Is it Possible to Plaiarise Yourself?
- Thread starter Nowhere Man
- Start date
That's great - try explaining that at an interview "sure I've got mediocre grades but I'm actually better than that, I was fighting the man".
The capricious policies of loony college professors rank pretty low on my list of pervasive social ills.
Gotta start small.Schools, universities, companies, they all have ridiculous policies and hide behind "it's always been like that, deal with it", and that's bullshit that needs to change. It wouldn't even take much effort to do that, it's just that the responsible people are too lazy and stubborn.
It's attitutes like that why we still can't take liquids on planes and get X-Rayed and patted down. It's why our phone calls are still bieng tapped without warrants. It's why governments, businesses and schools can trample all over us because, hey we need something from them, so deal with it. Well it gets old and we allow it because nobody stood up and resused to be treated like that.
Oh, for the love of God...
Get some perspective. Seriously. It's an English paper. It's not fascist repression. Write a new one and get over it. Jesus.
I noticed you don't really think it's your fault you failed the first time, and now it looks like you are setting yourself up to fail again--so long as you'll be able to blame it on someone else.
Just ask the professor. If s/he says “no,” then don’t; if s/he says “okay,” then state your concerns about turnitin.com-like sites.
Not that hard. Until one goes off this specific incident and begins discussing the overall idea and ramifications.
If I had similar assignments in two classes (never happened for me, and I was an English major--all we did was write papers), I might try to overlap them as much as possible, or at least the research aspect. But since they’re different classes, the focus is bound to be sufficiently different that similar ideas will also be sufficiently different.
Not that hard. Until one goes off this specific incident and begins discussing the overall idea and ramifications.
If I had similar assignments in two classes (never happened for me, and I was an English major--all we did was write papers), I might try to overlap them as much as possible, or at least the research aspect. But since they’re different classes, the focus is bound to be sufficiently different that similar ideas will also be sufficiently different.
Honestly, this is the professor's problem if he doesn't like it. If he wants to see new work, maybe he should put in a little himself and generate some new assignments?
If you have the possibility of people retaking the course, and want them to make new work, make new assignments. Also works well for preventing people from giving homework and tests to friends that take the course later.
Just BS laziness on the part of the professor, trying to push the blame off onto a student.
If you have the possibility of people retaking the course, and want them to make new work, make new assignments. Also works well for preventing people from giving homework and tests to friends that take the course later.
Just BS laziness on the part of the professor, trying to push the blame off onto a student.
Right. The Sixties are over, pal.
That's a lousy attitude. I understand that not all students have the native intellectual curiosity to immerse themselves in every subject, but if your main objective in going to school is to "beat the system," you really need to re-think what you're doing there.
It's a small paper--an academic assignment. The professor isn't assigning it to break your balls or to oppress you. The professor has assigned it because, in his/her estimation, this will help you better understand the course material and/or display your mastery of the material so that he/she can evaluate your performance. These are both things you are paying the professor to do.
Let's say you hire a personal trainer. They tell you to run 12 laps around the track. After 10 laps, you twist your ankle and call it a day.
The time you meet, she asks you to run 12 laps again. Are you going to demand "credit" for the 10 laps you ran before?
In general I've found that if students put as much effort into doing the work as they did trying to game the system, they'd have a knowledge of the subject matter and would have better grades.
Like I said before, this is lazy. Don't try to wrap it in "I'm fighting the system!" At the end of the day, I just see a student too lazy to do the same work that everyone else is supposed to do for the course.
This really isn't that unusual. At the two universities I've been to this was standard policy and usually a little blurb about why you shouldn't "self plagiarize" was written into the syllabus for each class. It might not even be the particular professor's call. Just write a new paper, that IS part of the reason you're in school, right? Not to get one over on the professors and administrators, but to learn something new and improve your skills, such as writing?
When it comes to using work from another class that has a similar assignment, ask the professors beforehand. I had similar assignments in my Geography and Environmental History of California classes and I consulted both professors who agreed that I could use the same research for both topics but structure the paper to favor their topic. So in the end I had two very similar but still different papers, and I think even that was unusual for professors to allow.
When it comes to using work from another class that has a similar assignment, ask the professors beforehand. I had similar assignments in my Geography and Environmental History of California classes and I consulted both professors who agreed that I could use the same research for both topics but structure the paper to favor their topic. So in the end I had two very similar but still different papers, and I think even that was unusual for professors to allow.
Ethically, I see no problem reusing your own work as the basis of a new assignment. People have made entire careers out of regurgitating the same thing in slightly different form, and in whatever your eventual career is, you'll almost certainly end up developing specific patters or spiels to deal with specific situations. It's more efficient than reinventing the wheel every time.
