1. Price details the complexities of plagiarism to a degree that it is nearly impossible to teach every instance of it to a class. This makes me wonder that if we as teachers inform our students that it is an ongoing conversation and context specific, should we expect a student not to plagiarize in some capacity (no matter how big or small). Should we be more relaxed in the sense that we allow the student to revise if their act of plagiarism wasn't intentional, instead of going straight for the repercussions?
2. In the Lessig text, it talks about the murky ground of how technology sometimes outpaces current law in how to deal with it. Just for curiosity, are there any technological issues today that law has not caught up with in the framework of copyrighting/plagiarism?
Hey Antonio! Answering #1, Price also acknowledges that we as instructors can't be expected to go into all the details of plagiarism and its context-specificity, which I appreciated. I was glad to see that she had a more practical tip--saying that even just including a line about the complex nature of plagiarism would be useful, perhaps sparking more student interest in joining the ongoing conversation about plagiarism (although frankly, I question whether most students would care any more about it...). I think that we should be more relaxed if the student seems to have plagiarized unintentionally--it seems like a great teaching opportunity in which we can discuss with the student why what she did would be considered plagiarism and how it can be avoided. This kind of approach might also encourage the student to actually think critically in the future about plagiarism avoidance, rather than just fearfully clinging to a specific rule developed from this particular instance of plagiarism.
ReplyDelete