Although no assessment can ever be considered ‘cheat-proof’, assessment design remains an important element of any strategy to combat contract cheating, and it is possible to use assessment mechanisms to give you a better chance of detecting cheating. (QAA 18/06/20).

All assessment types carry academic integrity challenges and advantages that need to be considered in both design and implementation. The University’s Assessment Framework sets out the general principles, practice and conduct of assessment, and the Online and Blended Assessment Toolkit contains helpful Assessment Principles that promote equitable and accessible methods, while the advice below draws specifically on recent research into contract cheating.

Managing risk for different assessment types

Many essay mills don’t just provide essays – they can also supply lab reports, reflective journals, PowerPoint presentations, computer programming, film editing and even whole-dissertation packages that comprise: proposals; intermediate/formative assessments; final reports - with implied fabrication of data in some circumstances; presentation slides; and notes for vivas), (p8, QAA 18/06/20).

The document below outlines the challenges and advantages of a range of assessment tasks and how they can be managed to foster academic integrity. 

• Managing risk for different assessment types (pdf) 

Assessment redesign for an online environment

For a look at online assessment design specifically through an 'academic integrity' lens, the presentation Assessment redesign and academic integrity (Douglas Harrison) (pdf, presented at REMOTE: The Connected Faculty Summit -13 & 14 July 2020 (Arizona State University)):

• defines the foundations of academic integrity in assessment design
• surveys key approaches to online assessment development
• provides an overview of tips and techniques for designing effective and secure online assessments

Guidance on designing open book assessments is available in a resource produced by Sally Hickson (ITL Fellow) and colleagues from the OBL Assessment Group and ITL; this resource also includes advice on supporting students with open book exams and practical tips for delivery.  

See also Designing out plagiarism for online assessment: a blog post for the Staff and Educational Development Association (SEDA) by Dr Jenny Lawrence, PFHEA. Head of the Teaching Excellence Academy, University of Hull Posted on April 2, 2020)

We welcome your feedback on the content, and suggestions on topics or resources to include. Please contact teaching.learning@manchester.ac.uk

Sources

Assessing with Integrity in Digital Delivery (QAA, 07/05/20) part of Covid-19 supporting resources at https://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/news-events/support-and-guidance-covid-19/academic-standards-supporting-student-achievement

Contracting to cheat in Higher Education: How to address essay mills and contract cheating 2nd edn.(QAA, 18/06/20) 

Supporting academic integrity: approaches and resources for higher education (HEA JISC Academic Integrity Service, 01/11/10) 

Contract cheating and assessment design: exploring the relationship by Tracey Bretag, Rowena Harper,  Michael Burton, Cath Ellis, Philip Newton, Karen van Haeringen, Sonia Saddiqui, Pearl Rozenberg in Assessment and evaluation in higher education, 2019-07-04, Vol.44 (5), p.676-691

7 Principles of Assessment Design: Infographic by Sally Hickson (ITL Fellow)

Report cheating services

Students or staff can report:

• a direct email from an essay mill,  'academic writing' service or other contract cheating company

OR

• concerns about a website that enables, or appears to enable, contract cheating (masquerading as 'essay writing help' etc.) through selling or sharing essays, or publishing course materials

to cheating.spam@manchester.ac.uk

As of 28 April 2022, the Skills and Post-16 Education Act made it a criminal offence for a person to provide, or arrange for someone else to provide, a 'relevant service' to students for a 'relevant assignment' in 'commercial circumstances'. It is also an affect merely to advertise such a service. 

The Advice and Response (Conduct and Discipline) team will look at the information provided and will seek to block domains from PCs on campus and in University residences, and/or email addresses if possible, working with the Legal Affairs team where appropriate.

These blocking methods are not infallible. Contract cheating services often change their email/website addresses and new services can slip through. They will also have no effect if a student use a non-University email account or PC. However, they do send a clear message about the University’s attitude towards such activities, and remind students to be on their guard against unscrupulous actors when using the internet and social media.

Our students say*:

"I would feel this [contract cheating] is really unfair"
“Implications of contract cheating should be made clear”
“The university should talk more about it because it’s never discussed or discouraged by lecturers”

*Student-run focus groups (July 2020) 

Educating students about the importance of academic integrity - including an awareness of the concept of contract cheating - is central to protecting students and minimising instances of academic malpractice. This section contains guidance to help Schools, led by Programme Directors and other key officers, to communicate regularly with their students.

(Guidance for all staff about embedding messaging to students within the curriculum can be found in the Teaching and Learning section below.)

Ultimately students are responsible for their individual actions, but we must fulfil our duty to ensure that students:

• understand why contract cheating undermines integrity
• are informed of the consequences of contract cheating
• recognise the approaches that essay mills use to engage students
• know how to access academic and pastoral support if they are struggling with their studies, and are encouraged to do so

The University is collaborating with Student Partner Interns and the University's Student Comms teams to develop institutional messaging both promoting academic integrity and warning about the pitfalls of cheating. Most students are invested in maintaining a fair and equitable system. To strengthen institutional messaging it is important to promote academic integrity within local learning communities, and to discuss cheating with students openly.

Induction & transition

It is vital to include information about the Academic Malpractice Procedure and potential penalties to students as part of their induction through the Guidance to students on plagiarism and other forms of academic malpractice. Contract cheating should be mentioned as a particular form of malpractice that students may be enticed into through social media or even direct emails to their student accounts. It is helpful to acknowledge this openly, so that students know that the University is alert to the direct approaches that students may receive and they feel confident to inform University staff if they receive a communication they are concerned by.

Regular messaging

“Timely information for students is crucial in addressing the threat of contract cheating” (QAA 18.06.20, 12)

Reinforcing messages should be repeated periodically throughout a student’s career, for example:

• for new and returning students at the start of the year
• at the start of the second semester 
• whenever tasks and assignments are set
• going into an assessment period

We know that students are increasingly being targeted individually by advertising, chat rooms, social media (including ostensibly private WhatsApp study groups) or even directly to their student email account, assuring them that use of online services is acceptable and common practice. It is clearly important that we counter these messages.

Rather than repeating the same information at key points throughout the year, a more effective strategy would be to discuss malpractice through different lenses. Messaging should reassure students that staff know that the majority of students don’t cheat. Rather than a “staff versus students” mentality, the reality is more a case of "staff and students" versus the bad actors:

• Informing: Forewarned is forearmed. It may seem counterintuitive to tell students about contract cheating sites and essay mills, when they might never have been aware of them before. But the line between legitimate online tutoring or proofreading services or chat rooms and essay mills can be difficult to discern. Students’ critical awareness about sources is important in this context. Students should be advised not to post details about their assessments on social media, or engage with contract cheating services who contact them. A poster, Work Hard, Work Honestly, has been developed by current students to raise awareness. Clear guidance for students is available on the Student Support microsite: Assessments and Exams - Avoiding Academic Malpractice.
• Collaboration and collusion: learning to work well within in group is a skill we want our students to develop, and most students are encouraged to collaborate through discussion boards, or  set up WhatsApp study groups. But collaborating on an examination or assessment is collusion (unless explicitly stated in the assignment brief) and we need to make this clear to students from week one. Several resources are available to help discussion with students in class or in group adviing sessions: a digital poster/infographic OK or NOT OK? Collusion versus Collaboration; a PowerPoint presentation, What is collusion? A guide for students; an article on Student News Collaboration or Collusion? (2-minute read, 04/01/23)
• Inspiring: the International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI) defines academic integrity as a commitment, even in the face of adversity, to six fundamental values: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage. This video created by the Student Steering Committee of the International Center for Academic Integrity, explains what these values mean and why they matter. Our students take part in many inspiring initiatives, such as volunteering, and the many ways of contributing to our community on and off campus under the Step up and Lead theme. (See the Stellify webpage for an overview). The final year of the Ethical Grand Challenges programme focusses on Workplace Ethics, and involves a range of interactive workshops and training scenarios that encourage students to consider ethical dilemmas in real-life work situations. These provide a positive context in which to frame discussions around the ethics of academic integrity and good citizenship.
• Warning: Students should be made aware that their application to be admitted into a regulated profession may be put at risk if they commit academic malpractice. Moreover, extortion and blackmail are becoming greater threats to people who use essay mills. This WonkHE article highlights the dangers students face and how they can be exploited. Personal data may be stored online with minimal security, which exposes users to identity theft and bank fraud. There have been reports of essay mills contacting students after purchases are made and threatening them with identifying them to their institutions unless further money is given to them. (QAA 18/06/20) 
• Planning and Supporting: Some students may have health conditions which affect their studies, and most will at some point experience personal issues which risk building up to a crisis. It is important to acknowledge that this is a part of life, and that ‘If you’re stressed, and come to an ethical fork in the road – don’t succumb. Choose legitimate support from within the institution’. State clearly who students can and should turn to for help - students should be encouraged to check with their Academic Advisor or use the Library's online chat function if they are uncertain about the legitimacy of any support offered to them.
• Detecting and reporting: Detection strategies must be visible in order to function as a deterrent. Students can report emails or websites they are unsure of to cheating.spam@manchester.ac.uk. (See IT blocking and reporting, above) 

