The Standards to Judge Plagiarism in KODISA Research Ethics and the Guideline of Global Journals

Hee Joong Hwang,Dong Ho Kim,Myoung Kil Youn,Jung Wan Lee,Jong Ho Lee 한국유통과학회 2017 KODISA ICBE (International Conference on Business Vol.2017 No.-

Purpose: In general, researchers try to abide by the code of research ethics, but many of them are not fully aware of plagiarism, unintentionally committing the research misconduct when they write a research paper. This research aims to introduce researchers a clear and easy guideline at a conference, which helps researchers avoid accidental plagiarism by addressing the issue. This research is expected to contribute building a climate and encouraging creative research among scholars. Research design, data, methodology & Results: Plagiarism is considered a sort of research misconduct along with fabrication and falsification. It is defined as an improper usage of another author's ideas, language, process, or results without giving appropriate credit. Plagiarism has nothing to do with examining the truth or accessing value of research data, process, or results. Plagiarism is determined based on whether a research corresponds to widely-used research ethics, containing proper citations. Within academia, plagiarism goes beyond the legal boundary, encompassing any kind of intentional wrongful appropriation of a research, which was created by another researchers. In summary, the definition of plagiarism is to steal other people's creative idea, research model, hypotheses, methods, definition, variables, images, tables and graphs, and use them without reasonable attribution to their true sources. There are various types of plagiarism. Some people assort plagiarism into idea plagiarism, text plagiarism, mosaic plagiarism, and idea distortion. Others view that plagiarism includes uncredited usage of another person's work without appropriate citations, self-plagiarism (using a part of a researcher's own previous research without proper citations), duplicate publication (publishing a researcher's own previous work with a different title), unethical citation (using quoted parts of another person's research without proper citations as if the parts are being cited by the current a

표절 예방을 위한 출판윤리 주체의 역할 모색

이인재 한국윤리교육학회 2022 윤리교육연구 Vol.- No.65

Although interest in research ethics has increased and research ethics education to prevent plagiarism has continued, the controversy over plagiarism has persisted. Judging from the fact that the National Research Foundation of Korea survey on research ethics activities of domestic universities in the last three years shows that the highest frequency of plagiarism is determined, it can also be seen that when the academic societies is struggling to verify plagiarism in the recently soaring journal papers, it is necessary to have an accurate understanding of plagiarism. Therefore, in order to help the members of the Korea Ethics Education Association (KEEA) to write correct academic writing, firstly, through the Q&A method related to plagiarism, I emphasized that we can accurately identify areas where we do not know or misunderstand plagiarism, and secondly, I suggested that supplemented standards for judging plagiarism that we currently follow, are inadequate in the current regulation of KEEA‘s research ethics in relation to the role of KEEA in preventing plagiarism. 연구윤리에 대한 관심이 높아지고 표절 예방을 위한 연구윤리 교육이 지속되어 오고 있지만 표절 논란이 끊이지 않고 있다. 최근 3년 간 국내 대학의 연구윤리 활동 실태 조사 결과 표절로 판정된 빈도가 가장 높은 것을 볼 때 또한 학회가 최근 급증하고 있는 학술지 논문에 대한 표절 여부를 검증할 때 구체적인 판단 기준이 없어 어려움을 겪고 있음을 볼 때 표절에 대한 정확한 이해가 요구됨을 알 수 있다. 이에 본 연구에서는 한국윤리교육학회 회원들이 올바른 학술적 글쓰기를 할 수 있도록 하는데 도움을 주기 위해 첫째, 표절 관련 Q&A 방식을 통해 표절에 대해 잘 모르거나 오해하고 있는 부분을 정확히 파악하도록 하였으며, 둘째, 표절 예방을 위한 한국윤리교육학회의 역할과 관련하여 현재의 연구윤리 규정에서 미흡하다고 생각되는 표절 판단 기준을 보완하여 제시하였다.

