Teddi Fishman | International Center for Academic Integrity (currently @ Clemson University) (original) (raw)
Uploads
Papers by Teddi Fishman
Many of the assumptions that inform the ways we respond to issues of plagiarism are based in laws... more Many of the assumptions that inform the ways we respond to issues of plagiarism are based in laws and traditions that pertain to stealing or to copyright. Laws about stealing, however, assume key concepts that are at odds with the conceptual realities of plagiarism. The notion of taking something, for instance, carries with it the concomitant idea that the rightful owner is deprived of the use of that thing. Laws about copyright are similarly derived from the notion of a physical text being duplicated to make additional (physical) copies to be sold, implying that if copyright is violated, the rightful owner suffers (financial) harm. Neither set of laws appropriately addresses plagiarism, however, which can occur without depriving the author/owner of the work or the right to profit from it. This paper will differentiate the elements of plagiarism from those of theft and copyright violations, and attempt to define plagiarism in terms that accurately describe its essential elements.
The increasingly popular trend of conceptualizing education in terms of "customer service" is, in... more The increasingly popular trend of conceptualizing education in terms of "customer service" is, in some ways, attractive. It encourages educators to think in terms of meeting students' needs and to develop innovative ways to deliver their "product." In other ways, however, it fails to convey the essential collaborative, participatory, reciprocal relationship that is central to effective teaching and learning. With respect to academic integrity, the customer service model also obscures students' roles and responsibilities. In this paper, we will identify some of the ways this model-in which the customer expresses a need and the vendor meets that need in exchange for payment-provides an inappropriate metaphor for understanding the project of teaching and learning (i.e., education). When embraced uncritically, the model has the potential both to undermine education and at the same time derail efforts to develop and sustain a culture of integrity. After identifying this model's shortcomings, we will suggest ways to develop and promote a more robust model in which faculty and students work together toward a shared purpose while recognizing and embracing their interlocking responsibilities.
Many of the assumptions that inform the ways we respond to issues of plagiarism are based in laws... more Many of the assumptions that inform the ways we respond to issues of plagiarism are based in laws and traditions that pertain to stealing or to copyright. Laws about stealing, however, assume key concepts that are at odds with the conceptual realities of plagiarism. The notion of taking something, for instance, carries with it the concomitant idea that the rightful owner is deprived of the use of that thing. Laws about copyright are similarly derived from the notion of a physical text being duplicated to make additional (physical) copies to be sold, implying that if copyright is violated, the rightful owner suffers (financial) harm. Neither set of laws appropriately addresses plagiarism, however, which can occur without depriving the author/owner of the work or the right to profit from it. This paper will differentiate the elements of plagiarism from those of theft and copyright violations, and attempt to define plagiarism in terms that accurately describe its essential elements.
The increasingly popular trend of conceptualizing education in terms of "customer service" is, in... more The increasingly popular trend of conceptualizing education in terms of "customer service" is, in some ways, attractive. It encourages educators to think in terms of meeting students' needs and to develop innovative ways to deliver their "product." In other ways, however, it fails to convey the essential collaborative, participatory, reciprocal relationship that is central to effective teaching and learning. With respect to academic integrity, the customer service model also obscures students' roles and responsibilities. In this paper, we will identify some of the ways this model-in which the customer expresses a need and the vendor meets that need in exchange for payment-provides an inappropriate metaphor for understanding the project of teaching and learning (i.e., education). When embraced uncritically, the model has the potential both to undermine education and at the same time derail efforts to develop and sustain a culture of integrity. After identifying this model's shortcomings, we will suggest ways to develop and promote a more robust model in which faculty and students work together toward a shared purpose while recognizing and embracing their interlocking responsibilities.