using essay mill

Essay mills explained: What they are and why you should avoid them

Essays and term papers can be stressful, especially for international students who sometimes doubt their ability to research in depth and write thousands of words in English, all to a tight deadline.  

That’s where essay mills come in, exploiting the fears of students and offering to do the hard work for them in exchange for money. 

But here’s the spoiler alert - you should absolutely avoid essay mills. All the time.

They don’t work for you. They don’t even work for the essay writers themselves, and you should see that as a big warning sign. But more on that below.

What are essay mills? 

Essay mills are pretty straightforward: You pay a company to write your essay for you. The company in turn offloads the essay to a (usually freelance) writer. A couple days or weeks later, and you get your completed essay in return. 

It’s not like a proofreading service, where someone can check your spelling, grammar and citations for a fee (though even those are controversial in universities). No, essay mills offer to write you an entire essay from scratch. 

In other words, they allow students to commit academic fraud. In fact, they exploit the worries and stresses of students and entice them into cheating. They’re considered deeply unethical, and put students themselves at risk of severe punishment if caught. 

Another business model of this kind are essay banks. Here, students can buy essays that have already been written. But there’s a much higher risk of getting caught for plagiarism, since who knows how many hundreds or thousands of people have used that very same essay. 

Are essay mills legal or illegal?

The legality of essay mills depends on where you go to university, but the unethicality is clear no matter the location. Here’s a quick rundown of essay mills’ legal status in popular study abroad countries:  

Anti - essay mill legislation in the UK was passed in the House of Commons in February 2021, and will soon be made law. It’s not totally illegal yet, but it’s just a matter of time. 

The Republic of Ireland has also passed a number of bills to help tackle essay mills, while the practice is totally illegal in Australia and New Zealand. 

As for the USA and Canada, some US states have made them illegal, while Canada is under mounting pressure to follow suit.  

But the content and nuances of these laws changes from place to place. For example, in some US states it’s illegal for the student to use them, whereas the bills in Ireland, the UK, New Zealand and Australia are an attempt to criminalise essay mill companies themselves.

However, when we talk about legality, we’re of course talking about the law. But just because you might not cause a criminal offense by using essay mills, it’s still academic fraud and/or plagiarism. And getting caught for that can come with some dire consequences. 

Long story short, you really shouldn’t use them, regardless of their legality. 

Why you should avoid essay mills

1. if it doesn’t make dollars, it doesn’t make sense.

The writer's pay is awful. I mean really bad. Trust me -- I write for a living, and I’ve seen hundreds of advertisements for essay mill jobs. Every time I see one I can’t believe how little money the writers make for so much time and effort.  

But does this affect you? Totally! Would you care about doing great work if, a) the money was terrible, and b) it wouldn’t take you anywhere in your career? I know I wouldn’t...

Let’s talk about cost and time to put this into some perspective. The price range of essay mills varies wildly depending on the writers they employ. You can pay anywhere between £10-£35 per page. Roll this out over a 10 page essay, and it could be anywhere between £100 and £350 for the final product. But you can also come across offers for much, much less money than this.

While that higher end of £350 might seem like a lot of money, trust me -- it’s really nothing for the amount of research, writing, citations, editing and proofreading required. 

If £100 per day is considered a “just fine but not great” sum of money in the UK, a writer would have to do all the work on your essay in 2.5 days just to make it worthwhile. And they’d have to do it without the subject knowledge that you have. 

2. The writers aren’t subject experts

Think about it: if they were a subject expert, would they really be working for a shady company that facilitates cheating? Not a chance. 

The main point is that these writers are badly underpaid and they’re not experts, therefore they’re putting very little effort or expertise into your essay. They just want to do it as quickly as possible before moving onto the next one. 

3. There’s no guarantee of a good grade

None. Since the writers are underpaid, lack expertise and rush their work, it’s a recipe for a bad final product. Multiple studies have shown that essay mills do mediocre work at best. 

The essay you pay hundreds of pounds for might get you a pass grade, but you could do much better yourself. 

4. The punishment is harsh

Every university has severe laws on plagiarism and academic fraud, which is the exact result of using an essay mill. At its most lenient, a student caught breaking rules on plagiarism will receive no grade at all for the work, but at worst they can be suspended or even expelled from your university.  

But the perfect “crime” goes unnoticed, right? Well, it’s unlikely in this case. 

5. Essay mills and detection services

Most universities use pretty innovative plagiarism detection software these days, which can pick up on any hint of fraudulent work. Thus, the risk of getting caught is very high. And by the time a student does get caught, they’ve already lost their hard earned cash to the essay mill company. 

6. Essay mills don’t care about you

The company doesn’t care about you, and nor does the writer. That’s a pretty bad starting point for doing business! Once they’ve got their money and done their sub-standard work, they can move on to exploiting someone else’s fears. 

7. There’s a risk of scams 

Most essay mill sites demand a deposit of the final amount, or sometimes the entire fee up front. Either way, you won’t see your essay until you’ve paid them something. This makes it a prime opportunity for scam artists to take your money without giving anything in return. 

You see, it’s extremely easy for scam artists to launch a website advertising essays for sale, then just shut the operation down once they’ve made some quick cash without doing any work. 

Speaking of scams, here’s an article on some other international student scams to watch out for !

8. There’s a risk of bribery too

And then there’s the risk of bribery. Even if a student thinks they’re anonymous while dealing with essay mills, they’re not. There’s an email address, bank account name, even their IP address to worry about. 

So if the company or the writer decides that they want to blackmail or bribe a student by threatening to unveil the truth, they can. And they’ll always be able to.  

A final word on essay mills: Honest work is the best work

It sounds old fashioned, but there’s no replacement for smart, hard, honest work. Any student can write a great term paper or essay assignment on their own. All it takes is time, research, and some focus. 

Even if you’re under pressure or lack some confidence in your English ability, there are so many better ways to deal with it. Use a study abroad education counsellor , speak to your teachers and your friends. They’ll be able to point you in the right direction and help make that essay easier. 

As for essay mills? Forget about them. They’re exploitative, they serve no good purpose, and you can do a better job yourself!

So you’re thinking about studying abroad? Great! Check out the range of amazing courses available through Edvoy. Click here to get started or click the button below!

Guest Author | Study Abroad Expert

Disclaimer: The views and opinions shared in this site solely belong to the individual authors and do not necessarily represent t ...Read More

International student life in the UK

Top 10 tips for students to keep busy during quarantine

5 reasons why employers love foreign graduates

10 best cities to study abroad in Europe

How to stay productive when you’re studying at home

Blended Learning: What is it and how do I improve at it?

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

Essay Mills and Why to Avoid Them

• 2-minute read
• 6th July 2018

Struggling with deadlines? College life feeling stressful ? You might be tempted to take a shortcut, especially if someone points you toward an essay mill. But what are essay mills exactly?

To help out, we’re here to explain what they are and why you should NEVER use them.

Essay Mills and Essay Banks

Some online businesses offer essays to students at a price. These come in two main types:

• Essay mills provide custom essays based on a specified topic, word count and deadline
• Essay banks sell pre-written essays, which are cheaper but less tailored

These businesses sometimes say that the essays they sell are just “templates” that students can use to generate ideas. However, using an essay mill is widely seen as cheating .

The Problem

Maybe you’ve read the descriptions above. But maybe you still think it sounds like an easy way to get a paper done without all the hard work of researching and writing it. Think again.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

If you use a paper from an essay mill or essay bank, you will regret it for several reasons:

• Using someone else’s words without citing them clearly is plagiarism
• If you are caught submitting a paper from an essay mill, it will count as academic fraud
• Colleges have software, such as Turnitin, designed to spot plagiarism
• Papers from essay mills can cost hundreds of dollars and there is no guarantee of quality

As a result, using an essay mill could leave you poorer and get you kicked off your course!

Essay Mills vs. Proofreading

But what if you still need help on a paper? If essay mills are a bad idea, what is your alternative? Well, the good news is that we can help! Having your work proofread has many advantages. We can:

• Correct your spelling, grammar, and punctuation
• Make sure your vocabulary is academic and that terminology is consistent
• Check that all of your sources are referenced correctly
• Tighten up your writing to make sure it is clear and concise

And all of this without making any major changes that could count as plagiarism. You will, of course, have to do the research and writing yourself. But that is how you learn things in the first place! The key is that we’re here to support you.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

4-minute read

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

Essay mills: What are they, and why students should avoid them

Have you ever been stuck on what to write for your university entrance essay, or felt under pressure with the numerous deadlines looming and have no time to work on your thesis?  Maybe a friend has told you how they’ve used essay mills, or perhaps you’ve seen an ad yourself popping up on your screen while surfing the internet.

Essay mills, or “essay factories” , are businesses that offer a service to write an essay or term paper for students for a fee.

These are not your basic proofreading or editing services, but businesses where essays are written for you. They do extensive research, proofreading, citations, and deliver a final essay to the customer (i.e. you, the student), which you can credit as your own.

Essay mills are nothing new in this day and age, having started in the mid-1800s when students in fraternity houses shared term papers. Later in the 1950s, the lucrative business of ghostwriting evolved where writers wrote material on behalf of authors or celebrities. 

Specialised companies were set up near university campuses where students could walk in and purchase the services of a team of writers to do their essays for them. However, with the onset of technology and the internet, the essay mills business has mushroomed in recent years. 

Some students have opted to use essay mills to get their work done without the stress and pressure of researching and working on a paper themselves. These essay mills or essay factories are easily accessible and promoted via various social media and online platforms.

Gareth Crossman from Quality Assurance Association for Higher Education (QAA), an independent body that checks on standards and quality in UK higher education, told the BBC that one in seven college students  might be cheating  on their work. 

With essay mills, there’s a risk of bribery, while there’s no guarantee that the article purchased is of excellent quality. Source: Christina Quicler/AFP

International students whose English isn’t their first language may be tempted to use essay mills due to their lack of language skills or insecurities.

Despite that, they are highly unethical and can lead to students being found guilty of plagiarism and academic fraud. Nowadays, many universities and colleges use software such as Turnitin, which can easily spot any discrepancies or plagiarism in a student’s work. 

Some are even resorting to asking students to take oral examinations if it is suspected that they have not completed the work themselves. Ultimately, it’s best for students to avoid essay mills at all costs.

Students have an obligation to submit authentic work while at university, and understand how writing and researching for a paper is part and parcel of the learning journey. 

Taking the easy option of using essay mills services is for short gain only as students are essentially cheating and taking the credit for something that another person has worked on. To boot, there’s no guarantee that the article purchased is of excellent quality or free from plagiarism.

Suppose you are struggling with writing your term paper; why not consider taking some extra classes to improve your English language skills or talk to your university professor or counsellor for some valuable advice? 

There’s nothing quite like that feeling of pride and accomplishment of submitting work that you worked on yourself. After all, as the ancient Greek philosopher Sophocles once said, “Without labour, nothing prospers.”

Popular stories

Best movies about smart people to help you figure out your university, career, and life.

Beyond South Africa: The best African countries to visit for summer break

Skip the tourist trap: The coolest countries to visit aren’t the ones you’d expect

Dance, drink, and have endless fun in these cities with the best nightlife for students

Unscrupulous essay mills will soon be banned in the UK

Harsher punishments for students who use essay mills, academics say

Is paraphrasing academically dishonest?

• Work & Careers
• Life & Arts

The essay mills undermining academic standards around the world

Try unlimited access only $1 for 4 weeks.

Then $75 per month. Complete digital access to quality FT journalism on any device. Cancel anytime during your trial.

• Global news & analysis
• Expert opinion
• Special features
• FirstFT newsletter
• Videos & Podcasts
• Android & iOS app
• FT Edit app
• 10 gift articles per month

Explore more offers.

Standard digital.

• FT Digital Edition

Premium Digital

Print + premium digital, ft professional, weekend print + standard digital, weekend print + premium digital.

Essential digital access to quality FT journalism on any device. Pay a year upfront and save 20%.

• Global news & analysis
• Exclusive FT analysis
• FT App on Android & iOS
• FirstFT: the day's biggest stories
• 20+ curated newsletters
• Follow topics & set alerts with myFT
• FT Videos & Podcasts
• 20 monthly gift articles to share
• Lex: FT's flagship investment column
• 15+ Premium newsletters by leading experts
• FT Digital Edition: our digitised print edition
• Weekday Print Edition
• Videos & Podcasts
• Premium newsletters
• 10 additional gift articles per month
• FT Weekend Print delivery
• Everything in Standard Digital
• Everything in Premium Digital

Complete digital access to quality FT journalism with expert analysis from industry leaders. Pay a year upfront and save 20%.

• 10 monthly gift articles to share
• Everything in Print
• Make and share highlights
• FT Workspace
• Markets data widget
• Subscription Manager
• Workflow integrations
• Occasional readers go free
• Volume discount

Terms & Conditions apply

Explore our full range of subscriptions.

Why the ft.

See why over a million readers pay to read the Financial Times.

International Edition

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Buying College Essays Is Now Easier Than Ever. But Buyer Beware

Tovia Smith

Concern is growing about a burgeoning online market for essays that students can buy and turn in as their own work. And schools are trying new tools to catch it. Angela Hsieh/NPR hide caption

Concern is growing about a burgeoning online market for essays that students can buy and turn in as their own work. And schools are trying new tools to catch it.

As the recent college admissions scandal is shedding light on how parents are cheating and bribing their children's way into college, schools are also focusing on how some students may be cheating their way through college. Concern is growing about a burgeoning online market that makes it easier than ever for students to buy essays written by others to turn in as their own work. And schools are trying new tools to catch it.

It's not hard to understand the temptation for students. The pressure is enormous, the stakes are high and, for some, writing at a college level is a huge leap.

"We didn't really have a format to follow, so I was kind of lost on what to do," says one college freshman, who struggled recently with an English assignment. One night, when she was feeling particularly overwhelmed, she tweeted her frustration.

"It was like, 'Someone, please help me write my essay!' " she recalls. She ended her tweet with a crying emoji. Within a few minutes, she had a half-dozen offers of help.

"I can write it for you," they tweeted back. "Send us the prompt!"

The student, who asked that her name not be used for fear of repercussions at school, chose one that asked for $10 per page, and she breathed a sigh of relief.

"For me, it was just that the work was piling up," she explains. "As soon as I finish some big assignment, I get assigned more things, more homework for math, more homework for English. Some papers have to be six or 10 pages long. ... And even though I do my best to manage, the deadlines come closer and closer, and it's just ... the pressure."

In the cat-and-mouse game of academic cheating, students these days know that if they plagiarize, they're likely to get caught by computer programs that automatically compare essays against a massive database of other writings. So now, buying an original essay can seem like a good workaround.

"Technically, I don't think it's cheating," the student says. "Because you're paying someone to write an essay, which they don't plagiarize, and they write everything on their own."

Her logic, of course, ignores the question of whether she's plagiarizing. When pressed, she begins to stammer.

"That's just a difficult question to answer," she says. "I don't know how to feel about that. It's kind of like a gray area. It's maybe on the edge, kind of?"

Besides she adds, she probably won't use all of it.

Other students justify essay buying as the only way to keep up. They figure that everyone is doing it one way or another — whether they're purchasing help online or getting it from family or friends.

"Oh yeah, collaboration at its finest," cracks Boston University freshman Grace Saathoff. While she says she would never do it herself, she's not really fazed by others doing it. She agrees with her friends that it has pretty much become socially acceptable.

"I have a friend who writes essays and sells them," says Danielle Delafuente, another Boston University freshman. "And my other friend buys them. He's just like, 'I can't handle it. I have five papers at once. I need her to do two of them, and I'll do the other three.' It's a time management thing."

The war on contract cheating

"It breaks my heart that this is where we're at," sighs Ashley Finley, senior adviser to the president for the Association of American Colleges and Universities. She says campuses are abuzz about how to curb the rise in what they call contract cheating. Obviously, students buying essays is not new, but Finley says that what used to be mostly limited to small-scale side hustles has mushroomed on the internet to become a global industry of so-called essay mills. Hard numbers are difficult to come by, but research suggests that up to 16 percent of students have paid someone to do their work and that the number is rising.

"Definitely, this is really getting more and more serious," Finley says. "It's part of the brave new world for sure."

The essay mills market aggressively online, with slickly produced videos inviting students to "Get instant help with your assignment" and imploring them: "Don't lag behind," "Join the majority" and "Don't worry, be happy."

"They're very crafty," says Tricia Bertram Gallant, director of the Academic Integrity Office at the University of California in San Diego and a board member of the International Center for Academic Integrity.

The companies are equally brazen offline — leafleting on campuses, posting flyers in toilet stalls and flying banners over Florida beaches during spring break. Companies have also been known to bait students with emails that look like they're from official college help centers. And they pay social media influencers to sing the praises of their services, and they post testimonials from people they say are happy customers.

"I hired a service to write my paper and I got a 90 on it!" gloats one. "Save your time, and have extra time to party!" advises another.

"It's very much a seduction," says Bertram Gallant. "So you can maybe see why students could get drawn into the contract cheating world."

YouTube has been cracking down on essay mills; it says it has pulled thousands of videos that violate its policies against promoting dishonest behavior.

But new videos constantly pop up, and their hard sell flies in the face of their small-print warnings that their essays should be used only as a guide, not a final product.

Several essay mills declined or didn't respond to requests to be interviewed by NPR. But one answered questions by email and offered up one of its writers to explain her role in the company, called EduBirdie.

"Yes, just like the little birdie that's there to help you in your education," explains April Short, a former grade school teacher from Australia who's now based in Philadelphia. She has been writing for a year and a half for the company, which bills itself as a "professional essay writing service for students who can't even."

Some students just want some "foundational research" to get started or a little "polish" to finish up, Short says. But the idea that many others may be taking a paper written completely by her and turning it in as their own doesn't keep her up at night.

"These kids are so time poor," she says, and they're "missing out on opportunities of travel and internships because they're studying and writing papers." Relieving students of some of that burden, she figures, allows them to become more "well-rounded."

"I don't necessarily think that being able to create an essay is going to be a defining factor in a very long career, so it's not something that bothers me," says Short. Indeed, she thinks students who hire writers are demonstrating resourcefulness and creativity. "I actually applaud students that look for options to get the job done and get it done well," she says.

"This just shows you the extent of our ability to rationalize all kinds of bad things we do," sighs Dan Ariely, professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke University. The rise in contract cheating is especially worrisome, he says, because when it comes to dishonest behavior, more begets more. As he puts it, it's not just about "a few bad apples."

Felicity Huffman And 12 Other Parents To Plead Guilty In College Cheating Scandal

"Instead, what we have is a lot ... of blemished apples, and we take our cues for our behavior from the social world around us," he says. "We know officially what is right and what's wrong. But really what's driving our behavior is what we see others around us doing" or, Ariely adds, what we perceive them to be doing. So even the proliferation of advertising for essays mills can have a pernicious effect, he says, by fueling the perception that "everyone's doing it."

A few nations have recently proposed or passed laws outlawing essay mills, and more than a dozen U.S. states have laws on the books against them. But prosecuting essay mills, which are often based overseas in Pakistan, Kenya and Ukraine, for example, is complicated. And most educators are loath to criminalize students' behavior.

"Yes, they're serious mistakes. They're egregious mistakes," says Cath Ellis, an associate dean and integrity officer at the University of New South Wales, where students were among the hundreds alleged to have bought essays in a massive scandal in Australia in 2014.

"But we're educational institutions," she adds. "We've got to give students the opportunity to learn from these mistakes. That's our responsibility. And that's better in our hands than in the hands of the police and the courts."

Staying one step ahead

In the war on contract cheating, some schools see new technology as their best weapon and their best shot to stay one step ahead of unscrupulous students. The company that makes the Turnitin plagiarism detection software has just upped its game with a new program called Authorship Investigate.

The software first inspects a document's metadata, like when it was created, by whom it was created and how many times it was reopened and re-edited. Turnitin's vice president for product management, Bill Loller, says sometimes it's as simple as looking at the document's name. Essay mills typically name their documents something like "Order Number 123," and students have been known to actually submit it that way. "You would be amazed at how frequently that happens," says Loller.

Using cutting-edge linguistic forensics, the software also evaluates the level of writing and its style.

"Think of it as a writing fingerprint," Loller says. The software looks at hundreds of telltale characteristics of an essay, like whether the author double spaces after a period or writes with Oxford commas or semicolons. It all gets instantly compared against a student's other work, and, Loller says, suspicions can be confirmed — or alleviated — in minutes.

"At the end of the day, you get to a really good determination on whether the student wrote what they submitted or not," he says, "and you get it really quickly."

Coventry University in the U.K. has been testing out a beta version of the software, and Irene Glendinning, the school's academic manager for student experience, agrees that the software has the potential to give schools a leg up on cheating students. After the software is officially adopted, "we'll see a spike in the number of cases we find, and we'll have a very hard few years," she says. "But then the message will get through to students that we've got the tools now to find these things out." Then, Glendinning hopes, students might consider contract cheating to be as risky as plagiarizing.

In the meantime, schools are trying to spread the word that buying essays is risky in other ways as well.

Professor Ariely says that when he posed as a student and ordered papers from several companies, much of it was "gibberish" and about a third of it was actually plagiarized.

Even worse, when he complained to the company and demanded his money back, they resorted to blackmail. Still believing him to be a student, the company threatened to tell his school he was cheating. Others say companies have also attempted to shake down students for more money, threatening to rat them out if they didn't pay up.

The lesson, Ariely says, is "buyer beware."

But ultimately, experts say, many desperate students may not be deterred by the risks — whether from shady businesses or from new technology.

Bertram Gallant, of UC San Diego, says the right way to dissuade students from buying essays is to remind them why it's wrong.

"If we engage in a technological arms race with the students, we won't win," she says. "What are we going to do when Google glasses start to look like regular glasses and a student wears them into an exam? Are we going to tell them they can't wear their glasses because we're afraid they might be sending the exam out to someone else who is sending them back the answers?"

The solution, Bertram Gallant says, has to be about "creating a culture where integrity and ethics matter" and where education is valued more than grades. Only then will students believe that cheating on essays is only cheating themselves.

Essay mills and their growing threat to UK academic integrity

By completing this form, you agree to Turnitin's Privacy Policy . Turnitin uses the information you provide to contact you with relevant information. You may unsubscribe from these communications at any time.

Custom writing services, also known as essay mills, have been an ever-growing concern for educators across the world since the start of the coronavirus pandemic—and are becoming increasingly prolific in the UK in particular. With the accelerated shift to remote learning, and with many students feeling anxious about their studies and career choices, essay mills have traded on the current situation, and are profiting in the process.

Students have found themselves bombarded with social media adverts offering ‘coronavirus discounts’ from commercial writing services - some even before they have begun their course of study. New research has found a substantial rise in the number of essay mills since the emergence of the coronavirus pandemic, with the QAA reporting at least 932 sites currently operating in the UK, a dramatic rise from 635 only three years ago.

This is an issue that Turnitin is passionate about. Custom writing services are a major threat to academic integrity worldwide and by increasing the prevalence of contract cheating and diminishing the significance of degrees and qualifications, they have the potential to seriously jeopardise institutional reputations.

Not only do essay mills harm student academic integrity and institutional reputations, but they also often rely on the exploitation of graduates both domestically and overseas, working long shifts writing essays for as little as less than £1 an hour or selling their own essays on to commercial writing services in return for a fraction of the profit.

The Essay Mills (Prohibition) Bill, led by Chris Skidmore MP, former UK universities minister, has already received its first parliamentary reading and garnered cross-party debate, with a second reading expected in the coming weeks.

Earlier this year, we shared our insights with Mr Skidmore and our evidence was cited in his speech to the House of Commons, introducing proposed new legislation to prohibit commercial writing services operating and advertising in the UK.

Turnitin is proud to be standing alongside major higher education bodies, such as the National Union of Students and the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC), along with academics from across the UK, to raise the need for legislation that specifically outlaws essay mills.

We are supporting activities that will penalise commercial writing services themselves, rather than students using them, by outlawing their operation and preventing them from targeting students through clever advertising.

Combined with the right policy framework at the institution level, awareness and engagement amongst both instructors and students, and the adoption of the right technology to support prevention and investigation, legislative action will help to counter the threat essay mills pose to the entire education sector.

As students, educators and institutions continue to adjust to the changed circumstances resulting from coronavirus, it has never been more important for legislative and institutional frameworks to align in tackling custom writing services.

The solutions and resources we offer are designed to tackle issues such as contract cheating. In 2015, the MyMaster cheating scandal rocked the Australian higher education sector. Shortly after, many of our Australian customers approached us to partner with them on a solution. But contract cheating is not just a cause for concern in Australia. This issue is global. We created Turnitin Originality in response to the growing need across the whole higher education sector to address essay mill use.

Turnitin Originality provides instructors and educators with the tools they need to address historically nebulous behaviour, working with students to ensure that they understand the seriousness of contract cheating.

