Taking pedagogic responsibility for the difference between plagiarism and cheating

Summary, in English

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.

• Författare: Mattias Alveteg; Jonas Josefsson
• Redaktör: Anders Sonesson; Maria Hedberg
• Avdelning/ar: Centre for Engineering Education CEE; Utbildningsvetenskap
• Publiceringsår: 2009
• Språk: Engelska
• Sidor: 261-264
• Publikation/Tidskrift/Serie: NU2008 Proceedings : Lärande i en ny tid - samtal om undervisning i högre utbildning.
• Länkar: http://www.ced.lu.se/upload/UCLU/Utveckling/NU2008.pdf
• Dokumenttyp: Konferensbidrag
• Förlag: Akademi sydost/nshu/Lunds Universitet
• Ämne: Educational Sciences; Pedagogy
• Nyckelord: SoTL
• Conference name: NU 2008
• Conference date: 2008-05-07 - 2008-05-09
• Status: Published
• ISBN/ISSN/Övrigt: ISBN: 978-91-977974-1-2