Examples from Professionalism and Ethics Presentation given by Associate Dean Annamaria Nields during firstyear orientation Students Paper EXAMPLE 1 In response the EU Council and Commission relied on the UN Charter FN and argued that the EC just like the EU Member State ID: 547126
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Plagiarism Examples" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Plagiarism Examples
Examples from Professionalism and Ethics Presentation given by Associate Dean
Annamaria
Nields
during first-year orientation.Slide2
Student’s Paper:
EXAMPLE 1
In response, the EU Council and Commission relied on the U.N. Charter [FN] and argued that the EC, just like the EU Member States, was itself bound by international law, especially law adopted under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter. [FN] The Council argued that any claim of jurisdiction on the part of the CFI would be the equivalent of indirect and selective judicial review of mandatory measures decided upon by the Security Council.
________________________________________________________________
In response, the EU Council and Commission relied on the U.N. Charter [FN] and argued that the EC, just like the EU Member States, was itself bound by international law
to give effect, within its spheres of power and competence, to resolutions of the Security Council
, especially
those
adopted under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter. [FN] The Council argued that any claim of jurisdiction on the part of the CFI
“which
would be
tantamount to
indirect and selective judicial review of the mandatory measures decided upon by the Security Council
in carrying out its function of maintaining international peace and security, would cause serious disruption to the international relations of the Community.”
THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE AND THE INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ORDER AFTER KADI
,
Grainne de
Burca
, Harvard Int’l Law Journal, Winter 2010, p. 19.Slide3
Example One
Underlines show differences from original text to student paper.
Student did the following:
Failed to put in
quotations direct text lifted
Deleted “to give effect . . . .”
Changed “those” to “law”
Deleted quotation marks and most of quote.
Changed “tantamount to” to “the equivalent
of”
Revised the language but it’s still de
Burca’s
writing that copied
Included de
Burca’s
footnotes, but concealed that it was de
Burca’s
work, never citing
to de
Burca
. Student should have cited de
Burca
, as well as the sources de
Burca
was citing. Slide4
Example 2
Student’s Paper:
A more difficult question is raised by migration within the European Union between member states. To illustrate, imagine a resident of
A
who contemplates moving
B
considers only her expected future utility levels in the two communities. As a rational participant in the labor force, she will likely ignore any externalities caused by her migration. One consequence of this action is that member states, which are comparatively more attractive places to live and work are likely to attract more than the optimal number of migrants, while comparatively less attractive member states are likely to excessive emigration. These problems raise questions both with respect to the rights of citizens to freely move about, and with respect to citizenship itself.
_______________________________________________________________________
A knottier question is raised by migration within the EU. A resident of
A
who contemplates moving to
B
considers only her expected future utility levels in the two communities. If she acts rationally and selfishly, she ignores any externalities caused by her migration. A consequence of this is that communities, which are particularly attractive places to live and work are likely to attract more than the optimal number of migrants, unattractive communities are likely to suffer from excessive emigration. These problems raise questions both with respect to the rights of citizens to freely move about, and with respect to citizenship itself.
Dennis C.
Meuller
,
Rights and Citizenship in the European Union
(Univ. of Vienna)Slide5
Example Two
In this example, smaller changes made to text.
“knottier” to “more difficult”
Student tried to make
it sound more conversational, like the student’s own tone.
“To illustrate, imagine a resident of A” and “As a rational participant in the labor force” instead of “If she acts rationally . . .”
“Particularly attractive places” to “member states, which are comparatively more attractive places”
In this example
Meuller’s
ideas/words have
been paraphrased but the structure is still
Meuller’s
.
Nowhere did the student cite to
Meuller
in this section of the paper, thus it is plagiarism.
