Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Technology as a Double-Edged Sword: A Promise Yet to Be Fulfilled or a Vehicle for Cheating?

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Academic Integrity

Abstract

The purpose of the present chapter is to illustrate and discuss relationships between academic integrity, technology, plagiarism, and deception. Academic integrity raises conduct issues. A prevalent idea is that the purpose of the Academy is to educate students to become independent, critical thinkers. A promise of technology is that it can support the qualification, socialization, and subjectification of students. With the advent of digital technology however, it is the cheating, plagiarizing, and colluding student who is attracting increasing attention. He/she is considered to defeat the purpose of higher education and is often regarded as one of the consequences of digital technology. Technology may thus be considered a threat. History demonstrates that what is considered a threat today, may very well be regarded as a valuable aid tomorrow. How technology is seen today may be different tomorrow, some practices perhaps even made obsolete or replaced as a result of new technologies, among other factors. This uneven development of academic ethos and practice is bound to create tensions between the Academy’s ideas of academic integrity and its use of technology – thereby causing both to change.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 799.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Akbulut, Y., Uysal, Ö., Odabasi, H. F., & Kuzu, A. (2008). Influence of gender, program of study and PC experience on unethical computer using behaviors of Turkish undergraduate students. Computers & Education, 51(2), 485–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angelil-Carter, S. (2000). Stolen language? Plagarism in writing. Harlow, UK: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apampa, K. M., Wills, G., & Argles, D. (2010). User security issues in summative E-assessment security. International Journal of Digital Society (IJDS), 1(2), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashworth, P., & Bannister, P. (1997). Guilty in who’s eyes? University students’ perceptions of cheating and plagiarism in academic work and assessment. Studies in Higher Education, 22(2), 187–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, M. (1997). Resistance to new technology and its effects on nuclear power, information technology and biotechnology. In M. Bauer (Ed.), Resistance to new technology. Nuclear power, information technology and biotechnology (pp. 11–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H., Geer, B., & Hughes, E. (1968). Making the grade: The academic side of student life. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bengtson, E. (1987). Vad rätt du tänkt. [Your rightous thoughts] Författarförlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berners-Lees, T., & Cailliaus, R. (1990). The World Wide. http://www.w3.org/Proposal.html. Accessed 5 Mar 2004.

  • Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonderup-Dohn, N. (2009). Web 2.0: Inherent tensions and evident challenges for education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 343–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colnerud, G., & Rosander, M. (2009). Academic dishonesty, ethical norms and learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(5), 505–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daun, Å. (1989). Svensk mentalitet [Swedish mentality]. Stockholm, Sweden: Raben and Sjögren.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeVoss, D. N., & Porter, J. E. (2006). Why Napster matters to writing: Filesharing as a new ethic of digital delivery. Computers and Composition, 23(2), 178–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dows, S. (2005). One administrator’s thoughts on – and experiences with – security of test materials. The Bar Examiner, 74(3), 6–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eklöf, A., Nilsson, L.-E., & Ottosson, T. (2014). Instructions, independence and uncertainty: Student framing in self-regulated project work. European Educational Research Journal, 13(6), 646–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elman, B. A. (2000). A cultural history of civil examinations in late imperial China. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (2006). Development, movement and agency: Breaking away into mycorrhizae activities. In K. Yamazumi (Ed.), Building activity theory in practice: Toward the next generation. Osaka, Japan: Center for Human Activity Theory, Kansai University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glendinning, I. (2014). Responses to student plagiarism in higher education across Europe. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 10(1), 4–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grafton, A. (2003). The footnote: A curious history (Rev edn.). London: Faber and Faber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham-Matheson, L., & Starr, S. (2013). Is it cheating–or learning the craft of writing? Using Turnitin to help students avoid plagiarism. Research in Learning Technology, 21:17218. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v21i0.17218

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallonsten, O. (2007). Kampen på kunskapsmarknaden – Om plagiat bland högskolestudenter. [The battle on the knowledge market – Plagiarism among college students.]. In W. Agrell (Ed.), Forskningens gråzoner. Lund, Sweden: Carlssons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heather, J. (2010). Turnitoff: Identifying and fixing a hole in current plagiarism detection software. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(6), 647–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilton, A. C. (undated). The Heathen Pass-ee. http://www.fullbooks.com/Collections-and-Recollections5.html. Accessed 21 May 2007.

