Sorry, I should have explained our disciplinary procedures more clearly when I first e-
mailed - more haste, less clarity!
Before we reach the stage of a disciplinary case, all work that is thought to have been
plagiarised will have been marked again by a second marker to check the suspicion. If
the second marker also believes plagiarism has occurred all students whose work is
concerned will then be interviewed by their Head of Department to try to determine who, if
anyone, has plagiarised. It is at this stage that the students are informed of the process
and shown the work alone that appears to have been copied. They are then given the
chance to present their side of the case. Following this, the Head of Department decides
whether or not there is sufficient evidence to warrant taking a full disciplinary case and
informs the students of the procedures for a disciplinary case. These procedures include
obtaining the permission of any students who may have been found not to have
plagiarised to include reference to them and their work if it builds the case.
If a student is found not to have plagiarised, they are given a written retraction of the
suspicion.
I hope this makes our position a bit clearer. I appreciate the points made in response to
my first e-mail and I shall re-visit our policies to ensure that we do do all of the above all of
the time.
Samantha
On 11 Oct 2004 at 16:28, Tim Trent wrote:
** Reply to note from Samantha Hill <[log in to unmask]>
Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:47:25 +0100
> We have followed a similar policy in disciplinary cases as Gail
> Waters' establishment because we believe it is in our legitimate
> interest to do so. A student who has plagiarised will do almost
> anything to get out of the charge, so if we do not provide evidence
> of the plagiarism in the first instance, including the name(s) of
> the others involved, the student will then challenge us to provide
> it (rightly so). Therefore, we avoid the middle step and the
> resulting delay by providing the evidence we have up front. If the
> student is
innocent, they will be able to produce their argument against our case
far better by knowing how our suspicions have arisen.
Hi,
So you provide the name of the student whose work may have been
plagiarised (who may or may not have anything to do with it) because
it is in *your* legitimate interests to save time and administrative
burden.
Have you considered asking that student for permission, even asking
him about it at all? Surely all you have to do is provide a copy of
the work you think has been plagiarised, who wrote it is not relevant,
unless you want to prove the first student guilty too of helping his
friend etc etc etc.
Crystal clear to me. It is Friday yet again.
Regards
Charles
--
Charles Christacopoulos, Management Information Officer, Planning &
Information, University of Dundee, Dundee, DD1 4HN, Scotland, United
Kingdom. Tel: 44(0)1382-344891. Fax: 44(0)1382-348845.
http://www.somis.dundee.ac.uk/ ::egothor http://www.egothor.org/
Even clearer than that, Charles. The student whose work has allegedly
been plagiarised has not given any form of permission (we presume) for
his/her data to be passed to anyone for this purpose. Ergo it is
unfair processing.
Tim Trent - Consultant
Direct: +44(0)1344 392644 Mobile:+44(0)7710 126618
email: [log in to unmask]
Marketing Improvement Limited, Abbey House, Grenville Place,
Bracknell, United Kingdom, RG12 1BP
http://www.marketingimprovement.com
This message is for the intended addressee's use only. It may contain
confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No
confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any
mis-transmission. If you receive this message in error, please
immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy
any hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must not, directly or
indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this
message if you are not the intended recipient. Any views expressed in
this message are those of the individual sender, except where the
message states otherwise and the sender is authorised to state them to
be the views of any such entity.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Samantha Hill
Complaints Officer
University of Portsmouth
Portsmouth PO1 2UP
Tel: 023 9284 3642
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|