e-Plagiarism - Prof. Bryan Hanson

Computers and Academic Integrity - When Does It Equal e-Plagiarism?

This document explains my views on avoiding academic integrity violations when working on the computer. It is an extension of the DePauw's policies and you will be held to it. Bryan Hanson, Dept of Chemistry.

Many science courses require students to use computers to prepare reports. Spreadsheets are used to manage data, such as preparing tables and various types of plots. Word processors provide an easy way to type, edit and integrate tables, plots, equations, graphics and so forth. Most of you have probably discovered that using a computer is generally more efficient, and provides nicer results, even if typed reports aren't required.

Unfortunately, some people have found that a computer makes it easy to borrow other people's work by copying graphs, data tables and even the discussion text. This is a violation of academic integrity.

The type of academic integrity problem most often discussed at a university occurs when a student uses material from another author and fails to cite it properly. I have found that in science courses this type of violation (plagiarism) is uncommon, probably because scientific papers are traditionally extensively referenced to handbooks, previous papers on the subject etc.

More commonly, integrity problems in science courses arise when a student borrows material from another student. This usually occurs between students who work together - perhaps they are lab partners, study partners, or write their lab reports together. One of them gets behind in their work, and asks the other if they can borrow their lab report to help them with the write-up. The 'borrower' then proceeds to make minor changes in the write-up, and turns it in as their own. This is a violation of academic integrity, and you should avoid being involved in it, either as the 'loaner' or the 'borrower' (and this sometimes occurs without the loaner's knowledge). By the way, this type of violation is incredibly easy to detect, because mistakes, strange ways of putting things, and other idiosyncrasies appear in both papers, and stand out like 'sore thumbs' during grading.

With easy access to computers, there are additional temptations involved, especially with regard to data analysis. Imagine that you and two lab partners have taken a data set which requires that some tables and a calibration curve be made for the report. One of you goes to the computer, and prepares some nice tables and plots the calibration curve. That person then prints three copies of the work, or passes the work to the others electronically who then merely turn the material in.
Is this a violation of academic integrity? Yes (but keep reading!). An older version of the Student Handbook stated "To be academically dishonest is to submit someone else's work as one's own scholarship." In the case described, two people did not contribute to the work and were therefore academically dishonest. I might add that looking on, while someone else enters the data, formats it, etc., does not constitute contributing to the work.

Learning how to use the programs is as much a part of the assignment as discovering trends in the data, deciphering an important principle or reaching a conclusion. In the situation above, it would be OK for students to help each other learn how to use the program, but once someone had shown the others how to do things, it then becomes each student's responsibility to do the details on their own. Each person should eventually enter their own data, do their own analysis, and prepare their own output (graphs, tables etc.). This is not to say that students cannot collaborate or work together in a variety of ways - collaboration is an important way of learning and certainly is an important part of science (see below). What I am suggesting here is that if you turn something in that you didn't prepare on your own using programs you know how to use, you are in violation of the academic integrity policy.

Collaboration requires that each person make a significant contribution. In the world of research, you won't get your name on a paper if you didn't contribute substantially to the work. In the example above, the two students looking on were probably learning how to use the program, with the student at the computer acting as a guide or mentor of sorts. When the "lesson" was over though, the proper thing to do would be for each student looking on to then do the whole exercise on their own (and the mentor should not pass on electronic copies of the work). That way, each student has not only learned the practical aspects of using the program, but then analyzes the data and presents it in their own way. This is what scholarship is all about. Collaboration and peer mentoring are not the same thing.

There are of course times in classes where a single report is due from a group acting as collaborators (and I'm sure you've been frustrated in such situations when one person didn't carry their own weight, but didn't get penalized). In my courses I will be very explicit if a report is supposed to be the result of collaborative analysis and writing. If you are in doubt as to the appropriate thing to do in various situations, don't hesitate to ask me. I would much rather clear things up ahead of time than discover later that people worked together in a way that might have been inappropriate.