Copy Cat Tastrophe, Astral Facts January 2015

Astral Facts, January 2015

Astral: (Theosophy) Consisting of, belonging to, or designating, a kind of supersensible substance alleged to be next above the tangible world in refinement; as, astral spirits; astral bodies of persons; astral current.

Copy Cat Tastrophe

We are approaching the middle of the current academic term (winter quarter), when midterms and first major essays start to hit the inboxes.  Frankly, this is raising some anticipatory anxiety for me.  This past fall term in my classes has turned out to be the “worst” ever in terms of blatant plagiarism in student papers.  In fact, I had to dismiss two students for repeated occurrences.  

It is unfortunate that such records will go on those students’ transcripts, but somehow the failing grade on the first paper just made them more desperate. Even though I informed them that I always drop the lowest score, which would wipe that from the record by the end of the term, it didn't temper the temperament.

Of course, this plagiarism thing isn’t new.  As Ralph Waldo Emerson stated about 150 years ago, it seems that once a person has been published, he has the right to copy anything others have written.  More recently, the “art” of plagiarism has come to be celebrated in a sense, as Tom Lehrer noted in his 1963 rendition (available on YouTube):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXlfXirQF3A

As the Internet has contributed to the temptation of easy access to plucking the “forbidden fruit” of the work of others, our campus recently underwent an effort to expand the education regarding the behavior.  As a team of us worked on this project, we found some interesting cultural differences at the root of the behavior. 

In some cultures, the act of identifying sources is regarded as an insult – both to the source and to the audience.  For example, using the phrase, “To be, or not to be: that is the question” and referencing it to Shakespeare would insult the audience’s intelligence.  The implication would be that those in the audience would be quite ignorant not to know the source if they hadn't been told.  Likewise, it would dishonor the reputation of Shakespeare to imply that his works and ideas are so obscure that they need to be identified when used. 

Thus, students and writers from such cultural backgrounds would be avoiding such taboos when they copy but don’t acknowledge the source.  However, “When in Rome ….” (as Shakespeare has noted - not to insult anyone’s intelligence).  Perhaps that was Shakespeare’s thought as well that he didn't need to cite any of his sources for his works (such as St. Ambrose for the “When in Rome…” statement.)

Because plagiarism can appear in many forms and because folks here in the Humanities Sciences like to refer back to the Greek and Latin roots of culture, here is the blooming taxonomy in the original Greek:

Varieties of Plagiarism and Plagiarists.

Greek terminology such as pathos, ethos, logos, etc., is often used in the broad scope of the humanities.  We could view the classification of major types of plagiarism in a similar taxonomy as follows:

Theo-sauros.  (aka T-sauros Rex).  This technique involves substituting a variety of words from the original source in order to disguise the original phrasing.   The Theo-sauros will do this to make the content appear original and more godly or royal.  Thus, phrases such as “common sense” will be changed to “ordinary feeling” or “communal sagacity.”   Of course, someone using “basic intelligence” would recognize that changing so many words and phrases will end up distorting the overall coherence of the writing.

Pseudopigios. This technique aims to lend credibility to the writer’s own unsubstantiated beliefs or opinions.  (This dates back to the ancient practice of pseudepigrapha when people would try to pass off their personal views as coming from Noah, Abraham, and even Adam and Eve themselves.)  The pseudopigio will make up credible sounding sources, usually bogus websites or non-existent online issues of accepted sources like Scientific American, which would not have page numbers for cross referencing.

Downloadios.  This technique involves the use of websites that sell or exchange fully written papers on a wide range of topics.  The websites have a disclaimer that the paper is for review only, but when students are paying as much as $10 per page, chances are that the “review tool” ends up being the actual paper.  Often the Theo-saurus will use this technique as a starting point.

Domestios, Fratios, or Sororios.   In this technique, known by several names, the writer will merely put his or her name on works done by a family member or close associate who has taken the same or similar courses.   Very few if any changes are made by the writer.  A variety of this is the Superidio, where the writers take their own writing done previously and make slight alterations (often not more than changing the date and course name) to submit as new work.

Spectato or Spectreios.  Sometimes Anglicized as “ghost writing,” this technique is an offshoot of the previous technique, but done under contract or by request.  Sometimes this is disguised as “peer editing” when the writer asks for help with a rough draft, outline, or paper topic and the other person produces the bulk of the final content.

Cuspidios.  In this technique, the writer merely expectorates content directly from lecture notes or class discussion, sometimes even from the same class the paper is written for.  Usually the original notes are not taken clearly, so the content may be a bit garbled as the writer merely repeats what has been heard as if it were his or her original thinking.

Oblivio.  This particular practice often includes one or more of the methods mentioned above without the practitioners recognizing that they are violating standards of academic integrity.  Such people often have been doing this as a matter of habit or they are so used to seeing those around them plagiarize that the practices seem “normal” behavior.

Insidios.   In this technique, the writer deliberately restructures sentences, reverses the order of list points or details or even cites a small portion of the original source as a means of deliberately presenting the source commentary, insight, and/or conclusions as his/her own original thinking.

 (Although these are posted on the Green River website, I don’t need to cite myself as the source.)

Returning back to the observations of Ralph Waldo Emerson from the top of the page, it seems fitting to close with another of his observations on bragging:  When we do encounter a braggart, we can acknowledge that, even though it might be done unconsciously, at least he is not guilty of plagiarism!

Walter Lowe
Astral Facts is a somewhat regular presentation of Humanities Science, produced in the bowels of the Humanities Science offices during the academic year.