Despite almost two decades of academic research, legislation, and institutional action, contract cheating remains a critical threat to academic integrity globally. In the UK, the high rate of contract cheating suggests that 8-9% of degrees awarded are unsafe. But this is a global problem.
Almost 20 years on from the first use of the term ‘contract cheating’, we look at the latest action and academic research on this critical issue—and provide informed advice for institutions looking to shore up their integrity practices against this ongoing threat.
What is contract cheating?
Contract cheating is a form of academic misconduct where students outsource coursework or other academic tasks to third parties—such as essay mills and now AI-human rewriter services—and submit the work as their own. Plus, it’s widespread–recent research suggests that 3% to 11% of HE students engage in contract cheating to some extent (Rundle, Curtis, and Clare).
Contract cheating is a term originated by Thomas Lancaster and Robert Clarke of Birmingham City University, described as the “successor to pure plagiarism”.
Unlike plagiarism—which involves copying content directly from existing sources—contract cheating uses external providers to create original content specific to the student and their assignment. This makes it much harder to detect and address.
For more information, read our in-depth guide: What is contract cheating and what does it have to do with academic integrity?
What’s the problem with contract cheating?
Contract cheating is problematic on several fronts. It undermines academic integrity, creates an uneven playing field, and rewards dishonesty.
For students who engage in it, contract cheating compromises their educational outcomes, reducing their ability to develop original ideas and critical thinking skills. It’s been shown to negatively impact student attendance and engagement in teaching and learning (Rahimi, Jones, and Bailey, 2023). Plus, contract cheating brings students into contact with often criminal enterprises, which have been known to extort their users later in their academic and professional careers.
For fellow students, contract cheating creates an unfair environment that devalues hard work and honesty, which can undermine morale and tempt others towards misconduct (Zhao, Mao, Compton, Peng, Fu, Fang, Heyman, and Lee).
For accreditation-based assessment—often found in STEM subjects—contract cheating can result in unqualified individuals entering critical professions, posing a risk to the public and the economy.
While, for institutions and the higher education sector as a whole, the practice undermines trust in qualifications and creates the burden of detecting and combatting the practice.
What’s being done to combat contract cheating?
Legislation against contract cheating
Several countries have implemented legislation to take action on contract cheating by making advertising and/or providing contract cheating services illegal.
- Ireland outlawed contract cheating in 2019—and England in 2022, with the Skills and Post-16 Education Act—making it illegal to advertise or provide third-party contract cheating services.
- Australia criminalized contract cheating in 2020 through the TEQSA Amendment Act. New Zealand followed suit in 2022 with its Education and Training Amendment Act.
- In America, there is no federal law against contract cheating but over a dozen states have enacted measures, including California’s 2021 Assembly Bill 1461.
Most of these are accompanied by substantial legal and financial penalties for offenders, reflecting the detrimental impact that contract cheating has on academic integrity. However, students still report being targeted by messages from criminal content mills, who are happy to risk fines for financial gain.
While legislative initiatives banning commercial contract cheating are an important step to stopping commercial contract cheating services at the source, they’re not foolproof and must be accompanied by institution-led efforts.
Academic research on contract cheating
When looking for helpers to combat contract cheating, the academic community is understandably at the forefront of the issue.
Beyond Lancaster and Clark, key academic advocates against contract cheating include the late Tracey Bretag (former Director of Integrity, University of South Australia Business School) and Cath Ellis (Pro Vice-Chancellor, Quality and Integrity, Western Sydney University). Their work to raise awareness of the practice has delivered impactful results, including pioneering the legislation listed above.
Bretag and Ellis’s accomplishments include founding the International Journal for Educational Integrity in 2005, editing the Handbook of Academic Integrity, and leading several large national research projects, funded by the Australian Office for Teaching and Learning.
Following Bretag and Ellis’ work to raise awareness of contract cheating, academic discourse has moved on to explore causes and preventive actions for institutions.
Academic research (see sources below) finds multiple systematic reasons and student rationales for engaging in contract cheating. Student factors include:
- Fear of failure.
- English as a second language.
- Dissatisfaction with the teaching and learning environment.
- Personality traits that make students more likely to engage in misconduct.
Furthermore, large class sizes, assessment design, and low penalties for cheating can all create a culture that is susceptible to academic dishonesty. Consulting academic research on contract cheating can help institutions tackle these issues.
Why students turn to contract cheating
Writing in International and Comparative Education in 2024, Ajit, Maikkara, and Ramku posit that international students are more likely to fall foul of contract cheating due to fear of failure and weak academic writing skills in English. This supports earlier findings that suggest ‘speaking a language other than English at home’ is a key factor in contract cheating (see the Australian government report below).
A 2023 literature review in Ethics and Education from Rahimi, Jones, and Bailey found students may habitually outsource their work or do so only once. Motives for outsourcing their assignments ranged from lack of perseverance and self-discipline to students with higher risk tolerance simply “wishing to outsource tedium and effort”. They conclude that contract cheating arises “from a complex intersection of personal and environmental factors and can be triggered by a specific situation”.
Those ‘specific situations’ may be personal but may be due to institutional factors and assessment design. In her 2019 report Contract Cheating and Assessment Design for the Australian Government, Bretag found students were most likely to cheat on assignments that were heavily weighted (i.e. high-pressure assignments) and those with a short turnaround time (e.g. one week to complete).
The same report also highlighted staff-reported factors including lenient penalties for contract cheating, inadequate teaching workload, large class sizes, and limited staff-student contact time.
How can educators detect contract cheating?
Contact cheating is more difficult to detect than traditional plagiarism because the content is original—it just hasn’t been written by the student. So comparing the assignment against existing work or running it through a similarity checker alone won’t capture this form of misconduct. As a result, academics may be reluctant to raise suspicions of contract cheating with the student or faculty (watch our video on this topic, where Felicity Prentice discusses these challenges in more depth).
However, there are telltale signs to help you detect contract cheating.
- Referencing irregularities (such as inconsistent citation styles).
- Perfect referencing—but not in the format you’ve assigned.
- Differences in student voice (such as different writing styles or vocabulary compared to their previous assignments).
- The assignment does not answer the question.
- The assignment sounds dated and doesn’t connect with recent course material.
- Irregularities across student work history (such as sudden improvements).
- Few references to ideas presented in class.
- Multiple references pointing to a single resource.
- Document metadata inconsistencies (e.g. the author of the document isn’t the student.
- Shallow, formulaic structured content–basic content that doesn’t show critical engagement.
Combatting contract cheating by design
Research findings can help institutions understand how to combat contract cheating by making changes to their teaching, learning, and assessment processes.
Clarify the rules on contract cheating
Although it seems obvious to educators that contract cheating is a form of academic misconduct, it may not be as clear to students, particularly in an age of AI, where students are increasingly comfortable using tools to generate assignments on their behalf. Institutions should ensure that academic integrity policies are clearly communicated, emphasizing that using third-party services for assignments is a form of misconduct.
Apply appropriate penalties
Bretag found ‘lenient’ penalties contributed to contract cheating. Research shows students are less likely to cheat when they fear both detection and penalties. By implementing stringent penalties and emphasizing the likelihood of detection, students may be deterred from using cheating services.
Reduce assignment pressure
Bretag also found assignments with a fast turnaround are more likely to be outsourced to content mills. Providing students with longer to complete assignments and accepting late assignments (within reason) may reduce contract cheating. It also helps students manage their workload more effectively, potentially reducing anxiety around assignments.
Require assignment plans and drafts
Design assignments with interim stages—such as requiring students to submit assignment plans, drafts, or outlines— allows educators to assess the development of the student's ideas and engagement with the topic. This approach makes it much harder to outsource the work and ensures that students are developing their own critical thinking throughout the process.
Incorporate oral presentations
High-stakes assignments are more prone to contract cheating. If an assignment makes up a large part of a final mark, add an oral presentation that requires the student to explain/defend their work. Requiring students to explain their work makes it more difficult for students to submit someone else's work as their own—and provides educators with an additional opportunity to identify potential misconduct.
Provide more support for non-native speakers
Non-native speakers are more likely to engage in contract cheating due to lack of academic confidence, as well as social factors like smaller support networks. Institutions have an obligation to ensure these students have access to adequate support—such as writing assistance and academic tutoring—to help them succeed without resorting to dishonest practices.
Manage class sizes
To combat contract cheating, a better understanding of student writing progress across their academic journey is essential. However, large class enrollments can make it difficult for educators to get to know their students and assess their individual writing styles due to the sheer volume of work. In contrast, smaller classes and room for educator intuition allows instructors to notice deviations from a student's usual voice or patterns in their work, making it easier to identify contract cheating.
Where physically smaller classes are not possible, technology for assessment and grading at scale can make large classrooms feel small, fostering a more supportive learning environment, encouraging engagement, and reducing the likelihood of cheating.
Use more formative assessment
Formative assessment is regular, lower-pressure assessment to gauge students’ understanding of a subject. It provides ongoing feedback, helps students stay on track, and reduces the pressure of high-stakes assignments. More frequent formative assessments and writing benchmarks allow educators to spot potential issues early and address them before they escalate into cheating or academic misconduct.
Teach academic integrity
Incorporate lessons on academic integrity, the value of original thought, and the importance of critical thinking to help students understand the broader ethical implications of their choices. Teaching these concepts proactively helps build a culture of integrity, where students see the value of their own work and are less likely to resort to cheating.
Closely link assignments to course content
Essay mills perform better on generic assignments that can be easily created by a non-specialist or using AI. So one way to make contract cheating easier to detect—and act as a deterrent—is to align assignments to specific course materials and discussions. This makes it harder for the provider to address the brief and makes detection easier.
Appoint integrity advocates
Some institutions now have integrity officers or advocates. They may be educators, administrative staff, or trained students who actively promote a culture of academic integrity. For example, through workshops, events, drop-ins, and support. Having visible advocates provides students with access to help to maintain their integrity while sending a strong message about your institutional stance on misconduct.
The University of New South Wales has a strong conduct and integrity team that combines support with accountability, to reduce and remediate misconduct—including their Speak Up strategy and Courageous Conversations approach.
Build a community at your institution
Whether you have dedicated integrity advocates or not, your broader academic ecosystem needs to stand together against contract cheating. This means:
- Educating peers on the topic.
- Keeping up to date with academic research on the subject.
- Disseminating new insights within your community.
- Having a clear code of conduct for students.
- Encouraging ‘courageous conversations’.
- Provide peer reporting mechanisms.
Technology to detect and deter contract cheating
Specialized academic integrity technology can help institutions identify and investigate contract cheating – and assemble accurate evidence to support disciplinary and remediation efforts. This is invaluable in large-scale university enrolments, creating a viable deterrent to academic dishonesty. The right software can:
- Identify similarities between submitted work and existing content.
- Spot inconsistencies in student writing style that can indicate outsourced assignments (AI/NLP).
- Check metadata in submitted files to verify authorship information.
- Predict at-risk students for additional support and interventions (predictive analytics).