Whether your college agrees with this view is another matter entirely, and should be considered independently of your personal viewpoint. If they do not, you then have to decide whether you want to run the risk of failing or not. And you'll have no recourse to complain if they catch you. But personally, I would see absolutely no ethical problem with repeating yourself, if the original work is of sufficiently high quality for you to be happy with the outcome.
Whether your college agrees with this view is another matter entirely, and should be considered independently of your personal viewpoint. If they do not, you then have to decide whether you want to run the risk of failing or not. And you'll have no recourse to complain if they catch you. But personally, I would see absolutely no ethical problem with repeating yourself, if the original work is of sufficiently high quality for you to be happy with the outcome.
pretty much. Is he also supposed to not look at his old tests (or the answers, if they were provided) when preparing for this course?
This is an attempt at laziness on the teacher's part, but he wants to push that responsibility to the students. Why not change the assignments slightly every year? At least have it on a couple year rotating cycle, so repeat students don't get the same assignments?
Rough example, but if he was asked to write a paper with his opinion on X, and he did that last time, and then gets asked AGAIN to write his opinion about X, why WOULD the teacher expect a very different paper? Even if he starts from scratch, the result ought to be fairly similar, and he STILL might fail the 'cheat check', right? He's the same guy, similar opinions, saimilar writing style.
This is an attempt at laziness on the teacher's part, but he wants to push that responsibility to the students. Why not change the assignments slightly every year? At least have it on a couple year rotating cycle, so repeat students don't get the same assignments?
Rough example, but if he was asked to write a paper with his opinion on X, and he did that last time, and then gets asked AGAIN to write his opinion about X, why WOULD the teacher expect a very different paper? Even if he starts from scratch, the result ought to be fairly similar, and he STILL might fail the 'cheat check', right? He's the same guy, similar opinions, saimilar writing style.
Presumably he'd have another year of experiences that could give him a different insight into whatever the assignment is about.
No!
Nowhere Man
Commodore
My point exactly. I've already done the work for the class, why make more work for myself when it's already done. I work in resturaunts, if I prep ahead for the next day, then I come to work not having to do that shit and I can relax or focus on something else. Let me point something else out. I don't believe it is so much the "professor" as it is the school. They get teachers aide's who are working on thier masters to teach the lower level classes. They are basically in their early-mid twenties. They rotate them out every semester, but the asignments stay the same. It's not like the same professor teaching the same class every semester the same way. So the teacher is different, but the assignments are the same. If for example I was told, "what are your thoughts on the new Star Trek movie?" and I wrote a paper on that and got my grade back and it wasen't so good. I then fail the class. Then retake the class and the same question is posed. I still have the work done, I still feel the same about the movie, why not use the same paper. If I change it and improve on it then is really the same, is that not the point of the class, to learn from your mistakes and improve? Then if I do turn in the paper i'm in trouble for plagiarism. Yet the person i'm plagiarizing is my self? WTF?
What kind of assignment is it? How many words/pages?
Nowhere Man
Commodore
The assignment is to make a personal/puplic argument. So, you tell about some event in your life that changed you or whatever and then you relate it to some bigger issue. Mine is my mom dying of cancer and I'm relating it cancer awareness. It's suposed to be 5-6 pages. The page requirements are actually less, so it would sort of be a new paper, but if I turn it in, it will pop up as plagiarism. That is why I wanted to fight it, because technically it's not.
The other problem is, there are more assignments and I have them all on my computer ready to be handed in, all I have to do is adjust it to this class and this "professor's" needs. For example, there is a project on advertising. We show how effective advertising is on people. Mine was on "IronMan" and specifically how comic con and the comic book fanbase is important to win over, bla bla bla. It was my thought that if you get a head start with comic con, you can get the fan base and word of mouth would spread to the general audience. This time, since I know there is going to be this assignment, I was going to change it to POTC or Thor or Captain America, i'm not sure. It would be the same premise, just altered and updated. I believe my ideas were good last time, but the execution was bad.
I'd just start from scratch.
The purpose of these assignments isn't necessarily to produce something: it's the process of producing something that is important.
Look at it this way: if you go to the gym, you might bench press some weight. Why? In real life, you're hardly ever going to be in a situation where you're lying flat on your back, having to push an equally-distributed weight off your chest. But doing bench presses will build your pecs, and make you generally stronger.
It's the same thing with assignments like this. It's not necessarily that the professor has a burning need to know what you think about Iron Man's advertising. It's a chance for you to develop your writing skills--skills that you yourself admit need some improvement. So why wouldn't you take the opportunity to do just that?
The purpose of these assignments isn't necessarily to produce something: it's the process of producing something that is important.
Look at it this way: if you go to the gym, you might bench press some weight. Why? In real life, you're hardly ever going to be in a situation where you're lying flat on your back, having to push an equally-distributed weight off your chest. But doing bench presses will build your pecs, and make you generally stronger.
