Honesty and Other Good Policies

In thinking about this project, I would like to do something that would be beneficial to me as a GTA and to my students in the future. As an English major, I’ve dealt with MLA citing and format for all of my academic career. In spite of this, I still need to refer to PurdueOWL almost every time I do citing of some sort, just to be sure that I remember correctly. I am currently sympathizing for my students because these nearly all of these freshmen are going into STEM fields—fields that do not use MLA formatting—and are being required in most English classes to use MLA format. After they leave this environment, most of these students won’t ever interact with MLA again, so effectively, they’re being required to learn in for one or maybe two semesters, and that’s that. And so far, I see they’re confused on how to correctly cite and format according MLA guidelines.

As a GTA, teaching students about plagiarism is part of my job. I also think that teaching them MLA citing and formatting should be part of my job as well. Thinking back to the beginnings of my college education, I only remember instructors telling students to buy an MLA formatting guide and figure it out ourselves. Ok thanks. Very helpful. Inevitably, I’d run into a source that seemed unprecedented as far as previous citing went and would nervously try to format it myself, hoping that I wouldn’t get in trouble for doing it wrong. I don’t want my students to feel this way.

So for this project, I’m thinking about making lessons for these two concepts that I’ll divide into different days: plagiarism and correct MLA citing. By means of Google Slides and a lesson plan, I’ll compile definitions and activities to make sure my students know what academic integrity at Virginia Tech is (because they should be familiar with the institution’s definitions/do they take the time to read the Honor Code?) I will also create a MLA Citation Guide, including popular sources that students may choose to cite and go over any questions my students have on citing. In all actuality, this project will be a large PowerPoint-like presentation on plagiarism and correct citation for my students that draws from my own personal experience of not having my instructors specifically lay down what they wanted us to know as freshman entering the academic world characterized by academic integrity.

Goals

Work Cited:

Butterworth, Natalie M. “MLA Citation.” MemeCenter. n.d., accessed 11 March 2017.

I’ve never had to deal with authorship issues before. Collaboration is definitely a thing in the Humanities and in English, but I wouldn’t say that it’s the norm. As far as I know, I will be focusing on writing my own work during the time that I am here. But is that really true? According to  the TEDx Talk “Steal  Like An Artist,” what I just stated was false. I can totally see how Austin Kleon gets his argument that art is theft (Kleon). I agree, for the most part. Within higher education, especially in English, faculty tell students to “enter into a conversation.” This means that if I’m looking to publish an article, I don’t blindly write about whatever I want, but I look to see what conversation is going on amongst scholars at the moment and look for ways that I can enter into this conversation. If I look at this through Austin Kleon’s lens, I’m looking at these conversations, seeing a point that I find interesting or maybe one that I don’t quite agree with, and formulating a response to this point—I’m stealing something I found interesting and building off it, making it my own (Kleon). But the idea wasn’t necessarily mine to begin with. So yes, I see how his argument can ring true. Often, I’ve felt discouraged though, like he suggests. Is there really anything new I can contribute to a conversation? Are there things to say that haven’t been said before in some way or another? It’s definitely something that people in the arts think about.

Jumping from the arts to the sciences—was the article from  The Chronicle of Higher Education appalling or what? The stories about those grad students whose work was stolen from them by their advisors were quite shocking. I’m sure it’s not the norm, but the stories provoke the thought of what a person should do in that situation. What do you do? In Padma Ashokkumar’s case, she became a pariah to her whole department and had to leave without obtaining her degree because she chose to stand up for herself (Patton). She practiced academic integrity and paid for it. I’m sure the pressure in the sciences is only going to increase. What was your reaction to this article, STEM friends?

Works Cited

Kleon, Austin. “Steal Like an Artist.” YouTube, uploaded by TEDx Talks, 24 April 2012, link.

Patton, Stacey. “‘My Advisor Stole My Research.'” The Chronicle of Higher Education, 11 November 2012, link, accessed 28 February 2017.

Thank God for Purdue OWL. I’ve been depending on that website for MLA help since the very beginning of my journey in higher education. I still use it very often and have linked the site into my syllabus so that my own students know how valuable of a resource it truly is. Actually, as far as forming citations, Purdue OWL is the only online resources or resource, in general, that I use. As an undergraduate, I found that websites that claimed to do the citations for me always ended up screwing it up somehow, and I was left with markings on my paper telling me that I needed to recheck the formatting. I quickly learned that it was much more reliable and in, most cases, more efficient for me to do the citations on my own. Because citation methods are ALWAYS changing, at least for MLA, I can’t depend on the sites to account for that.  Often times, the citation-for-you sites are not up to speed with the current citation format. For example, even the game that was linked into this week’s module, has not been corrected for the newest MLA update. I’m sure citation managers work well for many other people, yet I do think it’s important for scholars to learn how to format citations on their own.

Last semester, I was introduced to cites like Zotero and Endnote in my online Library Research class. Mendeley is my new best friend. Somehow, I had never been introduced to Mendeley. While it has a reference/citation manager feature, I still never use it, but rather use Mendeley for the simple fact that I can store, read, and annotate all of my articles for my multiple research papers in one place. It’s great.

This was all very interesting because last week in my ENGL 1106 class, I went over the Honor Code and plagiarism with my students. I began by asking why students choose to plagiarize, and the answers that popped up matched the ones that the Turnitin.com video suggested, except I didn’t consider undermotivation as a category (Yeo). I mean, in other words, laziness might be considered lack of motivation, but this reminds me that though its ultimately up to the students to resist the temptation to cheat or not to cheat, I also have a responsibility to them to do as much as I can do to motivate them to develop the skills they need to complete an assignment.

