|
Here are the statements from three professional societies (The American Historical Society, the Modern Language Association, and the American Psychological Association) as well as relevant sections from the SIUC Student Conduct Code.
THE AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION This is from the American Historical Association’s Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct. It is reprinted courtesy of the AHA.
Statement on Plagiarism and Related Misuses of the Work of Other Authors (Adopted May 1986; amended May 1990, May 1993, and May 1995)
1. Identifying Plagiarism and Other Misuses The word plagiarism derives from Latin roots: plagiarius, an abductor, and plag-zare, to steal. The expropriation of another author’s text, and the presentation of it as one’s own, constitutes plagiarism and is a serious violation of the ethics of scholarship. It undermines the credibility of historical inquiry.
In addition to the harm that plagiarism does to the pursuit of truth, it is also an offense against the literary rights of the original author and the property rights of the copyright owner. Detection can therefore result not only in academic sanctions (such as dismissal from a graduate program, termination of a faculty contract, or denial or promotion or tenure) but also in civil or criminal prosecution. As a practical matter, plagiarism between scholars rarely goes to court. Publishers are eager to avoid adverse publicity, and an injured scholar is unlikely to seek material compensation for misappropriation of what he or she gave gladly to the world. The real penalty for plagiarism is the abhorrence of the community of scholars.
Plagiarism includes more subtle and perhaps more pernicious abuses than simply expropriating the exact wording of another author without attribution. Plagiarism also includes the limited borrowing, without attribution, of another person’s distinctive and significant research findings, hypotheses, theories, rhetorical strategies, or interpretations, or an extended borrowing even with attribution. Of course, historical knowledge is cumulative, and thus in some contexts--such as textbooks, encyclopedia articles, or broad syntheses--the form of attribution, and the permissible extent of dependence on prior scholarship, citation and other forms of attribution will differ from what is expected in more limited monographs As knowledge is disseminated to a wide public, it loses some of its personal reference. What belongs to whom becomes less distinct. But even in textbooks a historian should acknowledge the sources of recent or distinctive findings and interpretations; those not yet a part of the common understanding of the profession, and should never simply borrow and rephrase the findings of other scholars.
Plagiarism, then, takes many forms. The clearest abuse is the use of another’s language without quotation marks and citation. More subtle abuses include the appropriation of concepts, data, or notes all disguised in newly crafted sentences, or reference to a borrowed work in an early note and then extensive further use without attribution All such tactics reflect an unworthy disregard for the contributions of others.
2. Resisting Plagiarism All who participate in the community of inquiry, as amateurs or as professionals, as students or as established historians, have an obligation to oppose deception. This obligation bears with special weight on the directors of graduate seminars. They are critical in shaping a young historian’s perception of the ethics of scholarship. It is therefore incumbent on graduate teachers to seek opportunities for making the seminar also a workshop in scholarly integrity. After leaving graduate school, every historian will have to depend primarily on vigilant self-criticism. Throughout our lives none of us can cease to question the claims our work makes and the sort of credit it grants to others.
But just as important as the self-criticism that guards us from self-deception is the formation of work habits that protect a scholar from plagiarism. The plagiarist’s standard defense--that he or she was misled by hastily taken and imperfect notes--is plausible only in the context of a wider tolerance of shoddy work A basic rule of good note taking requires every researcher to distinguish scrupulously between exact quotation and paraphrase. A basic rule of good writing warns us against following our own paraphrased notes slavishly. When a historian simply links one paraphrase to the next, even if the sources are cited, a kind of structural misuse takes place; the writer is implicitly claiming a shaping intelligence that actually belonged to the sources. Faced with charges of failing to acknowledge dependence on certain sources, a historian usually pleads that the lapse was inadvertent This excuse will be easily disposed of if scholars take seriously the injunction to check their manuscripts against the underlying texts prior to publication.
The second line of defense against plagiarism is organized and punitive. Every institution that includes or represents a body of scholars has an obligation to establish procedures designed to clarify and uphold their ethical standards. Every institution that employs historians bears an especially critical responsibility to maintain the integrity and reputation of its staff. This applies to government agencies, corporations, publishing firms, and public service organizations such as museums and libraries, as surely as it does to educational facilities. Usually, it is the employing institution that is expected to investigate charges of plagiarism promptly and impartially and to invoke appropriate sanctions when the charges are sustained. Penalties for scholarly misconduct should vary according to the seriousness of the offense, and the protections of due process should always apply. A persistent pattern of deception may justify public disclosure or even termination of an academic career; some scattered misappropriations may warrant only a formal reprimand.
All historians share responsibility for maintenance of the highest standards of intellectual integrity. When appraising manuscripts for publication, reviewing books, or evaluating peers for placement, promotion, and tenure, scholars must evaluate the honesty and reliability with which the historian uses primary and secondary source materials Scholarship flourishes in an atmosphere of openness and candor, which should include the scrutiny and discussion of academic deception.
This is from Joseph Gibaldi and Walter S. Achtert, MLA Hand book for Writers of Research Papers (3rd ed. New York: The Modern Language Association of America, 1988), PP. 21-25. It is reprinted courtesy of the Modern Language Association.
The MLA Handbook defines plagiarism as the use of another person’s ideas or expressions in your writing without giving proper credit to the source. The word comes from the Latin word plagiarius (“kidnapper), and Alexander Lindey defines it as “the false assumption of authorship~ the wrongful act of taking the product of another person’s mind, and presenting it as one’s own” (Plagiarism and Originality [New York: Harper, 1952} 2). “In short, to plagiarize is to give the impression that you have written or thought something that you have in fact borrowed from someone else.” This can include paraphrasing, copying someone else’s writing word for word, or using ideas that aren’t your own without proper citation. Plagiarism is often unintentional, and bad research habits can form early in elementary school. Unfortunately, these bad habits can continue throughout high school and college and may result in severe consequences, from failure in a course to expulsion. To avoid these consequences, always cite your sources if you are unsure if you are plagiarizing (Gibaldi 21-25). THE AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION This is from the Manual of the American Psychological Association (Washington DC: American Psychological Association. 1995), 292-95. It is reprinted courtesy of the American Psychological Association. Plagiarism (Principle 6.22)
Quotation marks should be used to indicate the exact words of another. Summarizing a passage or rearranging the order of a sentence and changing some of the words is paraphrasing. Each time a source is paraphrased, a credit for the source needs to be included in the text. SIUC STUDENT CONDUCT CODE This material on plagiarism is from the SIUC Student Conduct Code, May 1991, Amended October 1997.
I. Violations A. Acts of Academic Dishonesty 1. Plagiarism, representing the work of another as one’s own work, (p. 18)
V. Procedures Applicable to Academic Dishonesty
A. Jurisdiction
1. Department Level The department chair shall have initial jurisdiction over complaints of academic dishonesty and may adjudicate the case if the student accepts responsibility for the violation. In a case where the student does not accept responsibility for the violation, the chair shall review the complaint of alleged academic dishonesty and decide whether there are sufficient grounds to formally charge the student with a violation of this code.... (p.2l)
2. College Level a Each dean has the responsibility for the formal resolution of charges against a student. For the purpose of administering the code, the Graduate School dean shall operate at the level of other deans. . . (p.21)
B. Informal Resolution 1. Informal Hearing In cases where the student admits to a violation of this code relating to academic dishonesty, the matter may be adjudicated at the department level An informal discussion between the instructor and the student shall be held. If the student admits to a violation of this code, the instructor shall inform the department chair and the student whether, as a sanction for the violation, the instructor will assign a failing grade for the work and/or course. The instructor shall also recommend to the chair any other sanction that may be imposed, pursuant to V.B.2. The chair shall meet with the instructor and the student, receive the acknowledgment of responsibility from the student, receive the recommendation from the instructor, and apprise the student of the sanction. (p. 21)
2. Sanctions The full disciplinary history of the student shall be considered in determining sanctions Sanctions which may be imposed when the student accepts responsibility for the conduct are as follows: i. The student may be removed from the class for the remainder of the testing period. ii. The instructor may assign the student a failing grade for the work and/or course.