It's the same thing with assignments like this. It's not necessarily that the professor has a burning need to know what you think about Iron Man's advertising. It's a chance for you to develop your writing skills--skills that you yourself admit need some improvement. So why wouldn't you take the opportunity to do just that?
Reading this thread, I think I went through college the wrong way. I should've written just one long paper early on as a freshman, and then just adjusted it as necessary by course as I went through school. I would've been able to spend even more time in the bars.
Hillbilly, how freaking long can it take to write a five or six page paper that sounds like it doesn't even require any research? We're talking 1500 to 1800 words, maximum. How many words have you typed so far in this thread explaining why not being able to double-dip on a paper is unfair?
Double-dipping on a paper you wrote is not plagiarism, because it's your own work in both cases. However, even though you are not trying to sneak in the old paper as new, you are still trying to say something old is something new just because you've corrected a few mistakes and stylistic issues. It isn't.
Personally, if I were your professor, I wouldn't care if you wanted to follow up on the same topic in this case, just write it from the perspective of one year later. You could even start by writing, "Almost one year ago, I wrote about...." You could even cite the old paper as necessary to discuss where your feelings or thinking has changed or where it hasn't given how events have unfolded since you wrote that first paper. If the topic is that personal to you, I'd think the words would flow easily. And, it might be worthwhile for you to explore how your feelings have changed over the year.
Hillbilly, how freaking long can it take to write a five or six page paper that sounds like it doesn't even require any research? We're talking 1500 to 1800 words, maximum. How many words have you typed so far in this thread explaining why not being able to double-dip on a paper is unfair?
Double-dipping on a paper you wrote is not plagiarism, because it's your own work in both cases. However, even though you are not trying to sneak in the old paper as new, you are still trying to say something old is something new just because you've corrected a few mistakes and stylistic issues. It isn't.
Personally, if I were your professor, I wouldn't care if you wanted to follow up on the same topic in this case, just write it from the perspective of one year later. You could even start by writing, "Almost one year ago, I wrote about...." You could even cite the old paper as necessary to discuss where your feelings or thinking has changed or where it hasn't given how events have unfolded since you wrote that first paper. If the topic is that personal to you, I'd think the words would flow easily. And, it might be worthwhile for you to explore how your feelings have changed over the year.
I don't think we have exactly the same opinions here, but I do feel that there is sometimes laziness on the part of the professor who is assigning the paper topics. I actually could see an argument for having the same assignments repeated in a single course because it seems like many basic courses in a department follow the same guidelines and there may not be much room for departure from particular topics.
I don't think there's a good excuse for this sort of thing at higher levels, however. I have a professor right now who has assigned five papers over the course of ten weeks and I don't mind the work for any of them. He assigns us reading material and comes up with topics unique to that material. I don't see why so many classes seem to overlap assignments when there are so many possible paper topics for any given course.
Then again I'm viewing this from the perspective of a student, but I appreciate it when profs put some time and thought into their assignments.
Exactly. All it takes to avoid this is to change the topic SLIGHTLY, and keep the same basic class structure. Keep the assignments, but change the topic you focus on, problem solved. Pure laziness to just photocopy last year's sylabus and hand it out again. And if YOU can't put in the effort, why should the repeat students?
Plus, isn't the teacher plagarizing himself, according to his own rules?
In reality, they should at least change the topics to fit a, say, 5 year cycle. Re-use some of the old stuff, but not in the very next instance of the class. If you change them so they only come up so often, repeat students will get new material, which is a BENEFIT to those students, and that's supposed to be the goal, right?
Plus, it cuts down on things like cheating on tests. If the tests are new, you study for them. If you already took the class, or know people who did, and you KNOW the professor uses the same test every time, people are definitely going to be tempted to cheat.
Not saying the teacher has to go crazy and come up with a whole new lesson plan, just change it a little so the material is fresh (more fun for the professor to read/grade that way, too). If the assignment is to design marketing for a car, next time, make it about a lawnmower instead. Same exercise, same skills tested, forces new material/results.
Plus, isn't the teacher plagarizing himself, according to his own rules?
In reality, they should at least change the topics to fit a, say, 5 year cycle. Re-use some of the old stuff, but not in the very next instance of the class. If you change them so they only come up so often, repeat students will get new material, which is a BENEFIT to those students, and that's supposed to be the goal, right?
Plus, it cuts down on things like cheating on tests. If the tests are new, you study for them. If you already took the class, or know people who did, and you KNOW the professor uses the same test every time, people are definitely going to be tempted to cheat.
Not saying the teacher has to go crazy and come up with a whole new lesson plan, just change it a little so the material is fresh (more fun for the professor to read/grade that way, too). If the assignment is to design marketing for a car, next time, make it about a lawnmower instead. Same exercise, same skills tested, forces new material/results.