By providing insights based on a student’s body of work and their progression over time, Turnitin Originality helps educators identify and compile information to manage contract cheating cases.

• Share on twitter
• Share on facebook

Essay mills: university course work to order

David matthews investigates the scale and threat of the custom essay industry.

• Share on linkedin
• Share on mail

The damage contract cheating can inflict on society is clear. Graduates emerge from university with huge (and in some disciplines, potentially dangerous) gaps in their learning and knowledge

Picture the following scenario: marking an essay by one of your more underwhelming students, you grow suspicious. You would like to be pleased by the unexpected quality of the work, but instead you feel “a twinge that a sentence is too neatly framed”, as one scholar who has found herself in this position puts it. The analysis is superb, the writing style good - but is it too good? It bears little resemblance to previous work by the same student: indeed, it is in a different league. But it has been through Turnitin, the academic plagiarism checker, and come back clean. Has the student miraculously improved, or are you looking at a particularly pernicious problem afflicting today’s higher education sector: the paid- for, custom-written essay?

Custom essays, usually bought through websites known as essay mills, are in some ways an academic’s worst nightmare. Unlike standard examples of copy-and-paste plagiarism, they cannot be detected using software because they are “original” pieces of work - just not the student’s. They also arguably represent an even more cynical form of cheating than, for example, regurgitating unattributed passages in a piece of submitted work.

For many years, essay mills have been brazenly advertising their wares online, although they are always careful not to condone customers handing in bought pieces of work, arguing that the essays purchased are intended simply as useful guides or reference material.

No one knows how big the market in custom essays is, or whether universities are managing to detect those students who do hand them in. There are also concerns that in an age of mass higher education and high student-to-staff ratios, lecturers are less able to get to know their students’ work, making this form of cheating more difficult to detect. And there are fears that the pressures of the job might encourage some academics to turn a blind eye to the practice. But perhaps the most important question is whether it is possible to prevent this form of cheating in the first place.

Asking how many custom-written essays are being bought and sold in the UK is a bit like asking “how long is a piece of string?”, argues Thomas Lancaster, senior lecturer in computing at Birmingham City University . For obvious reasons (including the fact that cheats do not want to be caught, essay mills operate online, and there are no official statistics), it is difficult to come by reliable figures.

However, Lancaster, along with his former colleague Robert Clarke, has attempted to quantify the scale of the problem.

The pair studied a large sample of essay mill sites between March 2005 and June 2013, and identified nearly 19,000 attempts at contract cheating by students.

While they examined websites that could be used by anyone anywhere in the world, a more detailed study of 59 postings in 2011 on one website, vworker.com, found 18 references to assignments at UK universities.

“What we detected is the tip of the iceberg,” cautions Lancaster. No one even knows how many essay ghostwriting sites there are on the web, but five years ago Lancaster and Clarke listed 158.

In addition to the online activity, there is an unknown number of essay writers who advertise their work offline - even on campus.

“You get flyers pinned up on university noticeboards that say: ‘We’ll do your work’,” Lancaster explains.

Then there are those who arrange contract essays socially, for friends, family members or students one or two years below them, who leave no public trace at all.

Prices vary dramatically. An upper-second, five-page undergraduate history essay will set you back £70 at the cheaper end of the market, but some sites charge in the region of £150-£160. One website, which sells itself as a “premier” service, charges £50 an hour. This may sound expensive, but it is loose change compared with the cost (particularly for international students) of having to retake a year.

At the top end of the scale, postgraduate dissertations of 25,000 words cost in the region of £2,800.

Some essay writing companies are willing to provide more specific estimates of the scale of demand for their services, although the figures are self-reported and some academics say that the firms may exaggerate their popularity to attract publicity and gain more custom.

Jennifer Wiss, business development manager at All Answers (which trades under a number of names on the web, including UKessays.com), says that the company dispatched 11,470 custom essays in 2012, of which three-quarters were ordered from UK IP addresses.

This figure is difficult to verify, but the firm’s accounts appear to be consistent with a company selling essays in such quantities.

Wiss estimates that a further 4,000 custom essays are written in the UK by rival agencies each year (although students at British universities can also order from abroad).

In 2005 Barclay Littlewood, who was then chief executive of All Answers (which promoted itself as UK Essays), estimated that the business was worth £200 million a year and boasted that it had allowed him to buy a Ferrari and a Lamborghini.

Robert Eaglestone, professor of contemporary literature and thought at Royal Holloway, University of London , believes that custom-written essays are a problem, but thinks that some essay mills choose to exaggerate their size through the press “because it’s good advertising. It’s a very media- friendly problem.”

Whatever the number of essays being commissioned and the scale of the companies involved, information gathered by Times Higher Education under the Freedom of Information Act suggests that the number of custom-written essays being detected and officially reported is tiny.

THE asked UK universities to provide details of the number of students they had disciplined in the academic years 2011-12 and 2012-13 for handing in custom essays or assignments bought from essay mills. Among the universities that responded to the request within 20 days, just 29 students were disciplined in 2011-12; in 2012-13, 30 students from 15 institutions were penalised.

More than half the offenders hailed from outside the UK. Some argue that the high fees paid by international students and the need to write in English (if this is not their first language) create greater incentives to cheat.

Chasing plagiarists can be ‘too much effort’, Carroll says. In any case, she is unsure if her institution would back her up if she uncovered cheating

Wiss reports that for a significant number of All Answers’ customers, English is a second language. She claims that “many of these struggle to put their thoughts and ideas across, or to interpret their course material and lectures. I believe this is why they choose to use a service like ours.”

In Lancaster’s experience, both domestic and international students use essay writing services, but he believes that a particularly serious and related issue is the matter of students paying for the translation of an essay written in a foreign language before handing it in, a practice that can obscure plagiarism. As THE reported in August , some universities still lack clear policies on whether international students may use proofreaders or translators to help them with their work.

The damage contract cheating can inflict on society is clear. Graduates emerge from university with huge (and in some disciplines, potentially dangerous) gaps in their learning and knowledge. Lancaster even discovered one student who had attempted to outsource an assignment on nuclear engineering. One of the scholar’s presentations on the subject asks: “Do you want to live within five miles of this person?”

But there is also a more specific form of damage to the university. You need only one student to go “to a job and not be able to do it” for an employer to “write off” other graduates of that university, Lancaster argues. He believes that employers have long memories and will warn other companies that certain alumni are not to be trusted. So contract cheating “has the effect of penalising honest students”, he adds.

Given the ethical issues, who agrees to work for the sites? The companies advertise themselves as employing graduates with good qualifications: an anonymous essay writer who wrote for THE in August says he is a recent Oxbridge graduate who was asked to provide evidence of his qualifications and samples of his writing when applying for the job. Some companies claim to employ staff with at least 2:1 degrees, interview potential candidates and ask them to complete trial assignments.

Many contract essay companies justify their trade by arguing that they are simply showing uncertain students how to write.

“Many students just want to see how it’s done,” says Wiss, who also claims that the “vast majority” of All Answers’ customers do not hand in their purchased essays.

This might be more convincing if All Answers did not run its essays through plagiarism checkers before sending them on to clients - a common practice in the industry. Why do this unless customers want to hand them in? Wiss claims that this is to make sure that its writers are “spending the time they are paid for on the project and not cutting corners”.

In line with many in the business, All Answers tries to blame universities for the rise of the essay mill. Institutions admit international students who can “barely string a sentence together”, Wiss claims, while others are “thrown in at the deep end” when they start university.

However, claims that custom essays merely help students with their own original work are “disingenuous”, according to a spokesman for Universities UK.

“Such essays often cost several hundred pounds, will specify the grade they require [2:1, 2:2, etc] and are purchased invariably to meet clear deadlines,” he says.

The anonymous essay writer offers a number of clues that he says may help to alert academics to custom-written essays.

Essay writing agencies generally require writers to submit their work in a standard format, he explains, often including a contents page and chapter headings, regardless of length.

“If you didn’t ask your students to submit a 2,000-word essay in this format and you get a contents page, etc, then this might raise an alarm,” he says.

Ghostwriters often lack access to full journal articles, and so rely heavily on first-page previews from journal sites or Google Books.

“Really probe the references, because this is the weak part,” he advises.

Jude Carroll, an education consultant at Oxford Brookes University and a plagiarism expert , thinks academics should not be afraid to be aggressively “investigative” if they smell a rat. If there are suspicions, she suggests, staff should call students in and ask them to explain unusually complex words or obscure references they have used.

The “biggest worry” for academics who have such suspicions is that they lack proof, she says - but that is no excuse for inaction.

“There’s no support for the argument about proof. Students can’t question academic judgements. You don’t have to be [100 per cent] sure, you have to weigh the balance of probabilities - and be at least 65 per cent sure,” she thinks.

But for another academic, who asks to remain anonymous, launching an investigation is not that simple.

“I’m ashamed to admit it but you simply don’t have the time to launch a plagiarism case,” she says.

One colleague, the same academic recalls, had to “almost google every line” of a suspect essay and make several trips to the library to ascertain whether her fears about a piece of work were genuine.

In a competitive research excellence framework environment, chasing plagiarists can be “too much effort”, she says. In any case, she is also unsure if her institution would back her up if she uncovered cheating. Universities have a “real anxiety about the litigation culture” and are “anxious” about academics exercising their judgement.

When offenders do get caught, Carroll says, the punishments for handing in contracted essays are “highly variable”. She finds this worrying because penalties are a major determinant of how likely students are to cheat.

“I believe students should be thrown out” if caught, she says. “It’s fraud.”

However, according to the results of THE ’s FoI request, most students who cheat in this manner can expect to remain on their courses.

Of the 59 students who were caught handing in bought essays in 2011-12 and 2012-13, just 13 were expelled. In one case at Newcastle University , for example, an international student suspected of handing in work purchased from the site Essays.uk.com was given a “final written warning” but no other punishment.

Many believe that academics’ first line of defence against custom essays is to set assignments that are difficult, if not impossible, to outsource. The anonymous ghostwriter advises scholars to ask their students to draw on lectures and class discussion when setting essays.

“This is something that is either less visible or invisible to the ghostwriter,” he explains, and therefore much more difficult to achieve.

Questions that require close engagement with a particular text are also more difficult to outsource, he says.

“Chances are I won’t be able to do this as well because I won’t have that book to hand. If asked to, I have a problem.”

He also cautions against sending out lecture notes in electronic formats or putting them online, because this only makes it easier for ghostwriters to give the impression of having attended courses.

However, the Equality Challenge Unit points out that students with disabilities might find taking notes during lectures difficult or even impossible, and some departments require academics to provide lecture notes to all students for this reason.

Some essay questions appear time and time again, making them easier for contract writers to complete, so one obvious piece of advice from plagiarism experts is to avoid setting assignments on predictable topics such as “women in Dickens”.

Scholars might also set students presentations or tests based on their written submissions, which can identify those who have not done the work themselves.

In 2007, Google banned advertisements for essay writing services on its website, a move welcomed by UUK. Couldn’t the government introduce a blanket ban on the companies?

A spokeswoman for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills suggests that this would be impossible under current law.

“Whether a student and/or ‘writing service’ have committed an offence would be for a court to decide and depend on the individual circumstances of the case,” she says. “There is no action BIS could take to address this.”

Another drastic option is suggested by the tale of a US professor, recounted by Lancaster, who set himself up as a contract essay writer to test the waters, only to find one of his own assignments out to tender. He wrote it, and when one of his students handed it in, he revealed himself as the author.

Wiss maintains that All Answers is “very keen to work with universities to provide a service that can’t be abused in the first place” - but only if universities agree that the company is “a legitimate source of academic help”.

The UUK spokesman declines to comment on this and says: “More should be done to clamp down on these essay companies.”

He adds that the body does not have any specific proposals to tackle the problem (although suggestions are welcome).

So there does not appear to be any systematic solution to essay mills on the horizon, and responsibility for detecting and dealing with the issue continues to rest with individual academics and their universities.

“If academics really want to catch these essays, they are going to have to spend more time engaging with their students’ submitted work,” concludes the anonymous essay writer. Some may be left wishing that they had more time to do just that.

