Assessment 3 Literature Review on a research question +2200 word report
Purpose: To allow students to demonstrate their ability to pose a research question and write a critical literature review. This contributes to Learning Outcomes a, b, c, d and e.
Value: 20%
Due Date: Week 11 – 5.00pm 06 February 2016
Submission: Upload a soft copy – Word .doc or .docx - to Moodle and Turnitin. Students must also submit a separate file that has all the original source material and the parts of the source material used in their assignment should be highlighted.
Topic: Comparing viewpoints about a research question – the specific topic will be provided in class and via Moodle by week 8
Task Details: Students will be given specific readings about a research topic. Students will need to compare and contrast what the two given authors say, and review additional research on the same topic.
Please note:
Presentation: +2200 word critical review - Word .doc or .docx Title page, executive summary, table of contents, appropriate headings and sub-headings, recommendations/findings/conclusions, in-text referencing and reference list (Harvard – Anglia style), attachments if relevant. Single spaced, font Times New Roman 12pt, Calibri 11pt or Arial 10pt
Instructions for the literature review worth 20% of your final grade, +2200 words
email matthew.maccallum@koi.edu.au if you have any questions.
Goal of the assignment:
A postgraduate student has to be able to critically review literature, They have search for articles related to a particular problem themselves and critically review the literature, Most students find the easiest way to this is look at what has been done and think of what new research can be done, for example what factors have not been considered or if there different articles disagree how would you work out which article is correct. Follow the instructions given below and make sure you propose new research in the assignment you will have to refer to this new research in the exam. Some literature reviews are much more difficult for example they discuss why all the previous research is wrong, However most students find this difficult , I strongly suggest you matthew.maccallum@koi.edu.au if you want to argue that a journal article is totally wrong
Submission:
Upload a soft copy – Word .doc or .docx - to Turnitin.
The assignment must be properly referenced, you must give a references to all the material you used to the write the assignment and you must have actually read all the references given in your assignment. If it is not clear you have done this you will be be sent an email requiring them to provide a separate file that has all the original source material used in there assignment.
Presentation:
2500 + 10% word critical review - Word .doc or .docx Title page, executive summary, table of contents, appropriate headings and sub-headings, recommendations/findings/conclusions, in-text referencing and reference list (Harvard – Anglia style), attachments if relevant. Single spaced, font Times New Roman 12pt, Calibri 11pt or Arial 10pt
Instructions:
*All the articles/reports used in the literature review must be related to the topic “cheating at university”
* You have to demonstrate you understand what a literature review is, so make sure you have looked at the lecture slides explaining what a literature review is.
For your literature review you must refer to the article
http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/ReportOnAllegationsOfStudentMisconduct.pdf
And you must use at least 3 free journal articles taken from
https://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?start=10&q=cheat+use+website+university+assignment+journal+abstract&hl=en&as_sdt=1,5&as_ylo=2010&as_yhi=2016&as_vis=1
The free journal articles have a link to a free version of the journal article
Note that you are searching google for
“cheat use website university assignment journal abstract”
between 2010 and 2016

You can add extra words to refine the search but you cannot delete words
you can add the words “poor English skills”
https://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?start=10&q=cheat+use+website+university+assignment+journal+abstract+poor+english+skills&hl=en&as_sdt=1,5&as_ylo=2010&as_yhi=2016&as_vis=1
*The reason students have to find students have to use a particular search to find at least 3 articles is that it prevents them finding all the articles from Go to webpage that “helps” students write their essays and search for “literature review plagiarism”
*You can use other sources as well however , as mentioned before, you must refer to
http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/ReportOnAllegationsOfStudentMisconduct.pdf
and refer to at least 3 articles taken from
https://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?start=10&q=cheat+use+website+university+assignment+journal+abstract&hl=en&as_sdt=1,5&as_ylo=2010&as_yhi=2016&as_vis=1
(adding search terms is permitted deleting search terms is not)
You will also have submit a separate document that has all the original paragraphs you paraphrased when making your assignment, this proves you that is possible you actually read all the references on your reference list.

Marking scheme and tips to get marks
Marking Guide: The following rubric will be used and the total mark scaled to a mark out of 20 note that the topic is “a literature review on plagiarism at university so students must demonstrate they have researched plagiarism AND they know what a literature review is
80%-100% Full understanding of the topic and its importance to the broader context. Evidence of conceptually sophisticated thinking e.g. by inclusion of personal views, connections with other subject areas etc. Arguments supported by evidence and examples.
Student will have consulted a wide range of appropriate sources (journal articles)
. Appropriate referencing in a standard format with minimal errors.
Excellent overall standard of presentation, exhibiting a high standard of English and clarity of expression. Appropriate use of fonts and effects. Rich, flowing text, pleasure to read with minimal errors. Appropriate separation of text into sections/sub-sections.
Summarize all the results effectively for example use original tables and figures to summarize data from multiple sources to support an argument.
70%-79% Student will have demonstrated substantial understanding of the topic area and its place in the broader context. Critical evaluation and arguments supported by evidence and examples with some evidence of independent thinking, for example compare two of the articles, do the articles agree or disagree.
Evidence of consulting a range of appropriate
Sources (journal articles) which are appropriately referenced. No significant errors. High standard of presentation, exhibiting a good standard of English and clarity of expression. Appropriate use of fonts and effects. Writing is accurate
50%-59% Understanding of the topic demonstrated, but with limited evaluation of its importance. Restricted use of evidence and examples. Some errors. At least acceptable standards of English, but with ambiguities and awkward expression. Some attention to layout and formatting. References in text and bibliography correctly cited. Writing mostly accurate, but uninteresting.
Less than 50% Limited understanding of the topic area. Frequent factual or other errors. Inadequate standard of presentation. Poor use of English and inappropriate use of fonts and effects. Writing has frequent ambiguities, errors of expression, verbose or too brief. Insufficient reading around the topic. Referencing contains errors. Almost no attempt to provide a logical structure, or consider layout and formatting. No evidence of independent thought

Tips:
tip 1
As for your own example you can discuss the assignment you are doing,
example
A good assignment is supposed to reduce cheating however a boring assignment may encourage students to cheat, If an assignment has specific instructions it makes it harder for students to use webpages that “help” students write assignments but do the instructions of this assignment help students write assignments, Do you think the instructions prevent cheating.
Tip 2
Think of a specific problem related to plagiarism
For example Pretend you actually work at KOI, The government demands students do not cheat, It also demands there is a high pass rate, So you cannot simply fail the students that cheat you have to actually prevent them from cheating. There are examples of cheating given on moodle so make a report that discusses the problem and how journal articles can help fix the problem.
Tip 3
Also note that you are doing a literature review, it is OK to start of talking about plagiarism is general terms but at least some of you literature review should have a narrow focus, it should focus on specific issues.
Marking Guide: The following rubric will be used and the total mark scaled to a mark out of 20
80 – 100% Full understanding of the topic and its importance to the broader context. Evidence of conceptually sophisticated thinking e.g. by inclusion of personal views, connections with other subject areas etc. Arguments supported by evidence and examples.
Student will have consulted a wide range of appropriate sources. Appropriate referencing in a standard format with minimal errors. Use of original tables and figures to summarize data from multiple sources to support an argument.
Excellent overall standard of presentation, exhibiting a high standard of English and clarity of expression. Appropriate use of fonts and effects. Rich, flowing text, pleasure to read with minimal errors. Appropriate separation of text into sections/subsections.
70 – 79% Student will have demonstrated substantial understanding of the topic area and its place in the broader context. Critical evaluation and arguments supported by evidence and examples with some evidence of independent thinking. Evidence of consulting a range of appropriate sources which are appropriately referenced. No significant errors.
High standard of presentation, exhibiting a good standard of English and clarity of expression. Appropriate use of fonts and effects. Writing is accurate
60 – 69% Understanding of the topic demonstrated, but with limited evaluation of its importance. Restricted use of evidence and examples. Some errors. At least acceptable standards of English, but with ambiguities and awkward expression. Some attention to layout and formatting. References in text and bibliography correctly cited. Writing mostly accurate, but uninteresting.
50 – 59% Little understanding of the topic area demonstrated, with no attempt to synthesise.
Review will be little more than a précis of research papers. Opinions expressed are BUS701 BUS701 RESEARCH METHODS QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE T315 GH 30 OCT 2015 Page 9 of 11 *AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PTY LTD ABN: 72 132 629 979 CRICOS 03171A likely to be directly taken from published reviews or papers. Occasional errors in facts.
Limited reading with a short bibliography. In the main, references in text and bibliography are correctly cited. Some errors in layout and formatting. Basic use of reproduced figures and tables.
Less than 50% Limited understanding of the topic area. Frequent factual or other errors. Inadequate standard of presentation. Poor use of English and inappropriate use of fonts and effects. Writing has frequent ambiguities, errors of expression, verbose or too brief. Insufficient reading around the topic. Referencing contains errors. Almost no attempt to provide a logical structure, or consider layout and formatting. No evidence of independent thought.
This document has some claims and a related report and journal article, Use it if you are stuck for ideas on the literature review..
Some claims about cheating you can either agree or disagree
Claim 1
one reason why you should give students an assignment about cheating is that gives students an example of how government agencies place demands on a business. The fact that many students that blatantly cheat and get 0 but still argue say their mark needs to be changed clearly do not understand this.
Claim 2
It is difficult to do a proper literature review, they are not experts and they are not used to how academics describe the problem, However they do get a benefit from looking at actual journal articles and seeing how they discuss a specific problem and review the literature. If a student cheats by getting an essay from a website that makes fake essays they will not actually learn anything.
Sections on a government report related to the claims about cheating
For your literature review you have to refer to a government report on cheating
“Report on Student Academic Integrity and Allegations of Contract Cheating by University Students”
http://www.teqsa.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/ReportOnAllegationsOfStudentMisconduct.pdf
The following statements are relevant to claim 1 and claim 2
“Contract cheating – the purchase of another person’s work to present as your own – has a long history. Recently, the ready availability of sophisticated communication technology and the rise of social media have increased the opportunity to access and/or repurpose another’s work to present as your own. Availability of essay writing services is pervasive with both local and international websites advertising their services. A number of assessment strategies have been devised to minimise the opportunity for such fraudulent activity by students and to detect it when it occurs. However it should be noted that the efficacy of such strategies has not been established and the favoured way to combat such behavior is by the promotion of academic integrity in the student body. Approaches to assessment and promotion of good student conduct are discussed in the next section of this report”
“It is often considered that essays purchased through essay mills are less likely to be detected by anti-plagiarism software because they are kept behind firewalls and are supposedly bespoke products. However, this is not the experience of all providers (eg University of Sydney). Purchased work is usually detected because the quality of the academic content and/or language is significantly superior to the student’s usual performance in class or because the answer provided has a generic quality rather than addressing the specifics of the assignment task. It is widely regarded that the best way to detect and deter contract cheating is to “know your students”.”
Sections of journal article related to claims against cheating.
The following journal article discusses cheating
“Detecting the work of essay mil ls and file swapping sites: some clues they leave behind”
http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1441&context=gsbpapers
The following sections of the article are related to claim 1 and claim 2
“Many students references do not exist or are not on the internet so there is no way the student can read them
If students actually find the reference the author names were missing, and finer details such as issue numbers, volume numbers, and page numbers were different to the original papers as reflected in the journal databases (see Figures 1 and compare it to the actual reference)
The actual reference is
Edmondson, A.. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. http://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
The students seemed genuinely shocked, but had no explanation for the differences. It seems that some ghost writers, or mills may alter aspects of legitimate references, so that the reference appears correct (see Figure 1), but in actual fact is misrepresented (see the actual reference). These misrepresentations are not always obvious in Turnitin, and cannot be found by visual examination.
People grading papers do not have the time to individually check references to detect this, and for this reason essay mills and ghost-writers can limit the possibilities for detection.

A form of misrepresentation that could be detected via a visual check was where bibliographic ‘mashups’ were identified. References are created through a mix of journal, newspaper and/or book information combined into the one fictitious reference. An example of a bibliographic ‘mashup’ is presented in Figure 3. The reference in Figure 3 shows the ‘Journal of Economy’ which does not exist, and notes that it is the ‘Queensland edition – when journals are not published on a state basis. Finally the author name ‘Tribune’ was found to be the Herald Tribune newspaper when the ‘reference’ was Googled, and led to a file-swapping site in China. A copy of the file swapping site page matched to the reference is shown in Figure 4.
Figure 3 Bibliographic Mashup

Figure 4 File-swapping website match

The student was asked to find the reference during the interview, and tried searching through the University of Wollongong library databases, and became very frustrated when she could not locate the reference. When the student was shown the link to the file-swapping site, the argument changed. They stated that there was a Mr Tribune and it was a real reference. The student did not want to believe the lecturer that the Herald Tribune was a newspaper. There were two other students who had references that appeared with a similar style of ‘bibliographic mashup’ however searches via Google, Firefox and Internet Explorer could not detect the source. Throughout the course of the interviews with students a pattern of clues emerged which facilitated easier detection of material that had not been authored by the student, had been written by someone else, or repurposed by re-engineering prior student submissions. Any issues that required further action under the UOW Academic Integrity and Plagiarism policy, took place under due process with appropriate penalties applied. Others where the interviews could not confirm or deny the use of unauthorised materials were marked at face value – subsequently many of these students failed the subject due to their performance in the final exam demonstrating that the students had little understanding of the content despite 11 weeks of lectures and tutorials”