Obviously, the OP was plagiarized, and thus removed by the mods 
Obviously, the OP was plagiarized, and thus removed by the mods
Okay, let me try it again. The gist of the question was that one of my professors includes in her definition of her plagiarism the recycling of one’s own work from another class. My response–this is certainly an unscrupulous timesaving device, but how the heck is it plagiarism?
It isn’t. Give your teacher this link. (Be sure to cite it.)
That would only be plagiarism if you had sold all rights to that work to somebody else – obviously, rather unlikely in a classroom situation. But it has come up in the music world.
In other words, your teacher is wrong about the use of the word. Beyond that, I would not even consider it “unscrupulous.” You did the work, so if it happens to apply to more than one class, why not use it? For example, in high school I remember that we needed a research paper for both our history class and an English class. I wrote the same paper for both – though I will say that I did so with the full knowledge of at least the English teacher (don’t recall if I told the history teacher or not).
I have heard otherwise. To plagiarize, according to the minds that matter at my school, is to submit your work as original and your own. That is, if youve submitted work that is unoriginal (ie previously submitted) without obtaining permission from the original recipient, you are plagarizing. Hence if I publish a paper in one journal, then try to republish it in another journal later, youre not only potentially violating copyright laws but you are also plagarizing.
Your professor shows the difference between student and teacher.
When a student takes his own work and submits it to another class, the educational communtiy calls it plagiarism.
When a professor takes someone else’s work, adds a meaningless footnote, it’s called research.
>To plagiarize, according to the minds that matter at my school, is to submit your work as original and your own. That is, if youve submitted work that is unoriginal (ie previously submitted) without obtaining permission from the original recipient, you are plagarizing. Hence if I publish a paper in one journal, then try to republish it in another journal later, youre not only potentially violating copyright laws but you are also plagarizing.
t doesn’t matter what happens “to the minds that matter at [your] school,” this is not plagiarizing. To publish your own previously published work without permission is a breach of contract, but it isn’t plagiarism. Recycling your own work at school may be against the rules, but it isn’t plagiarism. Plagiarism is defined as passing off another’s work as your own in every dictionary I look.
I would say as much to the teacher. “It is fine to say you won’t accept work we have previously handed in, but don’t whimsically redefine a word because you are too lazy to add another bullet on your syllabus.”
Also, I support the rule. If you try to recycle a paper arguing that it is “your” work, you are adopting a task-reward view of collegiate education and missing the point entirely. You do not take classes to get a grade, if you are a serious student – you take a class to learn. The teacher doesn’t assign the paper to make you earn a grade, a paper is an assessment tool to figure out what you’ve learned in the class. The teacher has no interest in grading a paper you had already written, although many may allow you to revise a paper from an earlier class. Perhaps writing a new paper will indicate, upon reflection, how much you have learned and grown since you wrote the last paper.
In sum: don’t cheat yourself out of an education.
Genius. Sheer genius.
Well, if it was the second time, it wasn’t originally, was it?
But I agree with the “genius” assessment.
Well from my schools honor system’s site
http://www.honorsystem.vt.edu/definitions.pdf:
I have heard more than one teacher interpret it in the way I mentioned, its not just some teachers, it seems to be the whole honor system at my school.
Im willing to believe it varies from school to school, but for us at Tech, using the same paper in two seperate classes is a no-no.
It may very well be a no-no, but it isn’t plagiarism by nearly everyone’s definition of the world.
Off of University of Virginia’s site-
http://www.student.virginia.edu/~honor/proc/fraud.html
Looking at UVA’s site, plagiarism is a seperate offense from multiple submissions. Multiple submissions still arent kosher though.
How about submitting a paper for high school history on Thomas Aquinas and then translating it for submission for French class? The research and ideas were the same, but the language was completely different. Is that “slightly altered work”? It was, um… some thirty-five years ago, so it makes little difference at this point. Didn’t occur to me at the time that it might have been “unscrupulous”; no one had ever said “don’t do this” and I figured my work was my work. It was properly footnoted in both languages.
This notion that a student’s work must be original to the particular assignment or class, is little more than academic bull****.
Part of learning is remembering. Remembering what you know and what you did and not having to reinvent the wheel each time.
Professors often use the same material, the same assignments, textbooks and tests, year after year. It’s only new to the students. If they demand originality, then they need to clean up their own act first.
Knowledge itself depends upon recycling past original ideas.
Spoken like a true freshman, though depending on the situation, you may have a slight point; for example, if you were assigned a history paper on the Crimean War and had done one in 11th grade, remembering your previous research would help you to build on it by moving on to better and higher-level sources. Note, however, that this is different from changing the header on your old paper and reprinting it.
I used to teach college composition. The point in having students write papers was not only to force them to find where the library is (that building with the fountain in front), but to improve their style and writing skills. If you turn in an old paper, you’re not doing that.
As for the professors recycling syllabi, you know not of what you speak. Those who use the same course plan have found through years of tweaking and changing that it is the most effective way for their students to learn and for them to teach. There’s more to it than you may see in your three hours a week in class, grasshopper.
In the course I teach, the same question (not the only one) has been asked for more than 20 years: “Derive the general equililbrium efficiency conditions for an economy consisting of one private good and one public good”. This requires you to draw one picture, write one equation and show that you understand how the picture leads to the equation. I’ll consider writing a new question when the majority of students who choose to answer this question can do it.
The notion that a student must submit an original answer is based on the idea that a student should learn something from a course. If you had an answer you submitted for another course and added nothing to it, you have learned nothing and should fail. You wasted your time.
I’d say the student who submits his own work for credit in multiple courses has already learned a pretty good lesson about how to succeed when he leaves academia.
I certainly agree with your first paragraph. It was my point exactly. “Fit” should be the criteria, not originality. Don’t fix what ain’t broke.
As regards your second, I agree in theory but in practice a teacher is unlikely to know if a particular student obtained an answer because of the course, or knew the answer previously, and will most likely to be judged on the answer itself, not the timing or the original source of the knowledge.
I think it a fine idea to ask students the first day of class the same questions that will appear on the final exam, and then judge their final based upon their progress. But I’ve seldom seen this procedure.
While the theoretical goal of a class may indeed be learning, the point of a grade is to tell people what you know, not how much you learned. No one cares if a student started a class with near complete knowledge of a subject, or with a blank slate, as long as they both end up knowing what they need to at the end of a class. If I wrote a paper detailing some historic event for a writing class, there’s nothing wrong with working from it to create a paper for a history class. I wrote it, I know the material, its mine to do with what I wish.