Blog #4 (Sampsel, IC Library, Sands, Gladstone)

Plagiarism is something that I feel like I’ve heard about constantly since getting writing assignments in school. I would think probably in sixth grade english class it was discussed for the first time and then every year following after that. Maybe more than once a year. The Sampsel, Sands, and IC test all relate to this sort of academic plagiarism. All three of those make reference to plagiarism as being intentional or unintentional, which I think is an interesting distinction. We may copy something without meaning to, but the results, and punishments can be the same.

The example about George Harrison I found was especially interesting. How do we navigate this problem in music? If we hear a melody 100 times as a child, which then finds its way into our writing as an adult, but we don’t recognize it, what sort of punishment does that warrant? On the other hand there are myriad examples of sampling in popular music culture where plagiarism is not only tolerated, but celebrated. Is the difference there that we acknowledge it? Of course money plays a role too. If it is as simple as making an agreement beforehand about how to divide the dough, how can we copy that model in other disciplines so that we can more art forward? The last source, Gladstone, talks about doing this with writing and poetry. They alluded to a work he did where he copied an entire issue of the New York Times. You could argue that this is plagiarism, but it seems to me that he was after something different. It’s not like he was trying to pass off the content as his own, the journalism as something he investigated. There’s something more there about physically or electronically recreating an entire structure that doesn’t belong to you.

Back to the discussion of “academic” plagiarism, I was not surprised to hear about the program “Turnitin” that helps professors catch people copying. I think there is a need for something like that, and it seems like something that computers would be good at. I had also heard a news story previously about students paying custom papers. The main points were that students have easy access to this site, and there is an abundant supply of academics (grad students, PhDs, etc) who can’t find other work. Highly educated people with a very specific skill set. Writing papers for other people on academic topics is their niche.

There were a couple questions on the IC quiz that did surprise me though. Most of all was about not turning in a paper that you had previously written for an assignment for a new class, even though it fits all the requirements of the new assignment. Is this something that colleges discourage because they want students to learn, and you’re not really learning if you don’t do more work? Should you cite yourself? I’m imagining a professional context where I am asked to present about topic X, and cover specifically A, B, and C at a conference in 2017. Then in 2018, I am asked to go to a different conference and present about topic X, covering A, B, C again by a different host. Am I not allowed to use the work I did last year? This argument certainly doesn’t hold in the professional world. Writing something as long-lasting and thorough as a book wouldn’t make sense if it was a “one-time-use” piece of writing. So why is Ithaca College holding students to this standard. I think the real question in this case is why two professors are giving the exact same assignment in two different classes? I think I would be upset enough that I was assigned the same thing twice, even before I found out that I’m not allowed to use my previous work. The answer to the quiz basically just says you should talk to your professor. As a teacher I see the argument that in that conversation I would encourage the student to explore a new possibility. But that doesn’t seem like the same issue to me. If a student chooses to pass an opportunity by and turn in work they have already, “legally,” completed that may not be ideal, but I don’t see an ethical issue. I would be glad to hear some other perspectives on this.