1. If the student elects to challenge the severity of the recommended suspension, the student may request an informal hearing on the proposed sanctions before the dean. 2. The student must submit a request in writing for an informal hearing on the proposed sanctions within 5 days of receipt of the chair’s recommendation if personally served on the student or 7 days from the date of the decision if it was mailed to the student at the last known address. 3. In such cases the dean or his/her designee shall meet with the student, the chair, and/or instructor and apprise the student of the sanctions 3. Notification The department chair shall send written verification of the sanctions to the student. Such notification will normally be sent within 5 days of the meeting with the instructor and the student. 4. Appeal The student may appeal the severity of the sanction or failure to follow prescribed procedure, pursuant to V.C.8. A student may not appeal the question of responsibility
C. Formal Disciplinary Procedures
1. Initiation of a Complaint Any member of the campus community may initiate disciplinary proceedings by filing a complaint within 20 days of discovery of an alleged violation of the Student Conduct Code. i. The complaint must be made in writing with all available evidence attached.
2. Formal Charges The department chair shall review the complaint and, within 10 days, determine whether there are grounds to believe a violation may have occurred
i. If there are sufficient grounds to believe a violation may have occurred, within 5 days of such determination, the chair shall notify the student in writing of the violation with which the student is charged. A copy of the charges shall be submitted to the appropriate academic dean.
ii. If there are no grounds for disciplinary charges, the complainant shall be notified. If the complainant wishes to proceed with a disciplinary charge, a written request must be submitted to the appropriate academic dean within 5 days. The dean shall review the request, the complaint, and the department chair decision and decide whether to allow the complainant to pursue formal charges of the alleged violation set forth in the complaint.
2. Formal adjudication In cases of alleged academic dishonesty where guilt is disputed by the student, the case will be adjudicated at the dean’s level with a formal hearing. The dean shall notify the student in writing regarding the date, time, and place of the hearing The notification will be considered to have been delivered if the notice is sent to the current local address of the student as provided to Admissions and Records by the student. Thus, failure to notify the university of changes of address could result in a hearing being held in absentia.
i. The student has the right to: 1. be apprised of all evidence; While sworn statements will be accepted from those persons unable to attend the hearing, they may not constitute the sole form of evidence offered The student must provide, in addition to such sworn statements, substantial corroborating evidence, either in the form of testimony by live witness or in the form of circumstantial evidence. Character witnesses may be excluded by the hearing agent.
ii. Hearing agent The charged student may submit a preference for a hearing before a judicial board or the dean or his/her designee The dean shall decide the hearing agent.
4. Judicial Hearing Board i. A judicial board shall be composed of 7 members. A quorum required to conduct a hearing shall be 5 members. A decision shall be reached by majority vote. ii. Membership 1. Student members shall meet the following standards: a. be full-time as defined by the director of Admissions and Records;
Full-time university employees who are enrolled in classes may not serve as student members. Graduate assistants and student workers in the department in which the incident occurred shall be excluded from the judicial board.
2. Faculty members may be any person with a faculty appointment, excluding administrators.
3. All appointments shall be reviewed by Student Judicial Affairs to insure that candidates meet the minimum requirements. A list of judicial board members may be obtained from the dean.
iii. Administrative Advisers Each judicial board shall have an administrative adviser from Student Judicial Affairs. The adviser’s role shall be limited to providing guidance and clarification The adviser shall sit with the panel in both open and executive sessions.
iv. Terms Each judicial board shall be in session for twelve weeks during the fall and spring terms and for 4 weeks during the summer term. A board is not expected to meet during the first two nor the last two weeks of a term Disciplinary cases shall be adjudicated by an administrative hearing officer designated by the dean when a board is not in session or is defunct.
v. Powers A judicial board shall make a decision of guilt or innocence and shall recommend appropriate sanctions to the dean.
5. Judicial Hearings
i. Time limitations 1. A student electing formal adjudication shall be notified of the hearing date, which will occur no sooner than 5 days after receiving notice of a scheduled hearing or 7 days from the date of a mailed written notice. 2. A student shall have 5 days after receiving notification of the decision in which to submit an appeal.
ii. Failure to appear Initial jurisdiction hearings shall be held in absentia when the charged student fails to appear. An appeal shall be dismissed when the student fails to appear.
iii. Tape recordings All formal judicial hearings shall be tape recorded. After the appeal period has expired, the tape may be erased. Copies of hearing tapes will be made available to the charged student upon his/her request and at his/her expense.
iv. Challenge for cause A student may challenge panel members for cause. The decision to remove a panel member will be made by majority vote of the other panel members.
v. Confidentiality All evidence, facts, comments, and discussion at a closed hearing and all executive sessions shall be held in strict confidence. Failure to maintain confidentiality may result in removal of judicial board members by the dean. (p. 23)
6. Sanctions A student’s disciplinary history shall have no bearing on the question of guilt or innocence If, however, a student is found to be in violation of this code, the full disciplinary history shall be considered in determining the sanction. The academic dean shall request the student’s disciplinary record from Student Judicial Affairs. The academic dean and the coordinator of Student Judicial Affairs shall develop lines of communication to keep each other apprised of a student’s disciplinary history, for this purpose. Sanctions which may be imposed are as follows: i. the student may be assigned a failing grade for the work and/ or course;
7. Notification The dean shall send written notification of the results of the hearing and the sanctions to be imposed to the student Such notification will normally be sent within 5 days of receipt of the judicial boards recommendation or within 5 days of the administrative hearing
8. Appeals
i. Request for appeal must be submitted in writing within 5 days after receiving notification of the decision of a formal adjudication.
ii. Failure to request an appeal in a timely manner constitutes a waiver of any right to appeal.
i. Appeals must be submitted in writing to the vice chancellor for Student Affairs and Enrollment Management in cases of social misconduct or the vice chancellor for Academic Affair in cases of academic misconduct.
iv. The basis of an appeal will be limited to the following grounds: 1. there was a procedural error which substantially affected the outcome of the 4. the sanction is excessively severe.
v. An appeal is not a rehearing. It is a procedural safeguard.
vi. In an appeal, the burden of proof is shifted from the university to the student charged with the violation of the Student Conduct Code.
vii. A sanction shall take effect as soon as the time for filing an appeal has expired or, if an appeal is filed, as soon as the vice chancellor has issued his/her decision. On sanctions less than suspension, the appropriate vice chancellors decision is the final decision at the campus level.
viii. A student may appeal the decision from the vice chancellor, only with regards to suspension or expulsion, to the Advisory Review Board. The appeal shall be in writing and must be submitted within seven (7) days of receipt of the vice chancellors decision. The Advisory Review Board shall act as an advisory board to the chancellor. The Advisory Review Board ma only review cases involving suspension. The Advisory Review Board shall consist of 8 voting members 2 faculty members, 2 staff members (1. AP arid I Civil Service), 2 undergraduate students, and 2 graduate or professional students. A non-voting representative from the Office of General Counsel shall sit on the board and act as the board’s advisor. The members of the Advisory Review Board shall be appointed by the chancellor. The members of the Advisory Review Board shall elect a faculty member to serve as chair of the board. In accordance with Board of Trustee policy, a student will not be eligible to graduate while an appeal is pending.
9. Implementation of Sanction
i. The disciplinary sanction shall be implemented when the student has waived or exhausted the right of appeal, or the appeal period has expired.
ii. The sanction shall be specified by the final adjudicating agent However, when the sanction relates to the assignment of a grade, the instructor has the responsibility for assigning the grade. In a case where an “Incomplete” was assigned for a course, pending adjudication of charges of academic dishonesty against the student, the instructor shall immediately change the “Incomplete” to an appropriate letter grade
iii. A student separated from the university for disciplinary reasons is subject to the normal guidelines for tuition and fee refunds, grades, and financial penalties for terminating a housing contract.
iv. Following the implementation of the sanction, all records relating to the case will be filed with Student Judicial Affairs. (p. 24) |
|
|
|
|