I. Overview
II. Statement of Principles
III. Definitions of Violations
IV. Penalties
V. Procedures for Handling Cases
VI. Advice to Faculty Members
Appendix: Plagiarism
I.
OVERVIEW
The UNC Charlotte Code of Student Academic Integrity
sets forth the standards of academic integrity for students
at UNC Charlotte and describes attendant faculty responsibilities.
Students and faculty members are expected to be familiar
with its provisions. Transient students from other institutions
enrolled in courses for credit given by UNC Charlotte
are bound by the rules, regulations, and responsibilities
of the UNC Charlotte Code of Student Academic Integrity.
When transient students are convicted of violating UNC
Charlotte's Code of Student Academic Integrity, UNC
Charlotte may notify the student's permanent institution. The
Code defines student behavior which violates the standards
(Section III.), and enumerates the
penalties for violations and the circumstances under
which such penalties may be imposed (Section
IV.).
Section V. sets forth the procedures
for dealing with cases where a violation of The Code
of Student Academic Integrity is alleged. Those procedures
permit a faculty member to address a student's first
violation through discussion with the student. If the
student freely admits the offense and accepts the penalty
assigned by the faculty member, an
agreement settling the matter is signed by both,
the faculty member imposes the penalty, and the matter
ends (Section V.A.). If UNC Charlotte
records show that the student has previously committed
an academic integrity violation, or if the student decides
not to admit guilt or accept the penalty, or if the
faculty member believes that the seriousness of the
offense warrants a more severe penalty than those which
may be imposed in the
settlement process, the matter must be referred
to the UNC Charlotte Academic Integrity Board (AIB)
if any penalty is to be imposed (Section
V.B.). A student-faculty panel from the AIB hears
the evidence from the faculty member and student and
determines whether the student did commit a violation.
If no violation is found, the matter ends and no penalty
may be imposed. If the Hearing Panel finds that the
student did commit a violation, it determines the appropriate
penalty (Section V.C.). A student
found guilty may appeal from the Hearing Panel's determination
(Section V.D.).
II.
STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES
Academic honesty and integrity are essential to the
existence and growth of an academic community. Without
maintenance of high standards of honesty, members of
the instructional faculty are defrauded, students are
unfairly treated, and society itself is poorly served.
Maintaining the academic standards of honesty and integrity
is ultimately the formal responsibility of the instructional
faculty; and this responsibility is shared by all members
of the academic community.
As instructors, faculty members are responsible for
transmitting knowledge and the methods by which it is
acquired. To do so, they must be able to examine and
test student work. The faculty also sets academic standards,
awards academic credit and confers degrees when the
standards are met. To carry out these responsibilities,
faculty members must ensure that student work submitted
for academic credit is authentic as well as consistent
with established academic standards. Therefore, the
academic evaluation includes a judgment that the student's
work is free from academic dishonesty of any type; and
course grades should be and will be adversely affected
by academic dishonesty.
It is the duty of faculty members to take measures
to preserve and transmit the values of the academic
community, both through example in their own academic
pursuits and the learning environment which they create
for their students. To this end, they are expected to
instill in their students a respect for integrity and
a desire to behave honestly; they also must take measures
to discourage student academic dishonesty (see Section
VI. Advice to Faculty Members). To meet their responsibilities
when academic dishonesty is suspected, individual faculty
members must follow the policies and procedures stated
in this document.
Students are also members of the academic community.
As responsible members of the University, students are
obligated not to violate the basic standards of integrity,
and they are expected to take an active role in encouraging
other members to respect those standards. Should a student
suspect a violation of academic integrity, he/she should
make the suspicion known to a member of the faculty
or University administration.
Commitment to maintaining and encouraging high standards
of academic honesty and integrity is demonstrated in
many ways. One manifestation is the policies and procedures
governing violation of the standards. Herein contained
are the provisions of the UNC Charlotte Code of Student
Academic Integrity.
III.
DEFINITIONS OF VIOLATIONS
In this section defining student violations of academic
integrity: (a) "Intent" refers only to the
intent to commit the dishonest action. Other aspects
of the student's motive (e.g., a desire to avoid academic
suspension, or to help a friend) are not material in
determining whether an act of dishonesty has been performed;
and (b) "Authorization" is legitimate only
if given by the faculty member responsible for the evaluation
of the student's work.
A. CHEATING. Intentionally using
or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information,
notes, study aids or other devices in any academic exercise.
This definition includes unauthorized communication
of information during an academic exercise.
Typical Examples: Copying from another student's
paper or receiving unauthorized assistance during a
quiz, test or examination; using books, notes or other
devices (e.g., calculators) when these are not authorized;
procuring without authorization tests or examinations
before the scheduled exercise (including discussion
of the substance of examinations and tests when it is
expected these will not be discussed); copying reports,
laboratory work, computer programs or files and the
like from other students; collaborating on laboratory
or computer work without authorization and without indication
of the nature and extent of the collaboration; sending
a substitute to take an examination.
B. FABRICATION AND FALSIFICATION.
Intentional and unauthorized alteration or invention
of any information or citation in an academic exercise.
Falsification is a matter of altering information, while
fabrication is a matter of inventing or counterfeiting
information for use in any academic exercise.
Typical Examples: (Fabrication) inventing or
counterfeiting data, research results, information or
procedures; inventing data or fabricating research procedures
to make it appear that the results of one process are
actually the results of several processes; counterfeiting
a record of internship or practicum experiences; (Falsification)
altering the record of data or experimental procedures
or results; false citation of the source of information
(e.g., reproducing a quotation from a book review while
indicating that the quotation was obtained from the
book itself); altering the record of or reporting false
information about practicum or clinical experiences;
altering grade reports or other academic records; submitting
a false excuse for absence or tardiness in a scheduled
academic exercise; altering a returned examination paper
and seeking regrading.
C. MULTIPLE SUBMISSION. The submission
of substantial portions of the same academic work (including
oral reports) for credit more than once without authorization.
Typical Examples: Submitting the same paper
for credit in two courses without instructor permission;
making minor revisions in a credited paper or report
(including oral presentations) and submitting it again
as if it were new work. (Different aspects of the same
work may receive separate credit; e.g., a report in
History may receive credit for its content in a History
course and for the quality of presentation in a Speech
course.)
D. PLAGIARISM. Intentionally or
knowingly presenting the work of another as one's own
(i.e., without proper acknowledgement of the source).
The sole exception to the requirement of acknowledging
sources is when the ideas, information, etc., are common
knowledge. (NOTE: For more information regarding plagiarism,
see PLAGIARISM.)
Typical Examples: Submitting as one's own work
of a "ghost writer" or commercial writing
service; directly quoting from a source without citation;
paraphrasing or summarizing another's work without acknowledging
the source; using facts, figures, graphs, charts or
information without acknowledgement of the source. Plagiarism
may occur orally and in writing. It may involve computer
programs and files, research designs, distinctive figures
of speech, ideas and images, or generally any "information"
which belongs to another.
E. ABUSE OF ACADEMIC MATERIALS.
Intentionally or knowingly destroying, stealing, or
making inaccessible library or other academic resource
material.
Typical Examples: Stealing or destroying library
or reference materials needed for common academic exercises;
hiding resource materials so others may not use them;
destroying computer programs or files needed in academic
work; stealing or intentionally destroying another student's
notes or laboratory experiments; receiving assistance
in locating or using sources of information in an assignment
where such assistance has been forbidden by the instructor.
(NOTE: The offense of abuse of academic materials
shall be dealt with under this Code only when the abuse
violates standards of integrity in academic matters,
usually in a course or experience for which academic
credit is awarded.)
F. COMPLICITY IN ACADEMIC DISHONESTY. Intentionally
or knowingly helping or attempting to help another to
commit an act of academic dishonesty.
Typical Examples: Knowingly allowing another
to copy from one's paper during an examination or test;
knowingly distributing test questions or substantive
information about the material to be tested before the
scheduled exercise; collaborating on academic work knowing
that the collaboration will not be reported; taking
an examination or test for another student, or signing
a false name on an academic exercise. (NOTE: Collaboration
and sharing information are characteristics of academic
communities. These become violations when they involve
dishonesty. Instructors should make expectations about
collaborations clear to students. Students should seek
clarification when in doubt.)
