Although methods for automatically detecting contract cheating, that is finding students who have... more Although methods for automatically detecting contract cheating, that is finding students who have outsourced the production of their assessed work to a third party, have been proposed, successful implementations of these detection methods have not yet been reported. This paper instead reports on an investigation to make use of a database of known work for this purpose. The work is accessed through the non-originality engine Turnitin, against which attempts at contract cheating found on agency websites are matched. 369 assignment specifications found on online agency contract cheating sites, such as Freelancer.com, were collected between January and November 2013. These were all assignment specifications for which attempts to attribute these with any level of certainty to an academic institution had proved impossible to a contract cheating detective. The assignment specifications all represented cases that looked likely to belong a UK educational institution. The assignment specifications were run through the Turnitin database in use within the UK and the results analysed as part of a process attempting to notify tutors that one of their students may be attempting to cheat. The initial indications were that the use of Turnitin was of value to the contract cheating detection process, with 105 out of 369 (28.5%) initially identified. 2 out of 369 (0.5%) were subsequently found by a tutor at the institution concerned as a result of being in the database. However, several challenges were identified that will require the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) communities to come together and work to improve the use of Turnitin within the contract cheating detection process. This paper explores the results of this study and the wider issues surrounding the use of Turnitin for the detection of contract cheating.
Although methods for automatically detecting contract cheating, that is finding students who have... more Although methods for automatically detecting contract cheating, that is finding students who have outsourced the production of their assessed work to a third party, have been proposed, successful implementations of these detection methods have not yet been reported. This paper instead reports on an investigation to make use of a database of known work for this purpose. The work is accessed through the non-originality engine Turnitin, against which attempts at contract cheating found on agency websites are matched.
The process of contract cheating, the form of academic dishonesty where students outsource the cr... more The process of contract cheating, the form of academic dishonesty where students outsource the creation of work on their behalf, has been recognised as a serious threat to the quality of academic awards. Unlike student plagiarism, this cheating behaviour is not currently detectable using automated tools.
This paper analyses the monetary value of contract cheating to the different parties who play a role in the contract cheating process. The main analysis is based on a corpus consisting of 14,438 identified attempts to cheat. The corpus was collected between March 2005 and July 2012. The corpus was formed as part of a manual contract cheating detection process identifying students using online agencies. These online agencies are web sites which enable students to contract cheat. The agencies usually benefit from this by receiving a percentage cut of the money raised from the contract cheating that they facilitate. This corpus is used as the basis of an attempt to quantify the monetary value of contract cheating to online agencies.
Other parties exist who benefit from the contract cheating process. The paper identifies several such parties and gives examples of the monetary value of contract cheating to each of them. Most notably this includes the contractors who bid for the opportunity to produce work on behalf of the students. Further, the paper identifies the role of intermediary contractors. These are people who post assignment requests on agency sites but who are not themselves students. These intermediary contractors appear to benefit by first receiving requests to complete work for students and then re-outsourcing this work at a much lower cost than they were paid. The group of frequent workers, that is people who regularly work on student assignments and hence benefit financially, is also identified.
The paper concludes by presenting the changing trends in contract cheating that the authors have observed since they started working against this form of academic misconduct in 2005. Finally, recommendations for academics towards dealing with the issues posed by contract cheating are provided.
This paper proposes a systematic six-stage process that tutors can use to detect students who are... more This paper proposes a systematic six-stage process that tutors can use to detect students who are contract cheating. Contract cheating is where students have original work completed for them and submit it, without acknowledgement, for academic credit. A background to the problem is presented along with the current problems of preventing and detecting contract cheating. Examples of how pervasive computing techniques have made it easier for students to cheat are given. A description of how contract cheating is currently detected is presented, with shortcomings of these methods detailed. The paper formalises new six-stage contract cheating detection process developed to parallel approaches taken in the plagiarism literature.
The paper identifies a growing problem, referred to as contract cheating, considered to
be the su... more The paper identifies a growing problem, referred to as contract cheating, considered to be the successor to pure plagiarism. Contract cheating is defined as the submission of work by students for academic credit which the students have paid contractors to write for them. The usage of one particular site, RentACoder, known to be used for contract cheating is manually monitored. RentACoder is a site where computer solutions are written to contract for legitimate uses but can also be used for students to cheat. An exhaustive study shows that 12.3% of bid requests placed on RentACoder are identified as contract cheating. The primary study reported in the paper quantifies and discusses these contract cheaters. Out of 236 identified contract cheaters only 8.1% of these have made only a single bid request. Over half of the 236 cheaters have previously requested between two and seven pieces of work. The paper argues that this shows that this form of cheating is becoming habitual. The primary study identifies that as well as the usual types of individual students using the services of RentACoder non-originality agencies also appear to be working as subcontractors offering to complete student assignments. This adds an extra layer of complexity to methods of tracking cheating students. The paper concludes by advising that more automated detection techniques are needed and advises that assessments and academic policies need to be redesigned to remove the potential for contract cheating to be committed.
