... Forum

[robotrick]

My post was meant as a response to the first ~7 posts in this thread which basically read "you obviously plagiarized and you're a fuck up." Those are similarly unhelpful, not necessarily correct, and condescending. The only useful posts ITT are the ones that recommended deleting posts (which OP seems to have done) and consulting a lawyer.

[Loquitur Res]

I love these kinds of threads because there are always a handful of people eager to jump on their high horses and unequivocally condemn whatever borderline action the OP took.

Taking OP at his/her word, I think a plagiarism violation for copying a one sentence rule statement from wikipedia sounds like a bum rap. I can't help but feel that the fact that the info came from the internet rather than an E&E (and was thus searchable by anti-plagiarism software) is the only thing that separates OP from every other student who uses rule statements from other, paper sources.

This pretty much sums up my thoughts exactly. At my school, most students fill the gaps in their outlines using supplements and commercial outlines. The majority of our exams are open-book and/ or open-outline. I am sure that a majority of students transposed basic rule statements verbatim off of their outlines during exams. The only difference here is wikipedia. Only thing I can't think is that possibly OP's actions went beyond what he is saying, or this school/ prof has a specific policy against this sort of thing.

Someone up the thread stated something along the lines of "using someone else's words is plagiarism." Well, using someone else's words is plagiarism IF you don't cite, since citations are not required on exams I don't see this as a big deal. Skirting the line maybe, but not "CHEATING AND PLAGIARISM PERIOD!" as some are asserting, at least not at my school.

I do agree with other's advice to find someone who represents lawyers and students on character and fitness issues. My torts prof did this for a living, he would be the first person I would call if this happened to me.

[Tls2016]

Good luck OP. I know this must be insanely stressful. Get good advice on how to proceed. I hope it all works out for you.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Using someone's words without citing is plagiarism. That doesn't mean you can then use someone else's words on an exam just because exams don't make you cite. That's not how it works.

Though I agree there's something weird about the situation.

[robotrick]

If some schools have thought it prudent to make exceptions for plagiarism--or to change the definition of plagiarism--as it relates to exams (as posters ITT have said), that suggests it isn't so clear cut.

If I wrote in a civ pro exam "due process requires consideration of three factors: 1) the private interest that will be affected, 2) the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used and the probable value of additional procedural safeguards, and 3) the government's interest" but didn't cite Mathews, is that plagiarism? Or if I just wrote down the MPC definition of manslaughter verbatim? None of the words are my own, but I'd argue that's just how legal writing works. You use a stated rule (and in formal writing would quote and cite appropriately) and then you make your own analysis. The fact that it's common practice for exams not to cite changes things in this case imo. So maybe a strict constructionist interpretation of plagiarism reaches OP's purported conduct, but a functionalist interpretation might not/probably wouldn't.

[Tls2016]

This is Penns plagiarism policy. I didn't go there so I don't know how it works in practice:

The Law School Policy on Plagiarism
Section I.B.3. of the Law School’s Code of Student Conduct and Responsibility, found above, states that conduct which violates the Code includes “(t)he submission of plagiarized work in an academic pursuit including any use of another’s work without attribution, whether such use be verbatim or merely conceptual or structural.”

One is guilty of plagiarism if one intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly uses another’s words or ideas without attribution in written work submitted in satisfaction, or partial satisfaction, of academic or co‑curricular requirements, or in any other writings done under the auspices of the Law School. The rule against plagiarism is intended to prevent theft of another’s ideas or language by representation that they are one’s own.

Unless explicitly exempted from the attribution requirement, every writing assignment in theLawSchoolrequires attribution of ideas or language which are not the original contribution of the student submitting the written work. Since a student may at times be unsure whether the extent to which his or her reliance on another’s work without use of the same terminology requires attribution, a student is required to list all sources, consulted during the research or writing process, whose ideas may be reflected in the concepts or structure of the student’s written work.