대학 글쓰기의 표절 문제와 개선방안

오영록 한국문학이론과비평학회 2020 한국문학이론과 비평 Vol.88 No.-

Writing in the university is an essential learning subject for students in order for them to become members of the academic discourse community and an active being. Plagiarism is a problem that threatens the role of university writing. This study examines the problem of plagiarism in university writing and presents a practical improvement plan centered on instruction strategy. First, it relates to the resulting plagiarism. In the previous research, education on writing ethics was suggested as a process, but this provided a reason for excuses in the resulting plagiarism and made it impossible to grasp the problem clearly. It is necessary to instruct learners to write short but completed writings often to teach them through an understanding of their problem with writing in grasping sentence structure and style to prevent plagiarism. Through this, learners can understand the expressive ability of writing and gain self-esteem. When problems of plagiarism arise, they should not be hidden, but should be open to the public so that appropriate measures can be taken after review and verification. Secondly, it relates to the process of plagiarism. In order to prevent this, it is necessary to educate on citations efficiently. In the existing writing textbooks, the ethics of writing and citations are separated, but it is necessary to integrate them and instruct on them together. In addition, it is necessary to explain to the learners the details of the data collection and have them submit the summary. Since most plagiarism arises from indirect citations, it should be taught in a format so that the quoted part is listed in the footnote. It is necessary to emphasize the fact that referring to other people’s data is a manifestation of one’s academic endeavor and citing it as footnote is the right thing to do as a member of the university. Third, it relates to strategic plagiarism. First, it is necessary to emphasize that, other than quoted parts with footnotes, the rest is the learners’ writing, and to have them be aware of the situation in that they are responsible if plagiarism is found. In addition, in order to prevent re-editing and duplicate submission as self plagiarism, it is necessary to have undergraduate work and report records of the undergraduate in a database. Additionally, the instructor should have the learners do peer review among those who examined the same data for the same topic and point out plagiarism to prevent unintentional errors. 대학에서의 글쓰기는 학술적 담화 공동체의 구성원이자 하나의 능동적인 주체적 존재가 되기 위해 필수적으로 익혀야 하는 사항이다. 이와 같은 대학 글쓰기의 역할을 위협하는 문제적 사항이 표절이다. 이에 본고에서는 대학 글쓰기에서 나타나는 표절의 문제에 대해 살피고, 이에 대한 개선방안을 개괄적으로 제시했다. 먼저, 결과적인 표절에 관한 것이다. 이것을 막기 위해서는 학생들에게 표절이 단순한 실수가 아니라 잘못된 행위임을 인식시킬 필요가 있다. 교수자는 짧은 분량의 완성된 글을 자주 쓰게 해 수용자가 지니고 있는 글쓰기의 문제를 파악해 지도하고, 문장 및 문체를 파악해 표절을 막도록 해야 한다. 더불어 이를 통해 수용자는 글이 지닌 표현력을 익히고 자존감을 얻을 수 있도록 한다. 그리고 표절에 관한 문제가 발생했을 때, 이를 은폐하지 말고 공론화하여 검토와 검증 이후 적절한 조치를 이루어질 수 있도록 해야 한다. 둘째로 과정의 표절이다. 이를 방지하기 위해서는 글쓰기 윤리는 준수해야 하는 것이고, 이를 막기 위한 인용 작성법은 학습해야 하는 부분임을 인지할 필요가 있다. 교수자는 인용 각주에 대한 교육을 효율적으로 할 필요가 있다. 기존 글쓰기 교재에서는 글쓰기 윤리와 인용 각주에 대한 사항을 분리하고 있으나, 이를 통합적으로 지도할 필요가 있다. 더불어 수용자에게 자료 수집에 대한 사항을 상세히 설명하고, 이를 정리해서 제출하도록 한다. 대부분 간접 인용을 통한 표절의 문제가 주로 발생하므로 이에 대한 인용주석 형식에서 활용 부분을 병기하도록 한다. 수용자에게 타인의 자료를 많이 참고한 것은 자신의 학문적 노력을 드러내는 일이며, 나아가 그것을 인용한 주석으로 표기하는 것이 대학 구성원으로 당당한 일임을 강조한다. 더불어 교수자는 수용자에게 자료를 자신의 관점으로 해석하고 자기 말로 표현하는 연습을 시켜야 한다. 셋째로 전략적인 표절이다. 먼저 수용자에게 인용 각주가 표기된 것 이외에는 온전히 자신의 글이란 것을 강조하며 이와 관련해 표절이 발견되면 확실히 책임을 져야 한다는 상황을 인식하도록 한다. 더불어 자기표절 형태의 재편집 및 중복 제출을 막기 위해 대학에서 학부생의 과제 및 보고서 기록물을 데이터베이스화 하는 작업이 필요하다. 그리고 같은 주제에 대해 자료를 검토한 수용자 사이에서 상호 첨삭과 표절에 대한 지적을 통해 동료가 무심코 행할 수 있는 과오를 지적할 수 있도록 한다.

