This article is more than 4 years old

Banning essay mills – it’s time to act

For Paul Greatrix the case for legislation to ban essay mills is clear.
This article is more than 4 years old

Paul Greatrix is an HE expert and was until recently Registrar at the University of Nottingham

I’ve written here on a number of occasions about the evils of essay mills.

Some of the lines I’ve taken have been driven by real concern for students, but many of the points have also been angry, some mocking and others deadly serious about the need for new legislation.

Obviously none of this has had any impact at all, other than allowing me to feel better about venting publicly about the issue.

Legislation matters

Of course, tackling the huge problem of essay mills requires much more than just legislation –  a new law isn’t a silver bullet, this is a multidimensional issue but the signalling of legislation is hugely important.

As the experience of the introduction of a new law in Australia shows, it can work effectively:

A number of big-name essay mills have retreated from Australia since legislation which outlawed contract cheating came into force, highlighting how countries including the UK risk falling behind, but the switch to distance learning during the pandemic could stymie further progress.

The new legislation, which came into effect at the beginning of September, has made it an offence to provide, arrange or advertise academic cheating services. Those caught doing so face up to two years in jail or fines of up to A$100,000 (£55,270).

It has led to “big name” essay mills, as well as lots of smaller sites, ending their operations in Australia. Experts in the country told Times Higher Education that this was a positive sign but warned that, particularly with more online assessments and students learning at a distance, it would not end all contract cheating in the country.

This is enormously encouraging to see and it shows that legislation can be an important part of the response to  dealing with these parasites. I’m really pleased to see Chris Skidmore focusing on this in his Private Members’ Bill – which we can only hope will progress further.

Essay mills and the charlatans who run them operate a business model which, at its heart, is based on deriving profit from corrupting the higher education assessment process and exploiting the vulnerabilities and anxieties of students. These companies have to be stopped and we need legislation to help make that happen.

But it is not just about new laws, we have to address other aspects too and this is why this guidance published last year by the QAA is important. The Guide “Contracting to Cheat: How to Address Essay Mills and Contract Cheating” shows that many universities are making good progress with tackling the essay mill cheaters but that more needs to be done. This really helpful QAA paper updates earlier guidance, offering new advice, intelligence and good practice in response to the continually developing and growing essay mill threat.

The essay mills really are a threat

Let’s be clear, the people who run essay mills, who provide the essays for money as part of the cheating business are all engaged in a huge cynical, corrupt and exploitative operation which undermines the UK higher education sector’s hard won reputation and damages many students. We need to stop them.

This recent article in the Telegraph highlights some of the worst examples of essay mill behaviour – students buy poor quality products and are then blackmailed by the essay mill company with the threat of being reported to their university for having utilised the service in the first place.

What is most surprising about the piece is that it is actually arguing against proposed legislation, despite quoting Chris Skidmore on the importance of it. Instead it prefers the views of a couple of lawyers who seem to make their living from supporting students engaged in litigation against their universities and see legislation as unnecessary. These lawyers seem to be more concerned that universities aren’t helping them as much as they would wish in enabling their business to prosper:

“I think it is symptomatic of deeper problems in higher education,” he told The Telegraph. “Students [are] paying tens of thousands of pounds for what is essentially a distance learning course under house arrest… students who are getting a completely different experience from what they paid for seem to be getting little or nothing, so it does all tie in.”

“Another problem is there is quite a lot of vagueness when it comes to what academic misconduct actually is,” Mr Jacobs added. “A lot of universities get to create their own definitions.” Plagiarism software has failed to keep up with the detection-evasion techniques of essay mills, so academics are left to make subjective judgements.

This confusion, coupled with lawyers being barred from accompanying students in many academic malpractice panels, has seen Dr Sokol deal with devastated students expelled after being falsely accused of cheating.

“You’ve got innocent students who are found guilty… these students are conveniently forgotten,” he said. “I’m not convinced that most universities have sufficient training for their decision-makers to avoid miscarriages of justice.”

This all demonstrates how far-reaching is the impact of the appalling practices of essay mills.

Banning the essay mills

The minor concerns of universities’ operation of their own regulations are, of course, a complete distraction from the fundamental issue here which is that it is the whole pernicious essay mill enterprise which is undermining the academic integrity of our sector. It is not our own regulations which are the core problem here. We have to have legislation to outlaw these agencies if we are to address the cynical, exploitative essay mill business.

Chris Skidmore’s bill is unlikely to succeed. Introduced under the Ten Minute Rule, it will only be discussed further if all Private Member’s Bills introduced via the traditional Friday sittings are discussed, or if the government actively chooses to progress it. But it does highlight a pressing need for action: let’s ban essay mills for good.

5 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
hsmatthews2017
4 years ago

Let’s hope the government decides to pick this up and run with it.

Daniel Sokol
4 years ago

We are the “couple of lawyers” referred to, rather dismissively, in Mr Paul Greatrix’s article Banning essay mills – it’s time to act’ (WONKHE, 16th March 2021). In our work, we represent students who have been accused of using essay mills. Some are ‘guilty’ of the academic offence and others are innocent. Occasionally, we assist students who have been blackmailed by essay mills. One of us (Daniel Sokol) helped the blackmailed students in the Telegraph article referred to in Mr Greatrix’s article and, with the students’ consent, wrote up their cases so that others could learn from them. After many… Read more »

Johnny Rich
4 years ago
Reply to  Daniel Sokol

You write, “If a genie offered us the choice of ‘no more essay mills’ or ‘no more unfair decisions by universities affecting students’, we would choose the latter without a moment’s hesitation.” This may be lawyerly rhetoric, but it’s not a real choice and, by presenting it as an either/or, you do a disservice to your arguments, to Paul Greatrix’s and to the causes of better educational standards and students’ academic rights. It is, of course, possible both to legislate against essay mills and to put in place further safeguards against unfair decisions. Neither cheating nor unfair decisions will be… Read more »

Jukka Rintamäki
4 years ago
Reply to  Johnny Rich

Excellent points from Johnny Rich; I was going to make the same point about the false dilemma presented by Daniel Sokol above. Their concern would be slightly more believable without falling guilty of naughtiness such as that.

Graham Kendall
4 years ago

I wrote about a similar issue a few years ago in Science and Engineering Ethics. It might be of interest to those who follow this topic.

Is There a Role for Publication Consultants and How Should Their Contribution be Recognized?

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9710-9