  • HKR registry 986/329-08 (Kristianstad University: Disciplinary committee 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • HKR registry U2014-29-1119 (Kristianstad University: Disciplinary committee 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  • Houston, J. P. (1986). Classroom answer copying: Roles of acquaintanceship and free versus assigned seating. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(3), 230–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, R. M. (1995). Plagiarisms, authorships, and the academic death penalty. College English, 57(7), 788–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, R. M. (2007). Understanding “internet plagiarism”. Computers and Composition, 24(1), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, T. P., Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1987). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johannesson, G. (1982). Lunds universitets historia : Utgiven av universitetet till dess 300-årsjubileum. 2, 1710–1789. Lund, Sweden: Liber Förlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools: engaging critical thinking (2nd ed ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kane, G. (2008). Internet and open-access publishing in physics research. In C. Eisner & M. Vicinus (Eds.), Originality, imitation, and plagiarism: Teaching writing in the digital age. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koselleck, R. (2002). The practice of conceptual history: Timing history, spacing concepts. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruse, S. (1933). Matematisk formelsamling som plånboksinlägg. Stockholm, Sweden: Ahlberg & Lundquists boktryckeri.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liedstrand, A. (1903). Formelsamling i fysik för repetition till studentexamen. Stockholm, Sweden: Fritzes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, C., & Parlett, M. (1974). Up to the mark: A study of the examination game. London: Society for research into higher education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, L.-E. (2008). “But can’t you see they are lying”: student moral positions and ethical practices in the wake of technological change (Doctoral dissertation). Göteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, L.-E. (2013). Kategorisera studenter eller kategorisera text?: Perspektiv på användning av textjämförelsetjänster som kvalitetssystem i utbildning. [Categorizing students or categorizing text?: Perspectives on the use of text comparison services as quality systems in education.] Plattformen för forskning om verksamhetsförlagd utbildning och professionslärande. Kristianstad, Sweden: Kristianstad University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, L.-E., Eklöf, A., & Ottosson, T. (2008). Unstructured information as a socio-technical dilemma. In T. Hansson (Ed.), Handbook of research on digital information technologies. Innovations, methods and ethical issues. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pandey, R. (2015). Universities terrified Apple Watch will help students cheat, banning all watches from exams, IPhone Hacks. http://www.iphonehacks.com/2015/02/universities-terrified-apple-watch-banning-all-watches.html. Accessed 2015.

  • Parr, F. W. (1936). The problem of student honesty. The Journal of Higher Education, 7(6), 318–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pecorari, D. (2008). Academic writing and plagiarism: A linguistic analysis. London: Continuum Intl Pub Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prop. (1995/1996:125). Regeringens proposition 1995/96:125: åtgärder för att bredda och utveckla användningen av informationsteknik, 2001. http://www.distans.hkr.se/kkmtrl/politiska/itprop.pdf. Accessed 21 May 2007.

  • Purdy, J. P. (2009). Anxiety and the archive: Understanding plagiarism detection services as digital archives. Computers and Composition, 26(2), 65–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J., Hamilton, M., Gray, K., Waycott, J., & Thompson, C. (2012). In what ways does policy on academic integrity, copyright and privacy need to respond in order to accommodate assessment with Web 2.0 tools? Paper presented at the ACIS 2012: Location, location, location. Proceedings of the 23rd Australasian Conference on Information Systems 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rider, S. (2013). Higher heteronomy: Thinking through Modern University Education. In S. Rider, Y. Hasselberg, & A. Waluszewski (Eds.), Transformations in research, higher education and the academic market: The breakdown of scientific thought (Vol. 39, pp. 137–144). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, C. (2011). Virtual proctoring in distance education: An open-source solution. American Journal of Business Education (AJBE), 2(2), 81–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Şendağ, S., Duran, M., & Fraser, M. R. (2012). Surveying the extent of involvement in online academic dishonesty (e-dishonesty) related practices among university students and the rationale students provide: One university’s experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 849–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheshadri, R., Reddy, T. C., & Kumar, N. A. (2012). Web-based-secure online non-choice–based examination system (wones) using cryptography. Journal of DiscreteMathematical Sciences and Cryptography, 15(6), 353–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • SFS. (1958:327). Disciplinstadga för de studerande vid rikets universitet och vissa andra läroanstalter; given Stockholms slott den 16 maj 1958. Stockholm, Sweden: P. A. Norstedt & Söner.

    Google Scholar 

  • SFS. (1993:100). Högskoleförordningen. [Higher education ordinance]. https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/Dokument-Lagar/Lagar/Svenskforfattningssamling/Hogskoleforordning-1993100_sfs-1993-100/?bet=1993:100

  • SFS Swensk författningssamling. (1852:20). Kongl. Maj:ts nådiga förordning, angående den angående den universiteterna tillkommande disciplinära myndighet öfwer de studerande. Stockholm, Sweden: P. A. Norstedt & Sönder.

    Google Scholar 

  • SOU. (1994:118). Vingar åt människans förmåga : informationsteknologin : betänkande av IT-kommissionen [Wings to human abilities]. Stockholm, Sweden: Fritze.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skr. (1998). Tools for learning: A national programme for ICT in schools. Stockholm, Sweden: Ministry of Education and Science (Utbildningsdepartementet).

    Google Scholar 

  • Standler, R. B. (2012). Plagiarism in colleges in USA – Legal aspects of plagiarism, academic policy. http://www.rbs2.com/plag.pdf. Accessed 8 Nov 2013.

  • Suen, H. K., & Yu, L. (2006). Chronic consequences of high-stakes testing? Lessons from the Chinese civil service exam. Comparative Education Review, 50(1), 46–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland-Smith, W. (2013). Crossing the line: Collusion or collaboration in university group work? Australian Universities Review, 55(1), 51–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, A. A., & Rocha, M. F. (2010). Cheating by economics and business undergraduate students: An exploratory international assessment. Higher Education, 59(6), 663–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trost, K. (2009). Psst, have you ever cheated? A study of academic dishonesty in Sweden. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(4), 367–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TT. (2015). Höga fusksiffror på högskolorna, Aftonbladet March 23, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • UKÄ. (2014). Disciplinärenden 2013 vid universitet och högskolor. [Disciplinary cases at state-run higher education institutions in 2013]. Stockholm, Sweden: Universitetskanslersämbetet.

    Google Scholar 

  • UKÄ. (2015). Disciplinärenden 2014 vid universitet och högskolor. [Disciplinary cases at state-run higher education institutions in 2014] R 205:6. Stockholm, Sweden: Universitetskanslersämbetet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, J., & Farrington-Flint, L. (2015). Learning and the E-generation. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, J., & Szabo, A. (2003). Academic offences and e-learning: Individual propensities in cheating. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(4), 467–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language (6th edn). Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber-Wulff, D. (2012). Collusion detection system test report 2012. http://plagiat.htw-berlin.de/collusion-test-2012/. Accessed 8 Nov 2013

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education and Environment, Kristianstad University, S-291 88, Kristianstad, Sweden

    Lars-Erik Nilsson

Authors
  1. Lars-Erik Nilsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lars-Erik Nilsson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of South Australia, School of Management, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

    Tracey Bretag

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this entry

Cite this entry

Nilsson, LE. (2016). Technology as a Double-Edged Sword: A Promise Yet to Be Fulfilled or a Vehicle for Cheating?. In: Bretag, T. (eds) Handbook of Academic Integrity. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-098-8_21

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation