1. University of Portsmouth Business School
Unit Document for
The Marketing Environment
U16794
Presented by
Tom Chapman, Richard Christy,
Dr David Williams, Malcolm Stewart &
Sarah Turnbull
October 2010
1

2. CONTENTS
ABSTRACT 3
AIMS 3
LEARNING OUTCOMES (LO): 3
SYLLABUS OUTLINE 3
SCHEDULED ACTIVITIES (HOURS) 3
RECOMMENDED TEXT 4
SECONDARY TEXTS 4
ASSESSMENT 5
ASSESSMENT MARKING CRITERIA 8
PROGRAMME OF WORK: WORKSHOP & SEMINAR SESSIONS 10
INDIVIDUAL CLASS INFORMATION 11
APPENDICES 30
2

3. Abstract
The marketing environment introduces students to the broader external environment in which
businesses operate and the academic underpinning they will need to be successful students
whilst within the University framework. Students need to be introduced to the concepts of
debate and critical thinking; they need to understand the processes involved in the study of
the marketing subject and the relationship between various marketing elements or units on
their chosen programmes as well as the linkages that can be made with the broader external
environment. In addition to a clear appreciation of the marketing context, students are
required to understand the facilities and technologies available to them to produce academic
work fit for assessment and realise the motivation behind extending ones' own knowledge
outside the classroom through dedicated time management and teamwork as well as a self
initiated exploration of the subject material initially presented by the academic team.
Aims
1. To enthuse students in the subject of Marketing.
2. To develop an integrated understanding of both academic and periodical information
sources.
3. To provide an understanding of the various systems facilitated by the University to
assist students with their studies.
4. To instil an appreciation of the differences between Further and Higher Educational
teaching approaches as well as the dedication and effort required in order to be
successful at University.
Learning Outcomes (LO):
On successful completion of this unit, students should be able, at threshold level, to:
1. (LO1) Collect information from a variety of sources and communicate their findings in
an appropriate format.
2. (LO2) Work as a member of a group or team to enable the researching, preparation and
delivery of an oral presentation on an organisation.
3. (LO3) Describe and classify various elements of marketing in both an academic and
industry context.
4. (LO4) Report on and recognise the importance of the external environment in which
organisations operate.
Syllabus Outline
The topics covered in the unit will include:
1. Academic and Periodical Marketing Resources.
2. Team working and Time Management Skills.
3. Interpreting information.
4. Report Writing and Presentation Skills.
5. The Marketing Process.
6. The changing environment.
7. The value of money.
8. The art of communication.
Scheduled Activities (Hours)
11 (2 hours) Seminar / Workshops
3

4. Learning and Teaching Strategy
The unit will be delivered through a series of 2 hour workshops during which time the tutor will
use small case studies based on both real company examples that have current media
attention and academic articles to elicit debate and discussion between nominated groups of
students.
The later part of the workshop will be used by the tutor to facilitate the progression of the
assessment strategy and guide students in their own quest for knowledge surrounding another
organisation of their choice chosen in the initial stages of the unit as well as providing a
pertinent opportunity for the tutor to instigate formative feedback and encouragement to the
group.
In addition to this students will be expected to manage and drive their own investigations for
their assessment outside of scheduled activities.
Support will also be provided in line with eLearning strategies through the use of either Victory
or another environment to facilitate discussion between Seminars as well as individual student
groups and tutors. Online training assistance will also be provided to students in the basics of
Microsoft Office and Academic / Periodical resources and management of sources.
Recommended Text
Baines, P. Fill, C. & Page, K., 2008, Marketing, OUP (ISBN: 9780199290437)
Seely, 2002, Writing Reports, Oxford University Press (ISBN: 0-19-866283-1)
Billingham, J, 2003, Giving Presentations, OUP (ISBN: 0-19-860681-8)
Additional Materials will be posted on http://www.marketing101.co.uk
There is also a forum for debate and discussion available at http://
www.marketing101.co.uk/forums/
Please register on the site and post any questions or comments there to allow
communication between different student groups and lecturing staff. As part of the
registration process you are required to enter a username. The username can be
whatever you wish and as such it is strongly suggested that it is not your real name
or your email address to maintain your anonymity. You may also sign in using your
facebook or twitter account details.
You need to purchase the recommended texts and you are expected to read the
appropriate chapters in the recommended text prior to each session.
Secondary Texts
Secondary texts and additional reading materials will be introduced throughout the unit as and
when appropriate.
4

5. Assessment
The assessment is designed to demonstrate that the student has met the learning outcomes
(LO) of the unit.
Assessment for this unit consists of 100% coursework in the form of a group prepared (LO2)
Marketing Report (LO1) & Presentation (LO1, LO2) that considers the following:
“Three-quarters of UK university heads who took part in a survey think public spending cuts
will lead to the disappearance of some institutions. But almost none of those asked think their
institutions will fail, the poll for PA Consulting adds.” BBC News 05/08/2010 - http://
www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-10881360
Describe and evaluate the marketing activities used in the UK Higher Education
sector. In light of the above quote, recommend ways in which Portsmouth Business
School should compete with the numerous alternatives available to prospective
students in the future. (LO4)
This is a word-processed report with an maximum length of 2,000 words (excluding
references and appendices). The group will also present the findings of their report for 15
minutes.
To complete this assessment successfully each member of the Group must work to
together as a team (LO2) but with accountability and responsibility for specific roles
within the project including;
• Project Manager
• Editor
• Research Co-ordinator
• Technical Support - IT and Electronic Resources
• Presentation Coordinator
(Whilst all members of the team will be responsible for the finished and submitted output of
the assessment, there will inevitably be individuals within the group who have skill and abilities
that are better suited to certain project roles. It is up to the group to identify and allocate
tasks accordingly. THIS IS NOT A CASE OF 4 PEOPLE EACH INDIVIDUALLY WRITING 500
WORDS AND THEN SUBMITTING AS A 2000 WORD DOCUMENT)
It is important that you use news, periodical and other academic references in your
report & presentation (LO1, LO2, LO3). Merely quoting & reproducing the corporate PR
messages copied from an organisation’s website is not sufficient: the key to this report is in
the intelligent use of academic and periodical references (LO1, LO3), used in conjunction with
the research of an organisation operating in a difficult and uncertain climate (LO4) as well as
the structure and presentation of your findings in order to demonstrate at threshold level that
you can communicate effectively in a format appropriate to the discipline and report practical
procedures in a clear and concise manner (LO1, LO2).
You should structure your report as follows:
Structure
• Title Page - The precise title of the report is to be typed on the cover. Below this the
statement, “Submitted for the attention of {your seminar / workshop tutors name}. In
partial fulfilment of the requirements for the {your degree programme} (e.g. BA (hons)
in Marketing / BA (hons) Marketing with Psychology), University of Portsmouth”. Below
this should be the name of the unit and the student number for each member of the
group. The names of individual students should NOT be on the report.
• Executive Summary - a summary of the key points from the whole report, usually
about ½ page long.
• Contents Page
5

6. • List of Tables & Figures
• List of Abbreviations
• Introduction
• The main body of the report - ‘main body’ is not a title you should use, the group
should decide the titles of the headings used within the document. The document
SHOULD NOT be written in the ‘first person’ such as “I think…” or “we think…”. The
document should be written in the third person.
• Conclusions
• Recommendations
• References - in Harvard APA format
• Appendices - These may include tables, schedules, documents or long explanatory
notes, which have been referred to in the text but which, if included there, would break
the continuity of the argument. All appendices should have a title and the source should
also be given if appropriate. Titles of appendices should be the same as those used in
the text. It is also important when preparing the report to make sure that material is
not included in the text, which should be placed in an appendix and vice versa. The
Appendices are not a ‘dumping ground’ for pertinent material which would
have been included in the main report if the indicative word length was
greater.
• Group Timetable and Meeting Reports (see Appendix 1 & Appendix 2)
Format
• Page - A4, with 1in (2.54cm) margins, top, bottom, left and right
• Font - ‘Verdana’ size 10
• Paragraphs - should be numbered, ‘justified’ and have 1.5 line spacing
References / Sources
Each group is expected to use a minimum of,
• 1 Marketing Text Book
• 10 News or Periodical Articles
• 5 Academic Journal Articles
In addition to the standard format report above, each group will also submit a copy
of all the references used in the report. Those references should be filed clearly using
Harvard APA alphabetically A-Z. The copy of references / sources may be submitted
on disc in an electronic format.
• Books - where a book is referenced the group are required to submit a photocopy of
the front cover.
• Printed Journal articles and News - in the case of printed Journal and news articles
the first page should be copied and submitted.
• Electronic Journal articles and News - in the case of information sourced
electronically then a full copy of the article or page of the website should be included.
Literary Quality and Editing
In addition to the quality of content, students are expected to achieve a high standard of
presentation. The work must be effectively and neatly arranged and written clearly and lucidly
- free from major spelling and punctuation errors.
Responsibility for the finished report rests entirely with the group and therefore every aspect
(including typing) must be carefully checked and thoroughly edited. A careless report
containing numerous spelling, punctuation and typing errors will lose marks in terms of
academic scholarship.
The Marketing Report deadline is on Friday 10th December 2010.
The submission date for coursework is Friday 10th December 2010, and should be
handed in to the Undergraduate Centre in Richmond Building on or before that date.
6

7. We aim to make marked assignments available for collection by Monday 24th
January 2011. Marks should be on the Student Portal shortly afterwards. If there is
an unavoidable delay in completing the marking process, a message will be placed
on the Unit Victory site to inform you of the delay and indicating when work will be
available for collection.
Presentations will take place during week 12 of Semester 1 (13/12/2010)
Students must submit one paper copy and one electronic copy (MS Word format) of the
Marketing Report. Failure to submit a valid electronic copy will result in failure of the
assignment.
The electronic copy may be submitted to an online plagiarism checking service for comparison
against Internet content and individual submissions including those submitted by students
in the current and previous years.
In accordance with the University’s Assessment Regulations, work submitted after the
published submission date, but within two weeks of the due date or the end of the semester
(which ever is the sooner) will be marked. The mark awarded will be capped at the unit pass
mark of 40% but the uncapped mark will also be shown on the work. Work submitted later
than two weeks will be marked but a mark of zero will be recorded. Where an Extenuating
Circumstances Form is submitted and accepted, then assessment penalties may be waived.
The REFERRAL AND DEFERRAL REQUIREMENTS consist of an individual 2000 word
essay issued at the start of the referral period (04/07/2011 - 22/07/2011).
Students must submit one paper copy and one electronic copy (MS Word format) of the
Referral / Deferral. Failure to submit a valid electronic copy will result in failure of the
assignment.
7

8. Assessment Marking Criteria
The criteria used to assess the Marketing Report will be:
Description & Evaluation of the UK Higher Education Sector (20%)
Use of academic concepts and theories (20%)
Academic Scholarship (40%)
Class Presentation (20%)
Marking Criteria
Description & Evaluation of the UK Higher Education Sector (20%)
Description of the UK Higher Education Market
Breadth and depth of information Higher Education / University marketing activities
Use of supporting materials
Additional Marking Notes:
There are two likely / expected approaches to this assessment which may be taken by the
student groups. The first is a general ‘overview’ of marketing activities following the core
structure of the Marketing L1 unit (U16690). The second approach is likely to involve a level of
concentration or focus on a particular area of the unit or activity in which case there will need
to be justification for the topic area of choice in light of the Higher Education market so that
the marker is able to understand the choices made and the students are able to ‘sit’ the
chosen area within the broader marketing environment. Either approach is equally valid,
however, concentrating on one particular area will require the student group to present and
describe activities at a more detailed level in these circumstances.
Questions that may assist when judging the submitted piece of work:
Has there been good use of secondary sources?
• Mintel Reports
• Financial Reports
• Periodicals
• Other accepted sources available via the library
Does the report show a clear understanding of the market?
Poor answers will lack a range of objective and credible sources, restating corporate marketing
literature with little attempt to broaden information from a range of materials.
Mid range answers will set the scene but lack either a rational structure or be limited in scope
in terms of secondary sources.
Good Answers will display a range of the above points demonstrating a true understanding of
the market and the issues it is facing in light of changes to funding.
Use of academic concepts and theories (20%)
The extent to which academic materials have been incorporated
Depth of reading and application
Relevance of the content
Additional Marketing Notes:
As a Level one unit operated in conjunction with Marketing L1 (U16690) and other units,
students will have been introduced to numerous different models and frameworks. In many
cases it is unlikely that all will be presented. With this in mind however, it is likely, due to the
nature of the unit and the attention they were given that certain key models are likely to be
incorporated. It is also possible (and encouraging) that other models may be used that have
been introduced by other units on the student’s degree programmes. This section is looking for
a clear theoretical underpinning that enables the student to interpret and evaluate as
objectively as they can, market activities.
8

9. There should be reference to journal and periodical or news articles as well as specific
pertinent passages from the core text. The students may well make reference to other
marketing textbooks.
Although this is a reasonably ‘hands on’ assessment, academic theory should not be ignored.
To rely solely on content from lecture slides is really insufficient for all but the lowest range of
marks.
Given the maximum word limit, large descriptive passages about a particular model should be
left to the appendices, if included at all. Discussion or debate and argument surrounding the
choice of a model and its ease of application however is welcomed as it demonstrates what,
why, & how a model or framework was implemented.
Academic Scholarship (40%)
Logical reasoning, analysis and debate
Quality and depth of appraisal and interpretation of both the market and academic /
periodical / news materials
The logic and rationale for the adopted structure
The clarity of the points made
Correct use of Harvard referencing style
Additional Marketing Notes:
Moving forward through the assessment the students will have to bring together both the
academic, objective observation and application of their chosen methods in order to determine
what the market has done / is doing.
The important element to judge is how the answer was arrived at with clear thought
processes, structure, and synthesis of both the underpinning theory and its practical
application. Excellent answers will also demonstrate an appreciation for the less ‘fun’ elements
of academia such as the Financial position of organisations, the effects of and on of Human
Capital in the organisation, as well as resources and capabilities of the organisation.
This is a report and a marketing assessment and as such, the way in which the document is
presented (marketed to the reader) is important. Is there a clear structure, with pages
numbered and contents pages etc.? Is there good use of pagination and white space? There
should be careful but full use of diagrams and where applicable pictures used in explanation
and assessment of activities. There should be no doubt in the readers mind, where they are in
the document, what the market does / has done.
Due to the nature of the report, and the amount of information that is likely to come from the
Internet, the use of Harvard APA at this level of study is vital.
Class Presentation (20%)
Structure / Time keeping
Use of support materials and technology
Content
Contribution of all members
The ability to present is a vital component of both business and academic employability. Each
group will be given 15 minutes in which to present the findings of their report followed by an
opportunity to answer any questions that the marker may have. Presentations will follow a
strict time limit and as such those groups that present too quickly are likely to receive lower
marks than those who use the time most effectively. Short presentations (10 minutes or less)
clearly will not have used the time sufficiently; however presentation will be stopped at 15
minutes and only content presented will be marked so those groups that run out of time will
not be in a position to present full findings and may receive a low mark accordingly.
It is vital therefore that groups practise their presentation timings and familiarise
themselves with the various technologies and presentation aids available to them.
ALL members of the group are expected to contribute during the presentation.
9

10. Programme of Work: Workshop & Seminar Sessions
Week Week Workshop Topic Reading
No. Com
Unit Introduction / Team working and Time
1 27/09 Unit Handbook
Management Skills
Academic and Periodical Marketing Resources /
2 04/10 Harvard Referencing Leaflet
Harvard Referencing
3 11/10 Plagiarism / Assessment: Project Planning Appendix 4
Billingham (2003), Seely
4 18/10 Report Writing and Presentation Skills
(2002)
5 25/10 Interpreting information - Case: Wikipedia Wikipedia Case study
Case: The Independent Review of Higher Higher Education Funding and
6 01/11
Education Funding and Student Finance Student Finance Case
7 08/11 Case: Political Environment Political Case Study
Chapleo (2007) & Tauber
8 15/11 Journal Review/ Assessment Workshop
(1972)
9 22/11 SWOT Analysis / Assessment Workshop SWOT notes
Billingham (2003), Seely
10 29/11 Optional Group Assessment Workshop
(2002)
11 06/12 Presentation Rehearsal / Preparation
12 13/12 Class Presentations
10

11. Individual Class Information
Week 1 Unit Introduction / Team working and Time
W/b 27/09/10 Management Skills
Essential Reading Aim
To introduce The Marketing Environment Unit and the importance
Unit Hand book of teamwork and time management skills that are necessary not
only for this unit but for academic study in general.
At the end of the session, students should;
1. Understand the assessment requirements of the unit
2. Know who the other members of their group are.
3. Have familiarised themselves with Google docs and the associated technologies
available to them to assist with their assessment requirements
4. Produced a generic group timetable of academic and social / work commitments of
group members to enable them to plan study time outside the classroom environment.
5. Have identified areas for their own development in order to successfully orchestrate
their assessment report.
Relevant articles
Workshop Activity
1. Introduction to The Marketing Environment Unit and associated Assessment - Marketing
Report & Presentation.
2. Allocation of working groups
3. Discussion of Google docs
4. Production of working group timetable
5. Introduction and familiarisation with Group Meeting Report Form.
6. Introduction to learning contract
In your own time for the next workshop
1. In preparation for the next workshop read the unit handbook.
2. Decide as a group what responsibilities each member will have and the reasons why.
3. Visit the University of Portsmouth’s Library Website area for marketing subjects - Within
your groups prepare a list of questions or areas you would like clarified to assist you
with finding information about your chosen organisation.
4. Visit http://referencing.port.ac.uk/apa/index.html and try to find out how to reference
different types of sources. What would be the correct way to reference a quotation from
your core Marketing L1 (U16690) textbook compared to a television programme?
Online Learning Resources
http://www.port.ac.uk/library/subject/marketing/
http://www.youtube.com/GoogleDocsCommunity
http://services.google.com/apps/resources/overviews_breeze/DocsSpreadsheets/index.html
11

12. Notes:
In your designated groups of 4 or 5 (if necessary) use Appendix 1 on page 31 to enter the
committed times for all members of the group to determine when your are all free to meet
outside of class time to work on the assessment for this unit. The timetable ranges for all 7
days of the week from 9am to 9pm and should include external commitments such as part
time work / sports and even social events. If on completion, there appears to be no slot
available by all members then it is expected that something WILL HAVE to be sacrificed so
consider social commitments in light of this.
Each Group should also familiarise with Appendix 2: Group Meeting Report which should be
used to record the meetings of the group over time and the actions and responsibilities of each
member.
Appendix 3: Group Contact Details on page 33 allows each member of the group to record
other members details for reference should they need to.
12

13. Week 2 Academic and Periodical Marketing Resources / Harvard
W/b 04/10/10 Referencing
Essential Reading Aim
To familiarise students with the range of marketing resources
Harvard Referencing available and assist with the process of referencing those materials in
Leaflet (available online, the correct way for current and future assessments.
see below)
At the end of the session, students;
1. Should be familiar with a range of available reference materials
2. Should be able to reference those materials in the correct way in assessments.
Relevant articles
Workshop Activity
1. Introductions by each group on their chosen responsibilities.
2. Review / Question and answer session on sources of information from the library
website.
3. Harvard APA Citation and Referencing exercise
4. Introduction to Academic Articles, Databases & Endnote Web
In your own time for the next workshop
1. Read Appendix 4: Plagiarism: the pandemic of Universities or an accepted component
of Higher Education on page 34 and prepare answers in your groups to the questions
that follow it.
Online Learning Resources
http://referencing.port.ac.uk/apa/index.html
Notes
Citation and referencing exercise
In order to achieve good grades, you must not only learn well, you must also be able to
communicate your learning in such a way that those who mark your work can be satisfied that
you have mastered what you have studied.
In the early stages of your course, this may entail little more than demonstrating that you can
recall some basic concepts and related terminology, but you will soon find that you are being
asked to show that you can exercise judgement, develop arguments and draw conclusions
from relevant evidence.
During your course, you will be asked to present work in a variety of formats that may include
short and long exam answers, essays, reports, oral presentations, video presentations and
web pages. Though each format imposes its own disciplines, there are some general principles
that you should strive for in all the work that you present for assessment. In particular, you
should aim always to produce work that is relevant, authoritative and convincing.
These important attributes are largely derived from the way in which you make use of the
13

14. work of others. It is not possible for you to discover from your own first-hand observation all
that you will learn at the Business School. Instead, you will benefit from the fact that many
hundreds of people have devoted many years to reaching a better understanding of the
business world. You will draw upon their work and possibly extend it in due course. In order
to do so, you must learn to be critical of other people’s ideas. Not all are of equal merit; some
may simply be wrong; some may not have stood the test of time; some may be right in one
context but not in others. Then you must learn to present your synthesis of their ideas in a
way that will stand up to the same sort of critical scrutiny.
Consider the following statements about an imaginary medication called Brand A:
1. “Brand A is the best.” (from the manufacturer’s TV advertisement)
2. “Celebrity Sue Superstar always uses Brand A.” (from an article in a celebrity magazine)
3. “500 of our readers preferred Brand A to Brand B.” (from an article in a popular health
and lifestyle magazine)
4. “After a six-month clinical trial involving 500 patients, 60% recovered completely and
30% showed partial relief from symptoms. In 10% of cases, there was no improvement
or some deterioration in the condition. Of the 500 patients in the placebo control group,
5% showed partial relief from symptoms, 85% deteriorated and 10% died.” (from an
article in a medical journal)
The statements may all be true, but are they equally convincing? Which is most persuasive
and why? Which would you include in an academic argument advocating Brand A? How would
you then ensure that readers of your argument found it convincing?
You should by now be starting to appreciate the value of making effective use of the work of
others by judiciously selecting it as evidence to support your own report. It is important that
you know how to cite and reference the sources of evidence in accordance with good academic
practice, so that your readers are able to locate them easily and confirm that they agree with
your interpretation. This will add authority to your work and enable you to avoid the risk of
committing plagiarism.
The referencing system used in the Portsmouth Business School is the Harvard Format APA
Style.
An interactive introduction to Harvard Format APA Style referencing can be found in
Referencing@Portsmouth at http://referencing.port.ac.uk/apa/index.html
Detailed guidance can be found in
Bibliographic References: Harvard Format – APA Style. This is available as a free booklet from
the University Library and at http://www.port.ac.uk/library/guides/filetodownload,
68727,en.pdf (Rather than typing the full URL, try entering ‘Harvard’ in the search tool on the
University home page).
Imagine that a lecturer has asked you to write a short report on an organisation of your choice
and the way the recession has affected it’s marketing. The lecturer has suggested that you use
a range of source available to you such as newspapers, periodical articles and articles from
journals or a website.
What would be the correct way to reference a quotation from your core textbook
compared to a television programme?
14

15. Week 3 Plagiarism / Assessment: Project Planning
W/b 11/10/10
Essential Reading Aim
To understand what plagiarism is and how it can be avoided. To
Appendix 3 page 33 review progress on the assessment and group work being carried out
in additional to classroom time.
At the end of the session students;
1. Should be able to define plagiarism in their own words and understand the seriousness
with which it is treated within the academic environment.
2. Should have a clear plan of action in terms of the assessment deadline and other
academic commitments.
Relevant articles
Workshop Activity
1. Discuss the questions relating to Appendix 5: Plagiarism: the pandemic of Universities
or an accepted component of Higher Education on page 35
2. Review / feedback within groups progress with the assessment coursework.
3. Use the session to record an Appendix 2: Group Meeting Report and a list of actions as
outlined on page 32
4. Introduction to MS Word and Document Templates, Styles and Formatting
5. Introduction to News and Periodical Article Sources
In your own time for the next workshop
1. Collate all materials so far for the assessment and bring them with you to the next
workshop.
2. Prepare a template document in a word processor with the underlying headings you
propose to use for the report in the correct format as specified in the assessment
criteria.
3. Prepare a short (4 PowerPoint slides) of the group’s findings so far, which can be
presented to the class.
Online Learning Resources
Notes
The purpose of the workshop is to elicit debate surrounding the issues associated with
plagiarism and the availability of Turnitin software to ‘assist’ with the learning process.
It is also an opportunity time permitting for discussion of assessment progress and issues that
the groups may be having.
15

16. Week 4 Report Writing and Presentation Skills
W/b 18/10/10
Essential Reading Aim
To allow student the opportunity to present in a class environment
Billingham (2003), Seely and receive feedback on style and manner of presentation before any
(2002) formal assessment later in the semester
At the end of the session, students should be able to;
1. Understand the skills required for effective presentations
2. Identify area for personal development in presentation skill
Relevant articles
Workshop Activity
1. Introduction to the Marketing Report. Short class presentations of progress so far.
2. Feedback and debate of presentation styles and the use of visual aids
3. Review of working group progress and feedback from seminar tutor and other groups.
In your own time
1. Read the articles below regarding Wikipedia and prepare your thoughts to following
statement.
“Wikipedia is an acceptable online resource for researching our coursework.”
Online Learning Resources
Notes
Apart from short presentations by each group at the front of class and generic feedback from
tutors on all presentations, groups should work together to assess and debate progress so far
on their chosen organisations, to develop / highlight areas of good practice and areas for
further attention.
Any issues surrounding the use of IT and software applications need to be highlighted to
enable the unit co-ordinator to produce podcasts that are relevant and specific to group needs
rather than a “Microsoft Word for Dummies” trying to cover all aspects but with little applicable
content for the students concerned.
16

17. The Daily Telegraph (London)
February 12, 2009 Thursday
Wikipedia war over Titian's age follows Commons clash
BYLINE: Jon Swaine
SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 2
A CONSERVATIVE Party worker edited the Wikipedia entry about Titian yesterday, minutes
after David Cameron sought to embarrass Gordon Brown over the artist's age.
Last month Mr Brown attempted to explain that the present financial crisis was
unprecedented by alluding to the artist, "who reached the age of 90'', and completed nearly
100 paintings.
The Prime Minister noted that the artist "said at the end of it, 'I'm finally beginning to learn
how to paint', and that is where we are''.
At Prime Minister's Questions Mr Cameron said: "The Prime Minister never gets his facts
right: he told us the other day he was like Titian aged 90. The fact is, Titian died at 86.''
Four minutes after the end of PMQs yesterday the entry for the artist - which stated that
the artist lived between 1485 and 1576, indicating Mr Brown's statement could have been
correct - was changed to give the date of his death as 1572. The editor's IP address - the
unique numbers identifying internet users - belonged to a computer in Conservative Campaign
Headquarters.
A Tory party spokesman said: "An over-eager member of staff took it upon himself to put
right an incorrect entry.''
There is no academic consensus on the dates. Contemporary scholars believe Titian was
born some time in the late 1480s, while the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, among
others, states he died in 1576.
The Independent (London)
August 27, 2009 Thursday
First Edition
17

18. Why has Wikipedia changed editorial policy, and will it improve the website?; The big
question
BYLINE: AMOL RAJAN
SECTION: COMMENT; Pg. 32
Why are we asking this now?
Wikipedia, the online encyclopaedia launched by American entrepreneur Jimmy Wales in
2001 with the idealistic intention of being an online repository of all human knowledge,
announced this week that it would have to abandon one of its founding principles. To combat a
growing amount of vandalism on the website, a two-month trial is being initiated whereby
entries will be edited before they go up on the site. Previously, any user was allowed to make -
almost - any change to any entry: this was hailed as part of the democratising power of the
internet. But a sharp increase in false information - particularly in relation to people still alive -
has forced a rethink.
What exactly will the new editors do?
The new policy is referred to as "flagged revisions". It allows editors to adjudicate (mainly
through reference to other news sources) on changes made to the pages of a living person.
The flagged revisions will be rolled out over the next fortnight, and Wikimedia, the non-profit
organisation that runs the website, will monitor users responses over the
trial period.
A team of "experienced volunteer editors" will oversee amendments to such pages,
Wikimedia representatives said. "We are no longer at the point where it is acceptable to throw
things at the wall and see what sticks", said Michael Snow, chairman of the Wikimedia board.
And Mike Peel, its UK spokesman, clarified the intention: "Anyone can continue to edit these
articles, but the work of inexperienced editors with less than three days' experience will be
subject to review by more experienced editors", he said. "This is our attempt to create a buffer
to ensure that editors do not commit acts of vandalism."
How did the Wikipedia work before?
Wales has been feted as a brilliant business mind and social innovator for tapping into a
popular impulse to add to public knowledge that few people knew existed, and even fewer
publicly predicted. Wikipedia still works largely by allowing anybody to login as a user and click
on an "Edit this page" tab at the top of an entry. From there it's simply a case of making
changes and saving them, albeit according to a policy on "biographies of living persons". Any
changes are then filed under the "Edit history" of the page, and the IP address - a numbered
identity that shows where the change has been made from - is also kept on record. Pages that
contain unverified information are highlighted.
In terms of sheer scale, the existence of Wikipedia has helped popularise the notion that
the internet is awash with seemingly infinite information. There are limits to how reasonable
this view is, of course, and certainly Wikipedia is far from infinite. But with more than three
million English language articles alone, covering anything from different species of caterpillar
to the cast of minor Australian television shows, and with some entries running to several
thousand words, the volume of information is extraordinary. Since all of it has to be sourced,
and therefore accounted for in some way, much of it is reliable. And, given it is one of the most
popular websites in the world, with around 65 million users each month, its utility is difficult to
underestimate. There are 10 million registered users worldwide on the English language pages,
and, in all, there are around 13 million articles in 260 languages.
What errors forced the rethink?
It is ironic that the changes should be announced the same day that Ted Kennedy died,
given the controversy over an article about the Senator from last year, when he was taken
gravely ill at President Obama's inauguration, but survived, inaccurately reported his death.
That was the most high-profile error but there have been countless others, only some of which
come to public attention. Robbie Williams was briefly described as "eating hamsters for a living
in and around Stoke". Vernon Kay was listed dead from a yachting accident, causing the
television presenter to ring panicked relatives. David Beckham was said to keep goal for an
18th-century football team; Tony Blair, an update from February 2006 reported, kept posters
of Hitler on his bedroom wall. Last September, singer Miley Cyrus was falsely described as
18

19. having died in a car crash, much to the dismay of her fans, while the village of Denshaw in
Greater Manchester was described as "the home to an obese population of sun-starved, sheep-
hurling yokels with a brothel for a pub and a lingering tapeworm infection".
And when David Cameron admonished Gordon Brown in Prime Minister's Questions for not
knowing the date of the painter Titian's death, he in fact got the date wrong himself, only for
some ambitious Tory apparatchik to be exposed changing the Titian entry online in a bid to
protect his leader, which in turn drew further attention to Cameron's faux pas.
Haven't they been doing that for a while?
"Flagged revisions" have already been in operation on the German version of the website
for over a year. And representatives of Wikimedia have been playing down the significance of
this change, claiming it is only a slight extension of a policy that is already in place, and
therefore not a wholesale re-evaluation of its founding philosophy. To some extent this is true:
the website did employ editors already, and demands that information be well sourced, and
edit histories be comprehensible, shows a commitment to reliability from the outset. On the
other hand, this week's announcement does suggest that the presumption on certain articles
has changed. So numerous have the errors on the pages for living persons become that the
presumption is now one of incorrect information that needs to be checked.
Ultimately, Wikipedia embodies a play-off between accuracy and accessibility. In the past,
managers of the website have appeared to prize the latter ahead of the former. The latest
changes don't reverse this inclination, but do suggest a willingness to compromise. This won't
assuage the most trenchant critics of the website, but it may go some way to convincing them
that its pioneering founders don't have a blatant disregard for history.
Won't this put people off from contributing?
Inevitably, imposing restrictions on the freedom with which contributors can edit pages will
inhibit some from doing so. The new policy seems to suggest that while all editors are equal,
some are more equal than others. Wikipedia executives can (and do) argue that given this new
procedure applies only to a very small range of pages, there's no need to think that millions of
other contributors - who take care on updating entries relating to butterfly migrations, or
theories of time travel, for example - would be in any way disincentivised. Theories suggesting
this may be the beginning of the end of Wikipedia therefore seem premature, and not least
because the website has just received $2m (£1.24m) from a philanthropic fund set up by eBay
founder Pierre Omidyar, to help expand its network of volunteers.
a.rajan@independent.co.uk
Will new restrictions on editing pages make Wikipedia a better resource?
Yes...
• Errors relating to the entries on people that are still alive will not get published on the
page
• By sending a signal to users about accuracy, those tempted to vandalise other pages
may be put off
• The system has been a success in Germany and any new editors could be used to check
other entries too
No...
• The vast majority of pages are not subject to the restrictions imposed on pages about
living people
• Erecting barriers to users could put off people who might otherwise have edited entries,
or added new ones
• The new measures contradict Wikipedia's founding principles, where accessibility was
paramount
19

20. Week 5 Interpreting information
W/b 25/10/10
Essential Reading Aim
To assist students in the evaluation of different information sources
Wikipedia Case study and their use / acceptability in the academic context.
At the end of the session, students should be able to;
1. Understand a range of different sources available to them.
2. Assess the applicability of different sources in an academic context
Relevant articles
Workshop Activity
1. Wikipedia Case study.
2. Discussion of alternative resources
In your own time for the next workshop
1. Read the case study supplied in class on the economic climate and prepare answers the
stated questions.
Online Learning Resources
Notes,
In addition to the Wikipedia case, the unit co-ordinator will also distribute a case study
regarding the The Independent Review of Higher Education Funding and Student Finance for
use in wk 6.
20

21. Week 6 Case: The Independent Review of Higher Education
W/b 01/11/10 Funding and Student Finance
Essential Reading Aim
Consider the marketing environment in the context of the
Economic Climate Case Independent Review of Higher Education Funding and Student
Study Finance and the effect that is has on Higher Education marketing.
At the end of the session, students should be able to;
1. Understand that organisations do not work in isolation
2. Appreciate numerous factors and key individuals that affect the trading conditions in
which organisations operate
Relevant articles
Workshop Activity
1. Case study analysis.
2. Application of key economic factors affecting chosen organisation
3. Identification of evidential sources of information to assist with the point above
In your own time for the next workshop
1. Read the case study supplied on class on the political environment & national statistics
and prepare answers the stated questions.
Online Learning Resources
Notes,
The unit co-ordinator will also make distribute a case study regarding the political environment
for use in wk 7.
21

22. Week 7 Case: Political Environment / Case: National Statistics
W/b 08/11/10
Essential Reading Aim
Consider Marketing concepts in the context of the broader political
Political Environment environment and the effect that is has on organisational marketing.
Case Study
At the end of the session, students should be able to;
1. Describe the key differences in political arguments offered by individuals in the UK
2. Understand the use of statistical information to justify an argument or perspective
Relevant articles
Workshop Activity
1. Case study analysis.
2. Application of key Political factors affecting chosen organisation
3. Identification of evidential sources of information to assist with the point above
In your own time for the next workshop
1. Update assessment and collate any questions you may have for the tutor.
2. Locate and read the following journal article Tauber, E. M. 1972. Marketing Notes and
Communications. Why Do People Shop? Journal of Marketing. 36, 46 - 59.
3. Locate and read the following journal article Chapleo, C. 2007. Barriers to brand
building in UK universities? International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Marketing. 12, 1, 23-32.
Online Learning Resources
22

23. Week 8 Journal Review / Assessment Workshop
W/b 15/11/10
Essential Reading Aim
This week looks at journal articles and their contribution to
Tauber (1972) organisations operating outside the academic environment.
At the end of the session, students should be able to;
1. Appreciate the limitations of research articles
2. Assess reference materials in light of the above
Relevant articles
Workshop Activity
1. Identify the key points or arguments raised by the author in the article Tauber, E. M.
1972. Marketing Notes and Communications. Why Do People Shop? Journal of
Marketing. 36, 46 - 59
2. To what extent does the journal assist marketing decisions in the business world today?
3. To what extent do you agree with the following quote,
“grocery shopping is a customary activity of the housewife. Attempts to eliminate "food
shopping" through home delivery and telephone order have to date been relatively
unsuccessful. Apparently, the process of grocery shopping has positive utility for a large
segment of women who view it as an integral part of their role.” Tauber 1972, page 47
4. Highlight the key points made in the article Chapleo, C. 2007. Barriers to brand building
in UK universities? International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing.
12, 1, 23-32.
5. Continuing development of the Assessment Report.
In your own time
1. Read the notes below regarding “The SWOT Analysis”. In your groups prepare a SWOT
analysis of the University of Portsmouth Business School for discussion next week.
Online Learning Resources
Notes
Read the following explanation of the SWOT Analysis taken from Have, S., Have, W.; Stevens,
F.; van der Elst, M. 2003. Key Management Models. FT Prentice Hall.
SWOT Analysis
The big idea
Any company undertaking strategic planning will at some point assess its strengths and
weaknesses. When combined with an inventory of opportunities and threats in (or even
beyond) the company's external environment, the company is effectively making what is called
a SWOT analysis: establishing its current position in the light of its strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities and threats.
23

