Complexities and Dynamics of Korean Graduate Students' Textual Borrowing in Academic Writing

Abstract

Academic writing in U.S. higher education often involves textual borrowing, referred to as the integration and documentation of reading sources and carried out with summaries, quotes and paraphrases. Second language (L2) English students are likely to use sources inappropriately and consequentially are accused of plagiarism based on a moral judgment. A body of research on textual borrowing including this study has provided strong evidence that these students' inappropriate source use does not result from their intention to steal other's intellectual property and language, but from their cultural backgrounds or situated factors in their U.S. academic contexts. Few research studies, however, offer a thorough view of how both cultural backgrounds and situated factors are associated with L2 students' textual borrowing practices; much empirical attention has focused on a more limited examination of Chinese student populations. In this respect, this study explores the complex and dynamic nature of Korean graduate students' source use by investigating faculty expectations both in Korea and in their L2 academic setting and these students' perceptions and practices of textual borrowing. For these investigations, a qualitative research study was conducted, and multiple sources of data were analyzed: (a) interviews with two faculty informant groups and the student participants, (b) observations of the Master's meeting and group study meetings, (c) tutoring sessions at the Writing Center, and (d) written texts, including institutional and instructional documents, email messages, and multiple handouts, outlines, and essays. These sets of data were analyzed using two different methods: content analysis and text analysis. The findings of this qualitative research revealed that both cultural and situated factors were associated with the Korean students' understandings of and changes in textual borrowing practices. With regard to their initial understandings, the results showed that although the participants understood textual borrowing in terms of citation methods and writing skills, their practices were not aligned with their perceptions nor with faculty expectations. However, I noted that in the process of the research period, most of them were able to achieve the textual purposes by utilizing reading sources strategically and appropriately and thus fulfill the academic goals required in the situated context. Based on these findings, pedagogical implications are discussed.