FACU LT Y

F ORUM

Using an Ethical Decision-Making Model to Determine Consequences for Student Plagiarism

Ermalynn M. Kiehl, PhD, ARNP

The incidence of plagiarism, intentional or unintentional, in the professional nursing arena has increased in recent years, as has the occurrence of plagiarism among nursing students. Strategies for cheating have become very sophisticated with the use of aids such as personal digital assistants, camera phones, and instant messaging. Cheating on written papers has also increased. The Internet provides students with ready-made research and academic papers, and access to Web sites on a plethora of topics. In this article, I describe my experience with plagiarism of ethics papers during students nal semester before graduation. How I discovered the plagiarized work and used the A-B-CD-E ethical decision-making model in determining the student consequences for the event are presented.

ABSTRACT

isnt a new phenomenon, but technology makes them easy to commitand to catch. (p. 4)

ccording to Gordon Mac McKerral (2004), President of the Society of Professional Journalists:
Only the methods of stealing are new: plagiarism and fabricating Received: November 28, 2004 Accepted: May 20, 2005 Dr. Kiehl is Associate Professor, University of Central Florida, School of Nursing, College of Health and Public Affairs, Orlando, Florida. Address correspondence to Ermalynn M. Kiehl, PhD, ARNP, Associate Professor, University of Central Florida, School of Nursing, College of Health and Public Affairs, PO Box 162210, Orlando, FL 32816-2210; e-mail: Kiehl@mail.ucf.edu.

The incidence of plagiarism, intentional or unintentional, in the professional nursing arena has increased in recent years, as has the occurrence of plagiarism among nursing students (Cronin, 2003; Girard, 2004; Logue, 2004; Mason, 2002; Smith, 1999). Yet some authors believe that nurses are often plagiarizing without knowing it (Cronin, 2003; Girard, 2004; Mason, 2002). Nancy Girard (2004), Editor of the AORN Journal, stated that many authors believe that copying information from the Internet without referencing it is an allowable practice. Between 2001 and 2003, 10 manuscripts containing various forms of plagiarized material were submitted to Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing (Cronin, 2003). It has become a current practice in academia to teach nursing students the denition and consequences of plagiarism to avoid these pitfalls in writing.

Background

During the last semester of their senior year, three nursing students plagiarized the ethics paper required for their Role Transition course. All students had been verbally warned not to plagiarize by the teacher at the beginning of the course, and a written statement regarding academic dishonesty (Figure) was included in the course syllabus. Although it is true that plagiarism may be unintentional (Girard, 2004; Mason, 2002), this was not the case in these instances.

Two of the students copied and pasted many paragraphs of their papers from multiple Internet articles and Web sites, then presented the work as their own. In these cases, the plagiarism was clear. When confronted with the evidence, both students acknowledged the cheating and accepted the consequences set forth by the faculty: failure of the course and the nursing program. However, because the students readily acknowledged their responsibility for the plagiarism, they were given the option of reapplying to the program with full acknowledgment of the plagiarism, completing a course on academic honesty offered by the university, and retaking the course in another semester. The third case differed in that the plagiarized material was copied from several Internet sources, but cited as work from authors other than those who had written the original works. The citations were of authors who had published articles related to the chosen ethics issue, but who were not the authors of the sections noted as such. When confronted, the student was not forthright in admitting the plagiarism. Over the course of several days, the student had to be shown copies of each Web resource he had used in his paper before he acknowledged that he had, in fact, cheated. Only a few sentences in the entire paper were written by the student and were easily identied. In questioning the student, it was obvious that he was attempting to convince me that he believed plagiarism was dened only as presenting the work as ones own. He stated that since he had not presented the work
199

June 2006, Vol. 45, No. 6

FACULTY FORUM

Identication of Ethical Principles

Ethical principles considered in the situation of this student included autonomy, benecence, nonmalecence, veracity, and delity. Autonomy relates to the students choice of what to tell people regarding his potential delay in graduation. Benecence (i.e., promoting actions that will be benecial, seeking benets that will provide the least amount of harm, and considering clients best interests) and nonmalecence (i.e., avoiding deliberate harm, any risk of harm, and harm that may occur during any faculty actions) are integral as the various decision options were being considered. Other principles considered important in this situation were veracity (i.e., telling the truth) and delity (i.e., keeping promises) (Burkhardt & Nathaniel, 2002).

Applying an Ethical DecisionMaking Model

Figure. Academic dishonesty yer. Reprinted with permission from the Ofce of Student Rights and Responsibilities, University of Central Florida.

as his own, he had not plagiarized. However, at this university, failing to properly credit ideas or materials taken from another is considered plagiarism. Therefore, the student had plagiarized his paper, and it was essential for consequences to be imposed so he would understand the seriousness of cheating. Additional factors existed in this case that made the decision more complicated. The student was a divorced father with custody of his two young children. Graduation was days away, and he had out-of-town family coming to attend the graduation. His education was funded by the military, and he had his commissioning scheduled with the military ofcers. The student had already re200

ceived his orders to report to his next duty station within weeks of graduation. Yet, after graduation, he would be commissioned as an ofcer and, as such, would bear responsibility for enlisted mens lives. If this student would cheat on an ethics paper, deny the cheating, and only acknowledge his responsibility after being shown every page of plagiarized material, what would he do when faced with an ethical dilemma in his nursing practice? Integrity in nursing is essential. What would be the appropriate consequence in this specic situation, and what resources would be useful in determining action? The ethical decision-making model was used to determine consequences for this student.

The ethical decision-making model selected to determine consequences for this student was the A-B-C-D-E model (Sileo & Kopala, 1993), the intent of which is to make the concepts of decision-making models practical, rather than abstract. The model, developed to promote benecence when considering ethical issues, is a systematic guide for remembering the key elements of ethical decision making. When an event occurs that is complex and not specic to one ethical principle or another, the event must be thought through carefully and thoroughly to identify each plan of action option. The plans of action are then reviewed to determine the most appropriate action for the ethical dilemma at hand. The A-B-CD-E components are not intended to be sequential, nor does every ethical dilemma require each component. However, to reduce the risk of missing valuable thinking points when making an ethical decision, it is better to consider more information than necessary than not enough. Using this model ensures each component is considered, thus reducing the chance of overlooking a possible option.
Journal of Nursing Education

FACULTY FORUM

The letters A-B-C-D-E serve as a mnemonic in which A = assessment, B = benet, C = consequences and consultation, D = duty, and E = education. Because this situation is not the typical client-focused dilemma, the model and denitions have been modied.
A

The letter A refers to the careful examination of all factors, including an assessment of the individual, the situation, and the seriousness of the event. In this case, the students emotional state was frightened, evidenced by his defensive behavior and denial of guilt. The disclosure of this students cheating has the potential to be quite serious with his commanding ofcer. The additional threat of failure from the program, which the military had paid for, added to the stress experienced by both the student and me. My personal values and feelings about this situation leaned toward choosing a consequence strong enough to send a clear message that the action was wrong and should never happen again, yet compassionate enough to leave the students essence intact.
B

be for the military to make and was not my responsibility. Nor should it be the deciding factor in the consequence, as there is no direct relationship between my decision as the teacher and the militarys actions. If condentiality is maintained, the burden is on the student to decide what he will disclose to the military regarding his delay in graduation. The teacher-student relationship will benet through the preservation of trust, and the students autonomy will be

Statements regarding academic dishonesty need to be placed on every course syllabus so students are confronted with this issue in every course.

of any decision since the university guidelines are vague. Through careful education regarding options, the student might come to a conclusion that acknowledging his offense will bring more desirable outcomes in the long term. The emotional and therapeutic consequences would be those of telling his family members that they will not see him graduate. By exploring and educating students about the options, the teacher is acting as a student advocate, especially if it results in a change in the students future decision when faced with the temptation of cheating. Consultation with the school of nursing administration and department of student conduct is warranted. In addition, it is important to review the American Nurses Associations (ANA) (2001) Code of Ethics for Nurses with students to increase their understanding of the importance of ethical behavior in all aspects of nurses, and in this case nursing students, behaviors.
D

The letter B refers to benets and includes determining how the student, the teacher-student relationship, and other stakeholders might benet from the decision, as well as which action or decision will benet the most stakeholders. In addition to myself and the student, stakeholders included the school of nursing and university administration, the students family, the military division that had funded the students education, the students future duty station personnel, and the authors whose work he had used without correct credit. Additional stakeholders were the past and future nursing students who will potentially be held to the standard of this decision. If I failed the student, necessitating disclosure to the military, the decision would potentially prevent his commissioning as an ofcer and possibly his continuance in the military. However, that decision would
June 2006, Vol. 45, No. 6

preserved. The benet to the student would be a lesson learned regarding integrity and the pride he will feel when he has completed the terms of the consequence and successfully graduated.
C

Consequences and consultation, C, is the third consideration in this process. The model proposes that the ethical, legal, emotional, and therapeutic consequences be considered. It also suggests that appropriate colleagues, supervisors, legal counsel, or professional ethics committees be consulted, as necessary. The ethical consequences of not reporting the incident would foster a belief that the behavior is acceptable, which it is not. If other students nd out about the plagiarism and see this student experience no consequences, they receive the message that cheating is acceptable under some circumstances. There are no real legal consequences

The letter D stands for duty and addresses the question of to whom the teacher has a duty. In this case, I had a duty to the university to maintain high quality and, thus, only pass those students who earn the right to graduate. I had a duty to the military to stop this student from graduating until he understood and acknowledged the seriousness of cheating and lying. I also had a duty to the nursing profession to graduate only those students who demonstrate the integrity necessary to be good nurses. If a student would lie and cheat on an ethics paper, what would he or she do when making a nursing error? Students should be held accountable to the standard established by the Code of Ethics for Nurses (ANA, 2001). During this step in the decisionmaking process, faculty identify the options, which include doing nothing, failing the student on just that assignment, failing the student from the course, and reporting the offense to the department of student conduct. Weighing the options and con201

FACULTY FORUM

sequences of each, I recognized my duty to this students future patients and to future students to implement a consequence that sends a clear message that this behavior will not be tolerated.
E

The letter E stands for education. In this context, education refers to faculty members and students understanding of the ethical principles and codes applicable to the situation. Having a complete understanding of the ethical principles of the situation and following the steps of the decisionmaking model provides a framework for arriving at a decision. In this case, the decision was made to fail the student from the course and the nursing program.

Available resources for faculty to use to identify plagiarism include http://www.turnitin.com, http://www. Plagiarism.org/, and http://www. Edutie.com/. One strategyhaving students submit their work online through http://www.turnitin.com, an Internet service that searches students papers for plagiarized sectionsyields papers returned to faculty with any plagiarized areas noted. Another strategy is to type in quotation marks a 4-word to 6-word

When weighing all of the options in these situations, what is best for students is for them to be held accountable for their actions.

Conclusions

Cheating has become a national epidemic (Howard, 2004). Certainly a university, charged with educating the next generation of leaders, should not accept this behavior in its faculty or students. Integrity should be practiced by all faculty members, and concepts and issues related to integrity and plagiarism should be taught to university students early in their education (Bellack, 2004). Cheating should be addressed when it is suspected and stopped as soon as it is discovered. Easy, low-cost access to the Internet has provided another temptation for students. Although a search of university Web sites yielded some excellent resources for their faculty in cases of plagiarism, typically they are vague in the area of faculty action. Clear policies on consequences related to plagiarism need to be developed and posted on university Web sites and in student handbooks. Statements regarding academic dishonesty need to be placed on every course syllabus so students are confronted with this issue in every course. Faculty also need to become knowledgeable about the many aspects of plagiarism (Ryan, 1998), and exert tighter controls on the work their students submit.
202

The consequences for plagiarism should be severe enough to bring about a change in future behavior. Faculty need clear guidance in determining their action in cases of cheating. At my institution, the University Academic Dishonesty statement now has an Instructor Action section added, but there is still a wide range of possibilities for action, which leaves faculty with the ethical dilemma of making a decision that will change a students life. Using an ethical decision-making model may provide guidance in these matters. Although there are major differences among models, most models work through the dilemma by identifying the stakeholders, outlining decision options, and determining consequences of each option. The focus should always be on the student and what is best for him or her in the long term. When weighing all of the options in these situations, what is best for students is for them to be held accountable for their actions. It is better to learn that lesson as a student than to cause further damage with repeat breaches in judgment.

phrase from each suspicious student paper into the http://www.google. com search engine. Google can nd any instances of the phrase on the Internet. In every case described above, my search yielded those exact phrases in the sources in which they could be found. Going to those Web sites revealed entire paragraphs or pages lifted, in addition to the short phrases. Although skeptics of this method voice concerns that students are plagiarizing from resources not found on the Internet, this has not been found to be true. Typically, students are searching the Internet for a particular topic, then simply copying and pasting material as they are developing their paper. For nursing students, hospital Web sites are commonly used because they often include patient and staff educational material. Other commonly used sources are government sites, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health.

Existing Resources in Addressing Plagiarism

Many universities provide comprehensive written material on plagiarism for their students and faculty. For example, the Duke University Libraries (2001) Web site denes the nature and consequences of plagiarism and provides examples of how to avoid plagiarism. Indiana University at Bloomington provides a short quiz with immediate feedback, then presents material on plagiarism, followed by a test. After the test has been successfully completed, respondents receive a conrmation certicate of completion (Understanding Plagiarism, n.d.). The Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, The Johns Hopkins University Web site offers examples of unacceptable and acceptable paraphrasing, which may be helpful for writers (Guide on Plagiarism and Citations, n.d.). The Purdue University Online Writing Lab (n.d.) provides several tools for writers, including a
Journal of Nursing Education

guide for how to code their writing and a self-assessment instrument to use with their written work. Regarding the situations described above, the University had minimal material on plagiarism posted on its Web site or in the student handbook. However, the University does require a clear statement on each course syllabus related to academic honesty (Figure). What was not clear was a policy related to the consequences of plagiarism when discovered.

References

Summary

The events described above were painful for all concerned, including me, as the teacher. Tears were shed, and painful decisions were made. However, the result was positive. While reviewing this ethical decision-making model and the nal decision, the student demonstrated his understanding of the severity of the offense and the reason for my actions. The student told me he had telephoned his commanding ofcer and told him that he was not graduating because he had cheated on a paper. Because of the students honesty, the military ofcer told him they would accept him to his next duty station if he successfully completed his coursework. In addition, I told the student that I would provide a written recommendation for him to be accepted immediately back into the program so he could complete the course during the rst summer session. He would then only have a couple of weeks delay in arriving at his next duty station. I also told him that since he would likely be graduating within a few weeks after retaking the course, he could walk during graduation. The student responded, No, I wont do that. I havent earned it. At that point, I believed I had made the correct decision and the student had achieved understanding of the seriousness of his plagiarism.

American Nurses Association. (2001). Code of ethics for nurses. Washington, DC: Author. Bellack, J.P. (2004). Why plagiarism matters. Journal of Nursing Education, 43, 527-528. Burkhardt, M.A., & Nathaniel, A.K. (2002). Ethics and issues in contemporary nursing (2nd ed.). Albany, NY: Delmar Thomson Learning. Cronin, S.N. (2003). The problem of plagiarism. Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing, 22, 253-254. Duke University Libraries. (2001). Avoiding plagiarism: Practical strategies. Retrieved February 15, 2005, from http://www.lib.duke.edu/libguide/ plagiarism2.htm Girard, N.J. (2004). Plagiarism: An ethical problem in the writing world. AORN Journal, 80(1), 13-15. Guide on plagiarism and citations. (n.d.). Retrieved February 15, 2005, from the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, The Johns Hopkins University Web site: http://www. sais-jhu.edu/admissions/studentlife/ Plagiarism.pdf Howard, R.M. (2004). Plagiarism epidemics; media epidemics. Retrieved April 29, 2005, from http://wrt-howard.syr. edu/Papers/Colby.htm Logue, R. (2004). Plagiarism: The internet makes it easy. Nursing Standard, 18(5), 40-43. Mason, D. (2002). Stealing words: Some nurses are guilty of plagiarismoften without intending it. American Journal of Nursing, 102(7), 7-10. McKerral, G. (2004). From the president. The Quill, 92(4), 4 Purdue University Online Writing Lab. (n.d.). Avoiding plagiarism. Retrieved February 15, 2005, from http://owl. english.purdue.edu/handouts/research/ r_plagiar.html Ryan, J. (1998). Student plagiarism in an online world. ASEE Prism Magazine. Retrieved November 28, 2004, from http://www.prism-magazine.org/ december/html/student_plagiarism_ in_an_onlin.htm Sileo, F.J., & Kopala, M. (1993). An A-BC-D-E worksheet for promoting benecence when considering ethical issues. Counseling & Values, 37(2), 89-96. Smith, J. (1999). Plagiarists publish and perish. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 30, 777-778. Understanding plagiarism. (n.d.). Retrieved February 15, 2005, from the Indiana University at Bloomington, School of Education Web site: http:// www.education.indiana.edu/~frick/ plagiarism

June 2006, Vol. 45, No. 6