Control V: Approaching Plagiarism

While I've never used it, I borrowed the cartoon from, and it seemed hypocritical not to say so!

I was on Twitter yesterday when news began flooding in from fellow bloggers and the various NPR entities that I follow of the retraction of Mike Daisey’s now infamous piece on This American Life.  Over the course of several hours amidst March Madness updates and score updates from the Black Bears journey to the Hockey East finals, a debate opened up about journalistic integrity and the nature of truth.  Meanwhile, various listings and online bulletins are beginning to announce the talk that Doris Kearns Goodwin will deliver in Orono on the occasion of the new university president’s inauguration in April.  Goodwin, arguably among the best known and certainly most recognizable historians out there, has also run afoul of her peers on questions of plagiarism and academic integrity.  Taken together, these bits of news brought a few notions to mind.  One, not exactly a red letter day for my alma mater.  Go Mules!  Perhaps Colby should institute a unit on proper citations into one of its core requirements.  But more importantly it reminded me of our long-standing intention of launching a series on plagiarism.  It’s a subject that the Stillwater Historians have poured a lot of cheap vodka into without reaching anything resembling concensus.  And here is just a tiny bit of why:

Back when I was teaching pretty much full time, there were a number of things that caught me off guard–but none so much as the rate and severity of plagiarism I encountered.  I quickly recognized the need to be proactive in preventing it, through assigning “plagiarism-proof” assignments and building in introductory warnings and even dedicating ever larger chunks of class time to discussing what plagiarism is and how and why to avoid it.  But I found that better tailored assignments, while they may have slowed the occurrence rate slightly, really only made it easier to detect.  When I asked colleagues about it, they maintained that no one in their classes plagiarized and that clearly whatever was going on in my classroom was a function of my inexperience.  Over time I suspected, however, that this was their naivete, not mine.

Now clearly there is a broad spectrum of offenses that could be labelled plagiarism.  And here I’m not even talking about missing citations or page numbers, or even lack of quotation marks where required.  I found a few instances of this, too, but what concerned me far more was the practice of copy and paste from far and wide across the internet.  Very often it was paragraphs that stuck out as apropos of nothing at all, which turned out to have been lifted from wikipedia.  In some cases the student hadn’t even had the foresight to regularize font, size, and COLOR (!!!) of the type face.  In another instance I received the entire text of a paper delivered to a conference on popular culture a few months before, which had been posted to the conference website.  In some cases it was essays bought from services like cheathouse and others…though more often it was portions of essays lifted off of the “free previews” of such services.  In classes of 35 students it was not uncommon to have as many as 8 or 10 who were plagiarizing to some extent, 4 or 5 of which would be at the more egregious end of the said spectrum.  These were, to my mind, epidemic proportions.

Of course cases of plagiarism would irritate me greatly because they inevitably took up more of my time than the papers of students who had done the assignments honestly and in good faith.  If I detected plagiarism and intended to hold a student responsible, which my syllabus obligated me to do, I needed to thoroughly document where every piece of plagiarized content had come from.  And in many cases it was quite the casserole of websites–though all easy to detect by googling a few uncharacteristically eloquent turns of phrase.  In trudging through this process, though, I began to discover that passages that were being replicated in students papers appeared in multiple places around the web.  I even had a student sit in my office and after surveying their F, with the 4 page paper attached to the 12 pages of printouts detailing the source of 80% of its content, tell me that yes, he had plagiarized it, but “this isn’t where I got it.”  I began to wonder then about the wisdom of encouraging use of the internet (particularl at small schools with no library to speak of) which very often models the very behavior I was trying to prevent.  Soon I was adding in classes on responsible use of internet sources, and beginning to wonder, at the rate I was moving, how much time in future semesters would be left for teaching history!

I am irritated to no end by faculty who fall back on the excuse/complaint that students are not being properly prepared in high school to undertake college level work.  You don’t get to teach the students you wish you had, you teach the students you have.  And, oh by the way, who trained the high school teachers?  That said, I did begin to try to put myself in the place of my plagiarizers and ask myself why, given all the instruction and all the warnings, and all the threats of consequences…why would one resort to trying this course?  Especially when after a few semesters, my reputation of being true to my word on this was well established on my small campus.  I wasn’t comfortable accepting the notion that they were just bad people.  Overwhelmed?  Certainly.  It was clear that many had tried this tack before and been successful–they had gotten away with it.  Many openly said so.  Other instructors either hadn’t noticed or hadn’t cared.  Or for whatever reason they, like their students (ironically), took the path of least resistance.  And while I don’t like falling back on these types of explanations either–one must wonder to what extent a school dominated by adjunct faculty, who don’t want to make waves or dirty their hands with disciplinary issues, can expect to combat issues of academic integrity.  Adjuncts are not convinced that the administration will have their back if conflicts arise, and they’re even less convinced that they’ll continue to garner future courses if their current ones yield disciplinary complications of any kind.  Wasting the dean’s time can be considered a leading way of making yourself disappear!

What I concluded, in part, was that I had students who just didn’t know where to start when it came to writing a paper.  And I don’t mean in the way I hem and haw over the start of an article or chapter.  I mean they really didn’t have the aptitude or preparation to conceptualize the writing of a paper, regardless of length, format, or content.  They were at a loss.  They didn’t even know how to think about the process.  They put it off to the point where it became easier to cobble together some borrowed language than to both learn how to do it, and actually do it in the time allowed.  I can imagine that for some (not all, but some) the process was actually more painful than the punishment.

This was several years back, around 2002 to 2005, when our relationship to the internet was not as well defined.  It’s still not, but I think most would agree it has gotten better and we’ve gotten more savvy about dealing with the medium and incorporating it into our work, both teaching and research.  Thus we can better model responsible uses for our students.  My more recent teaching experiences have not yielded rates of plagiarism nearly as high, but it hasn’t disappeared either.  But I’m also at different schools with different student and faculty cultures as well.  While I have, at times, empathized with the compulsion towards plagiarism amongst students, I still adhere to and advocate a hard line.

But I’m ever intrigued by circumstances like we’ve seen this week.  Bob Garfield in his Guardian piece talks about feeling betrayed by Mike Daisey.  I sympathize and I guess I don’t disagree.  From Daisey’s perspective, is the larger truth any different because something that was known to have happened was reported to have been seen firsthand, but wasn’t?  And his argument that the rules change when we label it a different genre…not sure I’m compelled by that.  Does being in “theater” relieve one of the obligations of full disclosure?  And if it does, does it only do so if you openly declare that theater is, in fact, what you’re doing–despite the fact that your work is being delivered through journalistic channels?

So, like I said at the beginning, I am unresolved on issues of plagiarism and academic integrity.  These borders, like all others, shift with time and technology.  It seems clear that we’ve stumbled upon a teachable moment here.  But I can’t for the life of me decide what to teach or how to teach it…

Any thoughts?

7 thoughts on “Control V: Approaching Plagiarism

  1. I not only give “F’s” for papers that are lifted in part or whole from other sources, I fail the students who engage in such activity for the whole course. I don’t do this for phrases in quotes, or paraphrases with faulty citations, but for papers obviously intended as the student’s own work.

    I too am an adjunct, at a small 2-year college, and while the department and Academic Dean’s office are theoretically behind my stance on this, I have had students plot to assassinate my career by collaborating on student course evaluations. Of course, it did seem suspicious when 6 or 7 students used exactly the same wording describing why I was such a horrible professor! If it came down to a choice between turning a blind eye to cheating and plagiarism or being fired, I would gladly take the latter. But then again, I may have just a tad of a martyr’s complex. As proof of that, consider that I did decide to get into History as a profession.

  2. So they registered their dissatisfaction with your plagiarism policy by essentially plagiarizing on their course evals? That’s not funny, but…no, sorry, I think that might be kinda funny! I’ll save my diatribe about course evals for another day–and perhaps my colleague the assessment expert will put that on her list of things to blog about. But on the plagiarism front, I’m with you, Helen, on your policy. Or at least I have been in the past. My policy was one and done, and an F, not for the assignment, but for the course. As you say though, only for those with clearly deceitful intentions, not those with poorly formed or absent citations, or even those whose approach to paraphrasing is to take a thesaurus (probably the one in Word) to one word in every couple of lines. I never knew about sparknotes until I had several versions of its entry on The Jungle fed to me in one assignment, with various words replaced with some odd, unwieldy, not-quite-synonyms. I doled out some stern warnings in these cases but no outright Fs.

    But much as we like to say the war on drugs can’t be fought with stiffer sentences alone, there must be some way of approaching the problem from more than just the punitive side. I’m sure, like me, you’ve coupled your “one strike” policy with more and more detailed instruction on issues of academic honesty, practical approaches to sources and citations, and structures and techniques of writing. But faced with my own dubious results I’m left wondering if there is a better tack. I’ve heard it said that by expunging the student from the course with an F, they’ll just come back and take it again with an instructor who won’t catch them, or won’t have the same policy. And would it not be better, to send them back and make them do the assignment properly? At which point they begin to hone the skills, the lack of which impelled them to their original course of action–and perhaps ultimately they won’t need to plagiarize anymore.

    By failing them outright have we given away an opportunity to help them build the skills they lack? We may have taught them a lesson in personal responsibility, but they still don’t know how to write their next paper. The cycle must continue. Granted, some students are just lazy, and won’t take a second chance even if you offer it. Others just seem utterly incapable of getting their act together. But I’ve seen students who seemed by all indications I could glean to be legitimately interested in the course, engaged in discussions, and attentive in class. And then they hand me a plagiarized essay that I must adhere to my word and my policy and fail them for. Nobody wins. As I say in my post, I don’t have any solid answers yet, but I’m dissatisfied with my past and present approach, and interested in hearing some new possibilities.

    Also, on a practical level, if you’ve failed them for the course, why are they still there when the time comes for course evaluations? Why continue attending a class you can’t pass?

    • Didn’t see these comments before posting mine… My thought would be, an F with instruction and an opportunity to fix it, at least for first and maybe even second year students. Like you said there has to be some way to break the cycle, very difficult to achieve without total commitment across the academic spectrum.

  3. Rob I may have told you about this but I had a student slightly rearrange bulleted sentences from a Wikipedia page and pass it in as a paper. This raised my consciousness concerning some of the other papers I had in the stack, and while i cannot remember how many there were total, even one is egregious and there was more than one.

    Concerning your final question, I am not entirely sure I have an answer for you except to say it is the responsibility of people like you and me to stand against the rising tide of intellectual dishonesty, especially as historians, and while practical considerations like you mentioned, such as future employment, should certainly bear on the process of discipline and disclosure, what is the worth of working in a field that has been corrupted by work stolen from Wikipedia and hired gun companies? /// super run-on FTW

  4. A few questions:

    Do you describe plagiarism to your students at the beginning of each new class?
    If yes, what does that explanation look like? do you show examples?
    Do you explain what citations are and why they are necessary?

  5. Pingback: Ctrl V Redux: Relating to Digital Natives « Stillwater Historians

  6. Pingback: Steep Grade Ahead: Grad Students and Plagiarism | GradHacker

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s