Would the student's paper have been more acceptable had she given the proper credit to the sections you identified as plagerized? It's not a simple task for students to research a piece, and once they have those words and phrases imbedded in their conscienceness, rewrite it in a way that doesn't sound as though it has been copied.<br><br>
Well, of course giving credit would obviate the plagiarism.<br><br>Still, in the case of this paper, even giving credit to the source would not have made for a good paper. The paper reflected absolutely no thought beyond what it took to appropriate someone else's ideas.<br><br>In any case, I would not be very sympathetic to the "it's hard to gather the information" approach to the problem. I make it a point to tell students that they should not read secondary sources because I've read most of them already and am more interested in what the student has to say than in a repetition of what my colleague, with whom I've been arguing for the last decade, says. If the student nonetheless wants to use secondary sources, then it's incumbent on her to use it appropriately.<br><br>Incidentally, several of the points that were dead giveaway evidence for plagiarism in this paper were issues that had been raised in class, and on the course web page, both by other students and by myself. I always consider stuff that gets said as part of the course to be "common knowledge," not needing citation. But the student ignored all that rich source of information for the "easy" way out, which was to copy someone else. And, as the student would have known had she done the work of reading the postings on the course web page, the stuff she copied from someone else is just plain dead wrong!<br><br>Students who might be interested in graduate school I treat differently in regard to using secondary sources, but that certainly doesn't describe this student. Anyway, where there is secondary source reading, I tell the student that it's still her job to think through the information and come to a conclusion that's her own. Again, there was no effort in that direction (I mean the direction of thought) in this paper.<br><br>By the way, I am sensitive to the phenomenon of postmodern bricollage, and would be happy to accommodate a creative use of pastiche. But none of these issues applies here. It was simply a case of taking what no doubt seemed to be an easy way out of doing work.<br><br>edit: spelling!!<br><br>And that's true too.--Shakespeare, King Lear<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by yoyo52 on 05/16/02 02:46 AM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>
_________________________ MACTECHubi dolor ibi digitus
For 50 cents a student per year check out http://plagiarism.org/<br>I have never used it but it sounds interesting. For scientific papers just taking a few key phrases that sound "too good to be true" and dropping them into google can be interesting. For totally brazen students you can put the key phrase into Pubmed:<br>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi<br>and it will search through all abstracts. The laziest student, (definition of the plagiarist), will just paste abstracts together.<br> I've known professors who snag one student per semester this way.<br><br>Paul Morrison ... the striped bass are calling my name, looooser ...
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.