> This is an interesting point - but I don't think I would like to take
> the chance of arguing this the next time I need to assist a student
> who is accused of either plagiarism or collusion.
> Firstly there is a distinction between plagiarism and collusion.
> Plagiarism is generally accepted to be the unacknowledged insertion
> into a student's work of material taken from the work published or
> unpublished of another person.
> Collusion is where a student works in collaboration with another
> person either in terms of submitting or enabling another person to
> submit work, or knowingly permits another student to copy all or part
> of a piece of work to allow the other student to submit it as his/her own.
> Sometimes plagiarism and collusion occur together but generally it
> would be either plagiarism or collusion because of the distinction
> between the two charges.
> To enable academic staff to provide the evidence of plagiarism the
> details of the piece(s) of work (published or unpublished) must be
> released to the student who is accused to prove that plagiarism has
> With collusion I would argue the same applies. The details of the
> academic work should be treated as an unpublished source. If the
> academic staff can't produce the evidence, i.e. the piece of work -
> the accused students would not be in possession of enough facts to
> defend themselves under the rules of natural justice or under Art 6 of
> the Human Rights Act. It is relevant to ensure that the two (or more
> students) accused have independent representation to ensure fairness
> and avoid conflict of interest (which is not always easy to provide
> with the constraints on the services that can be provided by the
> Student Unions)...and each case should be judged on it's individual
> With the services of JISCPAS and other electronic detection services
> now available it would be harder to argue that the students are not
> informed that their work will be checked against other submissions
> with the references (source attribution - including names) of those
> other pieces of academic work produced as the basis of investigation
> into whether plagiarism or collusion has occurred. JISCPAS asks
> students to sign in agreement before work is submitted electronically
> to ensure that data protection rights are upheld.
> It would be interesting to post your query to the RAWS and the
> PLAGIARISM lists so you have a complete view.
>It has been practice in disciplinary cases involving plagiarism to give
>to the individual being investigated the name (only) of the student
>whose work appears to be very similar or the same as theirs. It is
>thought that this gives them the fairest way of explaining the alleged
>Do others think that this is a legitmate disclosure?
> All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
> available to the world wide web community at large at
> 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 : -
> (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
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 : -
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)