“Cut and Paste” Plagiarism in the Campus: Instructional

and Institutional Responses

by

Danilo L. Mejica, PhD

dlm_1850@yahoo.com
danilomejica@rocketmail.com

Abstract

Anchored on the concept of academic honesty and integrity, the study was
conducted to determine the understanding of faculty on the nature, extent and
frequency of “cut and paste” plagiarism among students. As output, the study
explores possible instructional and institutional responses to manage the
plagiarism issue. The study used the survey method reinforced and validated
with random interviews conducted to selected teachers and students.
Qualitative information was integrated in the quantitative analysis of the data.
The research built on the perceptions of faculty members of existing cases of
student plagiarism in the campus. Faculty understanding of “cut and paste”
plagiarism is centered on the idea of copying someone else’s work and
passing it off as their own which contain no original thoughts. Sentiments and
reactions of faculty revolving around concepts of plagiarism were thematically
grouped and five dominant reactions came up. First, faculty saw the need to
identify just what is at stake when they believe they are faced with plagiarism.
Second, faculty agrees that plagiarism taints institutional academic culture,
especially with institutions like HCDC where academic honesty and integrity
combined with the Church teachings are highly valued and respected. Third,
faculty believes that behaviors constituting “cut and paste” plagiarism are
actually occurring more frequently today because of the advent of digital and
World Wide Web technology. Fourth, the type of assignments and the
conditions which faculty give these assignments to students may have
actually increased the probability of students committing plagiarism. Fifth,
plagiarism among students has evoked some powerful emotions from the
faculty (indifference, anger, exasperation, disappointment). Faculty members
perceived that there is a greater extent of plagiarism nationwide than in their
academic program or department, in their classes, on this campus and in
other schools. When confronted with plagiarism among students for the first
time, majority of faculty members ignore the incident. On the second and third
time when plagiarism is caught by teachers, cases were not ignored by
teachers; in fact, majority of teachers gave strong warning to students. Most
teachers proposed to conduct workshops focused on paraphrasing and
citations of other people’s work as the most appropriate way to minimize
plagiarism. Others think that providing specific requirements such as
submission of cited literature and references can also minimize textual
copying. Initial reactions of faculty on institutional responses took the route of
educating both teachers and students about plagiarism. Many teachers
believe that the school should take a firm stand by holding a seminar or a
forum to discuss and confront the issue. A big sector of the faculty strongly
advocated for integrating specific policy on academic honesty which will also
cover plagiarism and cheating in the administrative manual; introducing policy
measures to sanction cases of plagiarism among students; and putting in
place digital technology to check plagiarism.

Plagiarism is the intentional or unintentional reproduction (copying, rewording,

paraphrasing, adapting, etc) of work produced by another person(s) without

proper acknowledgement in an attempt to gain academic benefit. Intentionally

or negligently allowing such reproduction to happen may also constitute

plagiarism (Undergraduate Handbook 2005-06, Department of English,

University of Bristol).

Cut and paste plagiarism happens when a person lifts (copy) a sentence or

significant phrase intact (verbatim or word for word) from a source without the

use of quotations marks and not reference the source by simply clicking and

dragging the mouse (of the computer). It is also known as internet plagiarism,

cyber cheating, and digital plagiarism.

The objectives of the research

To determine whether faculty had an accurate understanding of the nature,

extent and frequency of “cut and paste” plagiarism among students.
To explore possible instructional and institutional responses to manage
issue of “cut and paste” plagiarism.

Design of the study

The study used survey questionnaire and infused qualitative data
culled from interviews conducted to the analysis and discussion.

Types of data Respondents Tools for Techniques for Output of the

gathering data analyzing data study

Concepts of College Faculty Survey Analyses: Instructional and

Faculty; extent, members and questionnaire Frequency and Institutional
frequency & randomly and interview ranking of data; Responses to
responses to cut selected with selected thematic Plagiarism
& paste students faculty & responses from
plagiarism students interviews
Respondents

 75 faculty members representing 14 academic programs

participated in the survey questionnaire.
 Responses of 18 faculty members and 22 college students when
interviewed were recorded and transcribed.
 Responses from 9 college students were discarded due to
inconsistency of contents. The rest were transcribed and thematically
coded.

Data Analysis

Frequency and ranking applied; extent of plagiarism was interpreted through

the use of a Likert Scale; thematic coding was used to give meaning to
narrative responses.

Key Results

Prevailing conceptual perceptions of faculty regarding cut and paste

plagiarism

 works of other people are copied by manual or digital means

without the proper citation or acknowledgment of authorship
 submission of written work which has been “cut and pasted” from
various sources which may or may not include internet sources

Extent of plagiarism

Faculty members perceived that there is a greater extent of plagiarism

nationwide than in their academic program or department, in their class, in
other schools and on this campus. It is notable that perceptions regarding the
extent of plagiarism occurring vary widely.

Frequency of Student Plagiarism

Forty-three (24%) faculty members responded that they had never found
students plagiarizing in their classes. The highest percentage (32%) of
plagiarism perceived by faculty members were two to four times a semester.
Responses rose considerably (17%) with “5 to 7 times a semester,” but
responses dropped again (14%) with the faculty identifying “8 to 10 times a
semester.” Only nine (9) faculty members found students plagiarizing 16 to 20
times a semester.
Instructional Responses to Plagiarism

Good ways to decrease cut and paste plagiarism

conducting workshops focused on paraphrasing and citations of
other people’s work as the most appropriate way to minimize 72
plagiarism.
providing specific requirements such as submission of cited
literature and references can also minimize textual copying. 66
holding write shops and similar activities to develop writing
competency of students 56
Giving extra time to students to write term papers, research,
assignments, etc. 48
Requiring students to submit original & paraphrased materials for
comparison purposes 23
Preparing list of relevant books for students’ use (in coordination
with the library) 12

Institutional Responses to Plagiarism

Good ways to minimize cut and paste plagiarism

Educate teachers and students (thru seminars and handouts) on
how to recognize and avoid plagiarism 57
Hold a forum among teachers & students to confront issue 50
Review & upgrade institutional manuals to integrate policy on
academic honesty (plagiarism, cheating, etc.) 47
Orient teachers & students on the proper use of journal citations 42
Introduce policy measures to manage cases of plagiarism
among students (sanctions, guidelines, etc.) 42
Include issue/topic on plagiarism during student orientation 40
Creation of a body to look into this issue to examine various
forms of plagiarism 33

Discussion

Whether copied by hand or digitally reproduced, conceptual definition implies

that a person who engages in “cut and paste” plagiarism has no originality, is
dishonest and by inference, has low integrity (Hodges, 1998; Groak, Oblinger
& Choa, 2001).
Concepts of “cut and paste” plagiarism among faculty surfaced several
reactions:
 faculty should strive to identify just what is at stake when they
believe they are facing plagiarism;
 plagiarism taints current academic culture, especially with
institutions such as HCDC that value academic honesty and academic
integrity;
 plagiarism may actually be occurring frequently today than they
were in earlier decades;
 the type of assignments we give to students and the conditions
under which we give them may have increased the probability of
students’ resorting to prohibited textual strategies (such as plagiarism);
and
 faculty reactions to incidences of these forbidden textual strategies
evoked in them some powerful emotional responses such as
indifference, coldness, anger, exasperation or disappointment.

The faculty do not have factual data about plagiarism in academic

environments such as their classrooms, academic programs, and campus
where they are frequently interacting and have constant means of monitoring
students’ written activities.

On the other hand, it is ironic that greater extent was assigned by faculty
members to incidences of plagiarism occurring on a nationwide scale. This
means that faculty members might be more informed about what is happening
in other schools nationwide that those that are taking place in the institution.

