Re: Plagiarism Story -Part II
> Part II of my story continues with a definition of plagiarism. Although
> it may be redundant, I want to repeat part of a post sent to hosta-open
> on December 26, 1998 on Academic Honesty. It contained information taken
> from a six page Booklet prepard by the Faculty of Temple University for
> use as a guide for new students entering academic life. The Booklet
> outlines the way Faculty and students must behave toward each other and
> the appropriate use of one another's thoughts, words, ideas or published
> research. It provides guidance and rules to follow to avoid conflicts.
> I quote a part of it..."Rules are self evident and follow inevitably
> from a respect for the truth. We must not take credit for research, for
> ideas, or for words which are not our own. We must not falsify data or
> results of research. We must not present any work under false pretenses.
> We must understand exactly what is meant by the three major types of
> academic dishonesty...plagiarism, violating rules of an assignment and
> cheating on an examination"....
> "Plagiarism is the unacknowledged use of another person's labor, another
> person's ideas, words or assistance. There are many forms of plagiarism:
> repeating another's sentence as your own, adopting a particularly apt
> phrase as your own, paraphrasing someone else's argument as your own, or
> even presenting someone else's line of thinking in the development of a
> thesis as though it were your own. All of these forms of plagiarism are
> prohibited both by the traditional principles of academic honesty and by
> the regulations of Temple University. Our education and our research
> encourage us to explore and use the ideas of others, and as writers we
> frequently will want to use the ideas and even the words of others. It
> is perfectly acceptable to do so; but we must never submit someone
> else's work as if it were our own, without giving appropriate credit to
> the originator"
> "The following types of materials should be acknowledged through an
> acceptable form of citation:
> (a)Quotations. Whenever you use a phrase, sentence, or longer passage
> written (or spoken) by someone else, you must enclose the words in
> quotation marks and indicate the exact source of the material. This
> applies also to quotations you have altered.
> (b)Paraphrasing another's language. Avoid closely paraphrasing another's
> words: substituting an occasional synonym, leaving out or adding an
> occasional modifier, rearranging the grammar slightly, just changing the
> tense of verbs, and so on. Either quote the material directly, using
> quotation marks, or put the ideas completely in your own words. In
> either case, acknowledgment is necessary. Remember: expressing someone
> else's ideas in your own way does not make them yours.
> (c) Facts. In a paper you will often use facts that you have gotten from
> a lecture, a written work, or some other source. If the facts are well
> known, it is usually not necessary to provide a source....But if the
> facts are not widely known or if the facts were developed or presented
> by a specific source, then you should identify the source for the facts.
> (d) Ideas. If you use an idea or ideas you have learned from a lecture,
> written work or some other source, then you should identify the
> source...whether you agree or disagree with the idea. It does not become
> your original idea just because you agree with it."
> These definitions and guidelines regarding plagiarism are from an
> authoritative source. If anyone does not agree with this assessment, I
> suggest they provide their definition of plagiarism. Perhaps one from the
> Leiden University would also serve, if they have such guidelines.
> If no other suggestions for definitions of plagiarism are forthcoming, I
> intend to discuss in the next episode (Part III) the historical
> background of events as they occurred chronologically.
> Jim Hawes
To sign-off this list, send email to email@example.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN