Sorry - just had to dash off a quick reply... these students are not
'getting away with' these tactics - this is what we are teaching them.
The whole political and managerialist system actively teaches this
lesson about education - and we then blame the student for learning so
well that which we teach so well!
Until we re-design the education system - we will continue to teach -
and the students will learn - these lessons.
It is the same here in the UK - students who go through a similar
mangerialist system as that which you describe in the USA then get
accused of being strategic surface learners. Yet that is what policy and
practice has taught them!
It is ironic to me that the least powerful actors in the education drama
accrue the most blame!
Best,
Sandra
Rebel Palm wrote:
> Paula et al.,
> I am continually stunned by having to explain plagiarism to a graduate
> student. We just had a shake up in one of our depts where 6 grad
> student got caught plagiarizing. Since our writing center is in the
> college of education, I have a chance to talk to a lot of teachers, and
> I'm exposed to their own practices and values, and what they're passing
> on to the next generation of teachers.
>
> Re: our being high on the food chain to have to deal with this--I
> agree. As far as I can figure out, the reality in US primary and
> secondary grades is that the teachers teach to the standardized tests,
> the scores from which then become the assessment for the teachers
> getting re-hired. Here it's been especially bad since the No Child Left
> Behind Act defined accountability.
>
> Teachers don't emphasize creativity and original thought in primary and
> secondary grades--they emphasize being able to write an essay that will
> get a good score on a standardized test in 45 minutes--outline, first
> draft has to count, no re-writes. They teach templates and
> boilerplates. And in English 101 at this university, a "research" paper
> means quoting extensively from something the student found on the
> internet without any real thought for critical argument.
>
> By the time they reach graduate school, these students have had a career
> of being able to get away with throwing other people's (some expert's)
> ideas at a paper, writing it once (no revisions), with very little
> effort spent on original thought. Some of them come to me perplexed at
> a prof's demand for your "own ideas." They say, "no one's ever told me
> I get to have my own ideas." And this is grad school!
>
> So I agree--it should start a lot earlier. But until we start
> emphasizing writing about original thoughts and not just how well you
> can paraphrase (at least in high school and undergrad), I think we're
> going to continue having students who don't know what plagiarism is.
>
> Rebel
> Graduate Student Writing Studio
> College of Education
> University of New Mexico
>
>
> On Mon, 10 May 2010 11:13:51 +0300
> Paula Haapanen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Hello!
>>
>>
>>
>> My thanks as well for all of the comments. They will certainly help me
>> further explain this phenomenon to my students.
>>
>>
>> Just to wax nostalgic for a moment, I remember being taught not to steal
>> other people's ideas back in elementary school (and that was 35-30
>> years ago). Now I know we're talking about a variety of things here
>> (expressing things as they do in one's professional community,
>> boilerplate phrases, cognitive appropriacy of tasks) and I think these
>> are all valid things in academic writing at the higher education level.
>> However, it boggles the mind as to why are we dealing with the basic
>> concept of plagiarism at the university level.
>>
>>
>> Now I know my rant is not going to solve anything (but it feels good to
>> rant) and the reality is such that we Academic Writing teachers (aka
>> police) are the last line of defence against this sort of thing but, as
>> a relatively new teacher of Academic Writing, I just feel that we're a
>> bit high on the food chain for this.
>>
>>
>> I realize that different cultures deal with plagiarism in different ways
>> (I'm Canadian and I teach students from many different countries) but I
>> would have hoped that academic integrity is globally held in somewhat
>> higher esteem than it appears to be. What happened? Why aren't teachers
>> in earlier levels of education saying anything about this? Or are they?
>> And if so, what are they saying? This directly concerns point 3 of Mary
>> Ellen's summed up points below. Why isn't "the sense of how to clearly
>> mark off your own ideas and others' and when... strong in many sciences
>> now"? (Kerans, 2010) J
>>
>>
>>
>> ...end of rant.
>>
>>
>> Happy spring!
>>
>> --Paula
>>
>>
>>
>> **************************************
>> Paula Haapanen
>> Coordinating Lecturer - English
>> Language Centre
>> Lappeenranta University of Technology
>>
>> PO Box 20
>> 53851 Lappeenranta
>> Finland
>>
>> Phone: + 358 (0)5 621 2213 (direct)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: European Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing -
>> discussions [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of M. Ellen Kerans
>> Sent: 7. toukokuuta 2010 14:06
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Do SS learn to plagiarize in our classes?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you for this because you emphasize some points I've tried to bring
>> to instruction (now from an outsider's vantage in the world of author's
>> editing - i.e., pre-acceptance editing - and journal copyediting -
>> though I still teach a bit). May I summarize your points that I consider
>> to be very important to remember when planning instruction or orienting
>> (advanced) students? In this, I'm attempting to state the "problems" and
>> imply the solutions for instructors or mentors from the journal editors'
>> point of view as I understand it.
