I agree, Erik. I take Mike's example and question as an example of how
focussing on plagiarism as though it were the only name in the frame for
academic practice and malpractice blindsides us. I don't find Wikipedia a
provider of acceptable source material, though maybe it's ok for 'placing'
the researcher. In the example, I'd perhaps advise a student to check out
the Observer source, a respected British newspaper just cutting it into
acceptable for academic pursuit. If it were a researcher at a higher level,
I'd want the qualifications checked at the institutions. But this would all
be by the by, really, because my questions would be, for what level of
discourse, and which discourse, would this kind of descriptive biography be
needed? If this student was making a subsequent point, I might suggest he or
she keep to something like, "A respected commentator, Ruth Deech, has
noted..." and then hope the student engaged in something, possibly quoting
from Deech, but the point of citation is not just getting it right, it is to
be measured on who you choose to cite, how you use the quotes or how you
paraphrase the cited. To allow a student to dabble in the shallows of
Wikipedia, playing games of 'have I changed enough words' is what I view as
exactly the problem of the avenue such approaches appear to be going down.
Though, who knows, maybe it was a trick question and Mike was hoping for
responses like this.
(BTW, Wikipedia has many interesting pages on the topic of Wikipedia, which
I read as I formulated the argument against its use for academic writing -
some students feel it is respectable. Wonderfully democratic as Wikipedia
is, it accepts that its method encourages error-strewn misinformation to
abound...sometimes.)
Cheers
Iain
Iain Hood
Senior Student Adviser
Student Support Services
Anglia Ruskin University
East Road
Cambridge
CB1 1PT
0845 196 2316
[log in to unmask]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Erik Borg" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: Balance of Probabilities - and an exercise
> At Northumbria, the definition of plagiarism includes the description:
>
> "the inclusion in a student's work of more than a single phrase from
another
> person's work without the use of quotation marks or acknowledgement of the
> sources."
>
> It does not mention intent as an component of plagiarism. I don't think
this
> is a well
>
> In the modules I teach, I tell students they must use APA style. In APA,
a
> passage of more than 40 words must be indented. The Baroness Deech
passage
> fits that (assuming it's an accurate copy of the Wiki text), so they'd
need
> to indent it, which is something that can't be shown in a plain-text
e-mail.
> The in-text citation doesn't really fit APA, but citations of electronic
> sources are very difficult for students and for professionals, so, up
> through Master's level classes, I probably wouldn't complain. I wouldn't
> see it as plagiarism in any case.
>
> As for their use of it, that would depend on their level and what they
were
> writing about. Since I teach (among other things) the analysis of
writing,
> I'd say that for undergraduates citing Wiki is ok for peripheral topics,
> though in that case, the use of a long passage like this might border on
> padding. (For final year undergrads & MA students, padding, not citation,
> would be the issue.) I would generally feel that for areas central to the
> area of study, Wiki (or, for that matter, the Encyclopaedia Britannica) is
> an inappropriate source, and I would mark students down for inadequate
> reading around the subject.
>
> For Master's dissertations & PhD/professional work, Wiki itself would have
> to be under discussion for the passage to be appropriate. For example,
from
> a paper discussing intertextuality, "Students might think that is is
> appropriate to use the Wikipedia definition of plagiarism, which is easier
> to find than their own university's definition. That definition says,..."
> (a made-up example).
>
> When I started MA level study, a teacher marked us on conformity to APA
> style, without ever explaining the purpose of citations and
intertextuality.
> I suspect she couldn't have, really. I tend to focus on appropriate use
of
> sources, and, except for dissertations and all PhD work, honest but
> inaccurate citations would be minor issues. (E.g., overseas students
> quoting "Mike, R. (2006)" because names in Asia are given family name
> first.) For work at the end of a course or professional work (e.g., a
> Ph.D.), students have been through extensive training and they should have
> raised their game.
>
> Erik Borg
>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Reddy" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 9:20 AM
Subject: Balance of Probabilities - and an exercise
> I would be interested in hearing from colleagues who work at institutions
where the "balance of probabilities" was mentioned explicitly in university
regulations. If so, what would be your definition of such a thing.
>
> Also, where appropriate, if there is any precedent for the following:
>
> "Substantial" use of material, either quantified or qualified - We all
probably remember the case of Sunderland a year or two ago, but I thought it
would be interesting to see if colleagues have regulations at their
institution that provide safeguards against what Baroness Deech
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_Deech) described in her keynote; a case
where a few words in a 12,000 word essay were considered a major case of
plagiarism. Alternatively, if there was any explicit mention of any size of
offending material still being considered as an offence: i.e. anything over
the speed limit is still over the speed limit. Finally, if there is any
precedent for a consideration of quantity of offence in terms of mitigating
the penalty.
>
> A requirement for "intent" or alternatively, no requirement to prove
advertency - Some institutions have a need for deliberate acts for something
to be considered plagiarism. Some make a case for "inadvertent" plagiarism
to be a (plea bargainable?) secondary offence. Others state that there is no
need to prove intent, and that an offence is an offence even in ignorance.
>
> Finally, I would like to ask colleagues if they received an essay with the
following text, whether they would consider it to be plagiarism, as defined
by their own institution's regulations. Please note that this would be an
extract (say a page) from a ten page essay (this is an exercise only):
>
> *** Essay page ***
> Baroness Deech was born in 1943 in London, is an academic and a Governor
of the BBC. She is married to a solicitor, John Deech, and has one daughter,
a journalist for BBC News, interested in travel, opera, theatre,
entertaining and public speaking. In 1999, the Observer newspaper named her
as the 107th most powerful person in Britain.
>
> Deech studied Law at St Anne's College, Oxford, graduating with a first in
1965. She returned to the college in 1970 to be a tutorial fellow in Law,
until 1991 when she was elected Principal of the college, but retired in
2004, succeeded as principal by Tim Gardam. The college has since named its
latest building after her; the Ruth Deech Building, the fourth to be named
for a principal.
>
> After leaving St. Anne's, Deech was appointed the first Independent
Adjudicator for Higher Education, dealing with the resolution of student
complaints. She served as chair of the UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology
Authority from 1994 until 2002, the same year that she was made a Dame of
the British Empire (DBE).
>
> (Wikipedia 2006c)
>
> *** End of essay page ***
>
> In the bibliography, the following entry is found:
>
> Wikipedia 2006c, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_Deech, Accessed 20th
July 2006
>
> *** Note: The question is whether the text above is sufficiently
referenced in order to either be clearly not a case of plagiarism,
inadvertent plagiarism, or merely poor paraphrasing.
>
> I would be interested in your views either directly, or through this
mailing list.
>
> Mike
>
> *************************************************************************
> You are subscribed to the JISC Plagiarism mailing list. To Unsubscribe,
change
> your subscription options, or access list archives, visit
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/PLAGIARISM.html
> *************************************************************************
>
*************************************************************************
You are subscribed to the JISC Plagiarism mailing list. To Unsubscribe, change
your subscription options, or access list archives, visit
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/PLAGIARISM.html
*************************************************************************
|
