IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eltjnl/v9y2016i4p106.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparison of the Act and Frequency of Plagiarism between Technical and Non-Technical Programme Undergraduates

Author

Listed:
  • Madhubala BavaHarji
  • Thiba Chetty
  • Zalina Ismail
  • Krishnaveni Letchumanan

Abstract

Concerned with intellectual theft, we decided to examine intellectual theft among undergraduates at a private higher education institution. The aim of this study was to compare the act and frequency of plagiarism, particularly between programmes, gender, year of study and academic performance. This study adopted the quantitative approach, using a questionnaire to gather the students’ background information and the general practice of intellectual theft. It was administered to 120 students, i.e. 30 students undertaking the Engineering, IT, Management and Creative Multimedia programmes. For the purpose of this study, we categorised the programmes into Technical programme (TP), i.e. Engineering and IT programmes (science discipline) and Non-Technical programme (NTP), i.e. Management and Creative Multimedia programmes (non-science discipline). This study found that the act of plagarising was prevalent in both categories of the programmes, however, more prevalent among the technical programme students than the non-technical programme students. We also found that the act of intellectual theft was more evident among the males than female, junior than seniors and average academic achievers than high achievers. A comparison between programmes found significant differences in the act of plagiarism among gender, particularly among the female NTP students, among the Year 3 students and among the high achievers. No significant difference was found in relation to the frequency of plagiarism between programmes and gender, but among the students who sometimes plagiarise by level of study and by academic achievements.

Suggested Citation

  • Madhubala BavaHarji & Thiba Chetty & Zalina Ismail & Krishnaveni Letchumanan, 2016. "A Comparison of the Act and Frequency of Plagiarism between Technical and Non-Technical Programme Undergraduates," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(4), pages 106-106, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:9:y:2016:i:4:p:106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/57991/31003
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/57991
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:9:y:2016:i:4:p:106. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.