Nothing to hide (except your details)

“Although using our service is not cheating, and you have nothing to hide if you use the service responsibly, we still take your privacy very seriously … We never share details of your order with your university.” Oxbridge Essays

“First class in my chemistry coursework was unbelievable!!! thanks.” - Theo, Manchester My Uni Essays

“Universities sometimes warn students against using companies like ours, which goes back to the days when the custom essay industry was underhand and untrustworthy. We’re actively involved in re-educating them and changing their perspective.” All Answers

“Just wanted to send a note to say thanks. Your paper helped me get a 2:1 for my degree!! I can now apply for my Masters! Thanks ever so much!! Do you write to Masters level?” - Lucy, Stratford-upon-Avon Ivory Research

How to exorcise the ghostwriters

• Set students short tests or presentations based on their essays.
• Ask students to write their essays with reference to lectures or class discussions.
• Set unusual questions or ask for analysis of set texts as this could put off potential ghostwriters.
• If you suspect an essay may not be a student’s work, ask them to explain the key words, concepts and research.
• Check references: ghostwriters often do not have access to full journals or books, so may be able to reference only the preview pages of online articles.
• If an essay seems overly formatted, for example, with a contents page and chapters, this could be because of a standard format used by essay companies.
• Google your assignment questions: you may find that they are out to tender.
• Click here for more on preventing plagiarism.

Register to continue

Why register?

• Registration is free and only takes a moment
• Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
• Sign up for our newsletter

Or subscribe for unlimited access to:

• Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
• Digital editions
• Digital access to THE’s university and college rankings analysis

Already registered or a current subscriber? Login

Reader's comments (2)

You might also like.

How Asian universities entered the semiconductor ‘chip wars’

With more countries keen to capitalise on the lucrative industry, policymakers and companies are leaning on universities to address talent deficits

Let’s pause lecture recording and stop student loneliness

Evidence suggests that the benefits of lecture capture are coming at the cost of broader student and staff well-being, say Treasa Kearney and Liz Crolley

US law schools pushed to improve leadership training

Lack of management nous leaves legal profession vulnerable as human and technological shifts expose need for people skills

Student Login

Your account for thesubath.com is linked to your University BUCS account.

Staff, Job Advertisers Guests and Associate Members Login

Forgotten password Guest Registration form

Education Officer Blog - Essay mills - What are they and why you should avoid them?

Education officer blog, essay mills - what are they and why you should avoid them.

I’m sure you’ve all received at least one message, email, tweet, DM from someone part of a company offering to help write you assignments, I know I have! Only a few weeks ago someone messaged me on LinkedIn offering to help with my exams. Using unauthorised sources of information during online, remote exams and assessments such as platforms like essay mills and sites such as Chegg are against the University’s rules for exams ( Rule 2; Conduct of Examinations , the Academic Integrity Statement for Remote Exams and exam instructions/rubrics).

Essay mills exploit students and whilst they may appear as a simple way to do minimal work and get a decent grade, are not. They pry on students who are likely to be stressed with deadlines and exams, and do not provide the solution you may be searching for as it is incredibly likely you will be caught and the University takes offences such as this very seriously ( you could be asked to retake the exam or even expelled).  All whilst undermining the integrity of higher education.

More recently the Department for Education, with support from Chris Skidmore (former universities minister), have started to investigate the impact of essay mills and are advising ministers on how best to tackle the issues of contract cheating including legislative options such as a private bill outlawing essay mills. Michelle Donelan  (the current universities minister) has acknowledge that:

“Degree fraud cheats both learners and employers and has no place at all in our higher education system.

“This Government is committed to tackling academic misconduct, and upholding the hard work of students, especially during this difficult time.”

QAA has recently published a government backed Academic Integrity Charter for British Universities, at Senate on the 21 st April I raised the importance for the University of Bath to sign up to this charter to continue supporting students and withholding the high academic standards whilst cracking down on academic misconduct.

BetterByU is a campaign set up by Education Officers called the Academic Integrity Collective across the UK which the SU Bath are supporting. It is campaigning against essay mills and can be found on twitter @AcademicInteg . There is this excellent blog on WonkHE explaining how and why students can find themselves getting caught out - SU Officers are waging war against essay mills .

What to do in the mean time?

• If you are contacted by an essay mill – report it.
• If you feel you wont be able to complete your exam or assessment, speak to your DoS or Personal Tutor who will be able to offer help and support you.
• Raise awareness of the dangers of using essay mills with your peers.

What we are doing?

• Supporting the #BetterByU Campaign.
• Lobbying the University to sign up to the Academic Integrity Charter set out by QAA.

Whilst essay mills are not currently illegal (hopefully soon they will be), we strongly encourage you to report any service that gets in touch with you and not to use them.

The University have created a webpage with more information. This can be found here !

Sources of Support Before, During, and After Assessments

We understand that assessment periods can be very stressful, especially in the current climate. We have a range of services available to provide support and guidance for you to ensure that you are ready for your assessments and able to uphold ethical scholarship practices. The following are here to help you:

Academic Integrity Webpages – these pages contain links to our digital training package, the Ethical Scholar Toolkit, which provides guidance on referencing and avoiding plagiarism, as well as a referencing database. There is also a link to the University’s regulatory document, QA53, and a summary of your responsibilities as a student for maintaining your own academic integrity.

Academic Integrity Statement for Remote Assessment – a reminder of your agreement with the University to uphold our community’s ethical standards.

The Skills Centre – our experienced staff in the Skills Centre can provide group or individual assistance on developing assessment skills and helping you to solve challenges you are facing with your academic work.

The Library – our expert librarians are available to help you with your research skills, referencing support, and finding appropriate resources for your studies.

The Wellbeing Service – our professionals are here to provide advice and support on student wellbeing and welfare throughout your degree.

Student Support Services – our team are available to provide assistance with your needs and to help you get the most out of your degree.

SU Advice and Support Centre – the SU advisors offer confidential, non-judgemental information, advice and support on any issues you may be facing during your degree.

Exams and Assessment hub – Information available on what to do if you cannot take or continue with your exam or if you think your attempt might be affected, as well as links to many of the pages listed above.

Blog The Education Hub

https://educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2022/04/28/essay-mills-are-now-illegal-skills-minister-calls-on-internet-service-providers-to-crack-down-on-advertising/

Essay mills are now illegal - Skills Minister calls on internet service platforms to crack down on advertising

Skills Minister Alex Burghart has written to internet service platforms to make sure they know that essay mills - which facilitate cheating by helping academic writing, often by appearing to be legitimate - have been made illegal and to call on their support in making sure they can no longer advertise online. Here you can read that letter.

The Skills and Post-16 Education Bill has become law. Through this act, the Government has legislated for landmark reforms that will transform post-16 education and skills, including criminalising essay mills.

As you may know, Essay Mills are online platforms that facilitate contract cheating. Contract cheating happens when a third party completes work for a student which is passed off by the student as their own work. Many essay mill companies use marketing techniques which indicate they are offering ‘legitimate’ academic writing support for students. Reports also indicate that some essay mills seek to blackmail students who use these services. It is right that we have legislated against these insidious crimes.

It is now a criminal offence to provide or arrange for another person to provide contract cheating services for financial gain to students taking a qualification at a post-16 institution or sixth form in England, enrolled at a higher education provider in England and any other person over compulsory school age who has been entered for a regulated qualification at a place in England.

Similarly, it is now an offence for a person to make arrangements for an advertisement in which that person offers, or is described as being available or competent, to provide or arrange for another person to provide a cheating service. Importantly, the offence centres around the act of advertising to students, and for the offence to be committed it does not need to be seen by its target demographic.

There is now a strengthened, collaborative effort across the sector to tackle essay mills and we want you to be part of this campaign. Platforms such as yourself play an integral role in helping us to make the most effective use of the legislation; marketing and advertising are the lifeblood of any successful industry. We are aware that high numbers of essay mills have used your platform to promote their services to students in the past, paying for advertising to promote their companies. Essay mills are now illegal entities, and you should not carry their advertising. It is no longer a moral question; you will be facilitating an illegal activity. I ask you to do everything in your power to prevent the advertising these unscrupulous practices.

Removing essay mill access to online marketing will seriously hamper their efforts to target vulnerable students and I implore you to do so following the introduction of this legislation. We must now all work together to capitalise on it.

I hope that in writing to you today I have underlined the urgency of this issue and the important role that companies like yours play in stamping out essay mills once and for all and am sure I can be confident in your support.

Thank you for your support with this important matter.

Tags: cheating , essay mills , internet service platforms

Sharing and comments

Share this page, related content and links, about the education hub.

The Education Hub is a site for parents, pupils, education professionals and the media that captures all you need to know about the education system. You’ll find accessible, straightforward information on popular topics, Q&As, interviews, case studies, and more.

Please note that for media enquiries, journalists should call our central Newsdesk on 020 7783 8300. This media-only line operates from Monday to Friday, 8am to 7pm. Outside of these hours the number will divert to the duty media officer.

Members of the public should call our general enquiries line on 0370 000 2288.

Sign up and manage updates

Follow us on social media, search by date.

Comments and moderation policy

• Get involved

Trouble at mill: protecting students from contract cheating

There is growing concern in government and among universities and colleges about students’ use of essay mills. Where does the OfS’s commitment to protecting standards in higher education fit in?

The use of essay mills in higher education is a global phenomenon. It is possible to estimate the number of essay writing services at close to 1,000 . And the number of services available has been growing.

Essay mills are exploitative and immoral. Behind their slick marketing lie organisations which exist only to enrich themselves with no concern for the damage they cause. The pandemic and the shift to online learning and assessment has – unfortunately – led to a further recent increase in the number of sites targeting their services at higher education students in England and the UK.

A matter of standards

Essay mills are businesses which offer essay-writing services to students for a fee. These are often original pieces of writing which claim to be for a legitimate purpose, but which are then handed in by students as their own work. The practice is also referred to as commercial contract cheating.

The OfS is concerned about the growth of these services for two reasons. First, they put individual students at risk. Second, they threaten standards in higher education more widely.

The impact of using these services on individual students cannot be overstated. While it should be said that the overwhelming majority of students do not cheat, those students who do resort to essay mills may be under real pressure and feel that buying an essay is a way out. It is not.

Universities and colleges rightly have policies in place to identify and respond to cheating in assessment. The consequences for students can be severe, including removal from their course. Aside from the obvious academic consequences, students are also exposing themselves to a shadowy industry where cybercrime looms large and their personal data is at risk. And, even if they aren’t caught, students who contract out their learning miss out on the educational benefits of the assignment, and risk falling behind in their course. Essay mills are never the answer in any circumstances.

The wider impact of essay mills is profound too. If students are using these services in numbers this threatens standards in English universities and colleges and raises important questions about the integrity of the qualifications they award.

At all higher education levels, from Certificates of Higher Education (CertHE) to doctoral degrees (PhDs), the sector-recognised standards in the OfS regulatory framework set out the knowledge and skills students must have demonstrated to be awarded their qualification.

For a bachelors’ degree with honours, for example, the OfS sector-recognised standards state that students should have demonstrated, among other things, an ability to devise and sustain arguments, and/or to solve problems, using ideas and techniques, some of which are at the forefront of a discipline.

Where a student has bought their essays from an essay mill, they have not demonstrated that they can do these things. Standards, and the long-term value of their qualification, both to the student and to employers, are immediately compromised.

What can universities and colleges do?

As a principles-based regulator, the OfS does not set out specific policies that providers should follow to maintain quality and protect standards, but we do expect them to take the steps necessary to do so.

In practice this means that providers should, for example, ensure that they are designing assessments that remove opportunities for students to cheat, and ensuring that students are made aware of the risks of using essay mills to deter them from using such services. We also expect providers to ensure they can detect and deal robustly and fairly with individual cases of contract cheating.

Universities and colleges should also consider some of the associated cybersecurity issues. Essay mills are taking an increasingly sophisticated approach to targeting students, which includes seeking to compromise providers’ websites.

This represents a serious risk to university and college security, and their reputation and integrity as publicly funded institutions. This is a vicious circle too: if providers’ websites are compromised this also increases the likelihood of students coming into contact with essay mills.

We support the steps already being taken by the sector to support individual providers to engage with these matters. There is other welcome work underway. Universities and colleges have come together, coordinated by the QAA, to pledge to combat the threat of essay mills.

A group of students and student representatives has voiced their concerns about essay mills and explained why they believe students fall victim to these practices. 

Emerging evidence from Australia and Ireland suggests that legislation has the potential to have a positive impact in helping to tackle this issue, particularly alongside a wider package of activity to deter, detect and address contract cheating.

In England, the government has recently expressed support for the principles behind Lord Storey’s Higher Education Cheating Services Prohibition Bill and is exploring the Bill’s potential, particularly as part of a wider approach, to reduce the number of essay mills in operation and to send a clear sign to students and the companies themselves that this activity is illegal.

The role of the OfS

The OfS has been working with the Department for Education and sector bodies to address this issue and support students who might be targeted by these services. We believe a multi-pronged, sector-led, programme of work is the right way to clamp down on essay mills. The issues are complex and a multifaceted approach is necessary: ministers are considering the benefits of legislation; good information, advice and guidance for students is essential; and the OfS has its regulatory tools too.

We are working with our student panel, asking for students' advice on what the OfS can do to make students more aware of the real consequences of using these services. As a regulator, should we see evidence that standards may be at risk, we will engage with the providers concerned to understand what they are doing to make sure they are compliant with our conditions of registration. And we plan to go further.

In the coming weeks, we will be launching the next stage of our consultation on our future approach to regulating quality and standards. That will contain detailed proposals to ensure providers are playing their part and delivering rigorous assessment and reliable standards for all students.

Report this comment

Are you sure you wish to report this comment?

Share this page:

• Share on Twitter
• Share on Pinterest
• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn

Describe your experience of using this website

Thank you for your feedback

• Original article
• Open access
• Published: 26 December 2019

Are essay mills committing fraud? A further analysis of their behaviours vs the 2006 fraud act (UK)

• Michael J. Draper 1 &
• Callum Reid-Hutchings 1  

International Journal for Educational Integrity volume  15 , Article number:  11 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

4656 Accesses

5 Citations

5 Altmetric

Metrics details

Many strategies have been proposed to address the supply of bespoke essays and other assignments by companies often described as ‘Essay Mills’ with the act of supply and use being invariably described as ‘contract cheating’. These proposals increasingly refer to the law as a solution in common with other action. In this article, the lead author revisits work undertaken in 2016 as a result of recent legal and extra-legal developments to assess whether the UK Fraud Act (2006) might now be used to tackle some of the activities of the companies involved, by comparing their common practises, and their Terms and Conditions, with the Act. It was previously found that all sites have disclaimers regarding the use of their products but there were some obvious contradictions in the activities of the sites which undermined those disclaimers, for example plagiarism-free guarantees for the work. In this article, we ask and consider the question whether this is still the case having regard to the impact of a change in the law by the UK supreme court and recent action of the UK Advertising Standards Authority. We also consider whether a call for a new offence to be created which specifically targets the undesirable behaviours of these companies is still justified.

In this article we consider the development of law and policy in the area of contract cheating and in particular, whether or not recent changes in UK law, action taken by the Advertising Standards Authority and the guidance issued by the Quality Assurance Agency for the UK (QAA 2016 , QAA 2017 ) have had an impact on the knowledge and state of mind of UK registered companies engaged in supplying essays to students for financial gain and the consequences for the operation of the Fraud Act 2006.

Our findings in relation to the action taken by the Advertising Standards Authority have a wider implication for the current debate in relation to proposed legislative responses to contract cheating across the common law world, in particular Australia and the Republic of Ireland.

In earlier work, Draper et al. ( 2017 ), and Draper and Newton ( 2017 ) considered the main actors in contract cheating: a student, their university, and a third party (often a company or ‘Essay Mill’) who completes assessments for the former to be submitted to the latter, but whose input is not permitted. They also considered the legal consequences that might apply to such arrangements. Those legal consequences focussed on the operation of the Fraud Act 2006 and the relationship with the legal test of dishonesty necessary to establish criminal liability on the part of an Essay Mill under that Act.

Since the original work was undertaken there have been several critical developments in relation to essay mills in the UK. As noted above these involve a change in the law on dishonesty, action taken by the Advertising Standards Authority and guidance published by the quality assurance agency for the UK.

We undertook further and new research to update and expand upon our 2016/2017 findings to determine whether or not these developments have had an impact in the manner in which Essay Mills operate. Given the potential consequences of continuing to operate as usual in the context of these developments we thought it reasonable to assume that a fundamental change to the business model of Essay Mills and the terms and conditions under which they operate would be evident.

Assessing guilty minds

New case law has demonstrated and reaffirmed how knowledge may be attributed to Essay Mill companies in order to determine their potential criminal liability. Criminal liability usually requires that the defendant have a guilty state of mind, a criminal mental element which lawyers call ‘ mens rea’.

The Fraud Act 2006 (UK Government E 2006 ) has 16 sections but one general offence of fraud which may be committed in 3 principal ways:

section 2 (fraud by false representation),

section 3 (fraud by failing to disclose information), and

section 4 (fraud by abuse of position).

The guilty state of mind necessary to secure a successful prosecution for the purposes of these sections is focussed on the dishonesty, intention and knowledge of the perpetrator. As Essay Mills tend to operate commercially through a company demonstrating that a company has a guilty state of mind is essential if a criminal prosecution is to succeed. The knowledge of the directors and other principal officers of an Essay Mill must be attributable to the company and this critical issue has recently been considered by the UK Supreme court.

In Jetvia v Bilta (2015, UKSC 23) the Supreme court determined when the knowledge of a director will be imputed to the company. The court held that imputation is sensitive to the particular facts of any case but as a matter of general principle the knowledge of a director will usually be imputed to a company when considering whether a company has committed a criminal offence.

Of particular relevance to our discussion are the observations of Lord Sumption:

“English law might have taken the position that a company, being an artificial legal construct, was mindless. If it had done that, then legal wrongs which depended on proof of some mental element such as dishonesty or intention could never be attributed to a company and the present question could not arise … .. It cannot be emphasised too strongly that neither in the civil nor in the criminal context does this involve piercing the corporate veil. It is simply a recognition of the fact that the law treats a company as thinking through agents, just as it acts through them.”

That the law treats a company as thinking though agents is reinforced by section 12 of the Fraud Act 2006 which provides that an offence is committed by a company if the offence is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the company. Importantly the section goes on to provide that such individuals are also guilty of the offence and liable to prosecution and punishment.

Therefore human agents such as directors of an Essay Mill cannot escape liability and prosecution under the Act by hiding behind corporate personality and action claiming that the guilty mind and action is that of the company and not theirs.

Furthermore those directing the operation of Essay Mills should note that a company may take civil action against its directors for any loss suffered by the company as result of the actions of its directors.

The key question ‘When the directors of a company involve it in a fraudulent transaction, is the company barred by the doctrine of illegality from suing them and their accessories for losses caused by their breach of fiduciary duty?’ has been answered by Jetivia v Bilta with an emphatic ‘No’ .

The fiduciary duty of a director is to act in the best interests of the company in circumstances of absolute trust and loyalty. Consequently directors of Essay Mills are on notice that if a company suffers loss as a result of a breach of the law the company may take action legal against those directing or operating the company to recover its losses as they have failed to act in the best interests of the company. A Director cannot claim that their knowledge is attributed to a company and therefore provides a defence of corporate illegality in any action brought by the company against a director for wrongdoing.

Jetvia v Bilta also confirmed that s.213 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (UK Government E 1986 , which allows liquidators to seek a contribution from any person who was knowingly party to fraudulent trading by the company) has extra-territorial effect. Claims may be brought against any person across the globe “ at least to the extent of applying to individuals and corporations resident outside the United Kingdom.”

Draper et al. 2017 called for the creation of a specific criminal offence in relation to Essay Mills that had extraterritorial effect because many Essay Mills are legally established outside of the UK but operate within the UK through digital services and platforms.

The case therefore supports the argument that in cases of fraud both the law and the courts will not object on the grounds of principle and are capable of facilitating a criminal prosecution in relation to activity taking place outside of a legal jurisdiction, provided there is an established relationship or activity with the legal jurisdiction in question.

New law of dishonesty

Having established that both a company and its directors and principal officers may be held liable for criminal activity through the construct of a guilty mind, we turn now to consider how the legal test for dishonesty in the UK has fundamentally altered and the consequential potential impact on the liability of Essay Mills and their agents under the Fraud Act.

The Explanatory Note to the Fraud Act 2006 states:

“Section 2 makes it an offence to commit fraud by false representation. Subsection (1)(a) makes clear that the representation must be made dishonestly. This test applies also to sections 3 and 4. The current definition of dishonesty was established in R v Ghosh [1982] Q.B.1053. That judgment sets a two-stage test. The first question is whether a defendant’s behaviour would be regarded as dishonest by the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people. If answered positively, the second question is whether the defendant was aware that his conduct was dishonest and would be regarded as dishonest by reasonable and honest people.”

In the article ‘Are Essay Mills committing fraud? An analysis of their behaviours vs the 2006 Fraud Act (UK) (Draper et al. 2017 ) the difficulties of using the Fraud Act 2006 to take action against Essay Mills was demonstrated primarily because Essay Mills protect themselves in their terms and conditions by stating that their products are only to be used as a ‘reference work’ or equivalent, and must not to be submitted as the student’s own work.

Thus, the second question of R v Ghosh (1982, 1 QB 1053),whether the defendant was aware that conduct was dishonest etc., would probably not be satisfied.

The UK Supreme Court in Ivey v Genting Casinos (2017, UKSC 67) has revisited the test of dishonesty with significant consequences for the Fraud Act and Essay Mills.

The court has removed the subjective second question of the test for dishonesty and adopted a refined and straightforward test: does the relevant conduct fall below an objective standard of honesty?

In our view, Essay Mills should have been alerted by this decision to the fact that behaviour will now be judged to be “honest” or “dishonest” simply by the objective standards of ordinary, reasonable and honest people. In particular, the guidance given in Ivey by Lord Hughes on the application of the test of dishonesty in relation to criminal offences should be noted:

“When dishonesty is in question the fact-finding tribunal must first ascertain (subjectively) the actual state of the individual’s knowledge or belief as to the facts. The reasonableness or otherwise of his belief is a matter of evidence (often in practice determinative) going to whether he held the belief, but it is not an additional requirement that his belief must be reasonable; the question is whether it is genuinely held. When once his actual state of mind as to knowledge or belief as to facts is established, the question whether his conduct was honest or dishonest is to be determined by the fact-finder by applying the (objective) standards of ordinary decent people. There is no requirement that the defendant must appreciate that what he has done is, by those standards, dishonest. ”

The above analysis of dishonesty was strictly speaking not a binding part of the decision but offered up by way of explanation. However the analysis is important as it points in the strongest terms to a significant change from the previous standards of dishonesty. The clear intention of the Supreme Court means that trial judges may adopt the Ivey test of dishonesty on the assumption that the Court of Appeal would prefer Ivey over Ghosh , as was acknowledged in DPP v Patterson (2017, EWHC 2820).

Indeed this approach has now been approved by the Court of Appeal in the 2019 case of Group Seven Limited & Ors v Notable Services LLP & Orsin (2019, EWCA Civ 614). As we discuss in further detail later on this means that a finding of dishonesty in relation to Essay Mills is more likely because they will simply be judged by an objective standard of dishonesty.

However will Essay Mills persist in relying on their terms and conditions as an ‘industry’ wide standard providing them with a defence against an allegation of dishonest practice?

Most likely they will but the recent case of Carr v Formation Group (2018) confirms that this will not be a viable defence. Under the old test for dishonesty, it was possible to call expert evidence to show that conduct, however dishonest, was ‘market practice’ (or that ‘everybody was doing it’) in order to demonstrate a lack of subjective appreciation that it fell below an objective standard of dishonesty.

Morgan J explained that this could result in some significant consequences for the proper conduct of business. As he succinctly put it in the judgment (at paragraph 32):

“ The history of the markets have shown that, from time to time, markets adopt patterns of behavior which are dishonest by the standards of honest and reasonable people; in such cases, the market has simply abandoned ordinary standards of honesty.”

In other words, it would be perverse to let “markets” decide their own interpretation of honesty and then be judged by that .” The defence of ‘everybody in this was doing it’ is no longer available and this will have an impact across a wide range of industries such as Essay Mills where ordinarily ‘dishonest’ or misleading working cultures and practices have developed.

These practices are often most visible by the advertising employed by businesses and we now turn to developments in this area as a result of action taken by the UK Advertising Standards Authority (‘ASA’) in relation to the advertising of Essay Mills.

ASA rulings

Since July 2016, there have been three referrals to the ASA which we will now address. It is important to keep in mind that many of the observations made are equally applicable to advertising standards in a number of countries.

The first referral to the ASA was made by the QAA in relation to certain aspects of the advertising used by UK Essays. The ASA ruling on All Answers Ltd. t/a UK Essays was delivered on 21.3.18 (ASA 2018 ) and related to not uncommon advertising:

“The home page featured text that stated “ … GUARANTEED GRADE, EVERY TIME We’re so confident you’ll love the work we produce, we guarantee the final grade of the work. Unlike others, if your work doesn’t meet our exacting standards, you can claim a full refund … LOVED BY CUSTOMERS & THE GLOBAL PRESS UK Essays have lots of press coverage from all over the world confirming that a 2:1 piece of work produced by us met this standard … We were the first company in the world to offer you guaranteed 2:1 and 1st class work”.

Additional information about the service was included on pages titled ‘WORLD CLASS GUARANTEES’ and ‘UK ESSAYS IN THE PRESS’.

The QAA asserted that:

The advert was misleading, because they believed it did not make sufficiently clear the risks associated with submitting purchased essays; and

The references to the press coverage that UK essays received misleadingly implied that they had received positive coverage or endorsement from those press outlets.

The ASA considered that consumers would expect from the advert that they could submit purchased essays as their own that would meet the ordered grade without risks, which was not the case. They therefore concluded that the advert was misleading and the complaint was upheld. Furthermore, the ASA considered that the manner in which the quotes were presented was likely to give an overall impression that UK Essays received positive reviews or coverage from the sources referred to and again the complaint was upheld.

Interestingly, in relation to the point made on press coverage above, when accessed on the 16 July 2019, there is a quote on the UK Essays website on the ‘press coverage’ tab from The Guardian newspaper (a quality UK broadsheet). It reads “if you consider that the difference between a 2.1 and a 2.2 can be thousands of pounds on your starting salary, the incentives are obvious ”. This quote may suggest that using the services of UK Essays has a value. The quote is taken from a Boris Johnson article in 2006 (Johnson, 2006 written before his elevation to UK Prime minister) in which he refers to ‘ cheats ’ and that it makes him feel ‘ queasy ’.

As UK Essays stated in its response to the ASA investigation, the original press publications are readily available on their press coverage tab. However, the Boris Johnson article is available at the very end of the page, in much less bold text. Arguably, it is harder to find than other articles. The article is entitled ‘ the unbearable triteness of cheating’ . The quote they have used certainly does not seem to match the general tone of the article and a customer might think that UK Essays had received a positive review in this article.

The ASA explicitly directed UK Essays to stop presenting advertisements from press coverage and other published sources in a manner that was not reflective of the tone and content of those sources. This may not have been acted upon.

There has been another QAA referral in relation to the advertising by Essay Writing Services UK. The ASA ruling against Thoughtbridge Consulting Ltd. was delivered on 7.11.2018 (ASA 2019 a). The similar issue of being able to submit the essay as your own essay was flagged, as well the grade guarantee advertisement.

“ the home page included text on the home page which stated “Get the grades you Need and Achieve More Today! … GRADE GUARANTEE Get the grade you ordered first time, or your money back Plagiarism Free, Free plagiarism report with every order … Only for you The work you order will never be re-used or re-sold ”.

It was asserted that:

“Get the grade you ordered”, “Plagiarism free” and “The work you order will never be re-used or re-sold” misleadingly implied that consumers could hand the essay in as their own; and

“Grade guarantee Get the grade you ordered” was misleading and could be substantiated.

The ASA considered that consumers would expect that they could submit purchased essays as their own without risks from the advert, which was not the case. They therefore concluded that the ad was misleading and the claim was upheld. Furthermore, they considered that whilst the information was available on the “Guarantees page”, consumers could go through the process of purchasing an essay without being given this detailed information, and therefore it could be overlooked. It was further considered that it was not clear to consumers that the claim “Grade guarantee “Get the grade you ordered first time, or your money back” meant that if the consumer paid to have their work marked by Essay Writing Service UK and did not achieve the indicated grade they were eligible for a refund, rather than that if they handed in the essay they purchased it would achieve the grade for which they had paid. Therefore, the ASA concluded that the claim was misleading.

In our research the terms and conditions on Essay Writing Services UK could not be accessed. It is assumed one would have to put ‘additional info’ in on the order page to get to the terms and conditions. Given the fact it is hard to find any trace of any terms and conditions, it is considered that this would be an impediment for a student who is not actively looking for them.

The most recent ruling by the ASA was delivered on 9 January 2019 against The Oxbridge Research Group Ltd., known commonly as Oxbridge Essays (ASA 2019 b). There were two separate issues, both being upheld. The website included claims on the home page which stated “With Oxbridge Essays, it has never been easier to get the grades you’ve always wanted … First class? 2:1? No problem. We work with over 1,900 of the UK’s best academics to make sure you get the grade you want … Get better grades We’ll send you the product you have ordered on your chosen delivery date - it’s that simple ”. Further text on a page headed “Dissertation writing services ” stated “We put the time and effort into making every piece of work we write the best it can be - and the results speak for themselves … Your dissertation will include everything your university requires: introduction, research question, chapter outlines, literature review, methodology, analysis, recommendations and conclusion … Whatever standard you choose, we guarantee the work will be to that standard … Oxbridge-educated academics The vast majority of our writers have studied or taught at the UK’s two best universities, Oxford and Cambridge”.

The ad misleadingly implied that students could submit an essay they bought as their own; and

The claim “The vast majority of our writers have studied or taught at the UK’s two best universities, Oxford and Cambridge” was misleading and could be substantiated.

The ASA considered that consumers would understand from the advert that they could submit purchased essays as their own without risks, and the website did not make sufficiently clear that was not the case, concluding that the advert was misleading and the claim was upheld. They also considered that consumers would interpret the claim ‘the vast majority of our writers have studied or taught at the UK’s two best universities Oxford and Cambridge” to mean that almost all of the writers who wrote for Oxbridge Essays had either completed a degree or taught at either Oxford or Cambridge universities. Given the fact only 71% of the writers had either studied or taught at Oxford or Cambridge, it was considered not to be sufficient to meet consumers expectation based on the advertising claim, that almost all writers had a degree from, or had taught at, one of those universities, and that it was more likely than not that an essay would be written by a writer from one of those universities. The ASA therefore concluded that the claim was misleading and again the claim was upheld.

Given the potential consequences of continuing to operate as usual in the context of the change in the law relating to the legal test of dishonesty and the ASA rulings it is reasonable to assume that a fundamental change to the business model of Essay Mills and the terms and conditions under which they operate would be evident. We therefore sought to assess and test this assumption by revisiting and expanding earlier research.

Have essay Mills changed their business model?

In the first 2017 article, the commonly observed practises of some UK based essay-writing companies along with their terms and conditions of supply were compared to sections 1–7 the UK Fraud Act 2006 to determine whether or not these companies were committing an offence under these sections of the Act.

Twenty six sites operated by 21 apparently distinct companies were analysed; each had separate listings at UK Companies House. The identity of the specific companies were not included for publication for the following reasons: 1. not wanting to further advertise the services of these companies, either through publication or through any publicity associated with it. 2. there was no guarantee that the company number given on these websites was actually that of the company which ran the site. In some cases, the names were the same but in others this was not the case. 3. The content of the article was academic opinion and not the basis for legal proceedings. We have adopted the same principle in this article.

In July 2016, the websites of those companies (Table  1 ) were accessed to address a series of questions), which would then allow for consideration of the relevant sections of the Fraud Act. Questions were addressed by one author with cross checking by another. Table 1 is reprinted for ease of reference and comparison with new data.

In July 2019, we adopted the same methodology described above when updating results for the purposes of this article. The websites of those companies were accessed to address a series of questions (Table  2 ) which would then allow us to consider the relevant sections of the Fraud Act. Questions were addressed by one author with cross checking by a second. For the final question, “Is the advertising potentially misleading (compared to disclaimer/terms + conditions)?”, the authors considered the advertising to be misleading if it (for example) gave an overall impression that work purchased from the site could be submitted as if it were a student’s own work, without citing the company. A similar approach has also recently been adopted by the ASA, as we discuss below.

Our main conclusion is that UK registered essay mills have not significantly altered their terms and conditions since July 2016. However, there are some differences of note.

Six websites have either been taken down or not accessible since the original research, which explains the fewer number of sites considered by our current research.

There has been an increase in the number of websites which we consider to be misleading (gives the overall impression that work purchased from the site could be submitted as if it were a student’s own work) having regard to advice given in the ASA rulings: a rise from 31% to 68%. This is significant for our discussion on behaviours that might be objectively considered dishonest that follows later in this article.

As previously noted Essay Mills have a disclaimer in their terms of use on the website or in their terms and conditions. However, during our current research some terms and conditions could not be easily found, or personal details had to be registered in order to gain ‘additional info’ where it is assumed that terms and conditions are located. This too is an apparent change in practice and the reason for the percentage reduction in the tables from 100% to 88%.

The plagiarism free guarantee and qualified writer guarantee are inducements that these websites continue to deploy but again with a notable reduction in relation to the plagiarism free guarantee (100% offer down to 84%).

There is a reduction in the number of sites that allow a student to specify a grade. The reason for this may be explained by the fact that some companies guarantee a particular quality but not a grade. It would be inappropriate to characterise this as a ‘grade guarantee’.

A point of note is that there is now one website which no longer offers academic writing. It only provides free essays and the terms and conditions specifically state that they no longer offer academic writing services. This might be attributable to the impact of the ASA rulings. It is certainly a welcome development.

Changes in practice due to ASA rulings

The issues identified by the ASA in relation to Essay Mill websites are not unique to the UK and will have much in common with sites in other jurisdictions such as Australia, New Zealand and the Republic of Ireland.

Our Findings from Table 2 note that have been changes and we have sought to contextualise these changes having regard to the key issues identified by the ASA. Therefore Table  3 identifies the key issues addressed by the ASA in their rulings against the three essay mills noted above. We have looked at the current content of all the UK registered websites researched (so far as we able to do so) and questioned whether they clearly adopt the spirit or intention of the rulings of the ASA. We offer a reminder at this point that our interpretation is academic opinion and not a basis for further action by the ASA or otherwise.

The ASA considered it critical that Essay Mills should make it clear to customers at the point of order that they cannot submit purchased work as their own without risks. Our review indicates that this crucial recommendation has not been adopted in the manner intended (bringing this to the attention of students at point of purchase) and that the companies continue to rely on their terms and conditions to avoid liability or to carry key injunctions in areas of the website away from the order page (and therefore potentially unread by a purchaser) whilst also using familiar inducements in relation to guarantees and press coverage but in a revised format.

In our academic opinion, UK registered Essay Mills may be non-compliant in varying degrees with the ASA guidance in their current format as Table 3 demonstrates. If so and having regard to the change in the law relating to the legal test of dishonesty the question arises whether or not Essay Mills are operating in a dishonest manner.

Are essay Mills operating dishonestly?

The first point to note that although the majority of UK registered Essay Mills may have a website or advertising considered misleading for the purposes of advertising standards this does not of itself necessarily amount to dishonest behaviour for the purposes of the Fraud Act.

Essay Mill websites in the UK continue to provide familiar guarantees, for example, ‘100% plagiarism free’ and they do not appear to prioritise on their order page a clear warning that that the essay should not be submitted as the customers’ own work. Some websites draw attention to ‘model answers’ or are to be used ‘to inspire one’s own work’. However, this warning is not given prominence. Many outline this important injunction in the FAQ section or refer to it once in a small part of the home page. Having regard to the ASA rulings, such critical warnings should appear on the order page so that the student can clearly see it before committing to purchase. Does a failure to do so matter?

The answer is Yes. Although not inherently dishonest the above would be factors to be taken into account when making an objective finding of dishonesty. It should be remembered that any finding will depend upon the facts of and evidence available in any particular case.

Removing the entirely subjective second part of the two-stage test of dishonesty removes or at least lessens the possibility that an Essay Mill of questionable moral standing with their own personal code of honesty will escape liability under the Fraud Act. The key question then is would the behaviour and practice of an Essay Mill in a particular case be considered dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people?

The answer to this question will depend not simply on terms and conditions of business or nuanced judgements as to the overall ‘misleading’ tone of the website. Significant weight will be attached to the direct inducements and ‘chat’ that often takes place between students and Essay Mill prior to purchase as to how the student may use the essay. It can be said with some certainty that statements or ‘chat’ as to permitted use or other inducements which contradict terms and conditions of business are likely to be viewed as dishonest. We tentatively suggest that the change in the law of dishonesty which took place at the end of 2017 does not appear to have had a significant impact on the terms and conditions of UK registered Essay Mills as evidenced by Tables  2 and 3 above.

However a cautionary note is that the test in Ivey takes into account the defendant’s knowledge and belief, and therefore it is not a straightforward objective test and an outcome of a finding of dishonesty is not therefore entirely certain.

Whilst dishonesty is important for establishing the section 2 offence, another option that could be used to prosecute Essay Mills is Section 7 of the Fraud Act which makes it an offence to make, adapt, supply or offer to supply any article knowing that it is designed or adapted for use in the course of or in connection with fraud, or intending it to be used to commit or facilitate fraud. Section 8 extends the meaning of “article” so as to include any program or data held in electronic form. This should include an essay stored or supplied electronically by an Essay Mill. For a section 7 offence to be committed dishonesty on the part of the Essay Mill is not required, only knowledge of or an intention to commit or facilitate fraud will suffice.

“Knowledge” in Section 7 (1) (a) is a strict requirement although in practice, the use to which the article (essay) can be put is likely to provide sufficient evidence of the Essay Mills state of mind. Furthermore, as noted above, the publicity and media attention over student use of supplied essays would lead to a reasonable conclusion that an Essay Mill has relevant knowledge for the purposes of the offence ie that the student will beyond doubt submit it is as their own work.

However, the manufacture of articles (essays) that are capable of being used in or in connection with fraud but have other innocent uses (eg study aids tutoring or proof reading services) will probably not fall foul of this section unless the manufacturer intends that the essays should be used in a dishonest way (Section 7 (1) (b)). The terms and conditions of business will mitigate against the commission of an offence as essays are usually required to be used in a legitimate manner although again publicity in connection with how students are actually used and some of the advertising used by some of the Essay Mills may mean that s.7 is a viable prosecution option particularly again having regard to the ‘chat’ and other inducements prior to purchase noted above.

The key issue here relating to a guilty mind is that liability under s.7 depends on knowledge and intention rather than dishonesty. Does this matter? We have noted above that Ivey takes into account the defendant’s knowledge and belief in concluding whether or not dishonesty exists so the concept of knowledge is as important for section 2 as it is for section 7 of the Act.

So, what is knowledge for the purposes of the criminal law? Stephen Shute, ( 2002 ) states that all (criminal) offences which incorporate ‘knowledge’ of a specified proposition as a necessary element for their commission appear to require that the ‘known’ proposition be true. Shute also makes reference to the doctrine of wilful blindness, set out in Roper v Taylor’s Garage (1951 2 TLR 284, supported by R v Hall, 1985 81 Cr App 260), which suggested that ‘shutting one’s eyes to an obvious means of knowledge or deliberately refraining from making inquiries, the result of which the person does not care to have’ is in law ‘actual knowledge’. When supplying an essay does an Essay Mill refrain from making inquiries as to its use because they do not want to hear the answer that it will be used as a submission for an assessment – particularly given the common knowledge that must now exist as to likely use?

Deliberately not asking the question because you might not like the answer can be distinguished from merely neglecting to make inquiries. Neglecting to make inquiries is not knowledge (i.e. not asking a student what they intend to do with the essay will not amount to knowledge of the student’s intention to submit the essay as their own if they do so).

However, Shute concludes that the doctrine of wilful blindness is and should be treated as anomalous, he makes reference to the decision in R v Moys, (1984, 79 Cr App R 72) which seems to confirm that suspicion, even great suspicion, should not be held equivalent to belief. A belief must be correct in order to be considered knowledge. Otherwise, the exact definition of knowledge is not certain, and allows for flexibility depending on the context of the offence it is applied to.

Therefore, it is unclear what level of knowledge is required to establish criminal liability and it is unclear whether the doctrine of wilful blindness (I didn’t ask whether the student was going to submit the purchased essay and therefore I didn’t ‘know’ as my terms and conditions state that a student must not take this action) could be applied to knowledge in a criminal context.

This all means that liability under the first limb of section 7 for writing or supplying an essay for use in connection with fraud may be difficult to establish in relation to an Essay Mill although each case would turn on its own facts and in particular the ‘chat’ that may have taken place between the Essay Mill and student before or at the time of transacting in relation to the use of the essay.

Section 7 in its second limb relies upon intention (an intention that the essay be used in connection with fraud) as the basis of liability. R v Woollin (1999 1 AC 82) sets out the generally accepted definition for intention. It has been accepted that intention means either acting to bring about a particular result or acting in the face of the acknowledged virtual certainty that a particular result will come about (direct/indirect intention). However, Lord Steyn clearly states that “it does not follow that ‘intent’ necessarily has precisely the same meaning in every context in the criminal law. This means that intention may be taken to mean something other than purpose/foresight of virtual certainty in other contexts, such as under the Fraud Act. The key question here is whether or not Essay Mills intend an essay be used by a student in submission for an assessment.

In the context of media and other attention and the information required from students in relation to grade and essay title, then whilst arguably Essay Mills are wilfully shutting their eyes to the obvious it is by no means certain that there is sufficient proof for criminal liability under the second limb of section 7 on the basis that they intended the submission of the essay by the student. Their terms and conditions say something very differently but again, each case would turn on its own facts and the ‘chat’ that may have taken place between the Essay Mill and student before or at the time of transacting in relation to the use of the essay. These evidentiary challenges in relation to knowledge and intention are likely to mitigate against a prosecuting authority taking action under section 7 of the Fraud Act 2006.

Is criminal prosecution likely?

We have demonstrated that recent legal rulings make it easier to impute the knowledge of human agents to corporate Essay Mills and the context of QAA guidance and ASA rulings, as well as associated media attention, may assist in making a finding of dishonesty under the revised objective Ivey test in relation to the Fraud Act more likely. We have also demonstrated that other offences requiring knowledge and intention may be brought into play having regard to the chat and inducements that frequently occur prior to student purchase although the evidentiary challenges remain significant hurdles.

Furthermore action under the Fraud Act is on a case-by-case basis and requires the Crown Prosecution Service to bring a prosecution. The Crown Prosecution Rervice is a UK government agency employing lawyers who are responsible for examining police evidence, deciding whether to take criminal proceedings through to court prosecution stage and preparing cases for court and conducting prosecutions.

There are still a number of practical obstacles and questions to the use of the Fraud Act. The competing priorities of the Crown Prosecution Service is one such obstacle. An academic marking an essay becomes suspicious that a student has used an Essay Mill, does that academic become an investigator of a possible criminal offence? Should staff now call the police? How long would a case take and what would happen to the students and staff in the meantime? Where and how would evidence be collected; Does a university virtual learning environment become a crime scene? Many of these questions and practicalities arise because when the Fraud Act is applied; it would necessarily involve the student concerned and staff in determining whether there was a prima facie case and subsequently a successful prosecution.

These practical and evidential obstacles will militate against a criminal prosecution. If criminal prosecutions are unlikely due to practical and evidential challenges then these difficulties support the creation of a new criminal offence that is directed at the supply side and not the student demand side of the business model of Essay Mills.

Argument for a new law

For all of the above reasons, we maintain that a change in the law is required and that the central argument of the article ‘ A legal approach to tackling contract cheating? holds good.

Draper and Newton ( 2017 ) detailed a draft law, which could be used to outlaw the provision and advertising of essay writing services and would address the limitations identified above by targeting contract cheating at source; the Essay Mills themselves. This proposed new criminal offence relies on the legal principle of ‘Strict Liability’, which would simply make it an offence to offer contract cheating services, regardless of dishonesty, knowledge or intent.

There remains a strong public interest in ensuring that (for example) the doctor, engineer or lawyer has obtained their qualifications via learning they undertook themselves rather than bought from an Essay Mill. Essay Mills should not be able to obfuscate that ‘the terms and conditions say students should only use our bespoke custom written plagiarism-free guaranteed grade assignments as a ‘reference work.’

Strict Liability would ensure that the following is an offence:

“completing for financial gain or financial reward in whole or in part an assignment or any other work that a student enrolled at a Higher Education provider is required to complete as part of a Higher Education course in their stead without authorisation from those making the requirement”.

This principle would be extended to include the arrangement and advertising of such services. A Strict Liability offence would reverse the burden of proof and place the cost of the defence on the Essay Mill – a mill would be guilty of a criminal offence by mere fact of supply unless they establish a defence which is a much stronger deterrent and an provides an easier route to prosecution.

To establish a defence of due diligence we suggest that an Essay Mill would as a minimum have to remove plagiarism free guarantees, cease writing to a specific title and grade and give a clear warning at the point of purchase as to permitted use of the essay and the risks of failing to comply. All pre-purchase chat and reassurances as to use which contradict terms and conditions of business would have to end. An Essay Mill might even be required to submit the essay to a database which could be searched by text matching software of the type used by educational institutions and advise a student purchaser that this would be done.

Recent research published by Newton ( 2018 ) in Frontiers in Education, demonstrates that Essay Mills continue to thrive with students continuing to use their services. Anna McKie writing in the Times Higher Education (Mckie 2018 ), notes that UK registered essay mills wilfully continue to trade as:

“ … … essay mills are not illegal in the UK – as the UK Essays website points out, ‘we would have been shut down a long time ago’ if they were … …

The article by Draper and Newton ( 2017 ) was the only research cited to the then UK Education Minister in a 2018 letter signed by over 40 Vice Chancellors of UK Universities, calling for Essay Mills to be banned by the law.

Australia is seeking to pass new legislation (Amigud & Dawson 2019 ) and the Republic of Ireland has recently done so. Both countries operate similar criminal offences in relation to fraud as the UK and both have elected to adopt new legislation to combat Essay Mills because of the challenges faced with using existing fraud laws.

The Republic of Ireland passed an Amendment Bill in July 2019, which introduces changes to the Qualifications and Quality Assurance (Education and Training) Act 2012. Section 43A of the Amendment Bill will provide a statutory basis for the prosecution of those who facilitate cheating by learners; who advertise cheating services and who publish advertisements for cheating services.

The Amendment Bill does not directly provide for extraterritorial effect but will enable conversations with platforms such as Google and Facebook that continuing to host ‘marketing’ and ‘advertising’ material for Essay Mills will be in breach of that platforms operational terms and conditions in relation to posting illegal material. Indirectly therefore extraterritorial effect is achieved.

In circumstances in which Essay Mills frequently operate across national boundaries this indirect outcome and the in-principle support offered by Jetvia v Bilta (2015) for the creation of an offence that has extra-territorial effect will alleviate concerns over displacement and off-shoring of Essay Mill services.

The continued complexities of the Fraud Act: the precise nature of the new objective test of dishonesty, the meaning of knowledge and intention for the purpose of certain offences and the application of these concepts alongside the terms and conditions of Essay Mill websites and the direct marketing and ‘chat’ to which students are subjected (often contradicting key terms and conditions), are strong arguments for bespoke legislation that avoids these complexities through utlilising the principle of strict liability in order to address contract cheating for financial gain. This is particularly the case if we are to avoid students being the subject of criminal prosecution (students could be caught by the revised test of dishonesty and thus commit fraud through submission of a purchased essay) and in order to focus the resource and attention of prosecuting authorities on Essay Mills.

Although welcome, we have also demonstrated through Tables 2 and 3 , that the ASA rulings have not significantly changed the behaviours of UK registered Essay Mills. The only reasonable conclusion is that if we are to stop the activity of Essay Mills in the UK then we have to adopt the solution hinted at by UK Essays 2018 website – we have to make their services illegal.

We therefore submit that not taking action to create a new bespoke offence targeting Essay Mills in the UK in relation to contract cheating for financial gain and the advertising of such services is no longer an option.

Availability of data and materials

The original research data upon which the Tables in this article are based is held by the Lead Author. The data will not be shared for the following reasons:

1. The data is based on academic opinion of publicly accessible documentation linked to UK registered companies. 2. We do not want to further advertise the services of these companies, either through publication or through any publicity associated with it. 3. We had no guarantee that the company number given on these websites is actually that of the company which runs the site. 4. The content of our article is academic opinion and not the basis for legal or other proceedings.

Abbreviations

Advertising Standards Authority

Crown Prosecution Service

Quality Assurance Agency

Amigud A, Dawson P (2019) The law and the outlaw: is legal prohibition a viable solution to the contract cheating problem? Asses Eval Higher Educ. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1612851

Article   Google Scholar  

ASA (2018) Advertising Standards Authority Ruling on Complaint Ref: A17-4. Retrieved November 23, 2019, from https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/all-answers-ltd-a17-394574.html

Google Scholar  

ASA (2019a) Advertising Standards Authority Ruling on Complaint Ref: A18 -7 . Retrieved November 23, 2019, from https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/thoughtbridge-consulting-ltd-a18-452244.html

ASA (2019b) Advertising Standards Authority Ruling on Complaint Ref: A18-10. Retrieved November 23, 2019, from https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/the-oxbridge-research-group-ltd-a18-458914.html

Draper MJ, Ibezim V, Newton PM (2017) Are Essay Mills committing fraud? An analysis of their behaviours vs the 2006 Fraud Act (UK). Int J Educ Integrity 13(1):3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-017-0014-5

Draper MJ, Newton PM (2017) A legal Approach to tackling contract cheating. Int J Educ Integrity. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-017-0022-5

Johnson, B. (2006) ‘The unbearable triteness of cheating’. In The Guardian October 17 2006 Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/education/2006/oct/17/highereducationuk

McKie, A. 2018. ‘Can Universities beat contract cheating?. In Times Higher Education September 13 2018 Retrieved from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/can-universities-beat-contract-cheating

Newton PM (2018) How Common Is Commercial Contract Cheating in Higher Education and Is It Increasing? A Systematic Review. Front Educ. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00067

QAA. (2016) ‘Plagiarism in Higher Education - Custom Essay Writing Services: An Exploration and next Steps for the UK Higher Education Sector’

QAA (2017) “Contracting to Cheat in Higher Education – How to Address Contract Cheating, the Use of Third-Party Services and Essay Mills”

Shute S, Simester AP (2002) Criminal Law Theory. Oxford University Press; https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261387500013234

UK Government E (1986) Insolvency Act 1986 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/45/contents . Accessed 23 Nov 2019

UK Government E (2006) Fraud Act 2006 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/contents . Accessed 23 Nov 2019

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the contribution of Hannah Hutchison a law student intern in 2018 to the investigation of essay mill websites and background law upon which the data in this article is based.

Originality and review status

The authors confirm that this work is original and has not been published elsewhere, nor is it currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Not applicable. There are no sources of funding for the research reported.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Hillary Rodham Clinton School of Law, Swansea University, Singleton Park Campus, Swansea, UK

Michael J. Draper & Callum Reid-Hutchings

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors are solely responsible for this article. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript. This article was written by the lead author with support from the second author who undertook the most current primary investigation of the essay mill websites upon which the data in this article is based. The methodology is described in the main body of the article.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. Draper .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Draper, M.J., Reid-Hutchings, C. Are essay mills committing fraud? A further analysis of their behaviours vs the 2006 fraud act (UK). Int J Educ Integr 15 , 11 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-019-0050-4

Download citation

Received : 06 August 2019

Accepted : 04 December 2019

Published : 26 December 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-019-0050-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Contract cheating
• Fraud essay mill

International Journal for Educational Integrity

ISSN: 1833-2595

• Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
• General enquiries: [email protected]

QAA has updated its  cookie policy . We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on this website. This includes third-party cookies that may track your use of this website. To confirm you are happy with our use of cookies, please click Accept to continue. You can  change your settings  at any time.

QAA publishes new guidance to help tackle the use of essay mills

QAA has today published new guidance for UK higher education providers  to help them protect academic integrity and combat the use of essay mills in their institutions.

Essay mills are commercial entities that make money by encouraging students to cheat. While some are based in the UK, they are a global phenomenon impacting on higher education systems and providers around the world. Their use has the potential to damage the reputation of UK higher education. Typically, they will charge a student to write their assessment, which the student will then submit as their own work. They will often use sophisticated marketing techniques, and some will resort to blackmail or extortion once students have used their services. Research indicates their use by students has increased in recent years (such as published by Swansea University  and Channel 4 ).

Contracting to Cheat: How to Address Essay Mills and Contract Cheating , which is published with the support of governments across the UK, shows that many UK higher education institutions have designed effective institutional strategies and academic integrity practices to educate staff, support students, reduce opportunities to cheat and detect academic misconduct. However, more needs to be done.

Key findings and recommendations are:

• Identifying a strategic lead with responsibility for staff training and institutional coordination can help improve detection of essay mill use.
• Assessment design can help reduce opportunities to cheat, but no assessment should ever be considered cheat proof.
• Technology can help detect the use of essay mills, but is most effective when used by experienced staff with knowledge of the student.
• Essay mill marketing seeks to exploit students who are feeling vulnerable or anxious, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Effective institutional and peer support can help.
• Staff and students should be aware of, or be able to easily access, information and procedures to follow to report a suspicion of academic misconduct.

The guidance has been written following extensive consultation with universities, colleges, expert academics and students from across the UK. It updates earlier guidance with new advice, intelligence and good practice in response to the ever-evolving threat of essay mills.

Douglas Blackstock, QAA CEO, said : 'The essay mill industry has become increasingly sophisticated, and exists to make money by encouraging students to cheat. Students at every university or college in the UK will be targeted by them. In developing this guidance we’ve been encouraged by the many examples of innovation and effective practice in place to combat academic misconduct. A sector-wide response, working with governments and regulators, can help us get on the front foot in putting an end to the contract cheating industry'.

Universities Minister Michelle Donelan said: 'This is a difficult time for students, and those who are feeling particularly worried about their studies could be more vulnerable to essay mills marketing right now. It is abhorrent for these companies to take advantage of students in this situation and profit from anxiety during a global pandemic.

'I know universities are working hard to respond to coronavirus, to continue delivering their courses and supporting students. I hope this guidance, along with innovations in technology, will help them protect the integrity of our world-leading higher education and prevent students turning to contract cheating'.

Richard Lochhead, Scotland’s Minister for Further Education, Higher Education and Science said:  'Protecting the integrity of our higher education sector is vital and we must be vigilant in cracking down on those who actively engage in academic misconduct. I welcome the new guidance published by QAA which will help our institutions combat the use of essay mills, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic'.

Kirsty Williams, Wales’ Minister for Education said: 'I welcome the publication of this new guidance from QAA to help our higher education sector combat the pernicious effects of contract cheating and essay mills. In Wales and across the UK we pride ourselves on the integrity of our higher education institutions, and we cannot allow that to be undermined by predatory essay mill companies which often exploit the most vulnerable students.

I hope that universities in Wales consider this guidance carefully and take further steps, in partnership with HEFCW and students’ unions, to reduce the opportunities and incentives for students to cheat, particularly during the challenging circumstances that have been created by Covid-19'. Related information In March, we published a Blog entitled  Innovative Steps in Tackling Contract Cheating at the University of Northampton , written by Dr Robin Crockett, Reader in Data Analysis and University Lead on Contract-Cheating at the University of Northampton. More about our work in this area, including the Academic Integrity Advisory Group and all publications and guidance, can be found in the Academic Integrity section of our website .

More From Forbes

College essays that worked and how yours can too.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS - JULY 08: A view of Harvard Yard on the campus of Harvard University on ... [+] July 08, 2020 in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology have sued the Trump administration for its decision to strip international college students of their visas if all of their courses are held online. (Photo by Maddie Meyer/Getty Images)

The college essay is a pivotal piece of the college application showcasing your individuality and differentiated outlook to admissions officers. What makes an essay truly shine? Let’s dive into the words behind three standout essays highlighted by university websites and a school newspaper's brand studio so you can get into the right mindset for crafting your own narrative.

Embracing Differences: Finding Strength In Uniqueness

Essay Excerpt: ‘Bra Shopping ’ (Harvard)

Featured by the Harvard Crimson Brand Studio , Orlee's essay recounts a student's humorous and insightful experience of bra shopping with her grandmother, weaving in her unique family dynamics and challenges at her prestigious school.

What Works:

• Humor and Honesty: The student's humor makes the essay enjoyable to read, while her honesty about her challenges adds depth.
• Self-Awareness: She demonstrates a strong sense of self-awareness, embracing her uniqueness rather than trying to fit in.
• Resilience: Her narrative highlights resilience and the ability to find strength in differences.

For Your Essay : To write an essay that embraces your uniqueness, start by identifying a quirky or challenging experience that reflects who a key insight into your experience. Think about how this experience has shaped your perspective and character. Use humor and honesty to bring your story to life, and focus on how you have embraced your differences to become stronger and more resilient.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024, finding connections: humor and self-reflection.

Essay: ‘Brood X Cicadas ’ (Hamilton College)

As an example on Hamilton's admissions website, Nicholas writes about the cicadas swarming his hometown every 17 years and draws a parallel between their emergence and his own transition to college life. He uses humor and self-reflection to create a relatable and engaging narrative.

• Humor: Nicholas uses humor to make his essay entertaining and memorable. His witty comparisons between himself and cicadas add a unique twist.
• Self-Reflection: By comparing his life to the cicadas’, he reflects on his own growth and readiness for change.
• Relatability: His narrative about facing new experiences and challenges resonates with readers who have undergone similar transitions.

For Your Essay: To infuse humor and self-reflection into your essay, start by identifying an ordinary experience or object and think about how it relates to your life. Write down funny or insightful observations about this connection. Use humor to make your essay more engaging, but ensure it still conveys meaningful self-reflection. This balance can make your essay both entertaining and profound.

Persistence and Multicultural Identity: Life Lessons From Tortilla Making

Essay: ‘ Facing The Hot Griddle ’ (Johns Hopkins University)

In this essay published by Hopkins Insider, Rocio uses the process of making tortillas to explore her multicultural identity and the challenges she has faced. Her story beautifully weaves together her Guatemalan heritage and her experiences growing up in the United States.

• Metaphor and Symbolism: The process of making tortillas becomes a powerful metaphor for the student’s journey and struggles. The symbolism of the masa harina and water mixing parallels her blending of cultural identities.
• Personal Growth: The essay highlights her perseverance and adaptability, qualities that are crucial for success in college.
• Cultural Insight: She provides a rich, personal insight into her multicultural background, making her story unique and compelling.

For Your Essay: To write an essay that explores your identity through a metaphor, start by thinking about an activity or tradition that holds significant meaning for you. Consider how this activity relates to your life experiences and personal growth. Use detailed descriptions to bring the activity to life and draw connections between the process and your own journey. Reflect on the lessons you've learned and how they've shaped your identity.

A winning college essay isn’t simply about parading your best accomplishment or dramatizing your challenges. It’s not a contest for which student is the most original or entertaining. Rather, the essay is a chance for you to showcase your authenticity, passion, resilience, social awareness, and intellectual vitality . By sharing genuine stories and insights, you can create an essay that resonates with admissions committees and highlights your unique qualities.

For you to have the best possible essay, mindset is key. Here’s how to get into the zone:

• Reflect Deeply: Spend time thinking about your experiences, challenges, and passions. Journaling can help you uncover deep insights.
• Discuss and Share: Talking about your stories with friends, family, or mentors can provide new perspectives and emotional clarity.
• Immerse Yourself: Engage in activities that you are passionate about to reignite the feelings and memories associated with them.
• Draft Freely: Don’t worry about perfection on the first try. Write freely and honestly, then refine your narrative.

The secret to a standout college essay lies in its authenticity, depth, and emotional resonance. By learning from these successful examples and getting into the right mindset, you can craft an essay that not only stands out but also provides a meaningful insight into who you are. Remember, your essay is your story—make it a piece of writing that you will always be proud of.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

How to Help Americans Eat Less Junk Food

By Kat Morgan and Mark Bittman

Ms. Morgan is a food systems consultant. Mr. Bittman is a former Opinion columnist and a special adviser on food at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health.

Whether you shop for food in a traditional grocery store, a big-box store, a bodega or a gas station, you’ll have to contend with the reality that many if not most of your options are junk — highly processed foods often loaded with sugar, salt and chemical additives.

You’ll also have to contend with a haze of aggressive marketing — words like “low fat,” “gluten-free,” “paleo,” “keto-friendly” and “a good source of fiber” — that doesn’t answer the fundamental question: Is this food good for me? An orange is a simple enough choice, but a frozen dinner? There is little reliable guidance available for people who don’t have the time, patience or skill to analyze the dense nutrition labels on food packaging.

What could help is a system giving consumers important nutrition information at a glance on the front of a package: a warning sign that a high-sugar soda or breakfast cereal product, for example, is an unhealthy choice. The bold move here would be to steer people away from food that’s bad for them.

These kinds of labels, of course, are the last thing most large food manufacturers want on their products. But a few countries mostly in Latin America have begun to require or encourage such labeling, and there’s some early evidence that it’s already having a positive effect on the way people eat.

Some countries in the European Union use a system called Nutri-Score that grades food products on a scale from A (most healthy) to E (least healthy).

These chips sold in France received a C grade because of their salt and fat content.

Several other countries use a traffic light system to inform consumers about high (red), medium (orange) and low (green) levels of sugar, sodium, calories and fat.

That label takes up much of the space on this to-go packet of Nutella sold in Ecuador.

Chile and six other countries use black octagons to warn about high amounts of sugar, sodium, fat and calories.

Research suggests that this type of labeling has been more successful than the traffic light and Nutri-Score systems.

With some 60 percent of the American diet coming from processed foods — foods that have been linked to an increased risk for diabetes, heart disease and some cancers in the United States — it’s time for our government to update our labels with warnings, too.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .