2002

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.1001  Wednesday, 10 April 2002

[1]     From:   Edmund Taft <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 09 Apr 2002 12:38:00 -0400
        Subj:   Plagiarism and Update

[2]     From:   Martin Steward <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 9 Apr 2002 17:30:18 +0100
        Subj:   Re: SHK 13.0986 Re: Plagiarism and Update

[3]     From:   Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
        Date:   Tuesday, 09 Apr 2002 11:11:00 -0700
        Subj:   Re: SHK 13.0986 Re: Plagiarism and Update


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Edmund Taft <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 09 Apr 2002 12:38:00 -0400
Subject:        Plagiarism and Update

Larry Weiss writes:

"When the courts feel free to revise grades it is hardly surprising that
they will review disciplinary decisions.  Therefore, a teacher runs a
real risk of professional and financial ruin if she rejects a paper for
plagiarism but cannot prove it."

Right. Such an acute answer might lead one to believe that Larry is a
lawyer.

--Ed

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Martin Steward <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 9 Apr 2002 17:30:18 +0100
Subject: 13.0986 Re: Plagiarism and Update
Comment:        Re: SHK 13.0986 Re: Plagiarism and Update

Goodness, isn't it shocking that students should be afforded the due
protection of the law against unjust and unfounded accusations, as is
their right and privilege? What is the world coming to?

Ed Taft writes, "What's happened, as I understand it, is that the burden
of proof has shifted from the student to the professor, and for two
reasons:
(1)     the lawyers for students and the administration see things this way,
and

(2) they see things this way because the students are the consumers and,
hence, are the parties to be protected".

No - they see things this way because the students are the ACCUSED. It
would be peculiar for the burden of proof to be concentrated on the
VICTIM of an accusation (and this is the only "victim" in any cause sub
judice). The sentiments at the heart of The Merchant of Venice are fine
onstage: in the big bad world, give me a legal system and a good lawyer
who understands it any day.

m

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sean Lawrence <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 09 Apr 2002 11:11:00 -0700
Subject: 13.0986 Re: Plagiarism and Update
Comment:        Re: SHK 13.0986 Re: Plagiarism and Update

Larry Weiss writes,

>The problem is that notions of due process, adequacy of proof and
>procedural fairness have invaded the halls of academe.  In the good old
>days schools were permitted a larger scope of arbitrariness than they
>have now.

I have to say that I thank God things are changing.  I would hate to
teach, much less be taught, in any institution where students were
presumed to be guilty, and could have their lives ruined at someone's
pleasure.  It would be like living under martial law.

Yours,
Se 

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.