It’s not the student’s example, and can try to put in own words, but this is an example where an idea or language has been paraphrasedSlide6
Student’s Paper:
EXAMPLE 3
The new mobility rights – the right to move freely within Community territory to accept employment, to reside in any member state for the purpose of employment, and to remain in the territory of another member states after having been employed there – were implemented in three stages. [Willem Maas,
The Evolution of European Union Citizenship
, 2005(8)]. Whereas Treaty of Paris Article 69 had required member states to agree before workers could use their new rights, Treaty of Rome Article 48 was subject to a transition period scheduled to end by January 1, 1970. The Parliament advocated immediately introducing free movement and, in the end, full implementation of free movement for Community workers proceeded ahead of schedule, on October 15, 1968. [European Council (1968b, 1968a)].
_______________________________________________________________________
The new mobility rights were implemented in three stages. Whereas
the
Treaty of Paris has required member states to agree before workers could use their new rights,
the
Treaty of Rome
provisions were
subject to a transition period scheduled to end by
1 January 1970
. Parliament advocated immediately introducing free movement,
claiming that delay would risk “provoking a dangerous disequilibrium between the economic and the social measures being undertaken by the EEEC. [ ] The economic climate was propitious.
. . . allowing full implementation of free movement for Community workers by 1968, ahead of schedule.
William Maas,
Creating European Citizens
, 2007.Slide7
Example Three
First sentence contains the proposition that “the new mobility rights were implemented in three stages” and cites to Maas.
Then
goes on to provide further analysis and offer further history, giving dates and so on.
Student doesn’t give a cite for the second sentence, suggesting he wrote it.
Student does offer a cite for the third suggesting that is where he got the information he provides.
Reality – it’s all from Maas.
Tried to put in his own words by removing the underlined text, changing structure of some dates, but it’s Maas work.
Student did cite Maas at the beginning of the paragraph, but nothing to show rest of the paragraph from Maas as well.
COMPLICATING MATTERS FURTHER
It’s the wrong cite to Maas.
Could be an innocent error if working from more than one Maas piece but, with other examples of intentional manipulation, looks like trying to conceal the original source of the work. Further evidence of an intention to cheat.Slide8
Student Paper:
Example 4
Remarkable is the Court’s use of the word “also” in the given context, as this can only be read as an implicit reference to the employee’s interests, mentioned just before. At first glance, this scrutiny might seem to be of lesser importance when compared to the voting restrictions and their alleged infringement of Art. 56 EC. The historical events that gave rise to Germany’s argument concerning the ‘national measure’, however, lend the dispute a highly symbolic dimension. In 1959, an agreement between the workers and trade unions of Volkswagen on the one hand and the Federal State and the state of Lower Saxony on the other concluded an ongoing dispute about the ownership of the then legally ownerless but flourishing Volkswagen undertaking. [FN]
[FN]
Zumbansen
, Peer &
Saam
, Daniel.
The ECJ, Volkswagen and European Corporate law: Reshaping the European Varieties of Capitalism.
4 German Law Journal 45 (2003).
________________________________________________________________________
Remarkable is the Court’s use of the word “also” in the given context, as this can only be read as an implicit reference to the employee’s interests, mentioned just before.
[pg. 1039]
At first glance, this scrutiny might seem to be of lesser importance when compared to the voting restrictions and their alleged infringement of Art. 56 EC. The historical events that gave rise to Germany’s argument concerning the ‘national measure’, however, lend the dispute a highly symbolic dimension. In 1959, an agreement between the workers and trade unions of Volkswagen on the one hand and the Federal State and the state of Lower Saxony on the other concluded an ongoing dispute about the ownership of the then legally ownerless but flourishing Volkswagen undertaking.
[ pg. 1036]Slide9
Example Four
Paragraph
of information and at the end, student cites
Zumbansen
.
This is plagiarism and, when confronted, student said “but I cited
Zumbansen
at the end”
Here is why that’s not sufficient
Entire text is word for word from
Zumbansen
– need to be in quotation marks.
When you borrow a complete sentence, several consecutive words, or even a distinct phrase or word, you need to indicate that with quotation marks.
Also, the sentences came from different pages in the
Zumbansen
article (1039 and 1036). Reader cannot tell from the citation.
When you use someone else’s work, need to be precise. Tell the reader who wrote it and where, exactly, they can find it.