Attribution of use of another’s ideas or language is not required when:

a) there is an explicit exemption of the attribution requirement by the person assigning the written work, or

b) the student is writing an examination. This examination exception does not apply to papers or take‑away examinations unless there is an explicit elimination of the attribution requirement under (a) above.

https://www.law.upenn.edu/students/poli ... iarism.php

[jrass]

This is Penns plagiarism policy. I didn't go there so I don't know how it works in practice:

The Law School Policy on Plagiarism
Section I.B.3. of the Law School’s Code of Student Conduct and Responsibility, found above, states that conduct which violates the Code includes “(t)he submission of plagiarized work in an academic pursuit including any use of another’s work without attribution, whether such use be verbatim or merely conceptual or structural.”

One is guilty of plagiarism if one intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly uses another’s words or ideas without attribution in written work submitted in satisfaction, or partial satisfaction, of academic or co‑curricular requirements, or in any other writings done under the auspices of the Law School. The rule against plagiarism is intended to prevent theft of another’s ideas or language by representation that they are one’s own.

Unless explicitly exempted from the attribution requirement, every writing assignment in theLawSchoolrequires attribution of ideas or language which are not the original contribution of the student submitting the written work. Since a student may at times be unsure whether the extent to which his or her reliance on another’s work without use of the same terminology requires attribution, a student is required to list all sources, consulted during the research or writing process, whose ideas may be reflected in the concepts or structure of the student’s written work.

Attribution of use of another’s ideas or language is not required when:

a) there is an explicit exemption of the attribution requirement by the person assigning the written work, or

b) the student is writing an examination. This examination exception does not apply to papers or take‑away examinations unless there is an explicit elimination of the attribution requirement under (a) above.

https://www.law.upenn.edu/students/poli ... iarism.php

This is U of M's facism policy:

http://digital.lib.umd.edu/video?pid=umd:10718

[epsilonpegasi]

Guys, if anyone still remembers my question:

The prof had posted on his website a model exam answer which got the highest mark in the class. I looked through it and realized that in the answer a large number of its sentences are copied word-for-word directly from the textbook. However, the student who wrote the answer wrote the appropriate source (the textbook consists of multiple articles by different authors, along with cases) in brackets after each sentence that was directly copied.

So based on this the professor clearly doesn't care about copying word-for-word, as long as you appropriately cite where you copied from. So that means if I had just put "(Wikipedia)" next to each of my sentences, I'm surmising I would've been OK?

God, this is dumb as fuck.

[jrass]

Guys, if anyone still remembers my question:

The prof had posted on his website a model exam answer which got the highest mark in the class. I looked through it and realized that in the answer a large number of its sentences are copied word-for-word directly from the textbook. However, the student who wrote the answer wrote the appropriate source (the textbook consists of multiple articles by different authors, along with cases) in brackets after each sentence that was directly copied.

So based on this the professor clearly doesn't care about copying word-for-word, as long as you appropriately cite where you copied from. So that means if I had just put "(Wikipedia)" next to each of my sentences, I'm surmising I would've been OK?

God, this is dumb as fuck.

Yeah but the strange thing is that you get more points by citing to established precedent than you do making stuff up so logically the focus of anti-plagiarism policies in law school should be the reverse - making stuff up and citing to fake precedent. I would work with the tech people to get a version of your outline saved before the exam, and to print out your cookies to indicate you didn't log onto wikipedia during the test, and that you had copied from your outline.

[A. Nony Mouse]

This is U of M's facism policy:

http://digital.lib.umd.edu/video?pid=umd:10718

Don't be weird.

OP, as much as we all like discussing this, I don't think any of us are going to be able to help you, because we don't have your exam, we don't know your schools anti-plagiarism policy/honor code, we don't know your prof's policies, and we don't know exactly what they think you did on the exam. Like, this is all weird enough that I feel like there's some disconnect between what you think you did and what the school thinks you did.

If you're not going to get a lawyer, can you at least look into an academic ombudsperson at your school? I feel like you need a third party to be able to explain each side to each other.

[abl]

Guys, if anyone still remembers my question:

The prof had posted on his website a model exam answer which got the highest mark in the class. I looked through it and realized that in the answer a large number of its sentences are copied word-for-word directly from the textbook. However, the student who wrote the answer wrote the appropriate source (the textbook consists of multiple articles by different authors, along with cases) in brackets after each sentence that was directly copied.

So based on this the professor clearly doesn't care about copying word-for-word, as long as you appropriately cite where you copied from. So that means if I had just put "(Wikipedia)" next to each of my sentences, I'm surmising I would've been OK?

God, this is dumb as fuck.

The answer is: it really depends on the policies at issue. As a general matter, though, you're correct--that's how plagiarism works. What you've described is a pretty spot-on illustration of the difference between improper plagiarism and acceptable quoting (at least insofar as the terms are usually used). You're generally allowed to copy things verbatim from external sources--so long as you provide an attribution for your quote.* Copying from external sources without attribution is plagiarism. Maybe you think that's dumb, but you're not going to convince your school's honor committee that their traditional understanding of plagiarism is wrong or that plagiarism as it is generally understood isn't that bad because it's just one missing word ("wikipedia") and who really cares all that much about attribution.

The fact that you're still trying to work out this argument, and haven't responded to my or others' urgings to consult a professional, implies that you're still considering handling this yourself. Don't. (And if you show up in your meeting and try to rationalize your conduct using the above argument, you're almost certainly going to face harsher consequences.)

*It's very possible that your professor or school has stricter or different rules about quoting and plagiarism, which is why it's the policies at issue that matter more so than whatever "plagiarism" generally means in the outside world.

[Tls2016]

Guys, if anyone still remembers my question:

The prof had posted on his website a model exam answer which got the highest mark in the class. I looked through it and realized that in the answer a large number of its sentences are copied word-for-word directly from the textbook. However, the student who wrote the answer wrote the appropriate source (the textbook consists of multiple articles by different authors, along with cases) in brackets after each sentence that was directly copied.

So based on this the professor clearly doesn't care about copying word-for-word, as long as you appropriately cite where you copied from. So that means if I had just put "(Wikipedia)" next to each of my sentences, I'm surmising I would've been OK?

God, this is dumb as fuck.

The answer is: it really depends on the policies at issue. As a general matter, though, you're correct--that's how plagiarism works. What you've described is a pretty spot-on illustration of the difference between improper plagiarism and acceptable quoting (at least insofar as the terms are usually used). You're generally allowed to copy things verbatim from external sources--so long as you provide an attribution for your quote.* Copying from external sources without attribution is plagiarism. Maybe you think that's dumb, but you're not going to convince your school's honor committee that their traditional understanding of plagiarism is wrong or that plagiarism as it is generally understood isn't that bad because it's just one missing word ("wikipedia") and who really cares all that much about attribution.

The fact that you're still trying to work out this argument, and haven't responded to my or others' urgings to consult a professional, implies that you're still considering handling this yourself. Don't. (And if you show up in your meeting and try to rationalize your conduct using the above argument, you're almost certainly going to face harsher consequences.)

*It's very possible that your professor or school has stricter or different rules about quoting and plagiarism, which is why it's the policies at issue that matter more so than whatever "plagiarism" generally means in the outside world.

Oh man, the model example used citations?
You maybe don't understand plagiarism. I know it's different in other countries.
You are in serious trouble right now and you need to get a lawyer or an ombudsman. You need help with protecting yourself. You could fail the class,be expelled or both for plagarism at most schools. You need to take this seriously and get help that we can't give you.

[rcharter1978]

Guys, if anyone still remembers my question:

The prof had posted on his website a model exam answer which got the highest mark in the class. I looked through it and realized that in the answer a large number of its sentences are copied word-for-word directly from the textbook. However, the student who wrote the answer wrote the appropriate source (the textbook consists of multiple articles by different authors, along with cases) in brackets after each sentence that was directly copied.

So based on this the professor clearly doesn't care about copying word-for-word, as long as you appropriately cite where you copied from. So that means if I had just put "(Wikipedia)" next to each of my sentences, I'm surmising I would've been OK?

God, this is dumb as fuck.

So you didn't put (Wikipedia)? So perhaps the lack of citing was the problem for the professor. I'm not sure what you took from Wikipedia, but I might see where a student directly citing just for factual comparison/rules may be different than if there was some level of dependence on an outside source for your analysis.

Seriously though -- was this something from the Registrar, all formal like? Or was this something from your professor who may want to understand what happened and may allow you to explain?

Wow, I know you're really wishing you had just put (Wikipedia), or even (wkpd) or something like that.

[kcdc1]

Oh man, the model example used citations?

Of course the model answer used citations. You get points for appropriately using and citing to authority because it strengthens your analysis. That doesn't mean it's cheating to fail to cite -- under normal circumstances, you'd just be leaving points on the table. I don't know what's different about OP's situation. Either there are facts we don't know about, or the school is behaving strangely. Either way, OP really has no choice but to take this seriously, and should speak with someone who can properly advise him/her.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Oh man, the model example used citations?

Of course the model answer used citations. You get points for appropriately using and citing to authority because it strengthens your analysis. That doesn't mean it's cheating to fail to cite -- under normal circumstances, you'd just be leaving points on the table. I don't know what's different about OP's situation. Either there are facts we don't know about, or the school is behaving strangely. Either way, OP really has no choice but to take this seriously, and should speak with someone who can properly advise him/her.

I really disagree with this. I've never seen a model answer include citations (apart from maybe a case name). Including citations for secondary sources suggests that there may be different expectations going on here compared to what many of us are used to.

[epsilonpegasi]

Just for the record, I am absolutely going to speak to a lawyer.

[rpupkin]

OP, as much as we all like discussing this, I don't think any of us are going to be able to help you, because we don't have your exam, we don't know your schools anti-plagiarism policy/honor code, we don't know your prof's policies, and we don't know exactly what they think you did on the exam. Like, this is all weird enough that I feel like there's some disconnect between what you think you did and what the school thinks you did.

[kcdc1]

I really disagree with this. I've never seen a model answer include citations (apart from maybe a case name). Including citations for secondary sources suggests that there may be different expectations going on here compared to what many of us are used to.

I've seen answers that cite to scholars and articles the professors mentioned in class or circulated as supplementary reading. Not formal citations -- just (Author name), or "As Author argues, ____." It's above and beyond to go there, but they're model answers for a reason. And if a student could spit out the idea but couldn't remember the source on a timed exam, I don't think it would be be cheating to scribble down the point without flipping through articles to properly attribute.

[Tls2016]

My point about citing in the model answer was that the professor showed that he values citation. I think it hurts OP because OP can't claim he had no notice about this professor and citation with word for word copying. ( edit: OP can still claim it, but it will be harder to prove.)I'm not making a general point about anything else.

OP: Good luck with the lawyer. I'm sure this is very tough.Getting good advice from a lawyer who knows all the facts should help ease your mind a little.

[epsilonpegasi]

I am definitely being charged for copying Wikipedia sentences word-for-word onto my test page. A short talk with the Dean over the phone confirmed this. The Wikipedia sentences were on my outline - I am not being accused of accessing the internet and the Wikipedia website illicitly during the test.

I copied 5 'things' from Wikipedia. 3 were case ratios each 1-2 sentences long. 1 was a definition of a legal term, 2 sentences long. Finally, I copied a summary of the facts of a case, which was 5 sentences long.

As I said previously, I am going to speak to a lawyer. But is it appropriate to also discuss this issue with one of my professors? I simply need more information about what is going on, period. There is no document about this at my school which is analogous to the Penn document that was posted.

[rpupkin]

I am definitely being charged for copying Wikipedia sentences word-for-word onto my test page. A short talk with the Dean over the phone confirmed this. The Wikipedia sentences were on my outline - I am not being accused of accessing the internet and the Wikipedia website illicitly during the test.

I copied 5 'things' from Wikipedia. 3 were case ratios each 1-2 sentences long. 1 was a definition of a legal term, 2 sentences long. Finally, I copied a summary of the facts of a case, which was 5 sentences long.

I don't know what a "case ratio" is, so I'm not sure what to make of that. But the the last item you mention--copying five sentences verbatim from a summary of the facts of a case--sounds a lot more like an honor code violation than what you initially stated you did (copying short legal definition statements).

It's good that you're consulting an attorney.

ETA: Also, I'm struggling to imagine a situation where a five-sentence fact summary of a case would be appropriate in the context of a law exam answer, regardless of any plagiarism issue. It wouldn't surprise me if your copied fact summary stood out because it was a non-sequitur, thus making it seem more suspicious than it might otherwise.

[Tls2016]

I am definitely being charged for copying Wikipedia sentences word-for-word onto my test page. A short talk with the Dean over the phone confirmed this. The Wikipedia sentences were on my outline - I am not being accused of accessing the internet and the Wikipedia website illicitly during the test.

I copied 5 'things' from Wikipedia. 3 were case ratios each 1-2 sentences long. 1 was a definition of a legal term, 2 sentences long. Finally, I copied a summary of the facts of a case, which was 5 sentences long.

As I said previously, I am going to speak to a lawyer. But is it appropriate to also discuss this issue with one of my professors? I simply need more information about what is going on, period. There is no document about this at my school which is analogous to the Penn document that was posted.

No. Talk to a lawyer first. If you have a student ombudsmen talk to them. Let your lawyer find out the process. I wouldn't talk to another professor.

I don't exactly understand what you don't understand about your situation. From what you have written, it sounds like you have been formally required to meet with the Dean as prelude to the Dean deciding whether to proceed against you.

Your school must have an honor code policy. Look for it but don't post it here.

[rcharter1978]

Just for the record, I am absolutely going to speak to a lawyer.

I'm glad to hear this. An attorney with experience in this field will do you a world of good and will put your mind at ease (I always feel better when I know my situation so I can make a plan B).

I'm also not sure what a case ratio is, but I agree that the five sentence statement of facts is probably your biggest hurdle. But yes, talk to the attorney. If this is the real deal and already in the official channels do not talk to another professor. Was the SOF you copied on your outline? This was just a standard open book/open note exam, right?

[epsilonpegasi]

I don't know what a "case ratio" is, so I'm not sure what to make of that.

Sorry, the ratio is the main rule from the case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratio_decidendi

[jrass]

I don't know what a "case ratio" is, so I'm not sure what to make of that.

Sorry, the ratio is the main rule from the case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratio_decidendi

Hopefully you did not speak to the dean about any facts. Anything you say will be used against you as will what you don't say. There's no requirement they need to tell you this is the case, but it is. I don't know if you need a lawyer, because lawyers are expensive and may not add anything. You need to calculate and plan everything you do. If you don't have the judgment to do this then get a lawyer. But the shirt you wear, your tone of voice, facial gestures, all of it has to be calculated. There's no real due process requirement. They can expel just because you maybe did something bad, and they think your nose is too big. You need to make them like you. In addition, law professors are likelier to have IQ's way above normal than the average population, and have difficulty connecting with other people. They're likelier to be antisocial or sociopathic so you can't rely on common sense and guilt. There's a decent chance that your dean's perception of something is the complete opposite of 99% the population, and a chance your professor is completely irrational and spent some time in a mental institution. You really want to learn about these people, and find out the best way to defend yourself.