Involve students

“Working in partnership with students is integral to combating contact cheating.” (p5, QAA 18.06.20)

Students will benefit from knowing their peers’ attitudes to cheating. Students have a clear stake in ensuring that the hard work and dedication demonstrated by the majority is not undermined by the minority who seek to claim an unfair advantage. There are codes of ethics involved in academia - involve Student Reps and mobilise PASS leaders and Peer Mentors to engage with the Student Union as well as creating local initiatives, competitions and writing blogposts on the topic.

What to consider when drafting messages to students and planning local solutions

Studies have shown that students who cheat in assessments do so for a wide range of reasons, (p10, QAA 18/06/20). Bretag et al. have summarised the many reasons students plagiarise and cheat, including an inability to manage the demands of student life or low interest in the topic. You might consider implementing local solutions to support students, such as providing additional support for students with English as a second language. Below are the reasons provided by Bretag et al. in more detail: 

Sources:

• Academic Integrity in Australian Higher Education - A National Priority: Workshop slides (Bretag et al, 2017) available at https://www.teqsa.gov.au/workshop, https://www.teqsa.gov.au/workshop
• Contracting to cheat in Higher Education: How to address essay mills and contract cheating 2nd edn.(QAA, 18/06/20, p10) 

Academic Advising is a key element of the student experience and serves as an essential mechanism for supporting students as they progress through their time at University academically, personally and in preparation for the world of work.

As part of the Academic Advising role, advisors are expected to support students in recognising habits, situations and stressors that may lead them to feeling as though contract cheating, plagiarism or other forms of academic malpractice are acceptable or inevitable.

The Academic Advising Toolkit will contain supporting materials that help advisors to guide students in reflecting on current habits and pressures to pre-emptively address those areas (such as time management, differences in cultural or academic expectations or others) that may drive a student to consider academic malpractice. The Academic Advising Toolkit and this Contract Cheating Toolkit can be used in tandem to identify, discuss and address these issues with supportive strategies.

The Academic Advising Toolkit also links out to supporting services such as the Library, DASS and the SU Advice service, all of which can be recommended if appropriate, as part of an individual Advisee’s academic development.

Our students say*:

"I would feel this [contract cheating] is really unfair"
“Implications of contract cheating should be made clear”
“The university should talk more about it because it’s never discussed or discouraged by lecturers”

*Student-run focus groups (July 2020)

A two-year Australian research project - Contract Cheating and Assessment Design: Exploring the Connection (Associate Professor Tracey Bretag and Dr Rowena Harper (University of South Australia) - investigated contract cheating. The project found that students who cheated expressed significantly lower levels of satisfaction with three key aspects of the teaching and learning environment:

1. Staff ensure that students understand assignment requirements
2. Staff provide sufficient assessment feedback
3. Staff can be approached for assistance when needed

Source: Assessment design won't stop cheating, but our relationships with our students might. The Conversation (UK edition, 11/05/2017). 

Approachable staff

If a student feels able to seek clarification on something they don't understand or to discuss feedback, for example, they are less likely to fall behind, become isolated, and be desperate enough to go outside of the institution for 'help'.

Research ethics

Preparation for independent projects, dissertations or field work offers a way of opening up discussion of ethics in academia. Knowing that all academic work - even that done by academic staff - goes through ethical approval and review processes helps to make this a more real and relatable concept. 

Groupwork

Use group work to teach about the challenges and benefits of collaboration. Give students strategies for responding to academic integrity issues.

• University Guidance for assessed student group working sets out practical considerations for managing group assessment that is fair, inclusive, and explicit about collaboration rather than collusion

Recommended Open Access Teaching Resources about Academic Integrity

This list of recommended open access teaching resources about academic integrity was produced by the International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI)'s International Day of Action Against Contract Cheating (IDoA) 2022 Faculty Planning Group and compiled by the Faculty co-chair, Dr Mary Davis. 

International Day of Action Against Contract Cheating

The International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI) runs an annual International Day of Action Against Contract Cheating each October, where staff and students are encouraged to work together to raise awareness about cheating and promote academic integrity. This has included a Meme Contest. The purpose of the contest is to generate works that may be used either this year or in future years to promote the event and provide students the opportunity to share their opinions about the threat contract cheating poses to the higher education experience and the overall importance of academic integrity.

We welcome your feedback on the content, and suggestions on topics or resources to include.

Please contact teaching.learning@manchester.ac.uk

“Technology can help detect the use of essay mills, but is most effective when used by experienced staff with knowledge of the student.” Contracting to cheat in Higher Education: How to address essay mills and contract cheating (QAA, 18/06/20)

Plagiarism-checking software

The base Turnitin package (Originality) currently used by the University can be of some benefit in the detection of contract cheating. Essay mill contributors often use short-cuts and plagiarise sources or recycle prior commissions.

Conversely, some essay mills advertise “plagiarism-free” essays. Thus, they drive the originality score in Turnitin down implausibly low by running the draft essay through Turnitin, then eliminating anything it turns up. So, if you see 0% to just a few % similarity, and commonly-used phrases in your field are avoided through the use of synonyms and rewording, then you might have a case of contract cheating.

Thus although Turnitin does not provide a very powerful solution, since it is routine practice anyway this software may be of some use in assisting the identification of occasional cases. See "Detecting contract cheating" below for more information.

Advanced analytics software

More sophisticated software solutions are available on the market, e.g. Turnitin Authorship. These claim to use “forensic linguistic” algorithms to detect anomalies in a student’s body of work that could be associated with a purchased essay. However, in practice these are of limited value:

• These approaches rely on a student submitting several pieces of their own work to establish a baseline pattern that can then be used to detect anomalies. If a student begins using essay mill submissions early in their studies, this type of software will be unable to detect them.
• The measures used by such algorithms imply a level of sophistication, but in reality the data set (of an individual student’s work) is too small for these measures to have any real discriminatory power. Some potentially useful insights can be pulled from the metadata in a document’s header (author name, paper size, etc.) but there are many valid reasons for variations in these parameters – so very large numbers of false positives are likely.
• The whole approach is contradictory to anonymous and blind marking approaches – because to have any value, a marker needs sight of a student’s entire body of work. Significant changes to marking workflow would be required to make the use of this software practicable.

Detecting contract cheating

Tips on possible indicators of contract cheating, for markers of student work:

• Detecting contract cheating: tips for markers (pdf)

1. Something as simple as searching for your assignment titles online after you set them may show instances of students trying to commission answers.
2. An abnormally low similarity score. Some essay mills advertise “plagiarism-free” essays. Thus, they drive the originality score in Turnitin down very low, exceptionally low, by running the draft essay through Turnitin, then eliminating anything it turns up. So, if you see 0% to a few percent and commonly used phrases in your field are avoided through the use of synonyms and rewording, then you might have contract cheating.
3. Run the document through Turnitin with the reference list included. If the reference list appears duplicated as a block of references rather than individual references, then it is possible that the reference list is duplicating a document from an essay mill where they’ve reused the essay on this topic in different student reports.
4. If the essay is supposed to be a reflective piece written by the student, but the gender is wrong, then you might have contract cheating.
5. Turn on 'tracked changes' in Word. It may be that there are annotations to the student from the author to make certain changes that are then not deleted by the student.
6. If any parts of the assignment (e.g., student name, assignment name, course number, due date, word count) are enclosed in brackets (e.g., “[Joe Smith]”, “[EART10111]”, “Word count: [2497 words]"), then this may be an indication from the essay mill to the student that the student was supposed to change items in the file at these locations, but then left the brackets behind. D’oh!
7. If you see any weird strings of numbers (e.g., “CE-1234-5678") that may indicate a contract number with the essay mill (e.g., in the header or footer, in the document properties), then you may have a case of contract cheating.

Substantiating contract cheating

 A checklist for markers of student work where contract cheating is suspected, to aid decision-making and substantiation of a case:

• Substantiating contract cheating checklist (doc)

I think I have a substantiated case of contract cheating: What do I do next? 

• Please refer to the next section, Action, below.

Academic Malpractice Process Flowchart

The Academic Malpractice Process Flowchart summarises the process of bringing a case from an academic's perspective.

Authorised University Officer (AUO)

If you have completed the checklists above and believe you have detected a case of contract cheating, refer it to your local designated officer. AUOs are the people named in the Regulation e.g. Head of School, Faculty Dean etc who can take disciplinary action. In practice an AUO delegates their responsibilities around investigations, pre-hearings and hearings to whoever is best placed to perform a particular role (an Academic Malpractice Officer, Programme Director or equivalent).

