Departmental policy on
plagiarism
Plagiarism is taking
the words or ideas of another and passing them off as one's own. It is a very serious
offence, which may attract severe penalties (including being banned from taking
further examinations at UCL).
Plagiarism
can take many forms: copying the work of a fellow student, copying an internet
source, copying from a book or article, or indeed copying from oneself (the
same work cannot be credited twice). The advice that follows should be read in
conjunction with UCL Academic Committee's Policy
on plagiarism.
What
constitutes plagiarism (and what does not)
In order to
stay clear of (self-)plagiarism, you should minimally observe the following
guidelines.
Copying
If you copy an extract from a source, you must put quotation
marks around it and acknowledge the source. If it is a short quotation, it can
be part of the running text, as in the following example.
In the text:
- As Chomsky points out
"[i]t is hardly likely that some species
has this capacity but has never thought to use it until instructed by
humans" (Chomsky 1988: 38).
In the references:
- Chomsky, N. 1988. Language and Problems of
Knowledge. Cambridge: MIT Press.
If it is a longer quotation, it is better to separate it off
from the text and indent on both sides.
In the text:
- As Chomsky (1988: 38) points
out, not without humour:
- ". . . it is now widely recognized that these efforts have
failed, a fact that will hardly surprise anyone who gives some thought to
the matter. The language faculty confers enormous advantages on a species
that possesses it. It is hardly likely that some species has this capacity
but has never thought to use it until instructed by humans. That is about
as likely as the discovery that on some remote island there is a species
of bird that is perfectly capable of flight but has never thought to fly
until instructed by humans in this skill."
(Same reference format)
If you give the source for an extract, but still copy from it almost
word for word without using inverted commas, thus implying that the writing is
your own summary, then you are committing plagiarism.
Following a source
If you follow a source closely (for instance, by
substantially rewording the source, while following the thread of the exposition),
then you must acknowledge the source.
In the text:
- Chomsky (1988: 38)
points out that it is unlikely that some species has a capacity for
language acquisition but has never worked out how to use it until
instructed by humans.
(Same reference format)
This rule applies even if you are only rewording a single
sentence from a source, as in the example given here.
Depending on a source for an idea
Admittedly, this is by far the trickiest area. Passing off
someone else's ideas as your own constitutes plagiarism. However, once an
idea has become very widely accepted in some field, it may cease to be
associated with a specific individual. Instead, it becomes shared intellectual
property (people effectively treat it as a fact). In such circumstances, it may
not be necessary or even appropriate to attribute the idea to an individual.
Indeed, it might be more appropriate to reference a dissenting voice, if there
is one. Other ideas and concepts, for example the nativist
hypothesis, are so well-established in scientific discourse that it is not
necessary to attribute them to an individual. In the example below, you could
include some general references about argument structure, but no one would
consider it plagiarism if you did not.
In the text:
- Verbs and other lexical
items have argument-taking properties that determine the syntactic context
in which they may appear.
In many cases, however, the idea you are relying on does not
have the status of common intellectual property and must be attributed to its
originator(s):
In the text:
- The importance of
cognitive principles in pragmatics has been recognized only relatively
recently (Sperber and Wilson 1986).
In the references:
- Sperber, D. and D. Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
If you are unsure whether to include a reference for an idea, you should
err on the cautious side and include it. You will never be penalized for
including a superfluous reference.
Depending on a source for an argument
What was just said about ideas extends to arguments. You
must never present someone else's argument for or against a particular
viewpoint as your own. And here, too, when in doubt, err on the side of
caution.
Self-Plagiarism
This may
seem an odd concept but what it amounts to is that you cannot get credit twice
for one piece of work. This applies both within and across the courses you
take. It will sometimes be explicitly stated, on exam scripts or course
handouts, usually along the lines of "You must avoid duplication of
material". However, it holds across the board, whether stated in any given
case or not.
Why
plagiarism is often detected
Despite
popular belief to the contrary, plagiarism is relatively easy to spot and every
year a substantial number of students in UCL get caught at it. The main reason
for this is that the people who mark your work are very highly trained readers
who spot subtle changes in style and other tell-tale signs that typically
accompany plagiarism.
Many
students believe that you can get away with plagiarism if you use internet
documents as your unacknowledged sources. However, it is much easier for us to
find such sources than it is for the student. This is because we know precisely
what text we are looking for (we have the student's written work), while
the student, when searching for the source, did not. Thus, once our suspicion has
been aroused, a search engine will generally uncover the source in no time at
all.
Over the
past three years the BA Board in Linguistics has taken action in over 15 cases
of suspected plagiarism. The penalties that have been applied in these cases
include:
- lowering
a mark
- awarding
a result of 0
- awarding
a result of 0 and not allowing the student to retake or resit the relevant
course unit
- not
allowing a student to take any further examinations at UCL
How
plagiarism is penalized
If a
lecturer suspects that you may have plagiarized, he will notify the
departmental tutor, who will in turn inform the chair of the exam board. This
will put in motion the following procedure:
- The departmental tutor will notify the student
concerned and the relevant Faculty Tutor in writing that the matter is
being reported to the Chair(s) of the Board(s) of Examiners.
- Where the
allegation concerns prima facie evidence
of either (i) a second or repeat offences occurring
at separate examination periods; or (ii) an attempt to gain access to or
use of the assessed coursework of another candidate without that
candidate's knowledge, or, (iii) an offence which, if proven, may
result in the suspension or termination of a student's registration,
the Chair of the Board of Examiners will automatically refer the matter to
Registrar for subsequent consideration by the College's Examination
Irregularities Panel.
For all other
instances of plagiarism and/or collusion where the Chair of the Board of
Examiners deems on the evidence presented to him/her that prima facie evidence of a breach of the examination regulations has
been provided, he/she shall take action in accordance with the following
procedure:
- The Chair of the Board of Examiners shall write to
the student(s) against whom the allegation(s) is/are made. The letter
shall set out the facts of the allegation(s), the decision to refer the
matter to the Panel and shall invite the student(s) to respond in writing
to the allegation(s).
- The Chair of the Board of Examiners will at the
same time invite the student(s) to attend a meeting of the Departmental
Panel. The sole purpose of the panel is to investigate the grounds on
which the allegations have been made and to determine, where appropriate,
the penalty to be imposed. A formal written record of the meeting shall be
made.
- The
Departmental Panel may decide on one or more of the following actions:
- that no irregularity has been committed and no
further action be taken;
- that the student concerned be informally
reprimanded and reminded of the need strictly to observe the provisions of the
regulations (such an informal reprimand will be given by the student's
Faculty Tutor but will not be entered on the student's record);
- that the student concerned be formally
reprimanded and reminded of the need strictly to observe the provisions of the
regulations; the Faculty Tutor shall inform the Registrar as soon as is
practicable after the meeting of the Panel that such a formal reprimand has
been given to the student concerned (such a formal reprimand shall be entered
on the student's record as shall all other actions taken);
- that a reduced mark be given for the performance
of the student in the assessment in question;
- that no report be made upon the performance of
the student in part or in all of the
assessment in question;
- that the student not be permitted to re-enter
for part or all of those assessments before the expiry of a stated period of
time.
- Where the decision is that no report be made upon
the performance of a candidate in part or in all of the assessment(s) in
question and the candidate is permitted to enter for the assessment(s) in
question on a subsequent occasion, the candidate may, at the discretion of
the Panel, be required to re-enter all prescribed elements of the
assessment(s).
Bear in
mind that we are not 'out to get you'. Nobody is perfect and it is
to be expected that there are occasional lapses in good practice in
this domain. The people who mark your work are aware of this and will not
initiate the above procedure unless they have good reason to do so.
Further
information
In the department: It is
impossible to cover every aspect of this difficult subject in these notes and
you are advised to seek further guidance from your personal tutor if you are
unsure whether aspects of your work violate the letter or the spirit of our
policy.
In UCL: