comments excerpted from an email discussion on plagiarism on TEACH-NET
Reasons for Plagiarism
There is more to be said about the tension between a competitive university education and the needs of a collaborative work force. How can students NOT feel alienated and disconnected as one of 500 in a lecture hall, day after day, semester after semester? I think it is worthwhile to re-examine our own teaching practices and ask WHY they are cheating. We are faulting the students for responding to a depersonalized environment in a depersonalized way. (I wonder whether the problem is as prevalent in small private colleges with class size of 20?) Don't get me wrong — cheaters deserve to be failed and disciplined but there also may be other, more humane ways to address this. A punitive approach seems to invite the lawyers in without solving the root problem. What if all, or most, assignments included a graded (50%?) personal narrative reflecting upon the experience of completing the assignment? Which parts were difficult? Which parts instilled new ways of thinking about the material? Which parts were redundant? Why did you decide to organize this in the way you did?
Even with straight quantitative problem sets, it would not hurt for students to reflect upon their own learning and it would simultaneously give GSIs and professors good feedback about their assignments. If grading all of that took too long, it could be done on a random rotating basis (e.g., x% of the class on each assignment). Another approach: Students could be required to work in pairs and write a graded commentary about the process of collaboration or to work together in groups and then process that. The more that can be done to personalize the educational experience and the less the anomie, the more I would expect students to engage with their work and take personal responsibility for it.
Graduate School of Education
I thought you might find interesting a couple of brief excerpts in the latest edition of AAHE's Change magazine's Potpourri on the topic of plagiarism. I get the paper copy, but I suspect the campus has an electronic subscription.
To give you my two cents worth, I think this topic is treated much too simplistically and with much too much moralizing. From a learning perspective, copying is the most natural of ways to learn, learners appropriate language, genres, methods, etc. all of the time without censure. In fact, educators expect students to emulate these aspects of the intellectual enterprise. And, in my view, the "rules" of what counts as plagiarism are far more fuzzy and arbitrary than is generally conceded. I've worked with a student who came away from a "lesson" on plagiarism believing that she would have to attribute to a source the fact that Columbus landed on the North American continent in 1492. And, I reviewed a paper for a monograph in which the author felt it appropriate to quote the quotation of a dictionary definition in another paper. To me that is patently ridiculous, not to mention redundant, but apparently there are lots of conventions for quoting and citing. I think this variety is often viewed by students as merely arbitrariness. Apparently needless, arbitrary rules are not likely to be followed by anyone, it seems to me. The difference between faculty and students isn't that the former are more ethical than the latter, but that they have an understanding of and a stake in the ways their disciplines attribute knowledge. In short, I think plagiarism is as much a product of students (and others) not understanding the commodification of knowledge (to use Robin Lakoff's term) in academia as it is about being "lazy" or "deceitful" to name a couple of the most commonly trotted out explanations.
Student Learning Center
It sounds as though we need to do some serious thinking about why students are doing this, and I don't mean to excuse it—yes, I think stupid people, disenfranchised people, poor people, etc. have about the same moral duties as everyone else.
One thing that occurs to me is the difference between what constitutes cheating in school, including the faculty research side of 'school', and in the rest of the world. As Lauren Resnick noted, collaboration in school is cheating, in a workplace it's required and rewarded. Business environments do not require or expect much footnoting of ideas: if I see a nice linkage in your widget and it's not patented, no-one thinks me a bad person to just copy it, and with no note of thanks engraved on my product. At the same time, it's very bad behavior for me to take your report off your desk and submit it as mine, at the least because it misleads our employer about who should be promoted or given certain new duties.
In my original field of architecture, there is no copyright, or wasn't until recently (and it has had no consequences), except on construction drawings. If you design a house with a cool window or column, and it solves a problem for me, I'm expected to use it. Critics call a certain window Palladian and another Thermal; but if I put one of either in your house it would be ridiculous to engrave a citation in the stoolcap. Davitt, composers quote each other all the time (though there is such a thing as plagiarism in composition, especially in popular music) and popular musicians paste samples from copyrighted work in each others' mixes and tracks without opprobrium...and as regards performance, if you hear a really nice execution of a passage in a recording by Brendel, no-one thinks you a plagiarist if you adopt it without attribution.