24. When to use it
The first step in carrying out a SWOT analysis is to identify the said strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities and threats. It is important to note that strengths and weaknesses are intrinsic
(potential) value creating skills or assets, or the lack thereof, relative to competitive forces.
Opportunities and threats, however, are external factors: they are not created by the
company, but emerge as a result of the competitive dynamics caused by (future) 'gaps' or
'crunches' in the market.
Strengths
What is the company really good at? Do we benefit from an experienced sales force, or easy
access to raw materials? Do people buy our products (partly) because of our brand(s) or
reputation? Strengths are not: a growing market, new products, etc.
Weaknesses
Though weaknesses are often seen as the logical 'inverse' of the company's threats, the
company's lack of strength in a particular discipline or market is not necessarily a relative
weakness, providing (potential) competitors lack this particular strength as well.
Strengths and weaknesses can be measured in an internal or external audit, for example,
through benchmarking (see if you can find any information on a Benchmarking model).
Opportunities and threats occur as a result of external macroenvironmental forces such as
demographic, economic, technological, political, legal, social and cultural dynamics, as well as
external industry-specific environmental forces such as customers, competitors, distribution
channels and suppliers.
Opportunities
Are any technological developments or demographic changes taking place, or could demand
for your products or services increase as a result of successful partnerships? Can you perhaps
use assets in other ways, introduce your current products in new markets or turn R&D into
cash by licensing concepts, technologies or selling patents? There are many opportunities. The
level of detail and (perceived) degree of realism determine the extent of opportunity analysis.
Threats
Your competitor's opportunity may well be a threat to you. Also, changes in regulations,
substitute technologies and other forces in the competitive field may pose serious threats to
24

25. your company: lower sales, higher cost of operations, higher cost of capital, inability to make
break-even, shrinking margins or profitability, rates of return dropping significantly below
market expectations, etc.
Both opportunities and threats can be classified according to their potential impact and actual
probability, as illustrated below.
Listing the SWOT is not as easy as it seems. However, the second step of the SWOT analysis is
even more difficult: what actions should your company take based on its strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities and threats? Should you focus on using the company's strengths to
capitalize on opportunities, or acquire strengths in order to be able to capture opportunities?
Or should you actively try to minimize weaknesses and avoid threats? 'SO' and 'WT' strategies
are quite obvious. A company should do what it is good at when the opportunity arises and
steer clear of businesses that it does not have the competencies for. Less obvious and much
more daring are 'WO' strategies. When a company decides to take on an opportunity despite
not possessing the requisite strengths, it must either:
• develop the required strengths
• buy or borrow the required strengths
• outmanoeuvre the competition.
Companies that use 'ST' strategies essentially 'buy or bust' their way out of trouble. This
happens when big players fend off smaller ones by means of expensive price wars,
insurmountable marketing budgets, multiple channel promotions, etc. Some companies use
scenario planning to try and anticipate and thus be prepared for this type of future threat.
The final analysis
The value of a SWOT analysis lies mainly in the fact that it constitutes a self-assessment for
management. The problem, however, is that elements (SWOT) appear deceptively simple.
Actually deciding what the strengths and weaknesses of your organization are, as well as
assessing the impact and probability of opportunities and threats, is far more complex than at
first sight. Furthermore, beyond classification of the SWOT elements, the model offers no
assistance with the tricky task of translating them into strategic alternatives. The inherent risk
of making incorrect assumptions when assessing the SWOT elements often causes
management to dither when it comes to choosing between various strategic alternatives,
frequently resulting in unnecessary and/or undesirable delays.
25

26. Week 9 SWOT Analysis / Assessment Workshop
W/b 22/11/10
Essential Reading Aim
This week considers the use of a SWOT analysis and some of the
SWOT Analysis Notes difficulties of using what is sometimes seen as a ‘basic’ model.
At the end of the session, students should be able to;
1. Appreciate the complexities of carrying out a real SWOT analysis
2. Identify the links between a SWOT and other marketing topics covered in the
corresponding Marketing (L1) unit of study.
3. Link the issues highlighted in the SWOT analysis with referenced materials related to
the External and Internal operating environment
Relevant articles
Workshop Activity
1. Continuing development of the Assessment Report.
1. Discussion of SWOT analysis findings
In your own time
Online Learning Resources
26

27. Week 10 Assessment Report Workshop
W/b 29/11/10
Essential Reading Aim
To allow students to bring toegther and finalise the content of their
Billingham (2003), Seely assessment report and facilitate formative feedback from tutors
(2002)
At the end of the session, students should be;
1. Comfortable with the presentation, content, style and structure of the report
2. Aware of any further changes that are require to successfully present their findings of
their assessment coursework.
Relevant articles
Workshop Activity
1. Formative feedback and unit consolidation
In your own time
1. Finalise your reports within your groups in preparation for the assessed deadline.
Online Learning Resources
Notes
This is an optional workshop for students. It is an opportunity for them to make use of the
tutor. Tutors are not expected to meet and discuss this unit outside of class time.
27

28. Week 11 Presentation Workshop
W/b 06/12/10
Essential Reading Aim
To allow students to plan and test their presentation content and
Billingham (2003), Seely timings and facilitate formative feedback from tutors
(2002)
At the end of the session, students should be;
1. Comfortable with their presentation content, style and timings
2. Aware of any further changes that are require to successfully present their findings of
their assessment coursework.
Relevant articles
Workshop Activity
1. Preparation and testing of presentation format and timings.
In your own time
1. Finalise your presentations within your groups in preparation for the assessed
presentations.
Online Learning Resources
28

29. Week 12 Class Presentations
W/b 13/12/10
Essential Reading Aim
Allow student groups to present their report findings and to be
assessed.
At the end of the session, students;
1. Will have presented their reports and been assess by the tutor
Relevant articles
Workshop Activity
1. Presentation Assessment
2. Student Feedback Questionnaires
Online Learning Resources
29

30. Appendices
Appendix 1: Group Time Table Commitments ..................................................................31
Appendix 2: Group Meeting Report ................................................................................32
Appendix 3: Group Contact Details ................................................................................33
Appendix 4: U16794 The Marketing Environment Assessment Contract (2010) ....................34
Appendix 5: Plagiarism: the pandemic of Universityies or an accepted component of Higher
Education ..................................................................................................................35
30

31. Appendix 1: Group Time Table Commitments
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday
9-10 9-10 9-10 9-10 9-10 9-10 9-10
10-11 10-11 10-11 10-11 10-11 10-11 10-11
11-12 11-12 11-12 11-12 11-12 11-12 11-12
12-1 12-1 12-1 12-1 12-1 12-1 12-1
1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2
2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3
3-4 3-4 3-4 3-4 3-4 3-4 3-4
4-5 4-5 4-5 4-5 4-5 4-5 4-5
5-6 5-6 5-6 5-6 5-6 5-6 5-6
6-7 6-7 6-7 6-7 6-7 6-7 6-7
7-8 7-8 7-8 7-8 7-8 7-8 7-8
8-9 8-9 8-9 8-9 8-9 8-9 8-9
31

32. Appendix 2: Group Meeting Report
GROUP: LOCATION:
PERSONS PRESENT:
DATE OF MEETING:
Action / Person
Responsible
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
This meeting report has been produced as a representation of the agreed actions and
conversation that took place on the above date. If there are any statements that are not
accurate then these should be brought to the attention of the group immediately.
32

33. Appendix 3: Group Contact Details
Name Email Phone
33

34. Appendix 4: U16794 The Marketing Environment Assessment Contract (2010)
We the undersigned agree to the following terms below and will adhere to them throughout the
duration of the contract
• To make an equal contribution to the project and ensure that any contribution is
relevant to the project and to the highest quality possible.
• To hand in any work within the deadlines set within the assignment.
• To attend any meetings that will be arranged, whether these be workshops, lectures or
meetings arranged by the group outside of lectures.
• To stay in good communication with the rest of the group members and contact the rest
of the group within good time with any problems or questions.
Name 1 (HEMIS)
……………………………………………………………………………
Name 2 (HEMIS)
……………………………………………………………………………
Name 3 (HEMIS)
……………………………………………………………………………
Name 4 (HEMIS)
……………………………………………………………………………
Date: …………………………
34

35. Appendix 5: Plagiarism: the pandemic of Universities or an accepted component of
Higher Education
Abstract
Plagiarism is an area of academic discipline that has been given considerable attention by both
researchers and the popular press. Many have suggested ways in which it can be prevented,
deterred and detected, however, the recommendations of that attention rarely appear within
the working constraints of the Higher Educational environment. The document seeks to review
current findings and recommendations from the research and compare them with the
experiences of a new lecturer with a view to implementing changes in process and resources.
The findings of this document suggest that although plagiarism is clearly unacceptable, higher
education does accept its occurrence through either apathy, lack of time, technical expertise or
financial resource constraints.
Introduction
There is no doubt that Higher Education has undergone a number of changes in recent years,
and continues to change. Higher Education is no longer the place for a limited minority of
people based on social group or income; it is being actively pushed as a natural progression
from Further Education that all should have the opportunity to pursue if they wish. The
resulting increase in student numbers could be seen by differing parties as either good or bad;
but in essence the market that employs people from this resource pool have an ever widening
choice of candidates. This must inevitably increase the competition for graduate jobs placing
increased pressure on students to out perform their peers and distinguish themselves
(Bennett, 2005). It has also resulted in larger class sizes, reduced contact time with students
and arguably less control (Ashworth et al, 1997).
As with any organisation or business, changes in technology have led to the increased
availability of information and the birth of the Internet in particular has enabled ‘the many’ to
obtain information from numerous sources very efficiently regardless of geographical boundary
or time differences.
Since joining Higher Education as an Academic the author has noticed significant interest in
the area of plagiarism largely through the external media and some formal encounters in the
workplace. According to Underwood & Szabo (2003, 475) "academic dishonesty in this
technology-rich environment is a critical issue for Higher Education". It would appear, on initial
inspection that, plagiarism may be a cause for concern from an academic standpoint which
may require some form of change to take place at the University of Portsmouth, Business
School. If the literature is correct and, on average 30% of assessments are plagiarised
(Bennett, 2005; Underwood & Szabo, 2003; Zobel & Hamilton, 2002), clearly, many students
within the business school would appear to ‘getting away with it’ largely due the availability of
the Internet (Wood, 2004) and the University processes in place to deal with the issue.
Plagiarism may rightly be of concern to those graduate employers who shortlist candidates on
the basis of degree classification, because if the classification of the degree is based on
performance in assessments and those assessments are plagiarised then the student may well
have "little competence in the subject material" (Zobel & Hamilton, 2002, 23) or lack “the
academic skills of analysis and evaluation…” therefore being unable “… to synthesise ideas or
engage in rational argument.” (Bennett, 2005, 137). Also, “people who admitted to cheating
while at university have been found to be more likely to commit dishonest acts in employment
(Sims, 1995)” (Bennett, 2005, 137).
35

36. Aims & Objectives
It naturally follows that the topic of plagiarism requires further investigation to establish its
significance within the teaching and learning environment. In order to do this it is necessary to
answer a number of questions. Those questions are as follows:
• Why do students plagiarise assessments?
• How do students plagiarise assessments?
• Is plagiarism a problem at the Portsmouth University Business School?
• What strategies or procedures are in place within the University framework to
counteract plagiarism?
• What (if any) additional measures should be taken to reduce plagiarism?
• Is plagiarism an academic ‘crime’ or is it an inevitable element of modern higher
education that should be accepted?
Literature Review
It is not unusual for a literature review to start by engaging in a discussion surrounding the
definitions of key terms or phrases such as what is meant by plagiarism as in the case of
Austin & Brown (1999), Bennett (2005), Ercegovac & Richardson (2004), Gibelman & Gelman
(2003), Lampert (2004), Park (2003) Rosamond (2002), Saltmarsh (2004) and Woessner
(2004).
The definition used in the context of this document is taken from the University of
Portsmouth’s Glossary of Terms which states that,
Plagiarism occurs when one person submits another’s assignment as his or her own
work, or when a student uses the ideas or words of another writer without crediting
that person. (University of Portsmouth | glossary of terms, 2006)
The definition provided by the University of Portsmouth highlights the same issues that the
other definitions do, but a detailed discussion surrounding a definition does not give an
indication as to why plagiarism takes place.
It is clear from the literature that the underlying reasons for students plagiarising their work
can be placed in two distinct but related camps. One lies firmly with the students themselves
and the other lies with the Universities, the frameworks and procedures they employ to either,
deter, detect or deal with the issue of plagiarism.
Wood (2004, 238) suggests that students plagiarise partly because they do not understand the
term ‘paraphrase’ and receive mixed messages about what is and is not their work. There do
not apply the attention to detail required to source and reference material properly. They do
not generally place a value on their own work and as a consequence place little value on others
in terms of referencing. They are unable to critically evaluate anything giving equal weight to
all sources. An alternative view is held by Zobel & Hamilton (2002, 24) is that as the copying
of items such as software and music is acceptable in the broader environment, copying has
become acceptable in assessment work and that; students find the authoritative figures of
lecturers unapproachable relying on friends for assistance. The sharing of accommodation with
other students produces little ‘policing’ by the family unit or those that would stop the
individual. Zobel & Hamilton (2002) continue to cite other influences such as part time
employment and other activities leaving little time for academic work as students more and
more are, having to support themselves through the academic process; not wanting to appear
at a lower academic level than their peers, a view supported by Currie (1998, 2) who states
copying reflects less, an intentional violation of a cultural code than a survival
measure in the face of perceived difficulties or deficiencies Currie, (1998, 2)
36

37. Although Currie (1998) is primarily considering the viewpoint from an ‘international student’
perspective, all international students should have passed the necessary English requirements
to gain entry to the University programme in question.
Plagiarism may also be due to increased levels of competition between students as they battle
for the best marks possible in anticipation of entering a job market that expects 2:1 pass rates
or above. (Ashworth et al, 1997; Bennett, 2005; Park, 2004)
It is important however, to understand to some extent that plagiarism happens because
universities allow it to happen.
Plagiarism is too often treated arbitrarily, or with benign neglect. Its time
departments developed some proper professional processes to track it down and
punish it. (Zobel & Hamilton, 2002, 23)
A viewpoint substantiated by Underwood & Szabo (2003) who rightly point out that, if there is
little chance of getting caught and the value of passing is high then students are more likely to
do it, suggesting that students do not know if the staff are able to spot plagiarism or if they
are interested in spotting it. This does not take account of the enormous time it takes to prove
plagiarism.
the problem may have grown at least partly because of higher academic loads and
simply imposing further expectations on busy teaching staff would not succeed… …
a major cause of cheating has been lack of effective deterrence. . (Zobel, 2002,
23-24)
Lack of staff contact with students, large class sizes, an increase in group learning /
assessment strategies and the introduction of modularisation or ‘unitisation’ is also blamed
(Bennett, 2005; Ashworth et al, 1997).
Essentially cheating (which plagiarism is) is no longer seen as a ‘big deal’ (Groark et al, 2001).
There are various methods that students use to plagiarise. Paper mills, cutting and pasting
from other sources, asking assistance through internet channels such as newsgroups or chat
clients, methods which, are only constrained by the ability of the student concerned (Austin &
Brown, 1999, 22). Briggs (2003) however, argues that plagiarism in a ‘humanities’ setting is
often very different from that in a more scientific setting such as computer science, suggesting
that plagiarism should be considered from both a moral and ethical perspective.
Accepting that plagiarism does happen due to a number of factors, rather than a singular evil,
does not make it acceptable if students are to be assessed on academic content or research is
to be valued.
Once any organisation - small, independent journal or major university - decides to
investigate, it immediately confronts questions of what type of evidence will be
required to prove or disprove the allegation, whether such evidence exists and can
be obtained, and who should be required to supply or obtain it’ (LaFolette 1992).
(Zobel & Hamilton, 2002, 28)
The initial stages of detection and the collation of evidence are largely left to the individual
tutor concerned.
37

38. Schneider (1999) notes, ‘the real sticking point is time. Tracking down a plagiarist’s
sources can take days, sometimes weeks - time that professors can ill afford at the
end of a semester, when papers start flooding in.’ (Zobel & Hamilton, 2002, 29)
The time, stamina, and simple willingness of professors to do such cross-checking
is open to question. (Gibelman & Gelman, 2003, 240)
Academics may not and, in many cases do not have the resources or in some cases the skills
required to prove plagiarism through finding original text. (Larkham & Manns, 2002; Zobel &
Hamilton, 2002)
It is clear that as the use of the Internet becomes more widespread and its influence becomes
more imposing, that other software solutions inevitably ‘come to the rescue’ of bale agued
academics, however, the use of detection software could be seen to undermine the trust
relationship between the student and lecturer (Wood, 2004), assuming one exists in the first
place.
The detection of plagiarism should really be the last line of defence. Best practice would dictate
that prevention and deterrent is surely better than detection (Gibelman & Gelman, 2003). As
Sutherland-Smith, (2005, 83) states, "plagiarism is a multi-layered phenomenon
encompassing a spectrum of human intention." and as such it is reasonable to suggest that a
range of measures are necessary to limit its popularity. Surprisingly however,
Bear F. Braumoeller and Brian J. Gaines found that although verbal and written
warnings not to plagiarize had a negligible effect on rates of plagiarism, plagiarism
detection sotware, such as EVE and WordCHECK, proved to be successful in
discouraging students from plagiarizing. (Ercegovac, Z. & Richardson, 2004)
Clearly the introduction of plagiarism detection procedures supported by a range of penalties
has reduced the amount or plagiarism in some cases, but, those procedures and penalties
must remain consistent across a broad number of academics with differing opinions and
methods which is where problems can arise (Zobel & Hamilton, 2002; Briggs, 2003).
The literature surrounding the ‘policing’ or prevention of plagiarism is reasonably clear in terms
of the methods and practices suggested by various authors. Zobel & Hamilton (2002), Austin &
Brown, (1999), Scribner (2003), Hyland (2001), Groark et al (2001), Gibelman & Gelman
(2003), Ercegovac, Z. & Richardson (2004), Lampert (2004), Park (2003) and Briggs (2003)
suggest a recipe of measures to reduce the problem (see Table 1). The measures taken
singularly and with little preplanning might have little impact, but if taken together the results
could be enormous.
38

39. Measure Author
"promotion of appropriate study practices". Zobel & Hamilton (2002), Gibelman & Gelman,
(2003)
Require students to submit additional information Zobel & Hamilton (2002), Austin & Brown, (1999)
such as photocopies and proof of literature search
methods, rough drafts
ensure electronic submission to enable easy Zobel & Hamilton (2002)
checking
Let them know its happening and know the Zobel & Hamilton (2002), Gibelman & Gelman
consequences (2003)
Limit the references that the student can use so that Austin & Brown (1999)
it limits the possibility of plagiarism, test
understanding and argument.
Encourage the use of bibliographic software and Austin & Brown (1999)
introduce tests in class after submission to recall
knowledge to the written paper.
Use Plagiarism Detection software Ercegovac, Z. & Richardson (2004)
Ensure a consistent response Briggs (2003), Gibelman & Gelman (2003)
Hyland justifies cultural difference and stresses the Hyland (2001)
need for one to one formative feedback rather than
relying on written communication
"Research by Donald McCabe has indicated that Groark et al (2001, 43)
there is an inverse correlation between the rate of
plagiarism and the emphasis on academic integrity
by institutions or instructors."
“The university's policy on academic dishonesty Austin & Brown (1999, 23)
should be specific and direct, should define academic
dishonesty and should provide a process for
handling charges of academic dishonesty. The
university should publish the policy and distribute it
widely to both students and faculty. Copies of the
policy should be posted on the university web site, in
the library, student centers, dorms, and other
prominent places.”
Introduce Honour codes and instil ethical practice Gibelman & Gelman (2003), Austin & Brown (1999),
Ercegovac, Z. & Richardson (2004), Groark et al
(2001, 43), Lampert (2004), Park (2003)
Table 1: Plagiarism Prevention & Detection
Table 1 highlights the fact that there is no singular accepted method to prevent plagiarism.
Janowski (2002, 28) states that, “Plagiarism has always existed; the Internet has just made it
faster and easier”, a view supported by (Eastment, 2005). Carroll (2005, 4) suggests that
“most students fail to comply with regulations due to confusion or ignorance” but also accepts
that some students that do understand and “do it anyway”. Briggs (2003, 19) takes this view a
step further suggesting that plagiarism is a ‘complex issue’, the complexities of which have not
been fully considered.
Howard (1995, 788) states the copy and paste methodology is a “pedogogical opportunity, not
a juridical problem” and “To treat it negatively as a 'problem' to be 'cured' or punished, would
be to undermine its positive intellectual value thereby obstructing rather than facilitating the
learning process.”. This is view that would not appear to be upheld by other research or the
experiences of the author.
Ethical codes of conduct, is an area which has received some attention but this causes
significant problems for Academics when a minority would appear to ignore the values they are
meant to be advocating.
Expressions of outrage about student cheating are obviated by behavioural role
modelling of academic conduct (or misconduct). “Do as I say, not as I do,” is a poor
model of ethical behavior. (Gibelman & Gelman, 2003, 246)
39

40. Gibelman & Gelman (2003) rightly highlight that external media attention has focused not only
on students plagiarising but also on the plagiarist activities of some Academics. Academics also
plagiarise (Jones, 2001; Kock, 1999) and plagiarist activity solicits media attention. Plagiarism
clearly is of public interest, a straightforward search of the BBC News website highlights this
fact (see Appendix 1: BBC News Articles linked with Plagiarism).
Plagiarism at the University of Portsmouth
The University of Portsmouth has clear guidelines in relation to plagiarism set out in Hand Book
of Student Regulations (2005).
Although the University clearly define what plagiarism is and the procedures that should be
followed, little consideration is given to the time it takes to prove plagiarism. Although the
University does have a number of measures at its disposal the Hand Book of Student
Regulations (2005, 6) states, “Serious or repeated acts of plagiarism will result in the
requirement to appear before a disciplinary panel and a potentially substantial penalty, which
may include exclusion from the University.”
This statement can be (and probably is) interpreted in two ways; either as an insight into the
seriousness of the issue or alternatively, ‘it is Ok to plagiarise at least once’ or at worse ‘don’t’
get court more than twice’. The seriousness of the offence is not defined and is therefore open
to interpretation and differing methods of judgement by academics. Something that goes
against all the recommendations from previous research highlighted earlier.
During the course of the last year the author has carried out a small scale enquiry into
plagiarism within the Human Resource Management and Marketing Department. The enquiry
has largely taken the form of informal discussions with other Academics as well as the
discussion of plagiarism at Marketing Subject Group Meetings. In additional to this the author
purchased a piece or plagiarism detection software (EVE) and signed up for an online service
(www.mydropbox.com) to check assessments as the department does not at this time provide
those facilities. In addition to scanning documents for checking the author also checked all Post
Graduate Dissertations submitted electronically to the department for 2005 in Marketing
subjects.
The results (although not unsurprising) showed that a number of students had plagiarised their
dissertations. This does not suggest in anyway that the lectures concerned would not have
spotted such plagiarism but the consensus from the lecturers was that it was certainly quicker
and saved a significant amount of time in ‘proving beyond any reasonable doubt’ that the
dissertation was plagiarised.
In addition to this the author was at the receiving end of a dissertation from a student that he
believed was plagiarised. The document was scanned by the I.T. department (176 pages) and
uploaded to an online plagiarism checking service. The plagiarism service found nothing
suspicious. Convinced that the dissertation was plagiarised, largely because it was ‘too good’
given his knowledge of the student concerned, the author made further investigations. After
trying to contact persons and companies mentioned in the dissertation the author telephoned a
number of UK university libraries and marketing departments. Finally the author spoke to the
Head of the MBA programme at Southampton Solent who recognised the description of the
work given as belonging to a student who graduated from that programme a couple of years
earlier. Unfortunately the library at that institution could not locate a copy of the said
dissertation believing that it had been stolen. Luckily however the Head of Department was
able to obtain a second copy for comparison. The dissertations were identical. It transpired
that the sister of the Portsmouth student had access to the Southampton Solent library
through her employment with the institution although no accusation was made about this
connection. The student who consistently denied any plagiarism was subsequently excluded
without graduating from her degree.
This case does show that one should not rely on one technology, but it also shows the time
and effort required to prove such a case.
There is considerable consensus that International students plagiarise more readily that home
40

41. EU students often because of cultural differences in education. This may be the case some of
the time, but it may also be the case that they are just not as good at plagiarising compared to
other students.
The author has made a concerted effort to advertise the fact he uses plagiarism checking
software to the students he has contact with. This has resulted in various reactions ranging
from students being happy that something is finally being done to one student saying ‘oh,
shit!’. More importantly it has resulted in a reduction in the number of plagiarised assessments
he had had to deal with.
There are inconsistencies in the approach taken by the University to assessment. If a student
hands in an assessment after the submission date (without valid reason) but within two weeks
the mark is capped at 40%. After the two week period the mark is 0%. If a student plagiarises
an assessment they may get the mark reduced (something the marker often does anyway) or
possibly an opportunity to resubmit. Rarely do they fail outright, suggesting that to plagiarise
is not as serious as late submission?
Conclusions
Prime Minister Blair is well known for a delivering a speech that stated that the government
would be “tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime” (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/
uk_politics/3907651.stm). It is not unreasonable to regard plagiarism as a crime within Higher
Educational boundaries, and conclude that in order to truly deal with the issue it is necessary
to deal with the causes of plagiarism as well as ‘policing’ the consequences. Unfortunately it
would appear that some of the causes highlighted by authors are a direct result of the
University framework as much as it is the student. If plagiarism can in some part be attributed
to assessment design, unitisation, class sizes, lack of student contact, inconsistent handling by
academics, and a lack or resources to tackle such a problem when it does arise then,
universities are essentially guilty of undermining the academic standards they seek to uphold.
“Plagiarism is like an infectious disease and can spread rapidly amongst students, if
the environment is conducive.” (Balaram, 2005, 1353)
Universities (including Portsmouth) have limited budgets and resources. There are good
financial reasons why the business school recently built a lecture theatre that can hold 300
students at a time. The current university and economic environment ‘is conducive’ and is
enabling plagiarism to spread. Resources such as plagiarism detection software, and changes
to the culture of education in terms of class sizes and tutor contact time, the encouragement
of foreign students who in some cases understand little, and the promotion of unitisation under
the guise of ‘student choice’ may be seen by some as additional costs to the business that can
be ill afforded. Alternatively there may well be essential to the long term survival of everything
a true teacher holds dear.
“Plagiarism will certainly never be completely prevented though there will probably
always be a stream of media pundits who suggest simple ways to solve the
problem.”(Carroll, 2005, 6)
Recommendations
The purpose of this assessment was to answer the following,
• Why do students plagiarise assessments?
• How do students plagiarise assessments?
• Is plagiarism a problem at the Portsmouth University Business School?
• What strategies or procedures are in place within the University framework to
counteract plagiarism?
41

42. • What (if any) additional measures should be taken to reduce plagiarism?
• Is plagiarism an academic ‘crime’ or is it an inevitable element of modern higher
education that should be accepted?
Clearly there are a number of reasons as to how and why students (and academics) plagiarise
their work, reasons that have been highlighted in earlier parts of this document. Clearly
plagiarism is a problem within the Business School. The extent of the problem is still unknown
but given the levels of plagiarism highlighted at other institutions by previous research there is
no reason to believe that Portsmouth University is any better at prevention, deterrent, or
detection. The strategies currently in place are minimal, with references made to regulations
and some attempt to educate through the Academic Skills Unit and additional academic English
sessions for those students that want them. Little or no assistance however, is given to the
academic staff in the detection or collation of evidence to prove plagiarism exists.
Plagiarism detection software should be implemented as a matter of urgency. Assessment
processes should be changed to facilitate the checking of assessments centrally prior to
marking by a tutor. All students should be told (in no uncertain terms) about the use of such
software and the penalties for plagiarism. Penalties should be imposed such as fines (as in the
case of library books). There should be a code of ethics within the University that students
(and academics) adhere to and plagiarists should be named and shamed with notes made on
references to potential employers. Students should be encouraged to take additional classes in
academic writing and the technologies available to them without it becoming part of their
specific degree programme.
There has been a considerable body of research in recent years conducted around the subject
of plagiarism. A simple search of http://zetoc.mimas.ac.uk will produce in excess of 500
articles with plagiarism in their title.
Howard & Sharp (1983 p6) cited Bell (1999 p2) describe research as,
seeking through methodical processes to add to one’s own body of knowledge and,
hopefully, to that of others, by the discovery on non-trivial facts and insight.
The Microsoft Encarta Online English Dictionary defines research as the,
"methodical investigation into a subject in order to discover facts, to establish or
revise a theory, or to develop a plan of action based on the facts discovered"
Part of an Academic’s role within a university is to work towards publication in a research field.
Given the enormous body of knowledge available surrounding the issue of plagiarism it is very
difficult to understand why few appear to have taken sufficient notice of these findings. It
strongly suggests that plagiarism is accepted unless it’s easy to prove or there is current
interest from other parties such as the media. It does not however mean that plagiarism is
‘acceptable’ in whatever format it takes.
References
Ashworth, P., Bannister, P., & Thorne, P. (1997). Guilty in Whose Eyes? University Students'
Perceptions of Cheating and Plagiarism in Academic Work and Assessment. Studies in Higher
Education 22(2): 187-204..
Austin, M. J. and Brown, L. D. (1999). Internet Plagiarism: Developing Strategies to Curb
Student Academic Dishonesty. Internet and Higher Education 2(1): 21-34..
Balaram, P. (2005). Plagiarism: A Spreading Infection. Current Science 88: 1353-1354..
Bell, J. (1999). Doing your research project: a guide for first-time researchers in education.
3rd ed. Buckingham, Open University Press.
42

43. Bennett, R. (2005). Factors Associated with Student Plagiarism in a Post-1992 University.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 30: 137-162..
Briggs, R. (2003). Shameless! Reconceiving the Problem of Plagiarism. Australian Universities
Review 46(1): 19-23..
Carroll, J. (2005). Handling Student Plagiarism: Moving to Mainstream. Brooks ejournal of
Learning and Teaching, 1(2), 1-6. [Electronic Version]
http://www.brookes.ac.uk/publications/bejlt/volume1issue2/perspective/carroll.pdf!
Currie, P. (1998). Staying Out of Trouble: Apparent Plagiarism and Academic Survival. Journal
of Second Language Writing 7(1): 1-18.
Eastment, D. (2005). Plagiarism. Elt Journal 59(2): 183-184..
Ercegovac, Z. & Richardson, J.V. (2004). Academic Dishonesty, Plagiarism Included, in the
Digital Age: A Literature Review. College and Research Libraries 65(4): 301-319. [Electronic
Version]
http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/crljournal/crl2004/july/ercegovac.pdf
Gibelman, M. & Gelman S. R.(2003). Plagiarism in Academia: Trends and Implications.
Accountability in Research 10(4): 229-252..
Groark, M., Oblinger, D. & Choa, M. (2001). Term Paper Mills, Anti-Plagiarism Tools, and
Academic Integrity. Educause Review 36: 40-49..
Hand Book of Student Regulations (2005) [Electronic Version] Accessed 22/01/2006 http://
www.port.ac.uk/accesstoinformation/policies/academicregistry/filetodownload,10393,en.pdf
Hyland, F. (2001). Dealing with Plagiarism When Giving Feedback. Elt Journal 55(4): 375-381..
Janowski, A. (2002). Plagiarism: Prevention not Prosecution. The Book Report, Oct, 26-28.
Jones, E. L. (2001). Metrics Based Plagiarism Monitoring. Consortium for Computing in Small
Colleges, Middlebury, VT, Ccsc..
Kock, N. (1999). A Case of Academic Plagiarism. Communications- Acm 42(7): 96-104..
Lampert, L. D. (2004). Integrating )Discipline-Based Anti-Plagiarism Instruction Into the
Information Literacy Curriculum. Reference Services Review 32(4): 347-355..
Larkham, P., & Manns, S. (2002). Plagiarism and it's Treatment in Higher Education. Journal of
Further and Higher Education, 26(4), 339-349.
Microsoft Encarta Online English Dictionary:
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/research.html
Park, C. (2003). In Other (People's) Words: Plagiarism by University Students-Literature and
Lessons. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 28(5): 471-488..
Park, C. (2004). Rebels Without a Clause: Towards an Institutional Framework for Dealing with
Plagiarism by Students. Journal of Further and Higher Education 28(3): 291-306..
Rosamond, B. (2002). Plagiarism, Academic Norms and the Governance of the Profession.
Politics 22(3): 167-174..
Saltmarsh, S. (2004). Graduating Tactics: Theorizing Plagiarism as Consumptive Practice.
Journal of Further and Higher Education 28(4): 445-454..
Scribner, M. E. (2003). An Ounce of Prevention: Defeating Plagiarism in the Information Age.
43

44. Library Media Connection 21: 32-35..
Sutherland-Smith, W. (2005). Pandoras Box: Academic Perceptions of Student Plagiarism in
Writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 4(1): 83-95..
Underwood, J., & Szabo, A. (2003). Academic offences and e-learning: individual propensities
in cheating. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(4), 467-477.
(21/01/2006). University of Portsmouth | glossary of terms http://www.port.ac.uk/startUP/
glossaryofterms/
Woessner, M. C. (2004). Beating the House: How Inadequate Penalties for Cheating Make
Plagiarism an Excellent Gamble. Ps 37(2): 313-320..
Wood, G. (2004). Academic Original Sin: Plagiarism, the Internet, and Librarians. Journal of
Academic Librarianship 30(3): 237-242..
Zobel, J. and M. Hamilton (2002). Managing Student Plagiarism in Large Academic
Departments. Australian Universities Review 45(2): 23-30.
Appendices
BBC News Articles linked with Plagiarism
(16/01/06). BBC NEWS | Education | Software 'cannot stop cheating' http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/
hi/education/4460702.stm:.
(16/01/06). BBC NEWS | Education | Moves to curb coursework cheating http://
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4457938.stm:.
(16/01/06). BBC NEWS | Education | Coursework copying internet fear http://news.bbc.co.uk/
1/hi/education/4459544.stm:.
(16/01/06). BBC NEWS | Education | 'Blatant copying' in coursework http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/
hi/education/4399590.stm:.
(16/01/06). BBC NEWS | Education | Teachers 'ignore' coursework cheats http://
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/3180576.stm:.
(16/01/06). BBC NEWS | Education | Moves to curb coursework cheating http://
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4457938.stm:.
(16/01/06). BBC NEWS | Education | The problem with exam coursework http://
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4545035.stm:.
(16/01/06). BBC NEWS | Education | Net cheats 'devaluing coursework' http://
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/3362351.stm:.
(16/01/06). BBC NEWS | Education | Features | Mike Baker | Your concerns over coursework
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/features/mike_baker/1647523.stm:.
(16/01/06). BBC NEWS | Education | Features | Mike Baker | Parents 'need advice over
coursework' http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/features/mike_baker/1634426.stm:.
(16/01/06). BBC NEWS | Education | Features | Mike Baker | Where are universities heading?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/features/mike_baker/2692711.stm:.
(16/01/06). BBC NEWS | England | Public focus on university expansion http://
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2578657.stm:.
44