Taking pedagogic responsibility for the difference between plagiarism and cheating

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingPaper in conference proceeding

Abstract

The Swedish Higher Education Ordinance states1 in Chapter 8, section 1 (Svensk Förfat- tningssamling [SFS] 1993:100) that disciplinary action can be taken against a student who “at- tempt to deceive during examinations or when academic work is otherwise assessed”. Suspicion of such behaviour is to be reported to the disciplinary board, which in turn has to establish the students intent. The main focus of the teacher, however, is to uphold the quality of the educa- tion and thus the teacher typically cares less about intent and more about scientific quality and progression.
Contrary to popular belief the Swedish Higher Education Ordinance does not force teachers to report every suspicion of plagiarism to the disciplinary board. The ordinance forces teachers to report well-grounded suspicions of cheating (SFS 1993:100, Chapter 8, section 9). Once the pedagogical challenges of teaching academic conduct are recognised, suspicions of plagiarism may well take another turn: The differentiation between obvious deficiencies in the ability to formulate oneself independently and suspected attempts to cheat require pedagogic insights and actions.

Details

Authors
Organisations
Research areas and keywords

Subject classification (UKÄ) – MANDATORY

  • Educational Sciences
  • Pedagogy

Keywords

  • SoTL
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationNU2008 Proceedings : Lärande i en ny tid - samtal om undervisning i högre utbildning.
EditorsAnders Sonesson, Maria Hedberg
PublisherAkademi sydost/nshu/Lunds Universitet
Pages261-264
Number of pages350
ISBN (Print)978-91-977974-1-2
Publication statusPublished - 2009
Publication categoryResearch
Peer-reviewedYes
EventNU 2008 - Kalmar
Duration: 2008 May 72008 May 9

Conference

ConferenceNU 2008
Period2008/05/072008/05/09