From the reactions of students on the extent of unreported plagiarism

happening in the campus, pattern of behavioral effects on academic
motivation of students were identified by the researcher consisting of the
following dominant molds:
 academic requirements were made easier thru the internet (wrong
value);
 the practice itself taught students to paraphrase materials so as not
to be detected as plagiarized (wrong learning);
  students giving the excuse that “everyone does it, so why should
we not do it?” (wrong attitude);
 students know and accept the act as morally wrong, yet they still do
it as an easier way to pass the course (wrong conviction); and
 students rely much on the internet to the exclusion of the library as
source of information (wrong application).

Students have learned to seek out individuals and establishments who sell
researches, term papers and other similar academic requirements for a price
extending to the manufacturing and selling of “fake” diplomas, transcript of
records, thesis, dissertations to the highest takers.

The high number of teachers who deliberately ignore incidence of plagiarism

when done for the first time as compared with those who responded with
some appropriate measures is quite alarming. Why? This is happening in an
archdiocesan institution expected to have high moral standards.

For lack of a clear policy or guidelines on how to handle cases of plagiarism,

most faculty have resorted to ignore the situation the first time and to give
verbal reprimands to students the second or third time these happened.

Conclusions

Teachers and students have differing concepts and understanding of

plagiarism especially internet plagiarism.

The internet and the World Wide Web have made academic dishonesty

of the “cut and paste” variety among students considerably easier and faster.

The laxity of ethics among students confronted was closely related to the

Internet.

The type of assignments and the conditions which faculty give these

assignments to students may have actually increased the probability of

students committing plagiarism.

 Teachers are at a lost in handling or managing cases of plagiarism.

Majority of them would have relied on specific institutional policies (which are

actually absent) which they insist should be crafted to deter cases of

plagiarism.

Although cases of plagiarism in the classroom are perceived to be few

only, this does not convey the actual and accurate picture of the unreported

cases of frequent plagiarism unearthed by further interviews with students.

These students validated the practices of students who engage in plagiarism.

From students interviewed, three reasons came out for plagiarism: it is easy

with technology such as the Internet; the odds of being caught are low; and

those who are caught do not receive punishment or sanction.

Behavioral effects on academic motivation of students were observed

to have been happening due to the extent of plagiarism happening among

students (wrong value, wrong learning, wrong attitude, wrong conviction, and

wrong application).

As gleaned from interviews conducted, many times faculty gets

suspicious if a student cannot speak well or communicate clearly in class, but

yet suddenly seems able to write a perfect paragraph or page in a paper,

inconsistent with their perceived writing style or abilities.

Constant vigilance, unceasing promotion of intellectual honesty, an in-

depth knowledge of their area of specialization and the will to actually guide

students in their research and writing tasks are teacher’s best weapons

against plagiarism and intellectual dishonesty, even in the Internet age.

 Recommendations

Faculty members advocated for stronger punishments to be applied to

plagiarists, however, the punishment should be part of institutional policy on

academic integrity.

A review of academic policies with the aim of putting in place regulations on

plagiarism is in order.

Hand in hand with policies are proactive strategies such as conducting series
of fora or workshops to teach students on proper citations, referencing and
authenticating internet sources or materials.

The institution to consider conducting seminars on how to design school

assignments and assessments to discourage (or even prevent) cheating
and/or plagiarism from electronic or other sources.

Rather than looking at the Internet negatively, teachers should develop

meaningful learning activities that exploit the potential of the Internet as an
educational resource and take full advantage of the students’ online
experiences and training.

The library to purchase and introduce internet technology to combat

plagiarism (such as Turnitin) and teachers to be taught how to use devices on
the internet (via some verified websites) to check whether full manuscripts or
parts of the student’s work are copied or not. Suggested devices are
PlagiarismChecker.com; the Way Back Machine found at www.archive.org,
which teachers can use by typing the website cited by students and it will
show a timeline and view of the different versions the materials cited has gone
through (It’s like a massive internet scrapbook); a free website called
Copyscape www.copyscape.com which works very similar to Google by
searching the web looking for plagiarizers of the materials cited by students.

Faculty should require students to show their progress throughout the

research process by requiring them to submit outlines, research notes, and

drafts. These can demonstrate that the papers are indeed the students’ own

original work. Continued collaboration and work between academic faculty

and librarians can also reduce the problem.

References

Alexander, V. (1998). "Managing a book versus plagiarizing it." Teaching of

Psychology. Vanguard University of Southern California.

Anderson, Judy. Plagiarism, Copyright Violation and Other Thefts of

Intellectual Property. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 1998.
http://www.strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/cp/copy2000.pdf.

Angelil-Carter, Shelley. Stolen language? plagiarism in writing. Singapore:

Pearson Education Asia, 2000.

Auer, Nicole J., and Ellen M. Krupar. "Mouse Click Plagiarism: The Role of
Technology in Plagiarism and the Librarian's Role in Combating It." Library
Trends 49.3 (2001): 415-33. Academic Search Premier. 14 July 2001.

Ashworth, Peter, and Philip Bannister. (2001). "Guilty in Whose Eyes?

University Students' Perceptions of Cheating and Plagiarism in Academic
Work Assessment." Studies in Higher Education 22.2 (1997): 187-206.
Academic Search Premier. 14 July 2001.
http://www.strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/cp/copy2000.pdf.

Barnbaum, C. (2007). A Student’s Guide to Recognizing and Avoiding

Plagiarism. Journal of Physics and Astronomy. Valdosta State University,
Georgia, USA. http://journal@vcu. Plagiarism.html Retrieved: June 26,
2008
Bensman, W. (1998). "Term paper mills continue to grind." Educational
Record UT Press, US. (http://teaching.berkeley.edu/bgd/prevent.html).
University of California, Berkeley. Accessed 2006.

Bjaaland, K. and Lederman, H. (1993). The Case for Participatory

Democracy: Prospects for a Radical Society. New York: Grossman.

Bowden, Darsie. "Stolen Voices: Plagiarism and Authentic Voice."

Composition Studies/Freshman English News 24.1-2 (1996):5-18.
http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url

Buranen, L. and Roy, R. (1999). "The New Abolitionism Comes to Plagiarism."

Perspectives on Plagiarism and Intellectual Property in a Postmodern
World. Ed. Albany, NY: SUNY P, 1999. 87-98.

Broad, M and Wade, T. (1992) "An empirical approach for detecting program
similarity and plagiarism within a university programming environment."
Computers and Education. "Cybercheating: A New Twist on an Old
Problem." Phi Delta Kappan. October 2001. Expanded Academic Index
ASAP. Gale Group.

Canadian Intellectual Property Office. A Guide to Copyrights. Jan. 2007

http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?
url=http://www.strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/cp/copy2000.pdf.

Carroll, T. (1992).The Melancholy Anatomy of Plagiarism. "Lessons in the

School of Cut and Paste: E-mail and the Web Make Plagiarism a
Plague. Will Computers Be the Cure, Too?" New York Times. 28 June
2001.

Carroll J. (2004). Institutional issues in deterring, detecting and dealing with

plagiarism. Retrieved March 7, 2008 from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/
uploaded_documents/plagFinal.doc

Cranberg, O. (1992). "In search of a plagiarism policy." Northern Kentucky

Law Review

Collins, F. (1992). Bureaucratic Plagiarism: Challenging Abuses at the

Workplace. New York: Pergamon.

Conradson, Stacey & Pedro Hernández-Ramos (2004). Computers, the

internet, and cheating among college students: some implications for
educators. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 9(9). Retrieved
March 29, 2008 from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=9

Coser, Kadushin, and Powell, 1992. Books: The Culture and Commerce of
Publishing. New York: Basic Books.

Cosma, G. and Joy, M. (2006). "Source-code Plagiarism: a UK Academic

Perspective". Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference of the HEA
 Network for Information and Computer Sciences.
http://www.ics.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/assessment/plagiarism/index.ht
ml

Dant, W. (1996). "The culture of plagiarism." The New Republic. “Plagiarism

and Anti-Plagiarism”
http://newark.rutgers.edu/~ehrlich/plagiarism598.html). 1998. Accessed
2006.

Department of English, University of Bristol (2005). Undergraduate Handbook

2005-06. Retrieved February 20, 2006 from
http://www.bris.ac.uk/english/undergraduate/current/handbook.html

Evans, J. (2000). “The New Plagiarism in Higher Education: From Selection to

Reflection”. Interaction Vol.4/2 Retrieved November 2008 from
http://www.warwick.ac.uk/ ETS/interacitons/vol2no2/evans.htm

Faidhi, M. and Robinson, Y. (1997). "Lectures: the ethics of borrowing."

Journal of College Teaching. Singapore University Press, Singapore.

Fass, 1996. "Current trends in college cheating." Psychology in the Schools.

Saginaw Valley State University, MI.
http://www.svsu.edu/~dboehm/pixels.htm. Accessed 2006.

Fischer and Lazerson, 1997. "The plague of plagiarism persists in modern

science." The Scientist 6 (3 February)
(http://www.bedfordstmartins.com/technotes/workshops/talkingplagy.htm).
Bedford Workshops on Teaching Writing Online. Accessed August 2004.

Fulton, K. (1997). Learning in a Digital Age: Insights into the Issues. Milken
Exchange on Educational Technology. Santa Monica, California: Milken
Family Foundation.

Gresham, Keith. "Preventing Plagiarism of the Internet: Teaching Library

Researchers How and Why to Cite Electronic Sources." Colorado Libraries
22.2 (1996):48-50.
http://www.strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/cp/copy2000.pdf.

Groak, Marie, Diana Oblinger, and Miranda Choa. (2001)"Term Paper Mills,
Anti-Plagiarism Tools, and Academic Integrity." Educase Review 36.5
(2001): 40-48.

Groark, Oblinger & Choa, 2001; Groark, M., Oblinger, D., & Choa, M. (2001).
Term paper mills, anti-plagiarism tools, and academic integrity. Educause
Review, 36(5), 40-8.

Harvey, Gordon. Writing with Sources: A Guide for Harvard Students. Harvard
University, 1995 <http:/cg.harvard.edu/~sources/>
Hawley, I. (1994). The Unreality Industry: The Deliberate Manufacturing of
Falsehood and What It Is Doing to Our Lives. New York: Carol.

Hawley, C. S. (2004). The thieves of academe: Plagiarism in the university

system. Improving College and University Teaching, 32, 35-39, Retrieved:
January 21, 2007, from http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/

Hodges, J. (1998). Harbrace College Handbook. Harbrace University,

Minnesota. USA. (1998).

Introna, L., & Hayes, N. (2004). Plagiarism, detection and intentionality: on the
construction of plagiarists. In A. Pedden Smith & F. Duggan (Eds.),
Plagiarism: Prevention, Practice & Policy Conference. Northumbria
University Press. Retrieved January 3, 2008, from
http://www.bluej.org/index.html

Jensen, B. (1998). "The aesthetics and politics of plagiarism." Politics,

Culture, and Society. Newark Publishing, New Jersey, USA.

Jenson, J. & De Castell, S. (1004). “Turn it in”: Technological challenges to

academic ethics. Education, Communication, & Information, 4(2).
Retrieved May 20, 2006, from Academic Search Premier database.
http://turnitin.jensoncastell.asp.html

Keyt, O. (1998)."Allegations of dishonesty in research and their treatment by

American universities.” Guiding Students from Cheating and Plagiarism
to Honesty and Integrity: Strategies for Change. Westport, CT: Libraries
Unlimited, 2005.

