International Teacher Education Conference 2014 1

International Teacher Education Conference 2014
9. Copy and pasting pictures without stating the author. 3.60 High Extent
10. Uploading or using parts or the entire content of the video from the internet and claiming it as your
own. 3.20 Moderate Extent
Grand Mean 3.71 High Extent
5.00-4.50-Very High Extent,4.49-3.50-High Extent, 3.49-2.50- Moderate Extent, 2.49-1.50-Low Extent, 1.49-0.50- Very Low Extent
Extent of Students’ Cyber-plagiarism Behaviors
The data above implies that majority of the fourth year education students cyber-plagiarize very often. The
three highest means from table 3 coincides to the findings of Tsang (2006) that majority of the students
admitted frequent commission of cyber-plagiarism specifically in obtaining essay on the internet. In connection
to the Table 1, the student- respondents were highly aware of cyber-plagiarism but they still do it much often.
Cavanillas (2008) stressed that these cases of plagiarism have to be examined under the light of Cybercrime Law
in general and the Institutional manual in specific. Aside from these, the student’s manual in some universities
does not state the distinction between cases when they negligently omits citing the source of some of the
information included in their works.
Table 2. Summary of the Respondent's Extent of Cyber-plagiarism Behaviors
Indicators
Mean
Verbal
Interpretation
1. Claiming submitting another’s paper work or creation as own work. 3.04 Often
2. Combines partially or the entire cited sources with copied passages without
citation. 3.40 Often
Contains significant portions of text from a single source without changing the ideas. 3.58 Frequently
4. Mixes copied material from two or more sources. 3.69 Frequently
5. Paraphrases the ideas from multiple sources and tried to make them fit together. 3.98 Frequently
6. Annotated the source/s but the information is inaccurate about sources. 2.98 Often
7. Includes proper citation to sources but all the contents were copy pasted. 3.40 Often
8 Buying or purchasing paper from the internet and claim it as your own work. 2.51 Often
9. Copy and pasting pictures without stating the author. 3.33 Often
10. Uploading and using parts or the entire content of the video from the internet 2.65 Often
and claiming it as your own.
Grand Mean 3.26 Often
5.00-4.50-Always,4.49-3.50-Frequently, 3.49-2.50- Often, 2.49-1.50-Sometimes, 1.49-0.50- Never
Extent of Students’ Cyber-plagiarism Behaviors According to the Education Teachers
In order to avoid the subjectivity of the findings, the researcher also conducted the survey to the teachers of
the respondents. The Education teachers revealed that based on their observation and checked paper works of
students, students cyber-plagiarize often times. In this case, most of the teachers opined that the teacher has no
authority to directly impose deduction of grades due to misbehavior of students or as a form of disciplinary
measures as stated in the Batas Pambansa 232. This opinion was supported by Cavanillas (2008) in his findings
that the teacher has no legal hold or direct control of students particularly in making deductions in grades. On the
contrary, Cavanillas also clarified that the teacher can include the rule as part of the rubrics in checking the paper
works of students.
Significant Difference in the Respondents Assessment of Students’ Extent of Cyber-plagiarism Behaviors
Table 3 presents the significant difference in the extent of cyber-plagiarism behaviors
of education students as assessed by the students themselves and their teachers. As shown on the table, the
computed t- value of 1.745 is lesser than the tabulated t-value of 2.120 and concludes that there is no significant
530