The last slide of that video offered suggestions for teachers to apply to their course calendars. Many of these suggestions were based off of process pedagogy, of which I am a big fan. When teachers focus on the process vs. the product of an assignment, I believe it makes the assignment in general much more beneficial and less overwhelming. Building in draft days or assigning things like annotated bibliographies not only serve to help the students get started on the project earlier, leaving less room for procrastination and the stress that goes along with that, but also serve as a blockade for academic dishonesty. Students will most likely have to do this work themselves as opposed to finding drafts or anno bibs online. I appreciated seeing this idea reinforced.

Within that class last week, we also examined articles from popular newspapers that shared stories of successful people being accused of plagiarism. We got  to see what consequences went along with the decision of engaging in academic dishonesty. I think the interactive movie did a good job of displaying consequences as well, making it more personal. For example, in one of the scenarios, if Kim chose to report her labmate for academic dishonesty, her labmates ostracized her and she became the recipient of retaliation (The Lab). This retaliation became so bad that she ended up transferring to another lab that had a different focus, a move that set her back a year in completing her PhD. So her decision to report dishonesty ultimately ended up hurting her—the cost of integrity. Her labmate’s decision to fudge his numbers affected more than just him; it affected Kim significantly. Our actions affect other people whether whether or not we intend for them to do so. I think this is an important thing to keep in mind in academia, especially as graduate students.

Works Cited:

Yeo, Ikram. “Turnitin Webcast—Why Students Plagiarize.” YouTube,  31 January 2013, link

The Office of Research Integrity. The Lab: Avoiding Research Misconduct. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, accessed 14 Feb 2017.

When I first arrived here at Virginia Tech this past summer, I quickly learned that the Honor Code had undergone recent reconstruction and evaluation. I heard from multiple instructors and professors that the new Honor Code was indeed an improvement. Apparently, in the past, the burden of proving academic dishonesty fell mostly upon the instructors (who had multiple other things to do obviously than reporting plagiarism and taking on the load of work to report a student). This new system delineates that burden of research and hearing cases to a board. This seems to make things easier on the instructor or the professor as well as the student. For example. the Honor Code is structured so that the terms are defined and the punishments are tiered according to the severity of the act. I think its useful that for less severe transgressions there is the Probation option of punishment. This educates the student not only in how serious academic dishonesty is, but also educates him or her in how to avoid committing the same mistake again. So, it reminds the student of the why and how, so to speak. While more severe punishments might be appropriate for certain acts, the new Honor Code’s Probation option takes into account unintentionality  or carelessness on the part of the student and works to educate him or her in a less harsh and more beneficial manner, educating and rehabilitating certain students as opposed automatically expelling them every time. This is not to diminish the gravity of academic dishonesty because I do think students need to realize right away how serious a violation these types of actions are in the realm of academia —and the world for that matter.

I think the Honor Code and Constitution is communicated very well. We’re required to have links to the Honor Code in the syllabus so that the students are aware of its existence. As a graduate student, I think I was required to attend three separate talks on the Honor Code last semester alone; this makes me think that not being aware of the Honor Code is almost impossible for students here at Virginia Tech. I think its important, again, that the Code defines its terms, describing what Virginia Tech views as plagiarism, cheating, falsification, and academic sabotage, leaving little room for ignorance on the student’s part.

The article for English students was the CCCC (four C’s) “Guidelines for the Ethical Conduct of Research in Composition Studies.” Last semester was the first time I had ever heard of the IRB, which is largely due to the fact that as an English major undergraduate, my papers were on literary topics and never studies that involved speaking to a person of any sort. Even now, the majority of my papers are still on literary topics; however,  these ethical guidelines would be useful if I decided to do a study on, say, my pedagogical approach in my classroom this semester.

I found the timing of this reading uncanny because I just began my section on the Fieldwork Paper with my freshman writing students this week. Tomorrow, I will be going over interviews, surveys, and questionnaires. Because of this, I planned to talk about the IRB with the students, and its role in the process of publishing or sharing any study that uses human subjects as evidence, even in composition. I hadn’t thought to bring up the CCCC Guidelines for Ethics, but now I think I will show them this particular section from the Guidelines:

• “Some studies may include populations who may be considered vulnerable and protected, including but not limited to children and adolescent minors, students, prisoners, pregnant women, military veterans, disenfranchised groups, persons with disabilities, and adults with legal guardians. In these cases, as researchers, we consult carefully with the IRB/reviewing agencies, colleagues, and (when allowed) with prospective participants to develop a protocol that protects their rights, privacy, well-being, and especially, dignity.” (CCCC)

The concern of preserving the “rights, privacy, well-being, and…dignity” of the people who voluntarily involve themselves in a project is the main ethical concern, in my opinion (CCCC). Granted, reporting accurate facts and citing them properly is important, too, but our concern as members of the Humanities should also be to preserve the rights and dignity of human beings. I think this was an important inclusion in the code of ethics and is definitely something that I will bring up in class tomorrow because none of these students are English majors whose papers deal solely with literature and could very well have to go through the IRB before their time here at Virginia Tech is over.

Work Cited:

Conference on College Composition and Communication. “CCCC Guidelines for the Ethical Conduct of Research in Composition Studies.” National Council of Teachers of English, November 2003, link,  accessed 31 January 2017.