IV.
PENALTIES
All acts of academic dishonesty violate standards essential
to the existence of an academic community. Some first
offenses are properly handled and remedied by the faculty
member teaching the specific course in which they occur.
The faculty member must use the
settlement procedure described in Section
V. to handle such an offense. The penalties which
may be assessed are limited to the following:
a. a formal warning,
b. a reduced grade (including
"F" if undergraduate student and "U"
for graduate student) for the assignment,
c. a reduced grade (including
"F" if undergraduate student and "U"
for graduate student) for the entire course.
Whatever the penalty, a signed form recording the
settlement will be kept for five years in the Office
of the Dean
of Students. The purpose of this record-keeping
is to be sure students who violate The UNC Charlotte
Code of Student Academic Integrity a second time are
dealt with appropriately. A second purpose is to deter
students from repeating offenses. The first offense
file is an internal record, not part of the student's
disciplinary record nor the academic transcript.
In addition to the
settlement form on file, there is normally a grade
penalty for first violations. Zero credit is assigned
to the exercise in which dishonesty occurred. Further,
the course grade normally will be reduced beyond the
result of that zero. In almost all cases the course
grade is reduced to "F" for an undergraduate
student and a "U" for a graduate student.
All second offenses and some first offenses have import
beyond the specific course in which the violation occurred.
The University-wide AIB handles such violations, and
the range of penalties is greater. The Hearing Panel
chosen from the AIB may impose any of the three penalties
listed above (a., b., c.), and/or the following:
d. Disciplinary suspension from the University for a designated
period of time (one semester, one year, two years, etc.).
A record of the conviction will be kept in the disciplinary
file for a period of time to be determined by the Hearing
Panel, after which it will be removed upon written request
by the student to the Dean of Students.
e. The grade of "F" for an undergraduate student
or "U" for a graduate student for the course
with a designation "X" on the academic transcript
indicating that this is because of dishonesty. If the
Hearing Panel imposes this penalty, it will stipulate
the exact minimum length of time the "X" designation
shall remain on the academic transcript. When that time
has elapsed, the "X" designation may be removed
from the transcript upon written request by the student
to the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Enrollment Management
and University
Registrar. Students may not exclude a grade from
GPA calculations for any course in which they have received
a grade with an "X" designation. The disciplinary
record will record the offense and penalty for a period
of time to be determined by the Hearing Panel, after
which it will be removed upon written request by the
student to the Dean
of Students.
f. Expulsion from the University. The academic transcript
records the expulsion permanently. A record will be
kept in the disciplinary file for five years.
Normally, conviction of a second Code violation will result
in "F" for the course with the designation
"X" and a one-year suspension; and normally,
a third conviction will result in permanent expulsion.
V.
PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING CASES
A faculty member responsible for assigning final grades
in a course may acquire evidence either directly or
through information supplied by others that a student
violation of academic integrity may have occurred. After
collecting the evidence available, the faculty member
determines whether it warrants proceeding to the next
level of inquiry.
If the faculty member determines that the evidence
is sufficient, he/she contacts the Dean
of Students Office, which will determine from its
records whether the student has previously admitted
to or been found guilty of an academic integrity violation.
If the suspected violation would be a second offense,
the faculty member must take the case to the Chairperson
of the AIB. If the suspected violation would constitute
a first offense but one for which the faculty member
considers the appropriate penalty to be more severe
than "F" ("U" for graduate student)
in the course, the case must be brought to the Chairperson
of the AIB. If the faculty member believes, however,
that the suspected violation would be remedied by a
penalty no greater than "F" ("U"
for graduate student) in the course, the
settlement procedure is used to conclude the matter
and provide a record (see Section IV.
Penalties).
Once a student has received notice that he/she is charged
with an academic integrity offense, the student is not
permitted to withdraw from the course unless the procedures
for handling such violations result in no grade penalty.
