The activities in this section ask you to look at how our and other institutions define and handle academic misconduct. Of particular interest are the consequences for academic misconduct both at UConn and at other institutions, including a brief discussion of how a campus newspaper might announce that an article has been plagiarized.
- Review the Student Code regarding Academic Misconduct, and then do a Google search for “Honor Code” and “Academic Misconduct.” Review other university’s practices and select at least three different ways of encouraging academic integrity at different institutions. Spend 20 minutes writing about what’s at stake for students, for instructors, and for these institutions when it comes to academic integrity. What do you believe college campuses should do to better support and encourage academic integrity?
- Read carefully the following article on college newspapers’ responses to plagiarism among their staff writers, “Should Student Newspapers Name Fabulists and Plagiarists?” Write for 20 minutes about what you think the response to student newspaper plagiarism should be. What do you see as the relationship between plagiarism on a student newspaper and plagiarism in a college course? Should the names of students who plagiarize or cheat at UConn be published in the Daily Campus?
- French historian (and cultural theorist) Michel Foucault argued that what is called repression usually reveals “a veritable discursive explosion” (1.17). In some ways, this explosion of talk and writing about what should not be talked about teaches the subject rather than explaining the reasons for the interdiction. When teachers, writers, and students discuss the ethics of their work, “plagiarism” and “academic misconduct” come up. Take about 30 minutes to run a quick “Google Scholar” search on the terms “plagiarism” and “academic misconduct.” What’s the “discursive explosion” around those terms? Can all this talk about those terms in fact enable plagiarism and academic misconduct? How? If both staying silent about the issues and talking about the issues are not effective, what might that suggest about the ethics of authorship?