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. Long noun phrases are common and can be considered to have
>> status as terms in many fields. (Yes, they could be shortened after
>> they've first been established in a text, but they need to appear in
>> their entirety somewhere; otherwise reading is made difficult.) This is
>> why the "six-word string" criterion of some plagiarism detection
>> software won't be very useful. It's also why all electronic detection
>> outputs should be interpreted by a human being who is familiar with the
>> literature in the field, before plagiarism is assumed.
>> 2. Certain longish predicate phrases or clauses, especially in the
>> methods and results sections, should also be given the status of
>> "boilerplate phrases" equivalent to the sort John pointed out yesterday
>> as useful metalinguistic phrases for linking ideas. (There are just so
>> many ways to express statistical results, for example, and to deviate is
>> to change the meaning or display your lack of knowledge of a technique
>> and how it's talked about in that community.) Furthermore, certain
>> multicenter studies will have whole paragraphs that are boilerplates -
>> to tie a vast body of research together. A human interpreter of
>> plagiarism detection software outputs needs to know this.
>> 3. "Words unacknowledged" = plagiarism is a fair way to put it, OK.
>> However, many of us are dealing with authors who are learning from
>> mentors who themselves don't know much about citing (acknowledgment
>> protocols) and when to put quotes around exact wording. There are few
>> examples to follow in the sciences-for both good and bad reasons. (Note
>> how often applied linguists even put quotes around two-to-four word
>> phrases to express that a turn of phrase belongs to the cited author,
>> possibly because research on the ground is thin as you say. Quotes
>> around short segments seldom appear in the sciences, and when they do,
>> they're often so-called scare quotes suggesting disagreement or lack of
>> evidence. Lack of quotes is appropriate if the scientist is using the
>> type of phrasing mentioned in points 1 and 2 above. On other occasions -
>> the expression of points of view or interpretation or when clause-length
>> explanations are incorporated, it probably would be necessary to
>> acknowledge that phrasing is exact and just putting a cite at the end of
>> a sentence is insufficient.) A problem is that where lines are drawn
>> isn't being well handed down in many settings nowadays. The sense of how
>> to clearly mark off your own ideas and others' and when phrasing matters
>> isn't strong in many sciences now. 4. I think you're so very right
>> that tasks that are often not
>> really within the cognitive abilities of undergraduates are being set
>> these days in university classes (and not just EAP courses). Fixing this
>> alone would solve many problems. What's needed are tasks requiring
>> "bridge genres" - ways students can practice and gradually build up a
>> sense of how to use the language to participate in their field.
>> 5. I also think it's right to warn instructors off overemphasizing
>> paraphrasing activities as the best response to avoidance of plagiarism
>> on the student level (you say "EAP teachers get hung up on the words
>> rather than ideas or findings") . Plagiarism disappears from the
>> classroom (in my experience) when the task set is cognitively
>> appropriate and when a student writer focuses on the idea he or she
>> wishes to explain - to an appropriately imagined reader, such as a smart
>> younger cousin who's also interested in the field. Soon, natural marking
>> of "my idea" vs "their ideas/facts" emerges from the student's words and
>> citing begins to make sense to them. (In engineering, by the way, I find
>> the tasks set by Michael Alley and the groups he works with to be the
>> type of bridge task I'm talking about.)
>>
>>
>>
>> The only contributions I'd like to add:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1) I think that some of the repetition I think you're seeing in your
>> Google searches is a result of the fact that "compilation theses" (Am:
>> dissertations) are increasingly common. In case anyone's not familiar
>> with this practice, essentially the doctoral student must publish the
>> articles first, before "writing" (compiling) the thesis/dissertation.
>> Then, the thesis itself is a compilation of those articles - in their
>> exact forms - plus an introductory chapter summarizing the history and
>> subsequent events in the field, plus the usual acknowledgements. This
>> certainly isn't plagiarism. It's "complilation".
>>
>> 2) The hope that ("The Journal obviously doesn't think this is
>> plagiarism") may be optimistic because reviewers do not detect
>> plagiarism. This is the ostensible reason why journal editors are now
>> becoming more indignant about both duplicate publication and plagiarism
>> (hence the CrossCheck publisher's project). The community still views
>> this as a transgression, however. Sometimes editors go on the rampage.
>> Sometimes they get the tone of their reactions wrong. (See last year's
>> fiasco reported in Nature, 30 July 2009, Abbot), so young authors who
>> see their mentors have been copy-pasting for years may be rudely
>> undercut at some point. COPE has a flowchart with a protocol for editors
>> to follow, but few editors are members of COPE!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Finally: "boilerplate" comes from the practice of newspaper printers
>> using heavy (boilerplate) steel to set certain parts of a newspaper that
>> would have to be reprinted often - like mastheads. (Just thought someone
>> might find that tidbit interesting.)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Mary Ellen Kerans
>>
>> Translation & Editing - Writing & Education
>>
>> Barcelona, Spain
>>
>> Tel/Fax: 34 934 080997
>>
>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> or
>>
>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: European Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing -
>> discussions [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alexander, Olwyn
>> Sent: Friday, May 07, 2010 10:09 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: FW: Do SS learn to plagiarize in our classes?
>>
>>
>>
>> Forwarded from a colleague who is not on the list but interested in the
>> discussion.
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Jenifer Spencer [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent:
>> 06 May 2010 20:49
>> To: Alexander, Olwyn
>> Subject: Re: Do SS learn to plagiarize in our classes? Jenifer's Rant
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> My understanding is that it is plagiarism if you steal someone else's
>> ideas or words unacknowledged.That is regardless if you used their exact
>> words (which is easier to spot and prove) or your own words but it
>> really is their original idea or especially their experimental results,
>> which is the worst form of academic plagiarism. EAP teachers get hung up
>> on the words rather than ideas or findings, because they cannot see the
>> trees for the words! They think that seeing the same words means
>> plagiarism. Actually, it can just mean that is what is being studied or
>> discussed in a discourse community. Consider this e.g. from a PhD in
>> Petroleum engineering:
>>
>> Besson (1990) developed an improved semi-analytical correlation for the
>> geometrical skin factor of a fully penetrating deviated well in an
>> isotropic formation.
>> Google advanced search gives lots of results for phrases almost
>> identical to this 20-word NP - many of them from the same Journal and
>> set of conferences. I googled other longish phrases from the PhD at
>> random and each time this threw up many other articles with the same
>> phrases.This is because this is what this group of engineers is studying
>> and therefore what they talk about in their communications. The Journal
>> obviously doesn't think this is plagiarism- in fact I would imagine they
>> would refuse to publish anything that didn't have a high proportion of
>> appropriate, predictable 'set noun-phrases' like these, as it might
>> indicate that the author was not in fact an authentic member of this
>> discourse community. These phrases often have a good many more than 6
>> words in common. Perhaps it says more about the paucity of ideas or
>> research in political 'science' that six words in common would indicate
>> plagiarism!!!
>>
>> I think that the real confusion is engendered by he fact that essays set
>> in EAP courses are often on subjects that students know little about and
>> that they can contribute few ideas of their own to. This encourages
>> students, in desperationu to add quotes from the internet about topics
>> they only half understand- because they are outside that discourse
>> community. What is needed is for EAP teachers and subject lecturers to
>> get the students inside the discourse community as quickly as possible.
>> Actually, the PhD quoted above (and I have reason to suppose it is
>> considered a good one in the peer group, as the author has already been
>> published) and all those other sources I found in the Google search,
>> could be considered as 'patchwork writing': they have hardly a single
>> 'original' phrase between all of them: as well as the repetitive
>> technical phrases, the writers stick rigidly to formulaic academic
>> phrases and collocations taught in general EGAP courses- they are
>> exactly like all the depised 'models' of 'boiler-plating- probably
>> because that is how you make boilers!
>> However, it is clear that these writers are having a vibrant debate and
>> exchange of ideas. Here is a field that is moving on so rapidly that the
>> participants are willingly 'standing on each other's shoulders' to
>> facilitate this rapid development.They use this restricted code of
>> communication for speed and ease of communication (and probably to
>> acknowledge the reality that a very large number of these authors and
>> readers are NNS, who don't need any language challenges beyond the
>> conceptual and mathematical difficulty their field already poses).
>> Perhaps more originality of language might be found in fields where
>> research is thinner on the ground. It would be interesting to find a
>> field where there is little progress being made and see if that is where
>> the fancy 'original' language is to be found??
>>
>> If you put a socking-big acknowledged quote from another writer, it
>> might be considered rather a weak thing to do but it is certainly not
>> plagiarism- it is done in all academic books (including our own) and I
>> think the writers quoted are usually pleased to see their work given
>> such high exposure: it's a way of saying- look, you should really listen
>> to what X says about this, or sometimes a way of representing the writer
>> fairly if we are about to challenge their ideas.
>>
>> So, I think student plagiarism (as distinct from the serious type of
>> research stealing in professional academia) is more about being outside
>> the discourse community, and they will need those boiler plates to make
>> the boilers- they just need the opportunity to have something meaningful
>> to say about something they know enough about to an audience they are
>> aware of.
>>
>> Feel free to share this with your discussion group, if you think it has
>> any useful points.
>>
>> All the best]
>>
>> Jenifer
>>
>> Materials Writer, teacher training, editing, proofreading and
>> collaborative writing
>>
>> e-mail: [log in to unmask]
>> tel. +44(0) 1313333747
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity registered under charity
>> number SC000278.
>
>
> Bring to the act of writing all of your craft, care, devotion, lack of
> humbug, and honesty of sentiment. And then write without looking over
> your shoulder for the literary police. Write as if your life depended on
> saying what you felt as clearly as you could, while never losing sight
> of the phenomenon to be described.
> Norman Mailer, The Spooky Art
>
>
--
Sandra Sinfield
University Teaching Fellow
_______________________________________________________________________
Coordinator LDU & LearnHigher CETL www.learnhigher.ac.uk
LC-M10 London Metropolitan University, 236-250 Holloway Road, N7 6PP.
(020) 7 133 4045
www.londonmet.ac.uk/ldu
_______________________________________________________________________
Companies Act 2006 : http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/companyinfo
|