13th International Workshop on Teaching, Learning and Assessment of Databases (TLAD 2015), 2015
This paper examines student cheating on database modules. There is particular focus on the relate... more This paper examines student cheating on database modules. There is particular focus on the related areas of plagiarism and contract cheating.
Despite cheating being an area of wide interest to the academic community, there has been little work specific to the database discipline. Scope exists to identify the current scale of cheating on database modules. Small scale previous studies suggest that this lies between 6.7% and 12%. Techniques for plagiarism detection exist in other types of student work, particularly written essays and programming source code, but there has been little work to optimise this for database assignments and SQL.
The accompanying area of contract cheating, where students pay or use a third party to complete assessed coursework on their behalf, is considered. Previous research has shown that the database discipline is susceptible to contract cheating, both through standard coursework outsourced by database learners and through larger scale databases used in final year projects. Examples of the type of database assignments found online by contract cheating detectives are provided.
This paper reviews existing research into plagiarism and contract cheating, particularly indicating the applicability of this research to the database academic discipline. Suggestions to prevent and detect such cheating, distilled from existing research and database module case studies, are provided. The intention of this paper is to encourage further development of research into the extent of the problem, to develop technical solutions specific for database modules and to encourage the continued discussion and communication of good practice around the database academic community.
In the course of our research into “contract cheating” we have examined over 4,000 suspicious ite... more In the course of our research into “contract cheating” we have examined over 4,000 suspicious items and traced over 1,000 assignments to their source. (data correct March 2008)
In doing so we have observed some interesting behaviour, which we would like to share with you now.
The issue of attribution, identifying the institutions which students who attempt to outsource wo... more The issue of attribution, identifying the institutions which students who attempt to outsource work are from, poses a major difficulty for detectives monitoring online sites used for contract cheating. This form of academic misconduct occurs when students get other people to complete assessed work for them. Previous studies on contract cheating have focused on student use of Internet-based outsourcing services. The studies have demonstrated that those sites primarily provide students with work for subjects falling within the computing spectrum.
Although methods for automatically detecting contract cheating, that is finding students who have... more Although methods for automatically detecting contract cheating, that is finding students who have outsourced the production of their assessed work to a third party, have been proposed, successful implementations of these detection methods have not yet been reported. This paper instead reports on an investigation to make use of a database of known work for this purpose. The work is accessed through the non-originality engine Turnitin, against which attempts at contract cheating found on agency websites are matched. 369 assignment specifications found on online agency contract cheating sites, such as Freelancer.com, were collected between January and November 2013. These were all assignment specifications for which attempts to attribute these with any level of certainty to an academic institution had proved impossible to a contract cheating detective. The assignment specifications all represented cases that looked likely to belong a UK educational institution. The assignment specifications were run through the Turnitin database in use within the UK and the results analysed as part of a process attempting to notify tutors that one of their students may be attempting to cheat. The initial indications were that the use of Turnitin was of value to the contract cheating detection process, with 105 out of 369 (28.5%) initially identified. 2 out of 369 (0.5%) were subsequently found by a tutor at the institution concerned as a result of being in the database. However, several challenges were identified that will require the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) communities to come together and work to improve the use of Turnitin within the contract cheating detection process. This paper explores the results of this study and the wider issues surrounding the use of Turnitin for the detection of contract cheating.
Although methods for automatically detecting contract cheating, that is finding students who have... more Although methods for automatically detecting contract cheating, that is finding students who have outsourced the production of their assessed work to a third party, have been proposed, successful implementations of these detection methods have not yet been reported. This paper instead reports on an investigation to make use of a database of known work for this purpose. The work is accessed through the non-originality engine Turnitin, against which attempts at contract cheating found on agency websites are matched.
The process of contract cheating, the form of academic dishonesty where students outsource the cr... more The process of contract cheating, the form of academic dishonesty where students outsource the creation of work on their behalf, has been recognised as a serious threat to the quality of academic awards. Unlike student plagiarism, this cheating behaviour is not currently detectable using automated tools.
This paper analyses the monetary value of contract cheating to the different parties who play a role in the contract cheating process. The main analysis is based on a corpus consisting of 14,438 identified attempts to cheat. The corpus was collected between March 2005 and July 2012. The corpus was formed as part of a manual contract cheating detection process identifying students using online agencies. These online agencies are web sites which enable students to contract cheat. The agencies usually benefit from this by receiving a percentage cut of the money raised from the contract cheating that they facilitate. This corpus is used as the basis of an attempt to quantify the monetary value of contract cheating to online agencies.
Other parties exist who benefit from the contract cheating process. The paper identifies several such parties and gives examples of the monetary value of contract cheating to each of them. Most notably this includes the contractors who bid for the opportunity to produce work on behalf of the students. Further, the paper identifies the role of intermediary contractors. These are people who post assignment requests on agency sites but who are not themselves students. These intermediary contractors appear to benefit by first receiving requests to complete work for students and then re-outsourcing this work at a much lower cost than they were paid. The group of frequent workers, that is people who regularly work on student assignments and hence benefit financially, is also identified.
The paper concludes by presenting the changing trends in contract cheating that the authors have observed since they started working against this form of academic misconduct in 2005. Finally, recommendations for academics towards dealing with the issues posed by contract cheating are provided.
This paper proposes a systematic six-stage process that tutors can use to detect students who are... more This paper proposes a systematic six-stage process that tutors can use to detect students who are contract cheating. Contract cheating is where students have original work completed for them and submit it, without acknowledgement, for academic credit. A background to the problem is presented along with the current problems of preventing and detecting contract cheating. Examples of how pervasive computing techniques have made it easier for students to cheat are given. A description of how contract cheating is currently detected is presented, with shortcomings of these methods detailed. The paper formalises new six-stage contract cheating detection process developed to parallel approaches taken in the plagiarism literature.
The paper identifies a growing problem, referred to as contract cheating, considered to
be the su... more The paper identifies a growing problem, referred to as contract cheating, considered to be the successor to pure plagiarism. Contract cheating is defined as the submission of work by students for academic credit which the students have paid contractors to write for them. The usage of one particular site, RentACoder, known to be used for contract cheating is manually monitored. RentACoder is a site where computer solutions are written to contract for legitimate uses but can also be used for students to cheat. An exhaustive study shows that 12.3% of bid requests placed on RentACoder are identified as contract cheating. The primary study reported in the paper quantifies and discusses these contract cheaters. Out of 236 identified contract cheaters only 8.1% of these have made only a single bid request. Over half of the 236 cheaters have previously requested between two and seven pieces of work. The paper argues that this shows that this form of cheating is becoming habitual. The primary study identifies that as well as the usual types of individual students using the services of RentACoder non-originality agencies also appear to be working as subcontractors offering to complete student assignments. This adds an extra layer of complexity to methods of tracking cheating students. The paper concludes by advising that more automated detection techniques are needed and advises that assessments and academic policies need to be redesigned to remove the potential for contract cheating to be committed.
13th International Workshop on Teaching, Learning and Assessment of Databases (TLAD 2015), 2015
This paper examines student cheating on database modules. There is particular focus on the relate... more This paper examines student cheating on database modules. There is particular focus on the related areas of plagiarism and contract cheating.
Despite cheating being an area of wide interest to the academic community, there has been little work specific to the database discipline. Scope exists to identify the current scale of cheating on database modules. Small scale previous studies suggest that this lies between 6.7% and 12%. Techniques for plagiarism detection exist in other types of student work, particularly written essays and programming source code, but there has been little work to optimise this for database assignments and SQL.
The accompanying area of contract cheating, where students pay or use a third party to complete assessed coursework on their behalf, is considered. Previous research has shown that the database discipline is susceptible to contract cheating, both through standard coursework outsourced by database learners and through larger scale databases used in final year projects. Examples of the type of database assignments found online by contract cheating detectives are provided.
This paper reviews existing research into plagiarism and contract cheating, particularly indicating the applicability of this research to the database academic discipline. Suggestions to prevent and detect such cheating, distilled from existing research and database module case studies, are provided. The intention of this paper is to encourage further development of research into the extent of the problem, to develop technical solutions specific for database modules and to encourage the continued discussion and communication of good practice around the database academic community.
In the course of our research into “contract cheating” we have examined over 4,000 suspicious ite... more In the course of our research into “contract cheating” we have examined over 4,000 suspicious items and traced over 1,000 assignments to their source. (data correct March 2008)
In doing so we have observed some interesting behaviour, which we would like to share with you now.
The issue of attribution, identifying the institutions which students who attempt to outsource wo... more The issue of attribution, identifying the institutions which students who attempt to outsource work are from, poses a major difficulty for detectives monitoring online sites used for contract cheating. This form of academic misconduct occurs when students get other people to complete assessed work for them. Previous studies on contract cheating have focused on student use of Internet-based outsourcing services. The studies have demonstrated that those sites primarily provide students with work for subjects falling within the computing spectrum.
Uploads
Papers by Robert Clarke
369 assignment specifications found on online agency contract cheating sites, such as Freelancer.com, were collected between January and November 2013. These were all assignment specifications for which attempts to attribute these with any level of certainty to an academic institution had proved impossible to a contract cheating detective. The assignment specifications all represented cases that looked likely to belong a UK educational institution. The assignment specifications were run through the Turnitin database in use within the UK and the results analysed as part of a process attempting to notify tutors that one of their students may be attempting to cheat.
The initial indications were that the use of Turnitin was of value to the contract cheating detection process, with 105 out of 369 (28.5%) initially identified. 2 out of 369 (0.5%) were subsequently found by a tutor at the institution concerned as a result of being in the database. However, several challenges were identified that will require the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) communities to come together and work to improve the use of Turnitin within the contract cheating detection process. This paper explores the results of this study and the wider issues surrounding the use of Turnitin for the detection of contract cheating.
This paper analyses the monetary value of contract cheating to the different parties who play a role in the contract cheating process. The main analysis is based on a corpus consisting of 14,438 identified attempts to cheat. The corpus was collected between March 2005 and July 2012. The corpus was formed as part of a manual contract cheating detection process identifying students using online agencies. These online agencies are web sites which enable students to contract cheat. The agencies usually benefit from this by receiving a percentage cut of the money raised from the contract cheating that they facilitate. This corpus is used as the basis of an attempt to quantify the monetary value of contract cheating to online agencies.
Other parties exist who benefit from the contract cheating process. The paper identifies several such parties and gives examples of the monetary value of contract cheating to each of them. Most notably this includes the contractors who bid for the opportunity to produce work on behalf of the students. Further, the paper identifies the role of intermediary contractors. These are people who post assignment requests on agency sites but who are not themselves students. These intermediary contractors appear to benefit by first receiving requests to complete work for students and then re-outsourcing this work at a much lower cost than they were paid. The group of frequent workers, that is people who regularly work on student assignments and hence benefit financially, is also identified.
The paper concludes by presenting the changing trends in contract cheating that the authors have observed since they started working against this form of academic misconduct in 2005. Finally, recommendations for academics towards dealing with the issues posed by contract cheating are provided.
be the successor to pure plagiarism. Contract cheating is defined as the submission of
work by students for academic credit which the students have paid contractors to
write for them. The usage of one particular site, RentACoder, known to be used for
contract cheating is manually monitored. RentACoder is a site where computer
solutions are written to contract for legitimate uses but can also be used for students to
cheat. An exhaustive study shows that 12.3% of bid requests placed on RentACoder
are identified as contract cheating. The primary study reported in the paper quantifies
and discusses these contract cheaters. Out of 236 identified contract cheaters only
8.1% of these have made only a single bid request. Over half of the 236 cheaters have
previously requested between two and seven pieces of work. The paper argues that
this shows that this form of cheating is becoming habitual. The primary study
identifies that as well as the usual types of individual students using the services of
RentACoder non-originality agencies also appear to be working as subcontractors
offering to complete student assignments. This adds an extra layer of complexity to
methods of tracking cheating students. The paper concludes by advising that more
automated detection techniques are needed and advises that assessments and academic
policies need to be redesigned to remove the potential for contract cheating to be
committed.
Despite cheating being an area of wide interest to the academic community, there has been little work specific to the database discipline. Scope exists to identify the current scale of cheating on database modules. Small scale previous studies suggest that this lies between 6.7% and 12%. Techniques for plagiarism detection exist in other types of student work, particularly written essays and programming source code, but there has been little work to optimise this for database assignments and SQL.
The accompanying area of contract cheating, where students pay or use a third party to complete assessed coursework on their behalf, is considered. Previous research has shown that the database discipline is susceptible to contract cheating, both through standard coursework outsourced by database learners and through larger scale databases used in final year projects. Examples of the type of database assignments found online by contract cheating detectives are provided.
This paper reviews existing research into plagiarism and contract cheating, particularly indicating the applicability of this research to the database academic discipline. Suggestions to prevent and detect such cheating, distilled from existing research and database module case studies, are provided. The intention of this paper is to encourage further development of research into the extent of the problem, to develop technical solutions specific for database modules and to encourage the continued discussion and communication of good practice around the database academic community.
Conference Presentations by Robert Clarke
In doing so we have observed some interesting behaviour, which we would like to share with you now.
369 assignment specifications found on online agency contract cheating sites, such as Freelancer.com, were collected between January and November 2013. These were all assignment specifications for which attempts to attribute these with any level of certainty to an academic institution had proved impossible to a contract cheating detective. The assignment specifications all represented cases that looked likely to belong a UK educational institution. The assignment specifications were run through the Turnitin database in use within the UK and the results analysed as part of a process attempting to notify tutors that one of their students may be attempting to cheat.
The initial indications were that the use of Turnitin was of value to the contract cheating detection process, with 105 out of 369 (28.5%) initially identified. 2 out of 369 (0.5%) were subsequently found by a tutor at the institution concerned as a result of being in the database. However, several challenges were identified that will require the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) communities to come together and work to improve the use of Turnitin within the contract cheating detection process. This paper explores the results of this study and the wider issues surrounding the use of Turnitin for the detection of contract cheating.
This paper analyses the monetary value of contract cheating to the different parties who play a role in the contract cheating process. The main analysis is based on a corpus consisting of 14,438 identified attempts to cheat. The corpus was collected between March 2005 and July 2012. The corpus was formed as part of a manual contract cheating detection process identifying students using online agencies. These online agencies are web sites which enable students to contract cheat. The agencies usually benefit from this by receiving a percentage cut of the money raised from the contract cheating that they facilitate. This corpus is used as the basis of an attempt to quantify the monetary value of contract cheating to online agencies.
Other parties exist who benefit from the contract cheating process. The paper identifies several such parties and gives examples of the monetary value of contract cheating to each of them. Most notably this includes the contractors who bid for the opportunity to produce work on behalf of the students. Further, the paper identifies the role of intermediary contractors. These are people who post assignment requests on agency sites but who are not themselves students. These intermediary contractors appear to benefit by first receiving requests to complete work for students and then re-outsourcing this work at a much lower cost than they were paid. The group of frequent workers, that is people who regularly work on student assignments and hence benefit financially, is also identified.
The paper concludes by presenting the changing trends in contract cheating that the authors have observed since they started working against this form of academic misconduct in 2005. Finally, recommendations for academics towards dealing with the issues posed by contract cheating are provided.
be the successor to pure plagiarism. Contract cheating is defined as the submission of
work by students for academic credit which the students have paid contractors to
write for them. The usage of one particular site, RentACoder, known to be used for
contract cheating is manually monitored. RentACoder is a site where computer
solutions are written to contract for legitimate uses but can also be used for students to
cheat. An exhaustive study shows that 12.3% of bid requests placed on RentACoder
are identified as contract cheating. The primary study reported in the paper quantifies
and discusses these contract cheaters. Out of 236 identified contract cheaters only
8.1% of these have made only a single bid request. Over half of the 236 cheaters have
previously requested between two and seven pieces of work. The paper argues that
this shows that this form of cheating is becoming habitual. The primary study
identifies that as well as the usual types of individual students using the services of
RentACoder non-originality agencies also appear to be working as subcontractors
offering to complete student assignments. This adds an extra layer of complexity to
methods of tracking cheating students. The paper concludes by advising that more
automated detection techniques are needed and advises that assessments and academic
policies need to be redesigned to remove the potential for contract cheating to be
committed.
Despite cheating being an area of wide interest to the academic community, there has been little work specific to the database discipline. Scope exists to identify the current scale of cheating on database modules. Small scale previous studies suggest that this lies between 6.7% and 12%. Techniques for plagiarism detection exist in other types of student work, particularly written essays and programming source code, but there has been little work to optimise this for database assignments and SQL.
The accompanying area of contract cheating, where students pay or use a third party to complete assessed coursework on their behalf, is considered. Previous research has shown that the database discipline is susceptible to contract cheating, both through standard coursework outsourced by database learners and through larger scale databases used in final year projects. Examples of the type of database assignments found online by contract cheating detectives are provided.
This paper reviews existing research into plagiarism and contract cheating, particularly indicating the applicability of this research to the database academic discipline. Suggestions to prevent and detect such cheating, distilled from existing research and database module case studies, are provided. The intention of this paper is to encourage further development of research into the extent of the problem, to develop technical solutions specific for database modules and to encourage the continued discussion and communication of good practice around the database academic community.
In doing so we have observed some interesting behaviour, which we would like to share with you now.