
Anonymous wrote:Is there any way someone can rewrite the telling of the story while a) using both subjects and verbs in all the sentences, b) leaving out the irrelevant asides (such as "double jeopardy," which does not fit the setting), and c) cutting out the chaff?
If someone does, I will be your fervent admirer.
Anonymous wrote:OP: I’m still having a very hard time understanding what the alleged violation was. Did he copy an existing company’s sexual harassment policy word-for-word or did he copy the Civil Rights Act or state law word-for-word but without saying it was the law explicitly? The former is plagiarism as we normally think of it (albeit extremely low level plagiarism that I could see a student not understanding was plagiarism as long as they didn’t take all or most of their policies from one or two companies). The latter is not plagiarism, it just isn’t. It may be sloppy and not great high school work product, but it’s not academically dishonest especially if the rubric didn’t require sourcing (after all, very few company’s actual handbooks would cite all sources — meaning laws, court opinions, etc — the way that an academic text would). Saying that a company’s sexual harassment policies should mirror the law is not plagiarism. That’s idiotic. As the lawyer noted upthread, changing the wording a bit could actually take you out of compliance with the law. To me, it sounds like he’s not being frank about — or maybe doesn’t realize — how badly their zoom meeting went. That’s what the teacher is mad about.
Anonymous wrote:That does not sound like a respectful dialogue, honestly, especially the “must be an idiot” and “expect to rewrite laws” stuff. He needs to apologize and accept the results.
Anonymous wrote:Lawyer again. This just isn’t plagiarism in the usual sense. No lawyer or HR rep would cite a source when writing a policy. It isn’t done anymore than it’s done in form contracts. It’s pointless and counter-productive to come up with your own language for an HR policy. It’s not like a speech or research paper where originality is part of the assignment. This is just a weird and meaningless place to apply plagiarism standards.
It may however be a violation of the expectation for the assignment, if part of the goal is to ensure the student is using reputable sources for model policies, rather than a crazy random person’s blog. That I think would be reasonable for a student assignment. But it’s not a plagiarism issue.
Anonymous wrote:This is a dumb assignment to use a plagarism check for.
I’m a lawyer that writes these policies for companies. We all basically take the standards model language from internet sources (some of which he may have used such as SHrM, others of which would not be easily accessible to a non lawyer) and then edit for our particular client’s needs. You can’t ask someone to write a form policy and then ding them because their form policy follows the form.
This is a ridiculous application of plagiarism—you would not want a policy where people put things in their own words. The whole point of a policy is to use certain standard accepted terms so there is no later dispute about meaning.
Anonymous wrote:This is a dumb assignment to use a plagarism check for.
I’m a lawyer that writes these policies for companies. We all basically take the standards model language from internet sources (some of which he may have used such as SHrM, others of which would not be easily accessible to a non lawyer) and then edit for our particular client’s needs. You can’t ask someone to write a form policy and then ding them because their form policy follows the form.
This is a ridiculous application of plagiarism—you would not want a policy where people put things in their own words. The whole point of a policy is to use certain standard accepted terms so there is no later dispute about meaning.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:That sounds like a bad assignment and he should know to include works cited if he’s essentially using quotes regardless of rubric. However, the teacher sounds like she has no understanding of what plagiarism is if she thinks it can be identified by a subpar checker and then fixed in 10 minutes. If it was accurately picking up plagiarism the papers should be rewritten, not reworded.
He used quotes when given that final 20 minutes. Rubric didn't require works cited (though he does this for many assignments). What he did was state a policy, and include, "In accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990"
Rubric may not have required works cited, but if you cite someone else's work (even the American Disabilities Act), you need to include a works cited. If you continue to make excuses for him, as others have pointed out, he will figure it out the hard way in college.