They will review the material as a whole to determine whether to refer the case for disciplinary action to an appropriate level of the University; this may be based on various factors including consistency of handling, the seriousness of the case and the penalty that might be warranted.

Section 4.4 of the Academic Malpractice Procedure covers Contract Cheating: 

"If there is a reasonable suspicion that a student may have commissioned a piece of work from a third party, but there is no direct evidence of this, then in agreement with the School Officer a viva voce can be arranged to give the student the opportunity to demonstrate that they:

• Produced the work;
• Undertook the reading and research themselves;
• Undertook the preparatory work themselves;
• Understand what they have written.

The viva voce can have one of two outcomes:

1. The staff conducting the viva voce will confirm that they accept that the student wrote the work in question; no further action will be taken. The work should then be marked on its own merit, if it has not already been marked. (§4.4.3.1)
2. If the staff conducting the viva voce still remain doubtful of the authorship of the work in question, or the student admits that it is not their work, then the case should be referred for disciplinary action. Any future disciplinary panel should not include, as a member of the panel, the examiner or the same School Officer. The viva voce, in itself, will not result in a penalty being applied; a penalty can only be applied by a disciplinary panel. (§4.4.3.2)"

Guidance for Academic Malpractice Officers on substantiating contract cheating: key principles

Educate: Ensure all staff are aware of the signals that can indicate contract cheating.

Investigate: One or two signals do not provide enough evidence to substantiate cheating, but can provide cause for further investigation.

Use policy: The University’s Academic Malpractice Procedure section 4.4 covers contract cheating specifically.

Not ‘proof’, but ‘balance of probability’: Investigate suspected breaches as a lay proceeding, using the standard from civil law, where the ‘balance of probability’ is the relevant test to which allegations must be subjected. The balance of probability is based on ‘clear and convincing evidence’ that it is more likely than not that the allegation is true. This is less demanding than the criminal law test of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.

Examine: Look carefully at each aspect of the document and other relevant sources of evidence. Identify every aspect that is cause for concern. Conduct an interview with the student to ascertain his/her familiarity with the contents of the assignment.

Collect evidence: Accumulate a range of evidence that clearly and convincingly establishes the firm belief that the breach in question is not only probable, but highly probable. Two forms of evidence are critical: a. Textual evidence; b. Knowledge of the student’s academic and linguistic abilities

Use experience: Decide how much weight to give to each piece of evidence, based on common sense, everyday experience, and experience of previous academic integrity breach cases.

Source: TEQSA Substantiating contract cheating: a guide for investigators

Interviews: An effective way of detecting third-party written assignments is to interview the student after the work has been assessed. The use of assessment by viva is commonly used in HE but it is not practical to put these in place for every assignment on every course. A pragmatic approach would be to require an interview as part of an investigation process to establish evidence for decision-making.

The QAA advises, “Universities should raise requests for information and evidence to support academic misconduct cases relating ton essay mills/contract cheating directly with the tutoring service and take advantage of any policy published by the service to support such requests.” (QAA, 18/06/20 p26) The University's Legal Affairs team can offer legal advice and support.

Referring cases to the University Disciplinary Panel (UDP)

• Toolkit: Referring academic malpractice cases to the University Disciplinary Panel (UDP) (Advice and Response team)

Useful contacts

• FSE Teaching College - includes a list of Authorised University Officers
• Faculty of Humanities Staff Intranet – Teaching and Support - list of Academic Malpractice Officers
• FBMH - Conduct and Discipline pages

Poor practice or plagiarism?

This document, created by the Faculty of Humanities, is a useful guide in interpreting various signs of potential malpractice:

• Poor practice or plagiarism?

External sources and resources

• Contract Cheating and the market in essays, Dan Rigby, Michael Burton, Kelvin Balcombe, Ian Bateman, Abay Mulatu, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Volume 111, March 2015, Pages 23-37 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2014.12.019
• 'Mess, stress and trauma’: students’ experiences of formal contract cheating processes Penelope Pitt, Kevin Dullaghan & Wendy Sutherland-Smith (2020): ‘Mess, stress and trauma’: students’ experiences of formal contract cheating processes, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1787332
• Assessing with Integrity in Digital Delivery (QAA, 07/05/20) part of Covid-19 supporting resources
• Contracting to cheat in Higher Education: How to address essay mills and contract cheating 2nd edition, QAA, 18/06/20