KODISA 연구윤리의 표절 판단기준과 글로벌 학술지 가이드라인

황희중,김동호,윤명길,이정완,이종호 한국유통과학회 2014 유통과학연구 Vol.12 No.6

Purpose – In general, researchers try to abide by the code ofresearch ethics, but many of them are not fully aware of plagiarism,unintentionally committing the research misconduct whenthey write a research paper. This research aims to introduce researchersa clear and easy guideline at a conference, whichhelps researchers avoid accidental plagiarism by addressing theissue. This research is expected to contribute building a climateand encouraging creative research among scholars. Research design, data, methodology & Results – Plagiarismis considered a sort of research misconduct along with fabricationand falsification. It is defined as an improper usage ofanother author’s ideas, language, process, or results without givingappropriate credit. Plagiarism has nothing to do with examiningthe truth or accessing value of research data, process, orresults. Plagiarism is determined based on whether a researchcorresponds to widely-used research ethics, containing propercitations. Within academia, plagiarism goes beyond the legalboundary, encompassing any kind of intentional wrongful appropriationof a research, which was created by anotherresearchers. In summary, the definition of plagiarism is to steal other people’s creative idea, research model, hypotheses, methods,definition, variables, images, tables and graphs, and usethem without reasonable attribution to their true sources. Thereare various types of plagiarism. Some people assort plagiarisminto idea plagiarism, text plagiarism, mosaic plagiarism, and ideadistortion. Others view that plagiarism includes uncredited usageof another person’s work without appropriate citations, self-plagiarism(using a part of a researcher’s own previous researchwithout proper citations), duplicate publication (publishing a researcher’sown previous work with a different title), unethical citation(using quoted parts of another person’s research withoutproper citations as if the parts are being cited by the currentauthor). When an author wants to cite a part that was previouslydrawn from another source the author is supposed to revealthat the part is re-cited. If it is hard to state all the sourcesthe author is allowed to mention the original source only. Today, various disciplines are developing their own measures toaddress these plagiarism issues, especially duplicate publications,by requiring researchers to clearly reveal true sourceswhen they refer to any other research. Conclusions - Research misconducts including plagiarismhave broad and unclear boundaries which allow ambiguous definitionsand diverse interpretations. It seems difficult for researchersto have clear understandings of ways to avoid plagiarismand how to cite other’s works properly. However, if guidelinesare developed to detect and avoid plagiarism consideringcharacteristics of each discipline (For example, social scienceand natural sciences might be able to have different standardson plagiarism.) and shared among researchers they will likelyhave a consensus and understanding regarding the issue. Particularly, since duplicate publications has frequently appearedmore than plagiarism, academic institutions will need to providepre-warning and screening in evaluation processes in order toreduce mistakes of researchers and to prevent duplicatepublications. What is critical for researchers is to clearly revealthe true sources based on the common citation rules and to onlyborrow necessary amounts of others’ research.

자기표절, 저작권, 그리고 민주시민사회

박성호(Park, SeongHo) 한양법학회 2010 漢陽法學 Vol.30 No.-

Self-plagiarism is the ambiguous and difficult term. Even scholars may confuse it with plagiarism. Plagiarism, as defined in the 1999 Black’s Law Dictionary 7th ed., is the act or an instance of copying or stealing another’s words or ideas and attributing them as one’s own. In contrast to plagiarism, according to Wikipedia, self-plagiarism is the reuse of significant, identical, or nearly identical portions of one’s own work without acknowledging that one is doing so or without citing the original work. In principle self-plagiarism is not so much a question of legal or moral issue in journalism as a question of research integrity within academia. Nonetheless, each time a person from academia was nominated for a high government post, self-plagiarism questions were raised not by the academia, but by the media. With the result that the nominated person’s “self-plagiarism” issue was sensationally reported in the press without fact confirmation, it was misused or abused dependent upon factional interest or affiliation. The misuse of self-plagiarism issue might have an adverse effect on the social integration. The misuse of self-plagiarism issue on the basis of factional interest serves as a cautionary tale of how our academia paid too little attention to it. Before the indiscriminate use of self-plagiarism issue, it is worth establishing the objective standard concerning self-plagiarism. Establishment of the objective standard regarding self-plagiarism is academia’s urgent task. The purpose of this paper is to examine the academic arguments of self-plagiarism and establish the substantial standard of self-plagiarism The paper is divided into four parts. The first part is introduction. It provides emerging problems by means of the misuses of self-plagiarism. The second part outlines the meaning and contents of self-plagiarism by examining the terminological origin and making a distinction among self-plagiarism, plagiarism and copyright infringement. Also, the second part examines the existing arguments pertaining to self-plagiarism of other countries, for example, Japan, Germany and U.S. and considers the issues and cases surrounding it in Korean society. The third part emphasizes the primary role of a democratic civil society in the controversy and misunderstanding surrounding self-plagiarism. Finally, this paper concludes with some ways to avoid self-plagiarism.

Q&A를 통한 표절과 저작권 침해의 이해

이인재 ( Lee¸ In Jae ) 한국감정평가학회 2021 감정평가학논집 Vol.20 No.2

국내ㆍ외 대학에서 적용하고 있는 연구부정행위에 대한 가이드라인을 보면, 표절은 위조, 변조와 함께 대표적인 연구부정행위 중의 하나로 간주되고 있다. 연구윤리에 대한 관심이 높아지고 연구부정행위 예방을 위한 연구윤리 교육이 지속되어 오고 있지만 표절 논란이 끊이지 않고 있다. 최근 3년간 국내 대학의 연구윤리 활동 실태 조사 결과를 보면, 표절로 판정된 빈도가 가장 높은 것을 볼 때 그만큼 우리 학계가 표절 예방을 위해 노력해야 함을 시사한다. 표절은 제3자에게 남의 것을 내 것인 것처럼 할 때 성립하는 것으로 대표적으로는 출처표기가 꼭 필요한 경우에 출처표기를 하지 않은 경우이다. 그런데 연구자들은 출처표기를 반드시 해야 하는 경우를 잘 모르거나 의도적으로 누락하여 표절 의혹을 받곤 한다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 표절에 대한 올바른 이해를 바탕으로 표절을 예방할 수 있는 방안에 초점을 두고 다음과 같이 두 가지 점에 초점을 두고 논의를 전개하였다. 첫째, 표절의 의미와 특징, 유형과 저작권 침해와의 차이점은 무엇인지를 살펴보았다. 둘째, 연구자들에게서 자주 제기되는 표절 관련 물음에 대한 답변을 제시하는 방식으로 표절에 대한 무지, 오해를 해소하는데 도움을 주고자 하였다. According to the guidelines on research misconduct applied by domestic and foreign universities, plagiarism is considered one of the representative research misconducts along with fabrication and falsification. Although there has been a growing interest in research ethics and research ethics education to prevent research misconduct has continued, controversy over plagiarism has persisted. The results of a survey of research ethics activities at domestic universities over the past three years suggest that the Korean academic community should strive to prevent plagiarism considering the high frequency of plagiarism. Plagiarism is constituted when one’s research contents are posed as belonging to someone else by a third party, and is typically a case in which the source is not indicated when it is absolutely necessary. However, researchers are suspected of plagiarism because they do not know or intentionally omit cases where the source must be attributed. Therefore, this paper focused on two points to prevent plagiarism based on a correct understanding of plagiarism. First, this paper looked at the meaning, characteristics, types of plagiarism and the differences between plagiarism and copyright infringement. Second, it was designed to resolve ignorance and misunderstanding of plagiarism by providing answers to plagiarism-related questions frequently raised by researchers.

역사적 관점에서 본 표절과 저작권

이일호 ( Il Ho Lee ),김기홍 ( Ki Hong Kim ) 연세대학교 법학연구원 2009 法學硏究 Vol.19 No.1

There are many different definitions on plagiarism on the basis of varied perspectives, and none of them has been a leading theory ahead of others. Plagiarism could be characterized as a false representation to distort the attributed relationship between creators and their writings, spoken words and other types of work. In this view, the plagiarism and copyright infringement share applicable areas, i.e., many cases that could be treated as copyright infringement would cause plagiarism problems. Although the criterion of plagiarism is indefinite and could be explained in different ways of view, the resulting from plagiarism is socially serious and enormous. Nevertheless, the discussion in legal scholarship is on an elementary level thus cannot meet the increasing demand for solving the problem raised from mass media. This article is not about what constitutes a plagiarism, nor about whether or not some specific cases fall under it. The purpose of the article is to prove the relationship between copyright system and plagiarism in historical perspective and to predict the future development of `law against plagiarism` in our legal community. Mainly discussed, the norm on `making intellectuality of others one`s own` could be considered legally prior to establishing and stabilizingcopyright system. However, the legal framework of copyright system became to be more market-oriented and capitalized after development of the printing technology encouraged the publication and dissemination of works. During this process, the law against plagiarism melted into copyright law, and functioned partially as an auxiliary part in the field of moral right. Moreover, the moral right is reduced to one of little factors consisting contemporary copyright law as if its situation just guaranteed competitive position of copyright owners and investigators. It makes clearer that the question of plagiarism is treated as a matter of ethics, but not of law. The economic value of copyright becomes greater and this tendency leads the cultural and personality-respective copyright system to the industry-oriented. Policies aiming the promotion of this trend would be welcomed. However, the tendency may lead us fail to respect the personality value in copyright and a social role of law against plagiarism. We should embark on the discussion about what constitutes plagiarism and which role the moral right can play with regard to the plagiarism in the legal context.

