Fast Track to Plagiarism

The recent brouhaha over Senator Rand Paul’s plagiarism problems makes me wonder if plagiarism will ever go the way of small pox.

Etymologically derived from the Latin plagium, meaning a kidnapping, plagiarism is the kidnapping of someone else’s words and ideas. In a recent speech Senator Paul is accused of kidnapping the Wikipedia plot synopsis of a movie—verbatim without attribution. Plagiarism was further discovered in another speech, a 1,300-word passage in his book Government Bullies, and a Washington Times op-ed article he wrote.

Even more devastating than evidence of his plagiarizing is his refusal to openly acknowledge his mistakes, describe how the plagiarism occurred, and explain what he will do in the future to prevent plagiarism—steps to deal with the plagiarism scandal and make things right.

Instead, he has offered to duel with the “footnote police.”

Unfortunately, not just politicians, but professional researchers, academics, and scholars plagiarize. Retractions of articles in scholarly journals has significantly increased within the last 20 years due to plagiarism.

Online research has put a premium on speed and efficiency in accessing and capturing information.     Much academic reading ends up as quick, efficient sweeps through text that is copied into a draft without comprehending it. Starting at an early age, students master information retrieval, not knowledge formation from close reading. Because plagiarists are interested in the product, not the process—the grade, not the learning—the material passes efficiently from the website to the plagiarized paper without learning taking place. Still, one wonders how difficult a Wikipedia plot synopsis is to comprehend and put in one’s own words.

Inefficient learning should not be seen as unproductive; for engaged, in-depth learning is an arduous process that takes time and effort.

Reading comprehension through annotating, rereading, and reflecting on the text are inefficient but imperative processes to develop linear, hierarchical, and sequential thought patterns. There is no time-saving method to engage in concerted study, imagining new ideas, and creating a complex scaffold of knowledge in long-term memory. There is no quick way to concentrate on ambiguities and ironies in complex text, to track an inductive proof, to parse an article in Chemical Abstracts or Science, a legal or historical document, or read a complex literary work. This kind of in-depth learning can only occur slowly and deliberately. The essence of ethical research is slow, close reading of text.

Because material worthy of research is usually complex, often challenging the reader’s abilities, knowledge, and beliefs, rereading and reflection are required for understanding. Annotating and underlining key ideas and significant or confusing passages encourage pondering text-dependent questions or initiating discussions with one’s peers or teachers. Good readers are also writers of responses and notes to assist their memory. Careful note taking, accurate citations, and connecting each note to a schema of main ideas will enable the researcher to synthesize and manage the information from multiple sources.

Research papers, whether in the format of a student’s term paper, a scholarly article, or a speech, constitute the presentation of this research in the writer’s own words with accurate citations and bibliographies—in other words, without plagiarism.

On the other hand, with little understanding of the text, researchers will copy and paste or patchwrite their papers and blame the “footnote police” for exposing their faulty research process.

We live in a file-sharing culture where copying is a form of flattery and anything accessible online is fair game. Because teaching students to avoid plagiarism is an uphill struggle to change these digital cultural values, ethical research through careful reading, annotation, and attribution must be reinforced across the curriculum whenever research is required. Students must understand the process, feel comfortable with it, monitor their own work, and expect themselves to do the right thing into their adult careers.

When writers value ethical learning and intellectual inquiry, they will not mimic their sources or even copy from Wikipedia. They will have something significant to say and will generate new ideas based on a complex schema of knowledge they have acquired. As participants in the enlightened conversation with the references they cite, they will respect the intellectual property of those sources.