Klass, P. (1997). "Turning my words against me: A case of plagiarism." What

Is Plagiarism? [Online] Georgetown University Honor Council Web Site.
URL: http://www.georgetown.edu/honor/plagiarism.html [Accessed: 9
January 2007].

Kroll, K. (1998). "An empirical investigation of actual cheating in a large

sample of undergraduates." Research in Higher Education , 12. 112-
128.

LaFollette, O. (1992)."Plagiarism in high school: a survey." English Journal

Student Cheating, Plagiarism (and Other Questionable Practices), the
Internet, and Other Electronic Resources. 2006.

Larkham, P. J. & Manns, S. (2002). Plagiarism and its treatment in higher

education. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 26(4). Retrieved
November 11, 2005, from Tayler & Francis database.

Lathrop, Ann, and Kathleen Foss. Student cheating and plagiarism in the
internet era: a wake-up call. Englewood, CO:Libraries Unlimited, 2000.
Lindsay, S. (2006) Plagiarism - A Case of Copy & Paste. Retrieved June 26,
2008, from http://ezinearticles.com/?Plagiarism---A-Case-of-Copy-and-
Paste&id=309558

Llaneta, C.A.C. (2008). Intellectual dishonesty in the internet age. The UP

Forum - Jan.-Feb. 2008 - (Vol 9 Issue 1)

Mawdsley, R. (1996). "Plagiarism problems in higher education." Journal of

College and University. Law Talking about Plagiarism.
(http://www.bedfordstmartins.com/technotes/workshops/talkingplagy.ht
m). Bedford Workshops on Teaching Writing Online. Accessed August
2006.

Malloch, A. E. (1996). "A dialogue on plagiarism." Anti-Plagiarism Strategies

for Research Papers. URL: http://www.virtualsalt.com/antiplag.htm
[Accessed: 9 January 2007]. Strategies for increasing awareness, for
prevention, and for detection of plagiarism.

Mallon, Thomas (1999). Stolen Words: Forays into the Origins and Ravages
of Plagiarism. New York: Ticknor and Fields.

Martin, T. (1994). "Plagiarism: the unfun game." English Journal 71:92-94.

University of Boston Press, Massachusetts, USA..

Moeck, P. G. (2002). Academic dishonesty: Cheating among community

college students. Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, 26, 479-491

Moodie, G. (1993). "Bureaucratic plagiarism." Campus Review (Australia)

(25-31 March) “Combating Plagiarism,” from CQ Researcher, Sept. 19,
2003.http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?
id=cqresrre2003091900&type=hitlist&num=0& Accessed 2007.

Michaels, F. and Podlogar, S. (1998). Betrayers of the Truth: Fraud and Deceit
in the Halls of Science. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Mitroff, P. and Arthur Bennis (1998). "The detection of plagiarism."

Educational Forum. McGraw Hill Publishing, New York.

Oliphant, 2002; Oliphant, T. (2002). Cyber-plagiarism: plagiarism in a digital

world. Feliciter, 48(2), 78-80.

Perrin, N. (1992). "How I became a plagiarist." American Scholar.

Why Students Cheat.
http://www.dailyemerald.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/12/01/3fcb65fa
bb526

Posner, J. (1998). "By honor bound: encouraging academic honesty."

Educational Record. Student Cheating, Plagiarism (and Other
 Questionable Practices), the Internet, and Other Electronic Resources.
2006.

Perrin, N. (1992). "How I became a plagiarist." American Scholar. Why

Students Cheat.
http://www.dailyemerald.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/12/01/3fcb65fa
bb526. Part I of a five-part series including methods of cheating,
consequences of cheating, stopping cheaters, and profile of a cheater.

Reams, Jr., B. D. (1997). "Revocation of academic degrees by colleges and

universities." How to recognize plagiarism. URL:
http://www.indiana.edu/~istd/ [Accessed: 27 August 2007]. Web page
defining plagiarism and providing guidlines for avoidance.

Robertson, Hugh. "Best way to fight plagiarism is to teach essay-writing

skills." The Ottawa Citizen 13 Mar. 2001, final ed.: D4.
http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?

Ross, P. (2007). Google Generation (A BBC News Story). An entry in the

IPCentral.info weblog
(http://www.yale.edu/bass/writing/sources/kinds/internet/copy.html)

Rimer, S. (2003). "The thieves of academe: plagiarism in the university

system." Improving College and University Teaching.

Sigthorsson, G. (Jul. 2005) "Copy/Paste: The Joys of Plagiarism," M/C

Journal, 8(3). Retrieved 26 Jun. 2008 from <http://journal.media-
culture.org.au/0507/04-sigthorsson.php>.

Spender, T. (1989). "An improved framework for plagiarism litigation."

California Law Review. Anti-Plagiarism Strategies for Research
Papers. URL: http://www.virtualsalt.com/antiplag.htm [Accessed: 9
January 2006]. Strategies for increasing awareness, for prevention,
and for detection of plagiarism.

St. Onge, E. (1998). Stealing into Print: Fraud, Plagiarism, and Misconduct in
Scientific Publishing. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Spender, E. (1999)."Plagiarism and responsibility." Journal of Tertiary

Educational Administration. “Four Reasons to be Happy about Internet
Plagiarism.” Accessed at http://www.stu.ca/~hunt/4reasons.htm 2006.

Schab, F. (1992). "Cheating in high school: a comparison of behavior of

students in the college prep and general curriculum." Journal of Youth
and Adolescence. Berkeley Univ., SA.

Schulte, B. (2002). Cheatin’, Writin’ & ‘ Rithmetic. How to succeed in school

without really trying. The Washington Post. Sep 15, 2002, p. W16.
[Retrieved online October 19, 2007 from:
http://www.jhu.edu/~virtlab/misc/Cheatin.htm.]
Stavisky, Leonard Price (1993). "Term paper 'mills,' academic plagiarism, and
state regulation." Political Science Quarterly. Avoiding Plagiarism, URL:
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/research/r_plagiar.html
[Accessed: 9 January 2007]. A handout on dos and don'ts in attribution
of sources, with exercises.

Stevenson, Seth (2001). “Adventures in Cheating: A guide to buying term

papers online” December 11, 2001. Online magazine Slate Retrieved
February 13, 2009 from http://www.slate.com/?id=2059540

The Ignatian Perspectives (2006). Plagiarism and Copyright - What Are the
Differences? The Council Chronicle, Nov. 05. 16 Jan 2006 . Retrieved
Nov 12 2008 from http://theignatianperspective.blogspot.com

Thelen, D. (1991). "Becoming Martin Luther King, Jr. -- plagiarism and

originality: a round table." Journal of American History, Encyclopedia
Americana.

Thomley, Y. (1999)."Professors are woefully ignorant of a well-organized

market inimical to learning: the big business in research papers."
Chronicle of Higher Education 39 (28 October). Kimbel Library, Coastal
Carolina University, Conway, SC.

Thompson, 2003). Thompson, S. (2003). Why do students plagiarize?.

Retrieved March 15, 2008. from
http://library.csusm.edu/plagiarism/howtocredit/how_credit_online.htm.

Tichenor, S. (2001). Cutting edge technology: Inspiration or irritation?. Paper

presented at the annual meeting of the National Institute for Staff and
Organizational Development, Austin, Texas. Retrieved May 19, 2008
from http://nisod@austintexas.tichenor.html

Weinstein, J. (1999). "How college freshmen view plagiarism." Written

Communication . University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, UK.

______________________. FUU Student Manual (2006). Fr. Urios University,

2006 Edition, Butuan City.

Williams. I. (2008). Copy-Paste Plagiarism. Article released January 21, 2008

in the UK-based website vnunet.com .
http://www.vnunet.com/vnuetnews/2207715/teachers-concerned-
internet-plagiarism. Retrieved January 29, 2008