한시(漢詩)의 표절에 관한 법학적 논의 -허난설헌을 중심으로-

남형두 연민학회 2023 연민학지 Vol.39 No.-

허난설헌을 둘러싼 표절 논쟁은 당대 시작해 현재에 이르기까지 사백 년 넘게 이어지고 있다는 점에서 매우 이색적이다. 논란은 역사적ㆍ문학적으로 명확히 해소되지 않은 채 현재에 이르기까지 이어져 오고 있는데, 여기에 비교적 최근 표절에 관해 엄격해진 사회적 분위기에 편승한 언론의 설익은 관심 등이 더해져 논란은 궤도를 벗어난 측면이 있어 보인다. 허난설헌 문학이 제대로 평가받기 위해선 표절 논의가 종식되어야 한다. 분명한 것은 허난설헌 당대 표절 개념과 오늘날의 표절 개념은 같은 뜻으로 쓰이지 않았다는 점이다. 고전문학에서 논의됐던 표절은 오늘날의 표절 개념과 사뭇 다른 것이어서 현재의 표절 개념과 기준으로 고전문학을 다루어서는 안 된다. 독창성 보호는 동서고금을 막론하고 문명사회에서 간과할 수 없는 중요한 문제로서 허난설헌 당대뿐 아니라 오늘날에도 창작 세계에서 일관된 가치이기도 하다. 또한 식자층 및 독서환경에 따라 정도의 차이는 있어도 표절을 구성하는 기망적 요소는 포기할 수 없는 부분이기도 하다. 허난설헌 작품이 당대뿐 아니라 오늘의 관점에서 보더라도 도습 또는 표절에 해당하는지는 여성 문학, 정치적 상황 등 표절 외적 요소를 걷어 내고 오로지 당대의 지식사회, 출판 및 독서환경 등의 맥락을 고려해 신중히 판단하여야 한다. 용사/점화인지 도습/표절인지는 시에서 차지하는 전고의 양과 비율로 단정할 수 없고 작가가 추가한 부분에 대한 평가, 그리고 전고의 활용이 적절한지, 나아가 운율 등 형식미에 따라 독창성 유무가 중요하게 고려되어야 한다. 바로 이 부분이 허난설헌을 둘러싼 표절 논의의 핵심인데, 이 논문의 논의를 통해 잘못된 이해에 기반한 표절 논의 또는 법학적 논의가 고전문학 또는 한문학계에 무분별하게 침습하는 것을 막음으로써 허난설헌 문학이 오롯이 문학적 평가를 받을 수 있도록 하는 계기를 마련하고자 한다. 이 논문은 학제적 연구를 추구한다. 표절 금지 연구윤리 및 저작권법을 포함한 법학계의 논의와 문학계의 논의가 상호 영향을 주고받음으로써 서로의 논의를 발전시키는 계기가 된다면 필자는 나름의 소임을 다하는 셈이다. The plagiarism controversy surrounding Huh Nanseolheon is very unusual in that it has been ongoing for over 400 years to the present without being clearly resolved historically and literarily. This controversy seems to have gone off track as a result of the clumsy interest of the media riding on the relatively recent strict social atmosphere regarding plagiarism. For the proper evaluation of Huh Nanseolheon’s literature, the discussion of plagiarism must end. What is clear is that the concept of plagiarism of Huh Nanseolheon’s time and that today are not used interchangeably. Plagiarism discussed in literature of the past is quite different from today’s concept, so the former should not be treated with the current concept and standards of plagiarism. Originality protection is an important issue that cannot be overlooked in a civilized society regardless of the East and West, and it is a consistent value not only in Huh Nanseolheon’s time but also in the creative world today. In addition, although there is a difference in degree according to the educated class and reading environment, the deceptive element that constitutes plagiarism cannot be abandoned. Whether Huh Nanseolheon’s works fall under plagiarism not only at the time but also from today's viewpoint should be carefully judged by removing external elements of plagiarism, such as women’s literature and the political situation, and only taking the context of the contemporary knowledge society, publishing, and reading environment into account. In determining whether it is plagiarism, it is important to consider the evaluation of the part added by the author, whether the previous work is appropriately used, and furthermore, the presence or absence of originality according to formal beauty such as rhyme. This part is the core of the plagiarism discussion surrounding Huh Nanseolheon. This thesis posits that Huh Nanseolheon literature can only be evaluated as literary by preventing plagiarism or jurisprudential discussions based on misunderstanding from indiscriminately invading the world of literature of the past or Chinese literature of Korea. This thesis pursues an interdisciplinary study. If the discussions in the legal world, including anti-plagiarism research ethics and copyright law, and the literary world mutually influence each other and become an opportunity to develop each other’s discussions, then my role is fulfilled.

현대시 표절 양상에 대한 분석적 고찰

정끝별 ( Keut Byul Jeong ) 현대문학이론학회 2012 現代文學理論硏究 Vol.0 No.48

본고에서는 표절에 대한 일반적인 정의를 출발점으로 삼아 먼저 현대시에 유효한 표절의 기준, 방법, 층위 등에 대한 검토하였다. 이러한 이론적 검토를 바탕으로 한국 현대시에 나타난 표절 양상을 다섯 가지로 범주화시켜 구체적인 작품 분석을 통해 표절의 다양한 국면들을 조명해보았다. 창조적 모방으로서의 표절, 표절 유희, 표절 의혹과 예상 표절, 표절에 근접한 유사성, 표절 판정 등이 그것이다. 단계적으로 창작에서 표절로, 방법적 표절에서 표절로 진행된 과정을 보여주고자 했으며, 이러한 단계적 범주들을 통해 창작과 표절의 경계를 살펴보았다. 표절에 대한 위험성을 알림으로써 부주의나 무지함으로 인한 표절을 예방하고 나아가 다양한 모방 인용의 전략들이 일상화된 우리시대에 요구될 대중적 소양으로서의 표절 이해는 물론 표절에 대한 올바른 평가 관점을 제시하였다. This paper has considered at first effective criteria, methods, and strata of plagiarism in Korean modern poetry by taking the general definition of plagiarism as a starting point. On this theoretical consideration, various patterns of plagiarism in Korean modern poetry have been illuminated through concrete analyses on the plagiarized poems by classifying them into five categories: the plagiarism as a creative imitation, the play-plagiarism, the suspected plagiarism and the anticipated plagiarism(le plagiat par anticipation), the similarity near to plagiarism, and the judgment on plagiarism. Thus this paper has attempted to show the processes of advancing gradually from the creation to the plagiarism and from the methodic plagiarism to the plagiarism, and to reveal the boundary between the creation and plagiarism by applying these gradual categories to them. Consequently this paper has presented not only that to inform the public of dangers of these plagiarisms is to prevent plagiarisms which are owing to their inattentions or ignorances, but also that to understand these plagiarisms and to have a correct viewpoint of evaluating plagiarisms are the public cultivations at the requests of our age when various strategies of imitative quotations have become routines.

대학생의 연구윤리교육에서의 표절 실태 및 대안 연구

윤소정 ( So Jung Yune ),최용성 ( Yong Seong Choi ),최병학 ( Byung Hak Choi ),양삼석 ( Sam Seok Ryang ) 한국윤리교육학회 2011 윤리교육연구 Vol.0 No.24

본 연구의 목적은 대학생의 표절 문제를 입체적으로 해결하기 위하여 설정한 5요소 즉, 표절 기준·검색·제지·홍보·예방·교육에 따라 P 대학의 표절 현실태를 진단해 보고 이에 대한 대안을 모색하고자 하였다. 표절문제를 입체적으로 해결하기 위한 5요소는 보다 구체적으로, 1요소는 대학 차원에서 표절 기준 및 규정 확립, 2요소표절 규정 가이드 및 홍보, 3요소 표절검색 프로그램 완비, 4요소 표절제재조치의 제도화, 5요소 학문적 글쓰기의 내실화라는 5가지 요소로 구성되었다. 표절의 현실태 진단을 위하여 설문을 개발하였으며, 내용타당도 검정과 예비 검사를 통해 수정후 사용하였다. 최종 설문은 P대학 대학생 398명을 대상으로 실시되었다. 조사 결과 분석에는 다변량분석과 교차분석을 이용하였다. 그 결과 표절 기준과 표절 실태에 대한 인식과 대학내 학술적 글쓰기 및 인용법 교육에 대한 실태 인식에 있어 계열별 차이가 나타났다. 또한 학교 전체적 차원에서 보다 관심을 기울여야 할 요소로 모든 계열에서 표절 예방을 위한 홍보 및 클린 캠퍼스 운영이 필요하다고 답하였다. 본 연구를 통해 표절방지 및 학술적 글쓰기의 개선을 위해서는 개별적 차원보다 학교 전체 차원에서의 입체적인 표절예방교육이 보다 강조되어야 함을 알 수 있다. For solving the plagiarism problem collectively, this study is to examine the actuality of P University through 5 kinds of elements and students are surveyed by the department. And this study attempts to analyze and seek an alternative direction for plagiarism prevention education. One element of 5 elements is regulations established by the University in terms of plagiarism, Second element is plagiarism rules guide and promoting. Third element is equipping with search program. Forth element is the institutionalization of plagiarism sanctions. Fifth element is academic writing. These elements should be connected and managed collectively. And with this assumption, we examined concrete each of these elements about actuality and attempted to seek alternatives. The results of each elements in this study are still insufficient and inadequate levels for effective education of prevention plagiarism. In addition, the difference of department was presented in each curriculum. And the differences in each curriculum had a blind spot of plagiarism prevention education. For the improvement in search program, plagiarism sanctions and academic writing, school official`s effort was more important. After all, we presented plagiarism prevention education of the whole school level than individual level.