Adby Ad Adfilet Ime Submit T Ed 6 Mar 2017 024 1pm Submissio ✓ Solved

Adby Ad Adfilet Ime Submit T Ed 06 Mar 2017 024 1pmsubmission Id

Based on the provided content, the core assignment appears to involve analyzing a student's academic submission, focusing on its originality, sources, and related metadata. However, the original text is largely a compilation of submission details, similarity indexes, and source listings rather than a traditional assignment prompt. Therefore, the essential task is to interpret this data as an academic analysis or report on the student's submission, ensuring that the report discusses aspects such as originality percentage, sources cited, and the context of the submission, assuming the goal is to evaluate or discuss the submission's academic integrity and referencing.

In this report, I will analyze and interpret the provided details related to the student's submission at Howard Payne University, submitted on March 6, 2017. The submission has a similarity index of 19%, with 16% internet sources, 1% publications, and 18% student papers, indicating the extent and nature of the similarity detected. The details also list primary sources, including websites such as add-assets.com, and various academic institutions where similar papers have been submitted. This information suggests a focus on the originality of the work, source attribution, and academic integrity.

Paper For Above Instructions

The submitted document, identified as "ADHD_PAPER.DOCX," was evaluated for originality using similarity detection software, resulting in a similarity index of 19%. This percentage signifies that nearly one-fifth of the text matches other sources, which can be typical for academic papers that incorporate citations or commonly used phrases. The breakdown indicates 16% of the content matches internet sources, 1% from publications, and 18% from other student papers. These figures highlight the importance of proper citation practices and plagiarism prevention in academic writing.

The primary sources listed include websites like add-assets.com and multiple student paper submissions to various universities, such as Howard Payne, Keiser University, Adelphi University, and Leyton Sixth Form College in London. Understanding the origin and nature of these sources is crucial in assessing the originality and integrity of the submission. The presence of similar papers across different institutions indicates possible common use of shared resources or templates, but it also raises concerns regarding potential over-reliance on existing work without adequate paraphrasing or citation.

Academic integrity relies heavily on transparent and accurate referencing of sources used in research and writing. The similarity report's indication of matching with internet and student sources suggests that the student incorporated ideas or text from these sources, either intentionally or unintentionally, emphasizing the need for proper citation methods. Moreover, the low percentage of matches to published articles (1%) implies that the work primarily referenced or paraphrased from internet and student sources.

From an academic perspective, it is essential to evaluate whether the high similarity percentages are due to correctly cited quotations or paraphrased content, or if they reflect unoriginal work. Proper paraphrasing, citation, and adherence to academic standards can mitigate issues of plagiarism and strengthen the credibility of the research. Additionally, understanding the context of the sources used provides insight into the depth of research and scholarship involved in creating the paper.

This analysis underscores the importance of academic honesty, diligent source attribution, and critical engagement with existing literature. Educators and students alike should prioritize developing skills in paraphrasing, citation, and originality to uphold the standards of scholarly work. Further investigation into specific sections of the paper and the nature of matched content would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment of originality and academic integrity.

References

• Bretag, T. (2016). Challenges in addressing contract cheating in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 41(2), 347-360.
• George, M. (2017). Academic integrity in the digital age: Challenges and strategies. Journal of Academic Ethics, 15(3), 245–263.
• Lancaster, T., & Clarke, R. (2017). Identifying plagiarism and paraphrasing: Strategies for effective academic writing. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 13(1), 1-15.
• Reynolds, M., & Felten, P. (2017). Creating a culture of integrity: Strategies for promoting academic honesty. Teaching in Higher Education, 22(7), 774–789.
• Roy, T. (2018). The impact of plagiarism detection software on student writing. Journal of Educational Technology, 15(4), 134-145.
• Sutherland-Smith, W. (2018). Plagiarism, accountability, and the role of institutional policies. Australian Educational Researcher, 45(3), 345–359.
• Walker, M., & Towns, A. (2018). Strategies for teaching academic integrity. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 55(2), 178-187.
• Whitley, B. E. (2017). Managing academic dishonesty: Prevention and detection. Ethics & Education, 19(2), 149–165.
• Young, P. J., & Humes, P. (2016). Understanding plagiarism and academic misconduct. Studies in Higher Education, 41(4), 418-435.
• Zhou, Y., & Brown, J. (2019). Effective strategies to prevent academic misconduct among students. Educational Researcher, 48(7), 448–459.