We just had a teaching demo by a faculty candidate who talked in part about students downloading mp3 files, a topic I'm actually working on. We've all noted that students who are good people just can't see what's wrong with it, even though it's illegal, and I finally realized that they understand something really important about digital media: it's a non-rival good and there's no less of it available if they help themselves to some. Economic theory teaches that things should always be priced on the consumption side at their marginal cost, which in this case is zero. My kids, and my students, (who would not dream of stealing a CD or a book) have not generally been able to articulate this important result, but I rail at them a lot less lately, because they have an important point. And this experience has made me at least somewhat slower to assert immorality or moral turpitude of things that look bad to me on first acquaintance.
An awful lot of what and how we teach replicates and mirrors skills used by scholarly researchers (us profs) in our work, and only those skills. But nearly all of our students are not going into this line of work, so we may not be giving them the optimal preparation for their future lives quite generally. By pounding the table about a particular kind of behavior that would seriously undermine our particular work processes, especially with the atom-bomb sanctions that used to be threatened and maybe imposed, we may be missing chances to teach them something more useful, including moral teaching.
Thought experiment (just as a sort of affective garment to try on): How would you feel if you were told it was disgusting, immoral, and profoundly vile to maintain a dog right in your home with your family...that a person who could do that was obviously a moral defective and offensive in the sight of God? That protecting your family from burglars and such, or teaching your kids to care for creatures, or about the behavior of animals, counted for nothing against this judgment? Well, any Islamic authority will tell you exactly that. To what degree do we sound like such an Imam to our students when we talk about plagiarism by our definition and on our terms?
We need to do some serious thinking about the difference between (i) moral relativism and mushiness and (ii) moral learning. What, again, is the difference between a political leader who has absolutely solid principles and positions and never wavers, and a person incapable of learning.
Goldman School of Public Policy
I am fascinated by the content and the intensity of the discussion on this list about plagiarism - but more important, about academic honesty and student engagement and teaching in ways to foster academic integrity and minimize plagiarism. I recently presented at a symposium on Academic Integrity: Technological Change and Intellectual Property on the topic of "Student Learning and Academic Integrity in the Digital Environment" and the part that interests me most is the focus on instructional strategies that encourage academic engagement such as inquiry learning, research based learning, service learning, and designing assignments in ways that invite students into the academy and foster their own academic engagement and presumably, honesty.
One interesting and amusing article about this is by Rose, Shirley K. (1996, August). What's love got to do with it? Scholarly citation practices as courtship rituals. Language and Learning Across the Disciplines, 3, 34=9648.
Rose talks about "students academic promiscuity" a "kind of textual sleeping around among whatever attractive sources can be easily picked up" Rose discusses their need to learn "textual histories" in order to practice "safe text."
The Library
I have found myself taking seriously for a moment the reference to Shirley K. Rose's superfically attractive metaphorical concept of "students' academic promiscuity" as a "kind of textual sleeping around among whatever attractive sources can be easily picked up". I am comfortable with it, even amused by it, up to the punch line: the idea that students need to learn "textual histories" in order to practice "safe text." Is this meant to mean that by textually sleeping around we will probably catch the deadly virus of cheating?
Does this not imply that most of our feeble cures to the disease of plagiarism might be like antibiotics: effective on bacteria but not on viruses — let alone on a retrovirus like plagiarism that mutates at great speed? On the one hand, by implication, Rose's idea evokes the pleasures of intellectual promiscuity, which most of us no doubt know in one form or another. (Some people may have fun here with the post-Lacanian implication that students who "cheat" are in fact "cheating on someone" — the professor, perhaps? And what might that imply about the student-professor relationship?)
However, on the other hand, Rose's same idea evokes the moralistic concept of a vengeance that comes in the form of a destructive virus, a punishment for cheating. Am I alone in finding disquieting the subtext of "virus as punishment" that seems to underlie this idea? The cheating/virus analogy is perhaps seductive, but if plagiarism = deadly virus, then by analogy, presumably, deadly virus = cheating. These are "Excitable Words" (as one of our colleagues might call them). The implicit parallel between AIDS patients and cheaters is chilling.
I was also struck by the comment that with "Presidents, Senators, medical doctors, the media, and their buddies all cheating, well then, "what's the harm in cheating in a crummy class that I don't even care about and means nothing to my life?" attitude. The whole world cheats!" This sounds like a "Bad Money Drives Out Good Money" argument. It's good as theory, but fortunately it's not always true in practice. Or is it? At least, there are mechanisms to counteract it.
Maybe it's just a crypto-Darwinian idea: if cheating can help them to get ahead, then the members of the "Cheater Species" are the true survivors. So as teachers we perhaps need to be stressing the "evolutionary" long-term advantages of honesty over the quick gains of cheating. This seems to be part of the idea behind that idyllic course on the Biology and Geology of Tropical Islands at the Gump Research Station near Tahiti.
It all comes back to the carrot and the stick. Are we talking too much to the students about the stick? What about a tropical carrot? If we offered all students who use David Leonard's honor technique the opportunity to take a course with Jere Lipps and George Resh, on a tropical island near Tahiti, they would be lining up to prove how honest they were.
Department of Music
Cultural Issues
I have investigated plagiarism a bit in a cross-cultural context and I think it would be important for the group to hear that in some countries, education is based upon copying out choice parts of what prior scholars have said and submitting that in satisfaction of the assignment. The idea is that a lowly student could not presume to have anything to say about important things and that to do so would be the height of arrogance. The role of a beginner is to select the most important passages from the writings of someone who really knows something after years of study and thinking (a revered scholar) and to demonstrate the ability to find the essence of prior thinkers rather than to be arrogantly original. The cross-cultural dilemma for our foreign students from such an educational background is huge and our professors should be aware of that.
Graduate School of Education
Prevention
Seems to me that one approach to preventing the P Word is to develop curricula that integrate the process of research and scholarly inquiry into the fabric of teaching, and assignments that require a demonstration of these processes. Requiring students to keep research diaries, requiring them to turn in their notes and cites, and to document the research process can do a lot to cut down on plagiarism.
The Library
My experience is from the "school of hard knocks." My first term as an asst prof, I assigned a research paper to a class of 21 students. 7 students plagiarized their papers. I was devastated.
I learned:
[1] don't set the bar so high that even a good stretch by the student makes it insurmountable. Now I break assignments down and do a lot more explicit teaching of how to do research and how to write a paper.
[2] Give a clear definition of plagiarism. Most students think that it only pertains to copying word-for-word what someone else has written. And then they think it's only if they copy the whole paper. So now I'm very careful to include a definition. Here's what I put in my syllabus:
Academic Honesty Policy
In fairness to students who put in an honest effort, cheaters will be treated harshly. Any evidence of cheating will result in a score of zero (0) on that assignment or paper. Incidences of cheating will be reported to the Office of Student Conduct, which may administer additional punishment. Cheating includes plagiarism. What is most important is that everyone learns the proper methods of crediting their sources so as to avoid inadvertent plagiarism. Plagiarism includes appropriation of whole passages with or without credit, appropriation of words and phrases without credit, appropriation of both main and supporting ideas without credit, and paraphrasing without credit. Plagiarism also includes submitting a paper written by someone else. If you are unsure of how to properly cite sources, ask me for guidance.
[3] I have preliminary assignments due so that I can catch what I call the inadvertent plagiarism, telling them to be sure to cite their source. The challenge the students face is being able to tell what information is in the public domain, and what is considered proprietary and needs citing. The issue is more complicated by the fact that once something becomes widely accepted in the field, it slides from needing a footnote to being in the public domain. I tell them to err on the side of citing too much, of course, but also try to work with them in learning what is / isn't in the public domain. (Did you hear it in your principles course? Then it's probably in the public domain. Did you read it in just one place? Then it's not.)
[4] When I talk about plagiarism, I talk about how it ruins careers. Recently, I was able to use Doris Kearns Goodwin, the presidential historian who was a regular panelist on PBS until plagiarism charges were levied against her by others.
[5] And finally, I try to make it clear that I am a resource and aide for them when they are overwhelmed, and that if it is stress ("how can I possibly get all of this done when my parents need me to fly home every weekend to help with the family business and my girlfriend just told me she's pregnant and I don't know how to pay the increased fees unless I work an extra 10 hours a week?") that is leading them to plagiarize, they should come talk with me instead and we can work something out.
That said, I have had the following experiences of late.
Winter 2001 I taught an undergrad research seminar at Stanford, and wound up with one student who presented a data set as if it was something he had put together (to the point of using "I" to describe what adjustments had been made to the raw data) even though he had obtained the data from a professor at another school. He was indignant (beyond belief) that I would accuse him of plagiarizing. I was backed up by the department chair (who had a plagiarism case himself that term) and their Judicial Affairs folks. They eventually came to some resolution (he and Judicial Affairs) after the professional staff in Judicial Affairs felt he had stopped being indignant and gotten the point.
Department of Economics
The most interesting advice on plagiarism I have heard came from Dean/Prof. David Leonard who said that it is easy to prevent: students must submit photocopies of the sources they cite, when they turn in the assignment. It works!
Department of Music
After two episodes of blatant plagiarism—my approach is to 1) make it clear that plagiarism is theft and that anyone who plagiarizes will flunk the course—(among other things it's printed in the syllabus)- and explain that I have flunked people for this in the past; 2) show people how and when to cite; 3) post the thing from teach net that shows what is and is not plagiarism; 4) require a written research plan for the paper early in the semester; 5) encourage people to come to me/GSI for help; 6) have a special session for paper questions—it was packed and most Q's were about citation. Either the plagiarists are getting smarter or there is less of it.
ESPM Division of Society and Environment
Last semester I had five identified cases of plagiarism in my big class. They have left me with the following preliminary thoughts.
1) Defining standards more clearly:
I fully agree with what XX says about our needing to be aware of the cultural backgrounds (I had one case like this). But just because something is not considered cheating in one culture does not mean we should find it acceptable within the university culture. We should understand the nature of that difference but still explain to the students why it is not considered acceptable at the University of California. It is an old principle that "ignorance of the law is no excuse"; nevertheless, different students may need different kinds of information.
2) Informing students, at campus level:
Since it is better that such explanations should happen before cases of plagiarism are identified, something needs to be done more actively, at campus level, to make sure students understand what constitutes academic honesty and what may be considered plagiarism within this academic culture.
3) Informing faculty and GSIs at department level:
Some departments might need clearer written guidelines for both professors and GSIs explaining the potential cultural misunderstandings, and giving some guidance on handling such cases
4) Anticipation, at class level:
As teachers, we might sometimes find it useful to tell the students clearly what we do and don't consider acceptable (since some parameters might vary depending on the academic discipline, not just the cultural background of the students). We may need to check that they have understood. One way of handling this at the start of each course could be to send a general email message (through CourseWeb) to all students enrolled, raising the question of academic honesty (rather than plagiarism). We could outline how we expect them to help us recognize their academic honesty, how we expect them to gather their information from sources, and how we expect them to cite their references.
5) Helping GSIs:
Since plagiarism is a particular problem in the large courses, the people in the front line are the GSIs, who are often very troubled by this. It is an enormous waste of their time and energy. I know the cases of plagiarism last semester have left one of my GSIs still feeling extremely angry. This, too, is our problem, and we need to help GSIs be ready for the issue.
6) Plagiarism can have different faces and different names:
I had a case of one student who sent his paper to two friends (and team-mates). The two who copied his paper immediately admitted they had done wrong. The student who had written the original paper insisted he had not copied, and had therefore not done anything wrong. The concept of "aiding and abetting" or of "being an accomplice" did not really make sense to him in this context. When I asked what would be considered cheating on his team, he said "taking steroids" and admitted it was "because steroids would give you an unfair advantage over the other athletes". I asked what he would think of the person who supplied steroids since that person had "not cheated" because he hadn't taken any steroids, so was he guilty or not? That was when the student got the point, went silent, and finally admitted he had done something wrong, and we could then move on to the next stage of dealing with the case.
7) Handling individual cases:
Getting the student, if possible, right at the start to admit to the wrong-doing is far better than having to spend time accusing them of it. I confronted three of my students very bluntly. They all caved in and admitted it. This at least meant I did not have to worry too much about threats from their lawyers.
8) Sanctions:
More precise information is needed for faculty about the possible long-term effects on a student's career if sanctions are pursued at a higher level. "Letting the punishment fit the crime" may be a solid principle, but in some cases I suspect professors may not be sure of the long-term effects of any disciplinary action they might set in motion, and that they are therefore reluctant to do anything too far-reaching, for fear that the university's administrative machinery (once set in motion) might end up creating a result considerably beyond what the professor would have considered appropriate or just.
Department of Music
It seems to me that this discussion is inappropriately pessimistic.
(1) This is an old problem, not a new one. It has not changed in my 40 years in the profession. Cultural diversity is a new excuse, only rarely is it a new cause if the class is properly educated as to what constitutes plagiarism.
(2) There ARE things that can be done to significantly mitigate the problem. Let me describe my technique (which I have not added to the discussion earlier because I have mentioned it in earlier such discussions). I always requires students to write papers and I always require that when they submit the paper they also submit all the notes and drafts that they produce in the act of writing it. Then if I have any question about the integrity of the final product I consult the documentation on the process of its creation. You can buy or copy a good paper; you can't buy or copy drafts and notes. A really first-class paper can't be produced by pulling an all-nighter with no notes and no drafts. And it is virtually impossible to backward engineer drafts (for example putting back in the things that were cut out or corrected in the final draft). There are two major advantages to this method: (a) I can quickly detect and document plagiarism from these records of the creation process or I can penalize the student for failing to produce the documentation. This takes the burden of proof off me and puts it on the student, where it belongs. (b) More important, when I introduce this requirement to a class it provokes a very careful discussion on the part of the students as to what constitutes cheating. Before I used this method I was detecting plagiarism in 10% of the papers turned in to me (those are 1970s figures with a white, California student body!). After introducing the method plagiarism rates dropped below 1% and I wasn't having to obsess about it any more.
International and Area Studies and Political Science
I don’t feel that plagiarism is entirely an eradicable problem, and I don’t expect to reach every student. I do believe the university can take steps to ensure a more consistent standard for the students and the teaching staff, and in doing so deter students from taking this route. First, the university should develop and publish a set of standards that applies to all departments and to all students. Devolving this issue to the department level not only results in inconsistent standards and uneven application of those standards, it gives the instructor and the GSI considerable discretion in identifying, confronting, and punishing the student – discretion few instructors wish to have. Second, installing an honor pledge or similar “acknowledgement” mechanism will help to improve students’ awareness about academic integrity, and articulate the university’s intolerance for violations. Third, I believe that the academic demands on our students are particularly severe for students who have difficulty communicating in English, and I feel strongly that any policy concerning academic integrity should take care to address the broader challenges faced by these students when preparing their assignments. I believe these steps will help alleviate the problem of plagiarism, restoring integrity and pride to the academic environment.
GSI and Doctoral Student in Political Science