Wednesday, June 02, 2004
A Very Public Act of Plagiarism
I couldn't resist reproducing this short piece from The Week, 4 June 2004:
We've seen any number of examples of high profile plagiarists in recent years and varying degrees of condemnation. Now we learn that a student at the University of Kent is suing the university for not catching him in the act (from the London Evening Standard). Here's a clip:
There is clearly more to this story than the article reveals. Did Gunn plagiarise for more than one tutor? When was his plagiarism actually suspected and when proven? The rhetoric of the article turns the situation around and makes the university the cheater--not only complicity in Gunn's dishonesty, but deliberately so out of institutional self-interest. The final query by Elaine Gunn--"Where was the fairness"--is revealing about society's expectations that academia will pander to the student. Did not Gunn abdicate his expectation of fairness when he engaged in academic dishonesty? If a criminal is caught by the police after three years of committing crimes, can he sue them for not catching him earlier?
On the other hand, the story tells the very real difficulties that academia has in dealing with the problem. It is so widespread and so easy that academics are unable to take systematic effective action. Instead, it can only hold up a few unlucky ones who get caught as examples. Clearly, this is the moral standard for academic dishonesty. It's plagiarism if and only if you get caught.
Alberta's prime minister has been caught cheating, said Ira Wagman in The Ottawa Citizen. And like many high school dunce, it was his own brazen stupidity that got him caught. During a debate, Alberta Premier Ralph Klein recently made a throwaway comment that if you let socialism go too far, you invite dictatorship, just like "what happened in Chile." Canada's expat Chilean community erupted in outrage at the implication that socialism was to blame for the crimes of the Pinochet regime. In his defense, Klein entered into the public record a copy of a paper he'd just written on Chile for a university correspondence course. Big mistake. Once it was published, it was quickly discovered that Klein cribbed most of his paper from the Internet. At 61, Klein should know better: He is not par of the "Generation F" that was raised to think that copying and pasting together interesting paragraphs constitutes research. At the very least, he should have been savvy enough to change a few words here and there to disguise his plagiarism. Instead, "Klein has given those of us in the academic world a poster boy for next year's lectures on academic dishonesty."
We've seen any number of examples of high profile plagiarists in recent years and varying degrees of condemnation. Now we learn that a student at the University of Kent is suing the university for not catching him in the act (from the London Evening Standard). Here's a clip:
A new row over exam cheating erupted today after a student was told he would get no marks for his essays because he copied them from the internet.
The University of Kent at Canterbury has told 21-year-old Michael Gunn he will leave with nothing after a three-year English literature-course - except £11,000 in debts. But he has hit back, accusing the university of allowing him to complete three years of study and giving good marks for the essays it now says are worthless. He is planning to sue the university in the hope of recovering some of his student debt.
Mr Gunn, from Stanford-le-Hope, Essex, said: "I can see there is evidence that I broke the rules. But they've taken all my money for three years and pulled me up the day before I finished. If they had pulled me up with my first essay at the beginning and warned me of the problems and consequences, it would be fair enough. But all my essays were handed back with good marks."
Mr Gunn's father, Leonard, said one tutor told his son: "Everybody does this. You're the unlucky one. You got caught."
[...]
"Of course he knew what he was doing. One of his tutors told him everybody did it and that he was just the tip of the iceberg.
"They must have known what was going on but they were happy to take his fees all that time. Now he has been put in an impossible position. Ask yourself who is going to employ him now that this has come out."
Michael's mother, Elaine Gunn, said: "Where is the fairness in the way the university has treated him?"
There is clearly more to this story than the article reveals. Did Gunn plagiarise for more than one tutor? When was his plagiarism actually suspected and when proven? The rhetoric of the article turns the situation around and makes the university the cheater--not only complicity in Gunn's dishonesty, but deliberately so out of institutional self-interest. The final query by Elaine Gunn--"Where was the fairness"--is revealing about society's expectations that academia will pander to the student. Did not Gunn abdicate his expectation of fairness when he engaged in academic dishonesty? If a criminal is caught by the police after three years of committing crimes, can he sue them for not catching him earlier?
On the other hand, the story tells the very real difficulties that academia has in dealing with the problem. It is so widespread and so easy that academics are unable to take systematic effective action. Instead, it can only hold up a few unlucky ones who get caught as examples. Clearly, this is the moral standard for academic dishonesty. It's plagiarism if and only if you get caught.
Comments:
It's from a year ago but I stumbled across your blog whilst doing a search to see if there had been any consequence on the matter so I thought I'd have a go at answering your questions. (I am an alumni of the University of Kent, receiving my Bachelors in 2001 and Masters in 2002, in a different department but within the same faculty.)
Did Gunn plagiarise for more than one tutor?
Almost certainly - most Kent degrees are modular in nature and my recollection is that this is definitely the case for English. He would have submitted essays to a good number of lecturers.
When was his plagiarism actually suspected and when proven?
My understanding is that it was detected with new software so I suspect his final year essays would have been run through this software and the pattern noted. It's stated in the guidelines that all marks are provisional and that they can be adjusted at review. I guess that once the plagarism was noted on his final essays then his others would have been run through the software as well since it's reasonable to review all the work in such circumstances.
If a criminal is caught by the police after three years of committing crimes, can he sue them for not catching him earlier?
No. Where he might have a case is if he could prove that the University spotted the plagarism in an earlier year and did nothing about it, instead taking his fees for the remaining years in the intention of not awarding a degree. But that's a very hard thing to prove - it would be rather noticable if the university had been running the software in earlier years and only found finalists plagarising, giving everyone else a clean bill of health until after all fees have been paid.
Post a Comment
Did Gunn plagiarise for more than one tutor?
Almost certainly - most Kent degrees are modular in nature and my recollection is that this is definitely the case for English. He would have submitted essays to a good number of lecturers.
When was his plagiarism actually suspected and when proven?
My understanding is that it was detected with new software so I suspect his final year essays would have been run through this software and the pattern noted. It's stated in the guidelines that all marks are provisional and that they can be adjusted at review. I guess that once the plagarism was noted on his final essays then his others would have been run through the software as well since it's reasonable to review all the work in such circumstances.
If a criminal is caught by the police after three years of committing crimes, can he sue them for not catching him earlier?
No. Where he might have a case is if he could prove that the University spotted the plagarism in an earlier year and did nothing about it, instead taking his fees for the remaining years in the intention of not awarding a degree. But that's a very hard thing to prove - it would be rather noticable if the university had been running the software in earlier years and only found finalists plagarising, giving everyone else a clean bill of health until after all fees have been paid.
 |
|