A. SETTLEMENT PROCEDURE. The
faculty member meets with the student and presents the
evidence of an academic integrity violation, then requests
an explanation from the student. After hearing the explanation,
if the faculty member determines that a violation has
occurred, he/she fills out and signs the approved form
distributed to all faculty members, noting the penalty
to be applied, and gives the form to the student. The
student has seventy-two hours to consider and seek advice
on whether to admit guilt and accept the penalty by
signing that form. If the student agrees to sign, he/she
does so in the presence of the faculty member who then
implements the penalty. The faculty member forwards
the
settlement form to the Dean of Students, who keeps
a record of first offenses for five years, and thus
the matter is ended. If the student decides not to admit
guilt or not to accept the penalty, the faculty member
must take the case to the Chairperson of the
AIB, if any penalty is to be imposed.
B. ACADEMIC INTEGRITY BOARD.
The AIB is composed of all the current Student Hearing
Panel Members and thirteen full-time faculty members.
At least one faculty member shall be appointed to the
AIB from each college, and the number of faculty members
appointed from each college shall be in proportion to
the number of full-time faculty members with professorial
rank in each college. (The panel shall include appropriate
graduate faculty and graduate student representatives.)
The Chancellor shall appoint the Chairperson of the
AIB, and the Senior Associate Provost shall appoint
the other faculty members to the AIB. The term of appointment
of student members is the same as their terms as Student
Hearing Panel Members. The faculty members and the Chairperson
shall be appointed for two-year staggered terms. All
members of the AIB may be reappointed.
C. CONDUCT OF HEARINGS.
1. Initiation;
Notice of Charge; Panel Selection. The faculty member
refers a case to the AIB by communicating with its Chairperson.
The Chairperson selects one student and two faculty
members of the AIB as the Hearing Panel for the case.
One of the members is designated Convenor of the Hearing
Panel to conduct the hearing. Panel members are selected
on the basis of availability and impartiality. Neither
faculty member may be from the college in which the
alleged offense occurred. When the regular faculty members
of the AIB or Student Hearing Panel Members are unable
to serve on a particular case, the Chairperson of the
AIB is authorized to appoint a faculty member from an
appropriate college, or a student panelist, after consultation
with the appropriate Dean. The Chairperson then draws
up a written charge stating the facts alleged and notifying
the student and the faculty member of the date, time
and place for the hearing. The letter shall provide
the student and faculty member at least five days after
its receipt to prepare for the hearing, and it shall
note that the accused student may have access to the
case file in the Office of the Dean of Students.
(It is recommended that graduate students be appointed
as members of the hearing comittee or, at least, undergraduate
students who are on the committee be knowledgeable about
the differences in grading and the penalties of "C"
and "U" grades for graduate students.
In a course, a grade of "U" is an automatic
dismissal from the University.)
2.
Challenge. The student or the faculty member
may challenge any member selected for the Panel on grounds
of a bias or relationship that might affect impartial
consideration of the case by that Panel member. The
person brings the challenge by discussion with the Chairperson
of the AIB at least one day prior to the scheduled hearing.
If the Chairperson concludes that the Panel member should
be excused, a substitute is selected.
3. Nature
of Hearing. The hearing is essentially fact-finding
in nature. The process is intended to provide participating
members of the campus community with a fair, orderly
and clearly understood system for inquiry into the facts
bearing on a case of alleged dishonesty. The hearing
is not an adversarial contest to be "won"
or "lost" through clever tactics or merely
technical formalities.
4. Presentation;
Burden of Proof; Rights. The faculty member referring
the case presents the evidence of the offense to the
Panel. The student is responsible for presenting the
evidence he/she wishes, if any, in defense against the
charge. The burden of proof is on the faculty member,
who must establish the guilt of the student by a preponderance
of the evidence. The student and the faculty member
have the right to question any witness and inspect any
document offered as evidence, and to make whatever statement
or argument appears to be appropriate.
5. Failure
to Appear. If the accused student fails to appear
after proper notice, the Panel will reach its conclusion
on guilt and appropriate penalty on the basis of the
evidence which is presented at the hearing.
6. Witnesses;
Testimony. The student and faculty member may request
the attendance of witnesses at the hearing. University
student, faculty or staff witnesses are expected to
attend unless compliance would result in significant
and unavoidable personal hardship or substantial interference
with normal University activities. The student and the
faculty member may request the assistance of the Chairperson
of the AIB in securing the attendance of witnesses.
The Convenor will ask each witness to confirm that the
testimony to be given is truthful. Witnesses are expected
to attend and give truthful testimony or face appropriate
disciplinary action. Affidavits shall not be admitted
into evidence unless signed by the affiant and witnessed
by a University employee or a person designated by the
Chairperson of the AIB.
7. Attendance;
Assistance. The hearing is closed to the public.
The student and the faculty member may each be accompanied
by one person (including an attorney), but that person's
role is limited to conferring with and advising the
student or faculty member; the person is not permitted
to argue, make statements, or to question witnesses;
the person may respond to questions if asked by Panel
members to do so. Members of the student's immediate
family (parents or spouse) may also attend the hearing.
The Panel may exclude prospective witnesses other than
the student during the testimony of any witnesses. An
open hearing may be held, in the discretion of the Convenor,
if requested by the student.
8. Evidence.
Formal rules of evidence shall not apply. The Convenor
shall give effect to the rules of confidentiality and
privilege, but shall otherwise admit all matters into
evidence which reasonable persons would accept as having
value as proof in the conduct of their affairs. The
student's disciplinary record shall not be considered
in the hearing on guilt. Repetitious or irrelevant evidence
may be excluded by the Convenor.
9. Control
of Proceedings; Disruption. The Convenor of the
Hearing Panel shall exercise control over proceedings
to avoid needless consumption of time and to achieve
orderly completion of the hearing. Any person, even
the accused student, who disrupts a hearing may be excluded
by the Convenor.
10. Recording.
Each hearing shall be tape recorded and the recording
shall become a part of the case file in the Office of
the Dean of Students.
11. Deliberation
on Guilt. The decision on guilt shall be made in
private and shall be by majority vote, based on the
evidence presented at the hearing.
12. Not
Guilty Found. If the conclusion is that the student
is not guilty, the participants are readmitted, the
Convenor announces that conclusion, and terminates the
proceeding. Thereafter, a written report is prepared,
signed by the Convenor, and sent to the Dean of Students.
The Dean maintains only a single confidential file of
material related to the case. No part of that file becomes
part of the student's disciplinary record. The case
is closed, and no penalty may be imposed.
13. Hearing
on Penalty. If the conclusion is that the student
is guilty, the hearing continues to determine the appropriate
penalty. The Hearing Panel considers the factors listed
in Section IV. Penalties. Both student
and faculty member may submit evidence and make statements
concerning the appropriate sanction to be imposed. The
Dean of Students will supply the student's disciplinary
record for this supplementary proceeding.
14. Imposition
of Penalty. At the conclusion of the evidence on
the appropriate penalty, the Hearing Panel deliberates
in private. Upon making its determination of the penalty,
the participants are readmitted. The student is expected
to be present, and the faculty member may be present
if he/she wishes. The Convenor announces the penalty
determined. The date of his announcement is the Hearing
Conclusion Date. The Hearing Panel thereafter prepares
a written report, signed by the Convenor, stating its
findings, the determination on guilt and the penalty
it deems appropriate. The Convenor sends the report
to the student and a copy of the report to the Dean
of Students, who notifies the faculty member of its
contents. If a penalty of a grade of "F" in
the course or less is to be assigned, the faculty member
imposes that penalty determined by the Hearing Panel
and no other penalty. If a greater penalty is deemed
appropriate, the Dean of Students implements the penalty
indicated in the report.
15. Right
of Appeal; Effect. A student found guilty is permitted
three days from the Hearing Conclusion Date to file
a written notice of appeal with the Dean of Students Office (see Section V.D. Appeals). In the discretion of the Dean of Students
the imposition of sanction normally is deferred until
the three days have elapsed without notice of appeal
received or until the appeal proceedings are concluded.
16. Notice
of Imposition of Penalty. If notice of appeal is
not filed within the three days or if the appeal results
in no change in the Hearing Panel's decision, the Dean
of Students notifies the student by letter of the penalty
being imposed. The letter shall inform the student of
all records to be kept of the incident and of any opportunity
to expunge the records.
D. APPEALS.
1. As a member of the institution whose
Hearing Panel has made a determination on guilt and/or
appropriate penalty, the faculty member is bound by
the Panel's determinations and is not permitted an appeal.
If a grievance has arisen, the faculty member may take
it to the appropriate grievance body.
2. The student must submit any
notice of appeal from a Hearing Panel's determination
of guilt or penalty to the Dean of Students within three days
after the Hearing Conclusion Date. Failure to do so
will render the decision of the Hearing Panel final
and conclusive.
3. If the request for appeal and written
brief have been timely filed, the Dean of Students shall
deliver them with the record on appeal to the Vice Chancellor
for Academic Affairs.
4. A student who wishes to appeal must
submit a written brief in support of the appeal to the
Dean of Students Office within ten
days after the Hearing Conclusion Date. The appeal shall
separately state each ground upon which the student
claims that the Hearing Panel committed error in reaching
its conclusions and shall set forth the student's evidence
and arguments in support of such claims. Failure to
submit a written appeal will render the decision of
the Hearing Panel final and conclusive.
5. The Vice Chancellor for Academic
Affairs or his/her designate shall review the record
and issue a written decision on the appeal. If the Vice
Chancellor for Academic Affairs designates another,
that person's review and decisions shall be treated
in all respects as if made by the Vice Chancellor for
Academic Affairs. The decision may:
a. Affirm the decision reached
and sanction imposed by the Hearing Panel.
b. Affirm the decision and
reduce but not eliminate the penalty recommended by
the hearing Panel but only if that penalty is found
grossly inappropriate to the offense.
c. Remand the case for a new
hearing before a Hearing Panel composed of members of
the AIB who have not previously participated in the
case. The new Hearing Panel's decision(s) on guilt and
penalty to be imposed if any, shall be final and conclusive,
except that the student may appeal the Panel's decisions
on remand to the Chancellor. Such appeal is permitted
only by method and on the grounds specified in paragraph 7. below.
6. The Vice Chancellor for Academic
Affairs or his/her designate shall send copies of the
decision on the appeal to the student, faculty member,
Dean of Students, and Chairperson of the AIB.
7. The decision of the Vice Chancellor
for Academic Affairs or his/her designee shall be final
and conclusive, except that if the student alleges violation
of the right of due process and fair hearing, the presumption
of innocence until found guilty, the right to know the
evidence and to face witnesses testifying against him
or her, or the right to such advice and assistance in
his/her own defense as may be allowable under the regulations
of UNC Charlotte as approved by the Chancellor, the
student may file a written signed letter of appeal with
the Chancellor. Such written appeal must be received
by the Chancellor within four days after the student
receives notice of the Vice Chancellor's decision and
shall set forth with particularity the specific right
or rights allegedly denied and the facts or circumstances
alleged to establish the denial of such right or rights.
VI.
ADVICE TO FACULTY MEMBERS
The following are some of the measures appropriate
to preventing and discouraging violations of this Code:
1. Faculty members should outline their
expectations pertaining to academic integrity at the
beginning of each course. In doing so they might authorize
or prohibit specific forms of student conduct which
are unique to their courses or disciplines. They should
refer students to this UNC Charlotte Code of Student
Academic Integrity. Faculty members are reminded that
intent is an element of any academic integrity offense.
Thus, for example, a student who submits a group project
containing material plagiarized by a second student
has not committed an academic integrity violation unless
the first student knows that he/she is submitting plagiarized
material.
2. Faculty members are advised that
files of past examinations are maintained by some organizations
and are readily available to large numbers of students.
If faculty members wish to put any restrictions on the
use of examinations they return to students, this should
be made clear.
3. Academic department should keep
examinations in a secure location and should carefully
screen employees who may have access to such material.
All waste copies of examinations should be destroyed
along with stencil masters and ditto backing sheets.
Student employees should not be asked to prepare or
handle examinations.
4. Examinations should be carefully
proctored by trusted employees. More than one proctor
should be present when large numbers of students take
an examination. Other preventive measures include a
pre-arranged seating plan or a sign-in sheet (by seat
numbers), so the location of each student may be determined.
If it is not possible to allow sufficient space between
seats, consideration should be given to using several
different sets of questions, or permutating question
numbers. In large classes, instructors should consider
collecting an examination signature card from each student
at the beginning of the semester. At examination time,
another signature card, distributed with the examination,
could be collected and compared with the original.
5. Methods for preventing and detecting
plagiarism include (a) assigning specific topics for
each student, (b) use of in-class discussions to choose
topics, and (c) use of frequent in-class writing exercises,
thereby making anomalous submissions easier to identify.
Also, copies of the various commercial term paper catalogs,
which list the specific titles and topics currently
available to students, might be kept on file.
[University Policy Statements] [Office of the General Counsel] [UNC Charlotte]
APPENDIX
PLAGIARISM
Plagiarism is use of the distinctive
ideas or words belonging to another person without adequate
acknowledgement of that person's contribution. In the
context of academic work the standards for acknowledging
sources are very high. An author must give due credit
whenever quoting another person's actual words, whenever
using another person's idea, opinion or theory, and
whenever borrowing facts, statistics or illustrative
material, unless the information is common knowledge.
1. Direct Quotation:
Every direct quotation must be identified by quotation
marks or by appropriate indentation, and must be promptly
acknowledged. The citation must be complete and in a
style appropriate to the academic discipline.
EXAMPLE: The following
is an example of an unacknowledged direct quotation:
Original Source: "To
push the comparison with popular tale and popular romance
a bit further, we may note that the measure of artistic
triviality of works such as Sir Degare or even
Havelok the Dane is their casualness, their indifference
to all but the simplest elements of literary substance.
The point is that high genre does not certify art and
low genre does not preclude it." (From Robert M.
Duran, Chaucer and the Shape of Creation, Howard
University Press, 1967, p. 187.)
Student Paper: "To
push the comparison with popular tale and popular romance
a bit further, you can note that the measure of the
artistic triviality in some works of Chaucer's time
period is their casualness, their indifference to all
but the simplest elements of literary substance. The
point is that high genre does not certify art and low
genre does not preclude it."
2. Paraphrase: Prompt
acknowledgement is required when material from another
source is paraphrased or summarized in whole or in part
in one's own words. To acknowledge a paraphrase properly,
one might state: "to paraphrase Locke's comment
. . ." or "according to Rousseau . . ."
and conclude with a citation identifying the exact reference.
A citation acknowledging only
a directly quoted statement does not suffice to notify
the reader of any preceding or succeeding paraphrased
material.
EXAMPLE: The following
is an example of an unacknowledged paraphrase:
Original Source: "The
era in question included three formally declared wars.
The decision to enter the War of 1812 was made by Congress
after extended debate. Madison made no recommendation
in favor of hostilities, though he did marshall a telling
case against England in his message to Congress of June
1, 1812. The primary impetus to battle, however, seems
to have come from a group of War Hawks in the legislature."
(From W. Taylor Reveley III, "Presidential War-Making:
Constitutional Prerogative or Usurpation?", University
of Virginia Law Review, November 1969, footnotes
omitted.)
Student Paper: "There
were three formally declared wars during this era. The
decision to enter the war in 1812 was made by Congress
after extended debate. Madison actually made no recommendation
in favor of hostilities in his message to Congress of
June 1, 1812, though he presented a persuasive case
against Britain. The primary impetus to battle, however,
appears to have come from a group of War Hawks in the legislature."
3. Borrowed Facts or Information:
Information obtained in one's reading or research which
is not common knowledge must be acknowledged. Examples
of common knowledge might include the names of leaders
of prominent nations, basic scientific laws, etc. If
there is doubt whether information is common knowledge
the citation should be given.
Materials which contribute
only to one's general understanding of the subject may
be acknowledged in the bibliography and need not be
immediately cited.
One citation is usually sufficient
to acknowledge indebtedness when a number of connected
sentences in the paper or report draw their special
information from one source. When direct quotations
are used, however, quotation marks must be inserted
and prompt acknowledgement made. Similarly, when a passage
is paraphrased, prompt acknowledgement is required.
