Presented by the Writing Center and the Committee on Academic
Integrity
According to the USP Student Handbook, "Academic cheating
includes (but is not limited to) the following: falsification of
laboratory data, bringing unauthorized material to an examination
seat, copying another student’s work on an examination, misrepresenting
someone else’s work as one’s own (including borrowing
or purchasing term papers), and plagiarism" (20).
At USP, as in all institutions of higher learning, ideas are highly
valued, and so is the language that expresses those ideas. In both
a legal and moral sense, words and ideas are the property of
their authors. Plagiarism is the theft of that property. When
you plagiarize, you are presenting someone else’s words
and/or ideas as if they are your own. This situation applies
to all printed material as well as to words and ideas found through
electronic sources.
Plagiarism may be intentional or unintentional. In either case,
the penalty for plagiarism can be severe, including failure of the
assignment, failure in the course, and/or expulsion from the institution.
While the various disciplines differ in the specific formats that
they use to cite sources, they share a commitment to academic integrity
and to the requirement that students use source material correctly.
If you have questions about avoiding plagiarism in an assignment
for a specific course, ask your professor. You can get assistance
with correct documentation at the Writing Center.
COMMON KNOWLEDGE
In general, you are expected to show the source of all information
(including facts, statistics, opinions, theories, lines of argument,
examples, research results, etc.) except common knowledge.
The definition of "common knowledge" may vary according
to the expertise of the writer and reader; however, information
may be considered to be common knowledge if it meets one of the
following requirements:
- It is repeated in many sources.
- It would be known by an ordinary educated person who had not
researched the subject.
For example, the date (December 7, 1941) of the Japanese attack
on Pearl Harbor is common knowledge; no source would be given for
this information. However, a specific historian’s opinion
that the U.S. military should have been better prepared for the
attack would not be considered common knowledge, and a source should
be given for this view.
PARAPHRASE
Putting someone else’s ideas in your own words is paraphrasing.
Usually, a paraphrase is about the same length as the original.
Careless paraphrasing can lead to plagiarism. When you paraphrase,
paraphrase completely. This means:
- Don't use the original sentence structure.
- Don't simply substitute a few words here and there.
- Avoid using any of the author's key words or unusual words.
Disciplines vary in the amount of the original language that you
are permitted to use without quotation; check with your professor.
In any case, if it is difficult or impossible to paraphrase certain
language, then quote it exactly, and use quotation marks.
A good paraphrase takes work. An effective method is to read the
original sentence, think about its meaning, look away from
the original, write the idea in your own words, and then check
your version against the original to be sure that you have not
accidentally used too much of the original language.
Here are examples of acceptable and unacceptable paraphrases:
Original Version
The craft of hurricane forecasting
advanced rapidly in the sixties and early seventies, thanks
to fast computers and new atmospheric modeling techniques.
Now there is a lull in the progress, strangely parallel
to the lull in the storm cycle. The National Hurricane Warning
Center shoots for a 24-hour warning period, with 12 daylight
hours for evacuation. At that remove, it can usually predict
landfall within 100 miles either way. Longer lead times
mean much larger landfall error, and that is counterproductive.
He who misses his predictions cries wolf.
(From "Our Barrier Islands,"
by William H. MacLeish, Smithsonian, Sept. 1980, p. 54.)
|
Unacceptable
Paraphrase
(Plagiarized sections are in
bold type.)
Hurricane forecasting made rapid
progress in the 60s and 70s due to fast computers
and new atmospheric techniques, but there
is now a lull in the progress. The Warning Center
tries for a 24-hour warning period, including
12 hours of daylight. That close to the storm’s arrival,
the Warning Center can usually predict landfall within
100 miles either way. If lead times are longer, there
will be a much larger error, which will be
counter-productive (MacLeish 54).
|
Explanation:
Many phrases are stolen from the original. Leaving out or changing
a word here and there (for example, much larger landfall
error has become much larger error) is
not acceptable. Also, the plagiarized version duplicates the sentence
structure of the original, which is not permitted. Even though the
author (MacLeish) is supplied, the paraphrase is unacceptable.
Acceptable Paraphrase
| During the past thirty years, powerful computers
and new techniques which allow modeling of the atmosphere have
significantly increased the accuracy of hurricane forecasting,
though there have been no improvements in forecasting during
the past few years. However, now it is possible to predict where
a hurricane will hit land with an error of not more than 100
miles if a warning of 24 hours is allowed. If more than 24 hours
is required, the error will be greater. Repeated forecasting
errors will cause the public to ignore the warnings (MacLeish
54). |
Explanation:
This version uses different language and sentence structure from
that of the original. Note: Even when your paraphrase is
acceptable, you must show the source of the ideas. Putting ideas
into your own words does not make those ideas your own. They
are still the property of their originator, who must be given credit.
The reference to MacLeish provides that credit.
SUMMARY
A summary briefly conveys in your own words the main idea
of a passage. Like paraphrasing, careless summarizing can lead to
plagiarism. The same rules apply as in paraphrasing: use your own
language and sentence structure, and give credit to the originator
of the ideas. Here are examples of acceptable and unacceptable summaries
of the MacLeish passage given above:
Unacceptable Summary
(Plagiarized passages are in bold type.)
| Hurricane warnings can be provided within a 24-hour
warning period, with 12 hours of daylight for evacuation,
and can identify landfall within 100 miles
(MacLeish 54). |
Acceptable Summary
| Using computers
and new techniques which allow modeling of the atmosphere, forecasters
can now provide a 24-hour hurricane warning and predict where
a storm will hit with an error of not more than 100 miles (MacLeish
54). |
AN EXAMPLE FROM SCIENCE
(From Campbell, Neil A. Biology. 3rd ed. Redwood City, CA: Benjamin/Cummings,
1993)
| Original Version
The chemical behavior of carbon makes it exceptionally versatile
as a building block in molecular architecture. It can form
four covalent bonds, link together into intricate molecular
skeletons, and join with several other elements. The versatility
of carbon makes possible the great diversity of organized
molecules, each with special properties that emerge from the
unique arrangement of its carbon skeleton and the functional
groups appended to that skeleton. At the foundation of all
biological diversity lies this variation at the molecular
level (Campbell 61). |
Acceptable Summary
Biological diversity has its molecular basis in carbon's
ability to form an incredible array of molecules with characteristic
shapes and chemical properties (Campbell 62).
(This summary appears in the study outline of Chapter 4.) |
COMBINING PARAPHRASE AND/OR SUMMARY WITH QUOTATION
When you want to include some of the original language of the source,
you may combine paraphrase and/or summary with quotation. Here is
an example of an acceptable summary which includes a quotation from
the original version presented above:
| The public depends on accurate, timely hurricane
forecasting. When the forecasts are repeatedly wrong, the public
will stop believing them: "He who misses his predictions
cries wolf" (MacLeish 54). |
COLLABORATION AND ACADEMIC INTEGRITY
The purpose of most student assignments is to stimulate you to
do your own thinking. Thus, the written work you submit as your
own must be your own; otherwise, you are risking plagiarism.
Although discussion of assignments with other students may be beneficial,
you should never use the work--papers, notes, etc.--of another
student. The ideas, wording, and organization of your assignment
should always be distinctly your own.
Sometimes a professor will allow or encourage collaboration in
completing an assignment. If you are not sure whether you may work
with others, it is your responsibility to check with your professor.
When a professor requires a group to collaborate on an assignment
and to submit a single product for the entire group, fairness requires
that you take the responsibility of contributing your share of the
work.
Collaboration does not always result in a group producing a single
product. Instead, a professor may assign students to work in groups
to explore ideas or to work through a process, after which each
student may have to produce his or her own product--a written assignment.
In such a case, it is critical that students do not share
drafts of their written work.
USING ELECTRONIC SOURCES
The most important point to remember is that the rules
for printed sources also apply to material found through Internet
searches, electronic discussion groups, online databases, and other
electronic sources. Missing citations and/or failure
to use quotation marks when they are necessary constitute plagiarism.
Be careful to resist the temptation to simply cut and paste into
your paper material that you find on the web.
Each discipline has developed its own guidelines for the specific
method of documentation of electronic sources. In general, though,
more bibliographic information is included for an electronic source
than for a printed source because it may be harder to find the electronic
source after some time has passed. In fact, private sources, such
as email and electronic bulletin boards, may be impossible for anyone
else to locate, and therefore they are documented as personal communications.
If you find an electronic version of a printed journal or index,
you should cite the printed version because the reader may be unable
to access the same electronic source that you did.
You should evaluate the reliability and accuracy of all
sources, but because much of the material on the web has not been
screened by an objective viewer, you should be especially careful
to evaluate electronic sources. You may find inaccurate information
and biased opinions. Check on when the site was created or last
updated; for science and health-related topics, recent information
is likely to be essential. Find out about the qualifications and
motivations of the writer or sponsoring organization. The validity
of your paper will depend on the quality of your sources; don't
assume that whatever you find is equally valid.
Explanations and examples in this handout have been adapted
from the following:
Gibaldi, Joseph. MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers.
4th ed. New York: Modern Language Association, 1995.
Hacker, Diana, and Barbara Fister. Research and Documentation
in the Electronic Age. Boston: St. Martin's, 1998.
Leggett, Glenn, et al. Prentice Hall Handbook for Writers.
10th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1988.
Mulderig, Gerald P., and Langdon Elsbree. The Heath Handbook.
13th ed. Lexington, MA: Heath, 1995.
Woodward, Jeannette A. Investigating Resources in Cyberspace.
2nd ed. Lincolnwood, IL: NTC, 1999.
|
