A student handed in an assignment with responses copy-pasted from Wikipedia. This wouldn’t be breaking news if it weren’t for how badly the copy-pasting was done. If knowing how to plagiarize well were a gradable skill, he would have gotten an F for it. One would think that even if a person copy-pastes a text of which he doesn’t understand a single word, he could still make sure he copy-pasted complete sentences.
I can imagine myself offering classes in copy-pasting in the near future.
“See these dots that appear in the text at regular intervals?” I will ask. “They are called “periods” or “full stops.” The bits of text that appear between the periods are called sentences. When you want to cheat on an assignment, you need to select the part of the plagiarized text that appears between these dots. Don’t just copy-paste a random part of text if you want what you are submitting not to look completely insane.”
For those of you who speak Spanish, this is what the student handed in to me:
This was a response to “Analyze the title of the short story.”
Solidarity. In my more cynical moments, it occurs to me that if a student actually plagiarized a literature paper the old-fashioned way–by going to the library, identifying an article on the subject of suffiient obscurity, and passing it off as original work–I’d be tempted to smile benignly on the effort. It would at least show a recognition of what an excellent end-product is supposed to look like, in a way that the usual Google-cut-paste method does not.
LikeLike
I know what you mean. I often think, “Well, at least they’d have to get inside the library for this. . .”
LikeLike
Infuriating. And this is why I love teaching the subjunctive.
LikeLike