Edward Eckel, Engineering LibrarianWestern Michigan University

Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and LettersAlma College

March 2, 2012

SOURCE TEXT RE-USE IN ENGINEERING THESIS AND DISSERTATION LITERATURE REVIEWS:

A COMPARISON

WHAT I WILL TALK ABOUT…

• Study Motivation• Project Overview• Results• Implications and Suggestions

August 15, 2006

OUCH!!

• I discovered similar issues with copying in theses and dissertations at my own institution.

• Started to wonder whether this is a larger problem within engineering graduate writing.

• Decided to use the Google search strategy that I had used to uncover plagiarism at my own institution in a research study.

MCCULLOUGH AND HOLMBERG (2005)• Used Google to search strings of text

from 210 master’s theses from the Web• “Suspected Plagiarism” found in 27%• Highest in engineering

• 43.59% in computer science/engineering• 38.1% in mechanical/aerospace

engineering

MY PILOT STUDY 2009-10

• Random sample of 2007 English language engineering master’s theses

• Sample: 100• Published in Science and

Engineering Ethics (2011)• http://www.springerlink.com/content/m37x736k8672kl7

0/

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

• Do engineering master's theses have longer verbatim text matches than doctoral dissertations?

• Do engineering master's theses have more verbatim text matches than doctoral dissertations?

•  Basic hypotheses – yes for both questions.

METHODOLOGY 1

• ProQuest Dissertations and Theses• Random sample of 2009 English language

engineering master’s theses and doctoral dissertations• Thesis population: 937• Dissertation population: 6562

• Sample: 125 of each [150 eventually]• Literature review/background sections• Searched 30 seven word strings (basically the

first seven words from every fifth line)

METHODOLOGY 2

• Recorded: source name/author, source type, URL, number of words copied, date of posting/publication, Cited or Not

• Two measures: • longest verbatim string per

thesis/dissertation• Percentage of searches (out of 30) that

contained verbatim hits

COMPARISON – MEAN OF LONGEST VERBATIM STRING

MS Summary Mean Number (N)

Mean: 103 125

Mean (excluding outliers and

zeros):

69 95

PhD Summary

Mean: 52 125

Mean (excluding outliers and

zeros):

60 91

CONCLUSIONS

• Master’s and doctoral students have similar patterns in the length of the strings they copy

• Master’s students copy significantly MORE strings than doctoral students (p=.001)

CONCLUSIONS

• Overall sizable number of master’s and doctoral students engage in questionable source text copying. Copying that could get them in trouble, whether in graduate school or beyond if they continue with this pattern.

IMPLICATIONS

• Need for more instruction and practice in synthesis skills• Preferably at the beginning of graduate

program• More of an issue with master’s students

• May not be urgent enough for engineering programs to take this seriously

SUGGESTIONS

• Start discussions with faculty regarding graduate student writing abilities

• Work with writing programs to push for better instruction in synthesis skills

• Students could use focused practice on borrowing source langauge appropriately (Barks 2001)

• Development of explicit guidelines on using boilerplate technical language

BOILERPLATE TECHNICAL DESCRIPTIONS• “X has developed a model…”• “…an exploratory study was conducted…”• “as a result, there is a need for a method

to…”• “…requires a high degree of accuracy and

reproducibility…”• “Optical flow is defined as the apparent

motion of…”• “PIR sensors are passive devices in that they

only detect radiation…”• "A fuel cell operates like a battery…"

FINAL THOUGHTS (NOT IN ORIGINAL PP)• Now, the thing that I find interesting about this data is that we sort of assume that graduate

students are following the rules. But when you look at what they do, a fair number don't.  Does this mean that they are bad?  Based upon this data, can we say that there is a crisis in engineering graduate writing? No I don't think so.  

• The examples I show here, with few exceptions, are relatively minor. I think this is what we can realistically expect from novices in the field of engineering, based upon the level of writing instruction and practice they've received up to this point in their educational journey. 

•

So I think getting too judgmental about what graduate students are doing without teaching them what they need to know is kind of pointless.  You don't teach someone to avoid plagiarism by getting all judgmental on them. 

•

Based upon the literature on novice writers, particularly ESL writers, and on studies like my own, I think that the only way we can expect students to "avoid plagiarism" is by teaching them to write from sources.  You teach them by showing them (with examples) what's acceptable in the discipline and what is not.  You give them practice writing from sources over and over again until they master the skill. 

• If we want to avoid this kind of text reuse, this kind of instruction may need to become integral to graduate programs in engineering, if not other disciplines as well.  Otherwise we risk sending these people out into academia and the working world where they will perpetuate this kind of copying.

REFERENCES

• Barks, D. (2001). “Textual Borrowing Strategies for Graduate-Level ESL Writers.” In Linking Literacies: Perspectives on L2 Reading-Writing Connections. D. Belcher and A. Hirvela. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press: 246-267.

• Eckel, E.J. “Textual Appropriation in Engineering Master’s Theses – A Preliminary Study,” Science and Engineering Ethics 17(3) (2011): 469-483. DOI 10.1007/s11948-010-9214-6

• Howard, R. M. and A. E. Robillard (2008). Pluralizing plagiarism : identities, contexts, pedagogies. Portsmouth, NH, Boynton/Cook Publishers.

• McCullough, M. and M. Holmberg (2005). “Using the Google Search Engine to Detect Word-for-Word Plagiarism in Master's Theses: A Preliminary Study.” College Student Journal 39(3): 435.

• Pecorari, D., D. Belcher, et al. (2001). “Plagiarism and International Students: How the English-Speaking University Responds.” In Linking Literacies: Perspectives on L2 Reading-Writing Connections. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press: 229-245.

• Tomsho, R. (2006, August 15). “Familiar Words: Student Plagiarism Stirs Controversy at Ohio University.” Wall Street Journal: A1-A10.

EDWARD ECKEL

edward.eckel@wmich.edu