Is Plagiarism in the Eye of the Beholder?
Susan R. Van Patten, Faculty Development, Radford University
Candice Benjes-Small, McConnell Library, Radford University
Abstract: Given a sample paper rife with plagiarism and patchwriting, can students and faculty
members accurately identify and correct these errors? Participants in this interactive session will
discuss effective ways to train students to avoid plagiarism and learn about inconsistencies among
faculty when it comes to plagiarism issues.
Literature Review
Plagiarism and falsification are problems throughout education and the workplace, but are especially problematic in
higher education because they impinge upon academic integrity (Wan, Nordin, Halib, & Ghazali, 2011). While there
are students who knowingly plagiarize by copying and pasting from the internet or purchasing papers, many students
commit plagiarism unintentionally. In this type of “accidental plagiarism,” it is up to the instructor to ensure students
have the knowledge to quote, paraphrase, summarize, and cite correctly (Ferree & Pfeifer, 2011). Moreover, this
information must be constantly reinforced. A New Zealand study (Walker, 2010) found that seniors were almost
twice as likely to plagiarize as new freshmen (32% of seniors and 18% of freshmen).
Many students inadvertently plagiarize because they confuse “patchwriting” – changing a few words or altering the
sentence structure – with paraphrasing – restating a key idea or passage in their own words (Howard, Serviss, &
Rodrigue, 2010). The Citation Project, a study of research papers from sixteen American colleges and universities,
found that almost half of all citations used patchwriting (16%) and paraphrasing (32%). Only six percent used
summarizing with the rest categorized as quoting. Even more disturbing, only 4% of citations used more than two
sentences from the source material (Jamieson & Howard, 2011). This is a clear indication that students are not
engaged or understanding their references.
Then again students are not the only ones who struggle with paraphrasing source material and plagiarism.
According to Roig (2010), professors often disagree as to what constitutes plagiarism. This can create confusion
among students since what was acceptable in one course could be considered plagiarism in another. Even more
interestingly, when given a difficult-to-read passage outside of their field of expertise, many professors were unable
to paraphrase it adequately. If the instructors themselves cannot use others’ work in an ethical manner, perhaps our
expectations of students are unrealistic.
Goals and Objectives
During this practice session, participants will have opportunities to:
1) Investigate ways to help students paraphrase, summarize, and cite correctly;
2) Discuss assignments that require students to read and understand their source materials; and
3) Analyze differences in how professors and students identify plagiarism and re-write plagiarized passages.
Description of Practice
Approximately 30 new freshmen and 10 college instructors completed identical plagiarism exercises. In Part I, all
participants were given portions of source materials and fictitious writing examples based upon the source materials.
Participants were asked to identify the type of plagiarism (e.g., missing in text citation) and what they felt the
appropriate response/punishment should be (e.g., failure of the class). In Part II, participants were asked to re-write
sections using proper quotations, paraphrases, and summations, and then write a brief self-reflection about the
activity. The re-written papers were evaluated using a four-point scale from completely incorrect (1) to completely
correct (4). Comparisons of the student group vs. the professor group were then made.
Discussion
Based on the professional literature (Belter & duPre, 2009; Walker, 2008), the presenters spent two class periods
training students in techniques to avoid plagiarism prior to the assessment. In addition, we had the students complete
a homework assignment asking them to ‘fix’ a sample work. This assignment aims at higher-level skills, requiring
them to apply what they learned. Their reflections about these exercises capture what they found challenging and
educational.
The presenters are leveraging this assignment to also study professors’ abilities to identify plagiarism, to paraphrase
correctly, and to cite accurately. Most of the existing literature focuses on student plagiarism but does not examine
whether professor inconsistencies play a role in the problem. By comparing the students’ work with a sampling of
professors’, the presenters will be able to share some issues and challenges in this realm.
References
Belter, R. W., & du Pré, A. (2009). A strategy to reduce plagiarism in an undergraduate course. Teaching of
Psychology, 36, 257-261.
Ferree, C. W., & Pfeifer, H. L. (2011). The “write” stuff: Simple techniques designed to teach students how to avoid
plagiarism. Journal of Criminal Justice, 22(2), 286-303.
Howard, R. M., Serviss, T., & Rodrigue, T. K. (2010). Writing from sources, writing from sentences. Writing and
Pedagogy, 2(2), 177-192. doi: 10.558/wap.v2i2.177
Jamieson, S., & Howard, R. M. (2011, August). Datasheet #2: Sources cited in the paper. Retrieved October 7, 2012
from Citation Project: http://site.citationproject.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Sources-Cited-in-thePaper.pdf
Roig, M. (2001). Plagiarism and paraphrasing criteria of college and university professors. Ethics & Behavior,
11(3), 307-323.
Walker, A. L. (2008). Preventing unintentional plagiarism: A method for strengthening paraphrasing skills. Journal
of Instructional Psychology, 35(4), 387-395.
Walker, J. (2010). Measuring plagiarism: Researching what students do, not what they say they do. Studies in
Higher Education, 35(1), 41-59. doi: 10.1080/03075070902912994
Wan, R., Nordin, S., Halib, M. B., & Ghazali, Z. B. (2011). Plagiarism among undergraduate students in an
engineering-based university: An exploratory analysis. European Journal of Social Sciences, 25(4), 537549.