the academic writing services uk

the academic writing services uk

Exploring the Ethics and Efficacy of Academic Writing Services in the UK

1. Introduction to Academic Writing Services

Research into the desire for academic writing services has frequently been limited to investigating the demographic differences observed between contract buyers and non-customers. There is very little discussion in the literature about why students use these services, or whether their motivations cover various groups including both the financially able or otherwise embattled, or whether such provision is complete. At the boundary, studies into genuine job proposals aimed at students have been almost discriminatory on an organizational scale, either focusing on the desired deliverable product or the moral implications of “cheating”, to use an American phrase. The aim of the study was to develop an understanding of what students need from an academic point of view, to provide an essential reference to aid the service review and evaluating opportunities, and the development of appropriate strategies and techniques.

One of the key ethical dilemmas peculiar to academic writing services stems from the fact that the project cannot be taken without consent – model answer providers cannot, for example, impersonate their clients in exams or undertake pieces of research themselves. Consent to cheating is often the preserve of the customer themselves. This means that the desired deliverable is an academic paper that supports the intentions of the customer, providing them with a near perfect piece of work without a strong attempt to disguise its origins as an ordered project. The solution to this core issue results in model answer anyway being associated with moral ambiguity, irrespective of their intention to provide an essential service for students who are struggling with their course. This paper discusses the ethics of academia as practiced by model answer agencies and their capacity to serve as an essential support body for documenting professional employer organizations as experts within the subject area.

2. Ethical Considerations in Using Academic Writing Services

In another such vein, a 2009 study found that the most common punishment for contract cheating (by 70% of institutions) was to fail the student. There were other instances where the ignoring of the initial request led to emails from increasingly desperate clients who informed that they had to pay a high fine, they needed the coursework in order to increase their level of education facilitating them with a good job, and that they were not native English speakers. Given such realities, and general ignorance about the prevalence of academic writing services among students, we echo the calls for a focus on education rather than punishment.

As was briefly touched upon in the introduction, there are two main frameworks by which academics have explored the ethics of using academic writing services: punitive and rehabilitative. The Academic Misconduct in Higher Education Project Consultants report, Academic Misconduct in Higher Education, states that across the sector, virtually all institutions acknowledge the real existence of commercial essay writing companies, though some noted that they consider buying a service to write an essay to be relatively low-level compared with other more outrageous and cynical forms of contract cheating as their success rate is likely to be low in an institution that generally screens essays for plagiarism. The notion of concern only over low operational success is contradictory to universities’ assertions of robust and vigilant practice. If an institution isn’t going to take a strong stand either legally or operationally, the message sent out is that contract cheating is not very serious.

3. Impact of Academic Writing Services on Education Quality

Institutions make efforts to catch pupils who buy assignment texts. They develop policies under which a student can be expelled from their institute for using academic writing help. This is often a school’s last recourse. Institutions have improved code book systems that will help prevent the students from copying texts from their classmates since these texts could hereby turn out to be completed by any third parties (symptomatic of the fact that an academic fraud has been committed). However, do these efforts have an effect? Educational institutions report only around 5-10% of students who buy texts.

When students decide to pay to use such services, they are also inadvertently cheating the education system. The detrimental effect of academic writing services on the education quality occurs when customers use texts composed by such companies as their own. One such problem is the increase of knowledge gap between students who write texts on their own and those who pay for pre-composed essays to submit by the due time. In institutions that have students from different backgrounds, the problem may be more serious. While on the surface, the quality of higher education at such institutes appears to facilitate a significant expansion of opportunities, it still does not guarantee that the students will achieve a desired effect and gain a specific procrastination. The students that compose their works on their own obtain an academic advantage.

4. Regulatory Framework and Future Directions

To reiterate, the Quality Code is a document that defines the expectations and standards for academic degrees and domains related to higher education. Of the 10 chapters in the Quality Code, Academic Standards fall under Chapter B and could be rendered as the ‘what’ is expected of the academic component of higher education, whereas Chapter A, B, and C are for Expectations, Academic Standards, and the Regulator’s Advice and Guidance, respectively. This is the conceptualization of the responsibilities of protecting and reinforcing principles and expectations of academic standards in higher education. In the case when the degree-awarding role is not held by the higher education provider, the responsibility of the HEI includes monitoring academic standards, although the regulator’s organization, The Office for Students, is responsible for the action. To be eligible to register with The Office for Students, the HEI needs to meet the academic standards, including the Quality Code. HEFCE and the other £1.2 billion research funding are available to the HEIs, as long as they meet the Quality Code. Of the domain groups, The Academic Infrastructure Quality Group published the guide for the Quality Code in March 2019 but made no reference to it under the Teaching, Learning and Assessment: What we look for document, a publication for Review for Specific Providers.

The UK Quality Code for Higher Education