlearningeos’knowledgeofplagiarismas’willioaccepttheWesternnotionofplagiarism.

3.1.2Previousinstruplagiarism

AlltheAmeritsreportedtheyhadrestruplagiarismbothiarysdsedaryschhschool，theearlierinstrugbriefaermorepreheervietsprovideaclearerpithispoint.

Ilearplagiarismlateiaryswestartedersthatwehadtodoresearchover...They[instructors]toldthevariousasthatwereplagiarism.gothers’workwithoutgivi.Theysaidthatit[plagiarism]wasacademiestyandcouldgetusfailedoutofthedintotheprincipal’soffice.（StudentA2）

Earlyoaryschoolperhapsthirdrade;learociteproperlyihgrade.Plagiarismwasmadeclearthatitisanactofgbyotherperson’sworksuchasapeerorascholarwhetheritbefromprihecesexplainedinhighssistedofafailihepaper，afailiheclassdepeheinstrudsometimessuspensionfromschool.（StudentA3）

Inorethanhalf（51.9%）oftheesepartitsclaimedhaviruingtotheuy.Amongthosewhoclaimedhaviru，theyvariedtoagreatextentastotheinstrutheyhadreereceivedstrutheywerestudyingfhschooledutheUS（e.g.，StudenteheardtheideafromtheirfrieudentelearitfromTVudenterestruwhiorethanawarcopy”

（e.g.，StudentC9）.Thesedifferencesaremorevisiblewhenlookihetranscriptsoftheinterviews.

Inhighsoreclasses...thoseinstrusaidweeothers’wordsandideas，aodoitinapartiat，althoughIkindotwhatthoseformatsare.（StudentC4）

Myfriendwhoisstudyingabroadtoldmeabout“lagiarism”