While the information isn’t exactly what I was hoping for, it does help provide some additional insight into the case and, along the way, raise some interesting new elements to the matter that weren’t explored in the original reporting.

With that in mind, here’s a look at what Serpico said and what it possibly means.

A Quick Recap

To recap, Serpico was a Rutgers student who, last year, was accused of plagiarism in her “Argumentation” class at Rutgers University. She received an “F” for the course and, though she was able to graduate, she claims the grade and action has harmed her ability to get into graduate school. Serpico, for her part, has staunchly maintained her innocence, not only appealing at every junction in the disciplinary process but even filing a lawsuit to have the matter removed from her record and the grade restored.

However, there is a lot of uncertainty about what happened and whether or not Serpico actually plagiarized her paper. Unfortunately, without being able to look at the paper, there’s no way myself or others can do an independent analysis and make any determinations. Still, the story is an interesting case study for those who follow plagiarism matters in academia as it is extremely rare for such a plagiarism case to result in a lawsuit.

What Serpico Said

First, Serpico said that she could not provide me with the papers involved to perform an independent analysis due to “pending litigation”. While this seems sensible, it goes against earlier reporting that she was looking to “share all of the documents related to her case”.

That being said, she did say two things that were of interest to this case:

1. Citation Issues: Serpico said that the “three passages” at issue were correctly quoted and cited, but that they were quoted and cited to their primary source. The sources that the professor involved claimed that they were secondary sources that also used the same primary ones. According to Serpico, all content in the paper was cited to primary sources.
2. Procedure Issues: In addition to the plagiarism issues, Serpico is also fighting against wht she says were violations of Rutgers’ own policies in handling the case. This include giving her an “F” in the course before the investigation was complete (instead of an “Incomplete”), failure to give her a chance to speak with her professor about the paper and the failure of the school to provide needed documents.

Unfortunately, I can’t vouch for all or any of this. Without the paper in front of me, I can’t see if it was correctly cited to its primary sources and, since I don’t have any knowledge of Serpico’s disciplinary hearings I can not confirm the latter.

That being said, what Serpico said about the disciplinary process matches what is in Rutgers Academic Integrity Policy (See both Non Separable Academic Integrity Flow Chart for Faculty (PDF) and Page 10 on
Academic Integrity Policy (PDF)).

That being said, not meeting with the professor was, most likely a matter of practicality both as school was on break when the plagiarism was discovered and, according to Serpico, the professor was on vacation until January 13th of the next year. It may not have been practical to do so with the timeframe provided.

Still, it does seem Rutgers did make at least some mistakes in following its policies but it is unclear at this time if those errors materially hurt Serpico and her defense.

Bottom Line

All in all, while Serpico’s letter and expansion on her points are interesting and add some new elements to the case, they don’t really bring us any closer to understand what exactly happened and what, if anything, students and schools can learn from this case.

Hopefully those answers will come out over the course of the legal dispute and, with time, we’ll be able to get a better understanding of what happened.

In the meantime, this is going to be a case that plagiarism experts, universities and students alike will be watching very closely.

As part of the class, she wrote an opinion paper arguing on the politics of gay marriage. While everything seemed well after turning in the assignment, two days before Christmas (after the course had ended and she was on break), the instructor of the course emailed her and informed her that plagiarism had been detected in her work.

Serpico fought back, claiming that the software used for the detection, Turnitin, is flawed and appealed every step in the disciplinary process. However, she eventually lost and received an “F” for the course on her transcript. Further, though she was allowed to graduate, according to Serpico, that “F” may have resulted in her being denied admission to graduate school at the University of South Carolina, her first choice, and the University of Texas at Austin, her second.

Serpico is now suing Rutgers to have the grade changed though it is unclear if that is even capable of having an effect. In the meantime, she was accepted at Florida State University and is studying there.

The case, to put it modestly, is a mess for both sides. Not only has Serpico’s academic career been set back, but Rutgers is now fending off questions about its plagiarism practices. The public outing of the case, which was Serpico’s decision, has put both in a negative light publicly.

But what can be learned from this? A great deal if one is willing to read between the lines of the story.

Did Serpico Plagiarize?

The big question in this matter is whether or not Serpico actually plagiarized. Unfortunately, without access to her paper and/or the Turnitin report, I can’t really make any determination. I can only take Serpico and the school at their word and that leaves a lot of room for error.

Still, there are a few interesting points in the story.

1. After the initial accusation of plagiarism and Serpico’s response, the instructor admitted that much of the paper was correctly cited but said that there were three passages that were not. Though it’s unclear how long the passages are, the instructor said they, “take up so much of the total text in your paper… I am left with no other choice than to formally treat this as a case of plagiarism.”
2. Serpico said that the three sources involved, were cited in the works cited section, “Even if they were not properly cited within text, they were clearly made visible on my reference page at the end of my paper,” Serpico wrote in an appeal.
3. Despite a vigorous appeal, which included an 8-page response, Serpico eventually lost her case before the disciplinary board and received an “F” for the assignment.

The problem, based on this information, seems fairly clear. Since Turnitin (as well as all plagiarism checking services) can only detect verbatim copying, Serpico, most likely, used several passages verbatim and, though cited them in the works cited section of the paper, failed to cite them correctly in the text (quotes and attribution).

If that’s the case, then quite clearly this is plagiarism. When using text verbatim, especially in any large amount and in an academic environment, you’re supposed to mark it as a quote. This is designed to indicate that you did not write the words yourself and that they came straight from the credited source. This is both to indicate where the words came from and that the thoughts/phrasing are not your own, this is especially important in an argumentative paper, such as this one.

So it’s clear, if we assume the above is true, that Serpico at least technically violated the school’s plagiarism rules. The tougher question is if it was intentional or accidental. That will depend much more on the length of the passages at issue, something I can’t speak to as I don’t have the paper.

That being said, Serpico said that she is willing to “share all of the documents related to her case” and, if she does so with me, I’ll write a follow up article later this week on the topic. Unfortunately, I was unable to contact her for this story.

Other Statistics

One interesting element to this story is the statistics Rutgers provided on cheating and plagiarism at its school.

According to them, some 344 students last year were cited for cheating, 70% of which (241) were for plagiarism. From there, 92% of the students who were accused faced some level of discipline, whether it was failing the class, a 0 on the assignment or some other discipline.

Most students accepted responsibility for their actions and did not appeal the rulings.

What all of this does is paint a picture of just how unusual Serpico’s case is. Though plagiarism cases are more common than earlier, most seem to be dealing with very clear-cut cases of plagiarism where the student admits to the error, receives punishment and moves on. Rarely is there even an appeal.

However, this is exactly the scenario that students and instructors alike fear. When every student turns in a paper, they fear an incident where they feel they did nothing wrong (or maybe just made an innocent mistake) but are accused of plagiarism and suffer dire consequences.

Serpico, in short, is a poster child for what students are afraid of with tools like Turnitin being used.

That, in turn, shows what educators need to glean from this.

Quick Lessons from the Case

So what are the lessons from this case, as I see it, there are three major ones to learn:

1. Turnitin is Not Magical: No plagiarism check can actually spot plagiarism, they can only detect verbatim copying. While that’s a powerful too, teachers need to use their judgment to decide if the copying is plagiarism or not. Judging from the response of the instructor in this case and how the story changed after the first week, it seems like, initially at least, the Turnitin report was handled inappropriately.
2. Education vs. Discipline: Was this a case that warranted disciplinary action or would an educational approach been better? I can’t say without looking at the paper, but given that Serpico still is unclear on what she did wrong, it seems at least some educational opportunity was missed.
3. Plagiarism is a Serious Allegation: Even though the punishment Serpico faced was fairly mino compared to other schools, it has still had strong consequences on her academic career, at least apparently. These allegations can’t be taken lightly and we must be careful that the crime warrants the punishment. This is especially true consider, at Rutgers, these cases will stay on the student’s record for at least 10 years, possibly permanently.

All in all, this reenforces my original statements that schools need to move away from a purely disciplinary mindset on plagiarism and start looking at it more as an educational issue.

However, as Rutgers’ statistics show, that isn’t likely to happen anytime soon.

Bottom Line

All in all, I can’t make any final determinations in this case without the paper in front of me. However, even with the limited information we have in hand, there’s a lot that this can teach us about how plagiarism can and should be handled in academic environments.

To be clear though, it seems unlikely that Serpico’s lawsuit is going to do much good. The deck is just stacked too far in the school’s favor. Even ignoring the agreements Serpico signed to go to the school, it’s unclear what law she would use to force the change. She may be able to claim libel, but she has an uphill battle there as there is at least some evidence against her.

Still, it will be an interesting case and one that schools everywhere will be watching.

But what about those who deliberately copy their older works and writings in order to pass them off as newer creations? They are in a much different category and one that has given academia and the business world alike a significant problem.

Simply put, self-plagiarism raises a slew of ethical and even legal questions for which there are no easy answers. Unlike traditional plagiarism, which much more clearly-defined rules and consequences, self-plagiarism often exists in a gray area, one where it is hard to determine what action should be taken or even if anything wrong was done.

So what is self-plagiarism and is it an ethical issue? The answers aren’t easy, especially with so many contradictory rules and views on the subject.

What is Self-Plagiarism?

Fundamentally, self-plagiarism is when an author or other content creator uses portions of an earlier work in a new one without citing the original content. This can happen in academia as researchers often use bits of old papers in newer ones, but it can also happen in creative and business environments as well.

The nature of this reuse can vary. Some consider it self-plagiarism to repeat ideas and concepts from earlier works without attribution while others limit it only to the use of actual words, images, etc.

To further complicate things, most of the definition of what is and is not self-plagiarism, as with regular plagiarism, depends heavily on the the arena the accusation is being made in and the expectations that come with it.

However, the main concept remains the same, the author using their own previous works in a newer one without attribution.

Is Self-Plagiarism Unethical?

The ethics of self-plagiarism is where the debate truly begins. Where some wonder why there is an issue at all with self-plagiarism, others call it a scourge. Likewise, some see self-plagiarism as a contradiction even as others develop tools to root it out.

The reason for this conflict is the nature of plagiarism itself. The word “plagiarism” comes from the Greek root meaning to “kidnap”. The idea behind plagiarism is that you are “stealing” your words from somewhere else. However, with self-plagiarism there is no such “kidnapping” as you are putting your name to your words.

With no lie of authorship and no victim, at least in the sense that no 3rd party is plagiarized, many see self-plagiarism as a non-crime and a legitimate shortcut.

But at the same time, self-plagiarism does carry with it some level of dishonesty, at least in some situations.

The problem is that, when an author, artist or other creator presents a new work, it’s generally expected to be all-new content, unless otherwise clearly stated. For example, you, as the reader, have an expectation that the content of this article is new to me and Plagiarism Today, even if I have touched on these issues before, albeit comically.

This creates a situation where the audience of a piece is, to some degree, misled about it. But how much this harms the audience isn’t clear and varies wildly from situation to situation.

For example, with an academic paper, one is generally expected to showcase what they have learned most recently, meaning that self-plagiarism defeats the purpose of the paper or the assignment. On the other hand, in a creative environment, however, reusing old passages, especially in a limited manner, might be more about homage and maintaining consistency than plagiarism.

All of this, however, raises the question of what can or should be done about self-plagiarism?

Dealing with Self-Plagiarism

When deciding if and how to deal with self-plagiarism, the first thing that has be decided is “What are the expectations of the audience?”

In some cases, the audience has no expectation that the work is new. For example, in the legal industry, self-plagiarism is virtually a necessity to survive. Copying passages from previous documents is essential not just to save time, but ensure validity.

Another potential example is on this site in the 3 Count column. I reuse the same text every edition for the calls to action at the beginning and at the end. Reusing the text, which isn’t part of the actual content, saves time and, in my opinion, isn’t expected to be original with each column.

An honest look at the expectations of the audience goes a long way in deciding what, if anything, should be done. This can be tricky though as different members of the same audience often have different expectations but, taken as a whole, it is usually easy to understand.

If the self-plagiarism does mislead the audience or otherwise defeats the purpose of the work. Then action should be taken. What that action is depends on the situation but schools have honor codes and contracts are written between creatives just for this purpose.

Generally, it’s best to err on the side of caution, both avoiding self-plagiarism and treating cases of it as an offense. Legally, it’s also best to play it safe and make sure to mention self-plagiarism in any authenticity guarantee you propose or sign. It’s important to be clear that “original” also means “new”.

Playing it safe is definitely the best approach as no one wants to be the case study about the ethics and/or legal implications of self-plagiarism. Even if it isn’t wrong, it certainly isn’t a good thing either.

Bottom Line

In the end, the debate about the ethical and legal implications of self-plagiarism will go on for a long time. As long as there are authors who are looking to take short cuts, those that see self-plagiarism as an ethical solution will do so and continue to re-raise the debate.

In the meantime, the best thing you can do is avoid it completely, both by being careful not to self-plagiarize unless clearly appropriate to do so and make it clear your expectations of others not to do so.

For those most part, these issues arise when the creator and the audience have different expectations of the work. Make those expectations clear and the issue disappears.

It may be an awkward thing to do, but it avoids a much more awkward and difficult discussion later.

Credit: Comic image from Cyanide and Happiness. Some comics NSFW.

Ipeirotis’ efforts definitely produced results. Over the semester, he found that some 20 percent of his class had plagiarized to one degree or another and began taking action against them. His reward, however, wasn’t a promotion or praise, but rather, him having his raise reduced to the lowest amount he’d seen.

The reason, according to both Ipeirotis and the justification he received for the small raise, was that his students, many of which he had caught and reported for plagiarism, had rated him poorly.

What made Ipeirotis’ case unique was not that he fought plagiarism and was punished, but that he spoke out about it on a now-removed blog post. Behind the scenes, teachers have long been boiling over with concerns that their schools are not taking plagiarism issues with weight and, sometimes, are actively discouraging addressing the problem.

For that to change. schools need to take plagiarism seriously and begin rewarding teachers, the ones on the front lines, for addressing this issue. This means both taking the detection and discipline side of fighting plagiarism seriously as well as looking to alternative solutions that could render the problem moot.

Why Schools Turn a Blind Eye

To be blunt, it’s a difficult time for schools, especially in the U.S. At all levels and both public and private, money is tight and resources are very limited. Dollars for plagiarism fighting are a low priority in the big scheme of things, especially as issues that could impact the safety of students and faculty are growing in number and priority.

The truth is that fighting plagiarism doesn’t help test scores, improve graduation rates, bring in new students or improve the school’s reputation. As important as it is, a school can turn a blind eye to plagiarism and still function.

To make matters worse, fighting plagiarism often times hurts the schools in meeting benchmarks. Disciplined students often drop out, lowering graduation rates, and students that fail classes due to plagiarism lower the overall GPA.

Image-conscious schools have also become wary of the reputation issues that come from actively pursuing plagiarists. Dealing with a large amount of it earn a school a reputation for being a plagiarism haven, even though the amount found actually proves the opposite.

This is then compounded by plagiarists who use social media to bash schools online. Smaller, lesser-known schools are especially vulnerable to these kinds of attacks.

These challenges have led to an atmosphere where many instructors feel that students are treated more like customers, to be pleased and cared for, rather than students who need to be educated and graded.

That problem doesn’t just impact plagiarism, but all areas of academic unpleasantness. From homework, to grade curves and more, the relationship between teacher and student is changing, likely not for the better.

Getting Serious About Plagiarism

If schools want to provide the best education they can to their students, this attitude must change and soon.

For one, if there to be any merit to the idea that college is meant to prepare students for later occupations, plagiarism must be dealt with and strongly.

While it’s true that those who plagiarize an assignment successfully located the needed information, which is a part of any assignment (both in and out of school), it’s a part that is almost trivial with the birth of the Internet and the student still skipped on many of the most important elements.

Academic assignments, at least good ones, do far more than teach students how to find and spit back information. They teach critical thinking, including how to challenge ideas. They teach students how to spot connections and trends among bits of data they have and they even help improve writing skills, a necessary tool just about anywhere one goes.

Students who plagiarize an assignment miss most of the education that could have come from it. That, in the long run, means a lower quality education, which means a lower-quality graduate if they go that far.

But before one walks away thinking plagiarists only cheat themselves. consider the following issues:

1. Good students, sensing or knowing that their peers are cheating to get good grades, often better than theirs, will either start cheating as well, reduce their efforts or simply leave.
2. Good instructors, detecting plagiarism but unable to effectively respond to it, will often reduce their efforts or leave, once again reducing the quality of education for all students, cheaters or not.
3. Students who cheat are, generally, less dedicated to their education. They make poorer graduates that not only are less likely to become active alumni, but also will reflect badly on the school in other ways after graduation.

This isn’t to say that every plagiarist is a doomed failure that will sink your school, but plagiarism as an epidemic will, over time, erode the quality of education for everyone there and hurt the school’s reputation.

However, since most of the dire impacts take years to show up, many schools are happy to kick the can down the road and hope for a better solution to the plagiarism problem later.

Today is the Day

The problem with kicking the can down the road is that now is, most likely, the ideal time to address these issues.

First off, the technology to detect plagiarism is the best it has ever been and the cheapest it has ever been. It’s less expensive, easier to use and more powerful than ever. Unfortunately, new plagiarism techniques may soon shift the balance, making it critical to address these issues now, while instructors have the upper hand.

Second, the Internet generation is just now truly coming of age. Students who have never known research without the Internet are just now reaching the higher levels of education. Sadly, these are the ones perceived to be the greatest risk of plagiarizing, rightly or wrongly, but if they are reached now, then those behind them will see the shift in culture.

Finally, we have ways of dealing with plagiarism other than punishment. If we’re going to shift the academic culture away from the trend toward plagiarism, we can’t simply punish our way out of it. Education is critical and the tools above make it easier to do just that. However, in a few years, education might not be possible, or at least not as easy, as the plagiarists will be the ones who have done nearly all the teaching.

In short, now is the time to strike and waiting until tomorrow just makes the batter harder and even less-winnable.

Bottom Line

It’s time for schools to reward teachers like Professor Ipeirotis for their hard work fighting plagiarism and, more importantly, to start opening addressing the issue. Though it’s tempting to sweep that matter under the rug, doing so misses a valuable opportunity to deal with the issue and risks lowering the quality of education for everyone.

Plagiarism is certainly not a pleasant business, I know that well because it’s my 9-to-5, but it’s an important one.

Schools need to address it. Not just so that they can make better students, but better creatives and better workers. After all, when cheating becomes a way of life, its impact is felt well beyond the classroom.

If you value originality and authorship, whether philosophically as ideals or merely in practice, it can definitely feel like a dark time. As an article in the New York Times earlier this month discussed, students are seemingly placing less and less value on originality and are viewing plagiarism as a less serious offense.

In a survey cited in the article some 40 percent of students admitted to having copied at least some content without attribution in their studies and only 29 percent viewed copying from the Web as “serious cheating”, down from 34 percent a decade ago.

While it is easy to dismiss this talk as the standard alarm pieces that usually pop up as schools get ready to let back in, it is clear that there is at least some shift and academics, authors and artists all have cause to be worried.

Even more odd, all of this comes at a time when the technology to detect copying is at an all-time high both in terms of ubiquity and capability. Also, the punishments for plagiarism are also increasing, both in terms of severity and frequency.

With so much at stake, many are wondering what to do. Teaching plagiarism “generation plagiarism” is a major challenge but one that academics and artists have to reach to.

Searching for an Answer

Much of the answer may lie in another New York Times op-ed piece, this one written by Stanley Fish, a professor at Florida International University.

According to Fish, the philosophical arguments surrounding originality are moot in the subject of plagiarism. Whether or not there is a such thing as original work, plagiarism, once again according to Fish, is not a construct of a great societal moral code, but rather, is an “insider’s obsession” similar to the rules of a game or profession.

This is similar, in his view, to how there is a great philosophical debate whether or not there is such a thing a truly free speech yet we have free speech regimes that we value dearly. Originality is no different.

To illustrate this, he highlights how different professions have different standards of what is and is not plagiarism. For example, academics have a much more strict standard than attorneys, who often copy and paste freely. The standards are less about what is right and wrong, but the rules that the profession needs to survive and thrive, thus why those inside it take them so seriously.

And that, at least in theory, is a big part of the problem with students and many who post online. They are not part of the profession nor do they even consider themselves hobbyists within it. Students are part of the academic profession buy they are there by force, usually on their way to other careers, and those who post online are usually more interested in maintaining their presence on the Web than art, literature, etc.

That makes this “insider obsession” very foreign to them. They don’t understand it, don’t see why it is a big deal and don’t feel compelled to follow it. These “casual” plagiarists, which are opposed to “dedicated” plagiarists who are in the system and violate the rules anyway, are essentially playing by a different set of rules and see no reason to change.

One Minor Rebuttal

For the most part, I agree with Fish’s theories. There are definitely different standards of plagiarism across different professions, a factor that greatly complicates my plagiarism analysis work, there is also a universal element that is overlooked.

When you turn in something with your name on it or post a work online on your site, you are claiming to have created those works and, when you haven’t, it is a lie. It may be a lie to an instructor or the nameless/faceless masses on the Web, but it is a lie nonetheless.

Though plagiarism, may not have the same kind of cultural ubiquity as stealing, as Fish points out, lying is still not a socially accepted practice and, for the most part, is treated seriously. However, obviously, there is a growing belief in some circles that, at the very least this lie, is not a serious infraction.

Reaching Out

So this raises the question of how do we teach plagiarism to those who might not want to hear it. It’s a difficult question.

What is clear is that the current techniques don’t work. Ramping up punishments and explaining what plagiarism is doesn’t achieve the results. Instead of not plagiarizing, students (and others as well) just work harder to avoid detection and instead focus on doing the minimum needed to skate by and avoid problems.

Instead, there needs to be a focus on how plagiarism is taught, especially in schools, and a few things that can be done immediately.

1. Focus on Why: Students often say they don’t understand what is and is not plagiarism, but part of that is because they may not understand why it is important. When students understand the purpose behind plagiarism enforcement, what is and is not plagiarism becomes easier to understand, making them better able and more likely to follow the rules.
2. Tweak Assignments: Focus on creating plagiarism-resistant assignments. Not only does this force students to do their own work, but teaches them how and why to do it as well. That has the potential to also help encourage original work on assignments that might be more easily copied.
3. Treat Plagiarism As An Educational Issue: Plagiarism, as mentioned above, is about learning the rules of an industry. Though it can be a disciplinary issue, such as when a student buys a paper off the Web, it is more often than not an educational one. The same as you don’t punish new baseball player for running straight to third on a hit (though you should punish him for using a corked bat), you shouldn’t punish students for what is clearly an honest mistake.

Obviously, these are just some initial steps, there’s a lot of work to be done in this field and there will be no quick fixes. But unless academics can begin to teach plagiarism students will not only find themselves ill-equipped for the working world, where they will be expected to always do their own work, but many will find themselves at a loss when they enter fields, even as amateurs, that have higher standards for plagiarism.

Bottom Line

There is much more to be done, of course, in my work with schools and with academics I see that there is a lot of tension between students and teachers but, more importantly, I see a lot of interest in plagiarism issues from students. It almost borders on curiosity but is usually tinged with fear and when they have someone they can ask, whether an outsider like me or just a trusted teacher, there’s a lot they want to understand.

So, it seems to me the first thing that teachers can work to do is reduce the climate of fear around plagiarism. Treat plagiarism as a serious offense when appropriate, but the “us vs. them” mentality many instructors have taken is counter productive, causing students to question and hate the rules placed upon them, seeking out philosophical arguments against them and justifications for violating them.

If you want students to understand plagiarism, they have to be comfortable talking with you about it. They can’t fear you. Though you have to discipline those who knowingly cheat, the climate of fear has to end.

Note: For the record, I don’t like the term “Generation Plagiarism” but since the NYT articles it has sadly become slang, making me want to reach out to those who feel lost in trying to talk with those students.

By their very nature, schools are supposed to be a place of education. Students, whether they are young children or retirees, go to schools to learn and grow as human beings.

However, on matters of plagiarism, that seems to be less the case. Educators have been quick to consider plagiarism a cheating issue, which it certainly is, but either ignore or pay inadequate attention to the fact that it is also an education one.

Simply put, no one is born with the ability to understand the difference between paraphrasing and original work, how to properly cite sources and when citation is necessary. These are all things that have to be taught and learned and anything that must be learned must be learned through some trial and error.

Unfortunately though, schools have created zero tolerance policies on plagiarism. While these policies are well-intended, they actually do more to create a climate of fear among students and that, in turn, creates not a desire to play honest, but a desire to try and defeat the systems that check for plagiarism.

In short, educators have accidentally created a plagiarism war and, rather than educating their students in how to cite sources correctly have, in many cases, encouraged them to learn on their own how to better get away with plagiarism.

This is creating real consequences for both the education system and for content creators outside, problems that are, in many cases, avoidable.

The Biology of Plagiarism

In more ways than one, plagiarism is a bit like a virus (or more appropriately a bacteria) in that it is an unwanted item that damages a healthy system. Like a virus, it can grow and spread, often as students teach one another about plagiarism or help each other commit the acts, and infect other parts of the system.

However, most importantly, plagiarism evolves in response to the environment. In that regard, we can think of anti-plagiarism software as being similar to an antibiotic. Useful for detecting and stopping plagiarism initially but, through overuse, becomes less and less effective.

The problem is that plagiarists have not responded to anti-plagiarism checking software by playing it straight and doing their own work, they’ve responded by changing how they plagiarize and where they plagiarize from.

Though my evidence is merely anecdotal, it comes from talking with students and administrators alike at various schools. When I talk to administrators about plagiarism, most want to know about how to detect it more effectively, not how to prevent it. When I talk to students about plagiarism, most want to know about how to beat the tools that detect it (often through very sneaky questioning), not how to actually cite sources.

In my experience, only the most inept or lazy students get caught plagiarizing trivially. Most are aware of the detection methods used and will either plagiarize from a source under the radar, such as a bought essay from another student, or by modifying it heavily enough to avoid detection, which can only be done with great effort in most case.

In short, students who want to plagiarize can do so with little fear of getting caught. It is just a matter of increasing the effort put into it. However, with anti-plagiarism tools available, no student should want to plagiarize at all because the effort and time required to avoid detection is equal to or greater than the effort of creating an original work.

It seems illogical for students plagiarize but many still do. With either fear of getting caught or a difficult task staring down at them, one would expect students would respond with honesty. However, that is clearly not always the case.

The Climate of Fear

I remember when I was in college, one of my English classes had a very tense day. The instructor told the class that she could not return the papers from the previous week as plagiarism had been detected in one of them. The teacher invited to the student involved to come forward, assumedly to receive a lighter punishment.

The students, all 30 of us, wondered who it was but were more worried that it was us. Many of us began to talk openly about that fear saying things like “I didn’t plagiarize but… I hope it wasn’t me.” The conversation then shifted to specific quotes, missed citations and other mistakes, wondering if that triggered the alarm.

We were informed the next class that the student had come forward and the matter had been handled in private, much to everyone’s collective relief, but I realized that, as students, we were not aware as to what constituted plagiarism. Discussions about citation had been limited to the various styles and we were all unsure where the lines were drawn.

This was the climate that existed in the late 90s. Now, things are much worse as anti-plagiarism systems have become more prominent and are used by more and more schools. However, teachers don’t seem to be any more dedicated to instructing students on issues of plagiarism, at least in many schools, and that is creating a very real sense of fear with the submission of every assignment.

What Teachers Should Be Doing

The first thing educators need to do is focus on actually teaching about plagiarism. Currently, in many schools, the “education” about plagiarism is limited to a few paragraphs in a student handbook.

Writing courses, which are mandatory, need to teach more than just the mechanics of writing a good paper, but also how to cite sources, paraphrase correctly and be a good researcher. It seems simple but there seems to be a divide between what is taught in writing classes and what is useful when creating actual assignments.

Also, instructors need to focus on crafting assignments that are resistant to plagiarism. This includes topics that can not be easily copy/pasted and including in-class portions that test knowledge away from access to outside sources.

Finally, there needs to be a recognition that there will always be a plagiarism problem and that it can not be “stamped out”. The same as there are viruses and bacteria in even the healthiest person, there will always be some cheating, even in the most honest school.

If you accept that and deal with the cases that are caught, you’re much better able to ensure that honest students don’t turn to plagiarism further down the road.

Bottom Line

Strict plagiarism enforcement without solid plagiarism education doesn’t make better students, it makes better cheaters.

If schools are going to deal with the epidemic of plagiarism, they need to treat it more like an actual infection and focus on all-around health rather than pumping in more quick fixes. The current path only makes cheaters more resistant to the methods that are used to catch them and creates a climate of fear that is both counter-productive for learning and can actually encourage cheating, since many students feel as if they are being treated as such anyway.

Even worse for copyright holders is that these better cheaters, after graduation (or while in school) often show a high level of disrespect for intellectual property of others. Though not every file sharer or Web plagiarist is/was a plagiarist in school, or vice versa, there is little doubt that rampant plagiarism in an academic environment erodes the respect one has for honesty and other people’s work.

For the sake of academia and the creative world at large, it is crucial that school shift the way they deal with plagiarism and find a more product approach to the problem.

Yesterday a guest post of mine was published to the blog MLV Writes, an excellent blog by Monica Valentinelli, who is a writer and content consultant.

The post is about something I’m calling content splicing, which is a form of copyright infringement where, often plagiarized, passages of content are combined from various sources to create a “new” work that only has parts of the sources.

It is a form of content misuse that is more common in academia than it is online though we are seeing more of it on blogs and other Web sites.

This blog posts takes a brief look at what splicing is, where it sits under copyright law and, most importantly, why it is a bad idea including search engine penalties, quality of work issues and time required.

If you’re interested in this type of plagiarism, definitely give this article a read and leave a comment if you have any questions or additional thoughts!

photo credit: Wesley Fryer

When it comes to issues of plagiarism, it is only a matter of time before schools and universities come up.

Plagiarism has become a hot topic in the academic arena. High-profile scandals have made a historically private issue a very public shame, technology has made it easier than ever to copy your work and universities have invested more than ever in tools to counter that threat.

When I talk to professors and deans, I get the feeling that they see themselves as being in the middle of the war and, specifically, that they are losing. However, when I talk to the students, I get a very different picture. One of a faculty clueless about the latest technologies and unwilling to adapt to the modern world.

Since the attitudes and problems college professors and students deal with in plagiarism matters often spill over into the larger Web, it is worthwhile to take a moment to think about these issues, what is going on and what both sides can do to fix the problem.

Darn Kids

Every once in a while I get an email from a college professor. He suspects that he’s caught a student plagiarizing and wants a second opinion. He forwards me the information that he has and I give it a cursory look. I note similarities and differences and help him draw some kind of a conclusion.

Most of the time, it is a very informal process and, to my knowledge has never lead to any formal charges against a student. Though I have been paid for this a few times, usually out of some kind of “discretionary fund”, it often is pro bono as well.

But where the cases I have helped with have, traditionally, been fairly mild. Other universities have been far more aggressive in dealing with plagiarism.

Some schools, it seems, feel that they are at war with plagiarism and they have armed themselves with the latest tools to fight the “enemy”.

Never mind that the enemy is their own students and that the tools they use do not detect plagiarism, only similar text. In many of these schools, when an originality report ticks above a magic number, the professors and administrators seem to glee at calling the student on their alleged plagiarism in the same way a guerilla army celebrates capturing an occupying soldier.

These accusations, almost inevitably, lead to disciplinary trials which can then result in the expulsion of the student. Students can have their lives and futures ruined by the mere allegation of plagiarism and some universities seem to be all-too-quick to throw around the word.

This, in turn, creates a climate of fear on the part of the student. But where a fear of plagiarizing may be necessary, this particular fear goes well beyond performing any intentional misdeed and create undue stress about making honest mistakes or even having bad luck.

This is not conducive to good research, academic writing or learning in general.

The Problem of Plagiarism

Schools do have a great deal to worry about with plagiarism. With computers and the Web, plagiarism is easier than ever before. Where a plagiarist had to be dedicated to stealing in the age of the typewriter, the invention of copy and paste has brought plagiarism to the purely lazy.

The problem is compounded by the fact that many students do cheat. Though studies are unreliable, a high percentage of students do admit to having done something dishonest on an assignment at least once.

This creates a serious problem for schools. If they earn a reputation for being light on plagiarists, outsiders think less of the school. Should that happen, it’s degrees are given less weight, it is a less desirable school to attend and that hurts both admissions and donations.

For this reason, schools are scared. As technology increases the ease and likelihood of cheating, it also increases the danger their reputation could take a serious hit.

Many smaller schools, eager to improve their standings, have taken the initiative in this area, creating super-strong academic dishonesty policies that show zero tolerance for plagiarism.

As a result of these policies, every year, thousands of students are expelled or disciplined for plagiarism, often times for minor infractions or even accidents.

Why the War on Plagiarism is Bad

The problem with this war on plagiarism is two fold.

First, plagiarism, save in its most extreme cases, is highly subjective. Unless the student copied the entire paper or very lengthy passages, it is entirely possible two people can look at a case of plagiarism and, despite both being very smart and capable people, can draw two very different conclusions.

This subjectivity creates serious problems. First, it means that students often face plagiarism accusations due to misunderstandings or simple mistakes. Second, it has been used, allegedly, to push out students that were unpopular with the faculty.

The second, and much larger, problem is that schools are not supposed to be in the business of throwing out students or damaging their futures. The primary function of a school is to teach students and help them achieve greater things. That is not achieved by intimidating students and throwing them out on their ear.

Yes, cheating students need to be dealt with harshly. Not only do cheaters hurt the university but they are also unfair to the students who do put the effort in and do their own work, no matter what the grade.

However, not all plagiarists are cheaters. For every student that downloads a paper from the Web to pass of as their own, another forgets a citation, doesn’t paraphrase adequately or makes some other simple mistake.

It is the latter group of students I fear for and the latter group that needs the most attention.

Plagiarism as an Opportunity

If the goal of a university is to teach, then they should be eager to jump on any chance to educate students. Plagiarism issues, especially those that are borderline, provide such a chance.

Rather than being in a rush to throw students out of the school, where they can’t learn anything at all, every effort should be taken to educate and help students who face such accusations.

Simply put, a high number of similar but unmatched words could be a sign of many things, not just of a cheater. Consider the following problems the student might have:

1. Poor research skills.
2. Flawed writing skills.
3. Lack of computer experience.
4. Limited of familiarity with citation styles.
5. Misconceptions about plagiarism.

The point is that plagiarism should never equal automatic disciplinary action, though at some schools it does. Such a subjective crime with so many opportunities to educate should not carry automatic penalties. Room for human judgment has to be considered.

It makes sense, for first time offenders with subjective cases, that remedial courses, not suspension or expulsion, be the first punishment. Some schools have caught on to that idea, but many others have not.

This has resulted in many students being subjected to harsh punishments, not because they tried to cheat, but because they either made a mistake or lacked the skills to do the assignment correctly.

Schools should not be punishing students for what they don’t know or can’t do, instead, they should be helping them obtain the skills to get it right the next time.

Conclusions

While most universities will say that they are battling plagiarism for the benefit of the students who do their own work, I fail to see how overreaching policies that punish students for mistakes helps any legitimate students at the university.

Simply put, no one learns well in a climate of fear. Furthermore, no one does their best work nor do they grow as a person when they are worried about making mistakes.

The school’s job is to support its students, including those that need help.

While we can all agree that plagiarism is bad and the students who do cheat deserve serious punishments, we have to recognize that not all cases are so clear.

Simply put, originality reports are not definite answers from a magic program. They can not tell you whether or not plagiarism took place, only whether or not duplicate text appears.

It is up to the administrators and the students to decide if any rules were broken and to help those who may have unwittingly run afoul of the school’s code.