Academia is conducting a witch-hunt. The target? Plagiarists.
Under pressure from the academic community, Jimmy Jenkins, president of Edward Waters College, recently resigned after a plagiarism scandal cost his school its accreditation. The self-study the college submitted to its accreditation group last month had been partially plagiarized from Alabama A&M University.
The 139-year-old institution could now potentially close its doors due to an administrative lapse. Evidence clearly shows that Jenkins neither condoned nor was aware of any wrongdoing. Since becoming president in 1997, Jenkins had doubled enrollment and vastly improved Edward Waters College's facilities. Nevertheless, despite years of diligent service to Edward Waters, Jenkins paid for the mistake with his job.
It is difficult to defend plagiarism -honest writing is imperative to the success of public discourse, whether it is academic, literary or journalistic. However, Jenkins' case sheds light on the unwarranted standards regarding scholastic dishonesty and punishment thereof.
Consider how Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard censured historian Stephen Ambrose for his failure to properly cite a passage written by another author. Though Ambrose apologized for the mistake, Barnes continued his puritanical mission to seek out more supposed plagiarism in Ambrose's work. The result? Because of a few negligible errors and an overzealous reporter, Ambrose, a prolific and influential writer, now suffers a tainted reputation.
Too often, public opinion mandates that the appropriate penalty for any sort of plagiarism should be severe. If accused of plagiarism, whether you're a student, administrator or author, whether it's intentional or not - don't expect a long career.
The problem with public opinion is that there is little discretion in its judgment. The majority of scholastic plagiarism cases are unintentional - a student fails to cite the words of another author or simply uses an argument or sentence comparable to something already published.
Take the case of playwright Bryony Lavery, whose reputation was recently destroyed by a case of accidental plagiarism. Her play "Frozen" lifted approximately 675 nonconsecutive words from a New Yorker article about psychiatry. Lavery asserted that the plagiarism was unintentional; the playwright argued that she thought the article was "just news" and therefore not subject to copyright. Author Malcolm Gladwell wrote of Lavery's dilemma, "She was confused because she didn't understand how six hundred and seventy-five rather ordinary words could bring the walls tumbling down."
Is it appropriate for an entire career to be damaged because of one indefinite offense? Why make these excessively harsh judgments on unintentional plagiarists? If our ultimate goal is to promote honesty in discourse, then there's a double standard at work here; journalists and pundits may calculatedly spew the most venomous, misleading and mudslinging of polemics, but the second they cite sources incorrectly, their reputations are decimated - just ask Dan Rather.
Over the past few years, the obsession to catch plagiarists has intensified largely as a direct response to the growth in the Internet's usage. While the Internet is a valuable research tool, it also gives plagiarists more source material than ever before.
In the United Kingdom, universities are urged to use detection software and appoint special officers in order to remain vigilant against the "constant threat" of plagiarism. But such paranoia sounds more to me like the Red Scare than a feasible effort to promote honest academic discourse. "Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Plagiarist Party?"
Fortunately, Brown University takes a more enlightened approach. Professors generally outline proper methods of citation so as to avoid confusion and ask that students visit them with any questions about plagiarism policies. Rather than fearing technology as a force of academic corruption, most professors promote Internet use. Such policies reflect trust in students. But while these smarter policies facilitate honesty in the classroom, they do little to affect the public perception of those maligned by plagiarism charges.
It's time to re-evaluate the stigma we attach to plagiarism, both inside and out of the classroom.
Plagiarism is a serious problem that must be dealt with. But incorrect citation certainly shouldn't be a reason to topple a career. and you can't promote academic honesty with a witch-hunt.
Nicholas Swisher '08 plagiarized most of this article.
