论文部分内容阅读
Plagiarism in L2 academic writing has been recognized as a noticeable issue for decades. The primary identification of plagiarism is the exact copy of the source text from other’s work without making any endeavor. It was regarded as “cheating” by academic institutions. But when discussing it in the ESL/EFL setting， the causation is more complicated than personal quality. Instead， the causations are various from learning experience to school policy.
The notion of plagiarism in some countries is inherent within their culture is ungrounded. Cultural background can be one factor of plagiarism， but it is not the causation. Kyoko （2003） stated that the study of the L2 students’ different cultural perception might provide researchers a better understanding of their text borrowing strategy. In the EFL/ESL setting， the L2 writers shared different system of evaluating the ownership of the source text. However， this acknowledgment of culture difference impedes the teachers explicitly to identify the plagiarism behavior， thereby plagiarism phenomenon became more tolerable within the L2 context.
Also， academic writing requires a comprehensive understanding of the sociocultural and intertextual aspect within the target language， which is more challenging for L2 writers. In Qing Gu’s study， the ten Chinese participants revealed that the reason of plagiarism was multiple， including the misunderstanding of teacher’s instruction， unfamiliar with Western academic writing’s criteria and the confusion of utilizing source text to develop the personal argument. The result of the study presented that it is a stereotype to relate the concept of “Chinese academic writing” with “plagiarism.”
Another cause of plagiarism is that many institutional plagiarism disciplines remained unclear to student writers. The rules helped the L2 writers to be aware of the academic integrity but failed to guide them distinguish the inappropriate text borrowing strategy. The academic writing system required a reevaluation of the current anti-plagiarism strategy， as well as to establish a comprehensive policy framework.
Furthermore， plagiarism is the counterpart of the authorship， but most L2 students haven’t developed a textual identity to address themselves as the author other than reader or “student.” In Abasi’s study， some L2 plagiarist had a high TOEFL writing score， and this suggested that lacking the authorship concept for the L2 writer is the more dominant cause of plagiarism other than their language competence since they often neglect the creative interaction in English writing. The professor’s reaction to student’s misconducted citation is another important element. Some teachers might have regarded the detecting process of plagiarism as unworthy. As a result， not only the L2 students faced the challenge of obeying the plagiarism policy， the educators also met the difficulty of preserve the academic integrity.
To prevent plagiarism， the schools need to assist the students adapted to the Western academic writing system by providing specific and practical plagiarism policy to eliminate the mystification of the plagiarism for ESL/EFL teachers and learners， and thus release the L2 writers’ frustration of unsure and unconfident about their writing. The instructor needs to improve the interaction and feedback during the teaching procedure， also help students to apply practical text-borrowing teaching strategy. For L2 students， they need develop the authorship for their assignment and try to utilize critical thinking beyond paraphrasing the source text.
References：
[1]Abasi， A. R.
The notion of plagiarism in some countries is inherent within their culture is ungrounded. Cultural background can be one factor of plagiarism， but it is not the causation. Kyoko （2003） stated that the study of the L2 students’ different cultural perception might provide researchers a better understanding of their text borrowing strategy. In the EFL/ESL setting， the L2 writers shared different system of evaluating the ownership of the source text. However， this acknowledgment of culture difference impedes the teachers explicitly to identify the plagiarism behavior， thereby plagiarism phenomenon became more tolerable within the L2 context.
Also， academic writing requires a comprehensive understanding of the sociocultural and intertextual aspect within the target language， which is more challenging for L2 writers. In Qing Gu’s study， the ten Chinese participants revealed that the reason of plagiarism was multiple， including the misunderstanding of teacher’s instruction， unfamiliar with Western academic writing’s criteria and the confusion of utilizing source text to develop the personal argument. The result of the study presented that it is a stereotype to relate the concept of “Chinese academic writing” with “plagiarism.”
Another cause of plagiarism is that many institutional plagiarism disciplines remained unclear to student writers. The rules helped the L2 writers to be aware of the academic integrity but failed to guide them distinguish the inappropriate text borrowing strategy. The academic writing system required a reevaluation of the current anti-plagiarism strategy， as well as to establish a comprehensive policy framework.
Furthermore， plagiarism is the counterpart of the authorship， but most L2 students haven’t developed a textual identity to address themselves as the author other than reader or “student.” In Abasi’s study， some L2 plagiarist had a high TOEFL writing score， and this suggested that lacking the authorship concept for the L2 writer is the more dominant cause of plagiarism other than their language competence since they often neglect the creative interaction in English writing. The professor’s reaction to student’s misconducted citation is another important element. Some teachers might have regarded the detecting process of plagiarism as unworthy. As a result， not only the L2 students faced the challenge of obeying the plagiarism policy， the educators also met the difficulty of preserve the academic integrity.
To prevent plagiarism， the schools need to assist the students adapted to the Western academic writing system by providing specific and practical plagiarism policy to eliminate the mystification of the plagiarism for ESL/EFL teachers and learners， and thus release the L2 writers’ frustration of unsure and unconfident about their writing. The instructor needs to improve the interaction and feedback during the teaching procedure， also help students to apply practical text-borrowing teaching strategy. For L2 students， they need develop the authorship for their assignment and try to utilize critical thinking beyond paraphrasing the source text.
References：
[1]Abasi， A. R.