Eighteen people punished by plagiarism board over three years

Only 18 DCU students have been dealt with by the University Disciplinary Committee on plagiarism over the past three years.

This figure – which was uncovered as the result of a freedom of information request – comes despite an anonymous survey that was carried out for the last issue of the College View finding that 66% of students have plagiarised at some point during their time in DCU.

Students’ Union education and welfare office John Murphy told the College View that he feels 18 cases being referred to the University Disciplinary Committee over three years isn’t a “particularly low figure” and that punishments for plagiarism are “fair enough”.

Students who were dealt with by the University Disciplinary Committee incurred punishments including having to repeat a year, repeat a module, submit extra assignments, grade caps – and in the case of one PhD student last year – being de-listed as a student, a punishment that Students’ Union president, Alan Keegan says is “as tough as you can get.”

He says that punishments by the University Disciplinary Committee are tough enough and that they, “want the student to stay in university, and will always work towards a good balance between that and a suitable punishment.”

According to the DCU plagiarism policy, students that have been caught plagiarising more than once must be “immediately referred” to the University Disciplinary Committee with initial cases of plagiarism being dealt with by lecturers.

In reality, lecturers have told the College View this doesn’t actually happen – with bureaucracy and the time it takes for cases to be processed by the University Disciplinary Committee cited as reasons for them to deal with the problem themselves even with second time offenders.

According to the Students’ Union president, Alan Keegan, detection of plagiarism is not a problem at DCU, and that given most cases are dealt with at faculty level, “if you were to look closely at the faculties… the number of cases would increase.”

DCU president, Ferdinand von Prondzynski says most cases of plagiarism, “can be dealt with more lightly, and in my experience most students who plagiarise in a minor context do not re-offend.”

He added that when he was a lecturer, he “detected quite a few cases of small plagiarism,” such as not properly crediting sources but that, “usually this could be dealt with on the spot, and it wouldn’t have figured in any college records.”

The College View’s survey also found that 5% of students had been caught plagiarising.

According to von Prondzynski, however, the detection rate at DCU could be much higher that this, with respondents “reluctant to admit they were detected.”

He says that he is, “now trying to get feedback from staff as to how they deal with plagiarism, in order to see whether the 5% includes minor cases” and that he will be able to give more feedback in coming weeks.

Full results of FOI and the punishments in each case

2007

Student 1: (2nd year) Deemed to have failed the year and must repeat year.

Student 2: (2nd year) Deemed to have failed module and must repeat.

Student 3: (Final Year) Asked to submit two final year projects the subject of which to be decided by the School and degree to be capped at a Pass level.

Student 4: (1st Year) Had to re-submit the three modules plus an extra piece of work.

Student 5: (2nd Year) Deemed to have failed the project and must repeat it and also complete an additional piece of work

Student 6: (Final Year) Deemed to have failed final year. Must re- submit project and may only receive a mark of 60% and final degree will be capped at a H3.

2008

Student 1: (Final Year) Deemed to have failed final year. Must re- submit project and must receive a mark of no higher than 60% and final degree will be capped at a H3

Student 2: (2nd Year) Three modules including any written examinations already taken to be repeated plus an additional assignment.

Student 3: (2nd Year) Three modules including any written examinations already taken to be repeated plus an additional assignment.

Student 4: (Masters) Committee determined work submitted did not meet the University’s requirements in terms of originality, citation and reference. Therefore it was not possible for the University to give grades for any of the examinations and projects for the current year

Student 5 (Masters) Committee determined work submitted did not meet the University’s requirements in terms of originality, citation and reference. Therefore it was not possible for the University to give grades for any of the examinations and projects for the current year

Student 6: (1st Year) Must repeat three assignments along with another piece of work to be decided by the Chair of the Programme Board

Student 7: (1st Year) Complete a course on essay writing and repeat original essay along with additional piece of work.

Student 8: (Final Year) Take time out from course and will be considered for re-admission to the final year in October 2009.

2009

Student 1: (3rd Year) Deemed to have failed module and must repeat at next available opportunity. Original mark of “0” for module will count towards overall mark for degree and not grade received in repeat.

Student 2: (3rd Year) Deemed to have failed module and must repeat at next available opportunity. Original mark of “0” for module will count towards overall mark for degree and not grade received in repeat.

Student 3: (PhD) Student de-listed as a PhD registered student.

Student 4: (1st Year) Student to repeat blog and essay with an additional 5,000 word essay and will be assigned some web work on plagiarism.