%&XeLaTeX
\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage[letterpaper,heightrounded,height=9.3in,width=6.5in]{geometry}

%\usepackage{ucs}
\usepackage[cm-default]{fontspec}
%\usepackage{fontspec}
%\usepackage{xunicode}
%\usepackage{xltxtra}

%\defaultfontfeatures{Scale=MatchLowercase,Mapping=tex-text}
\defaultfontfeatures{Mapping=tex-text}

\setmainfont{Liberation Serif}
\setsansfont[Scale=MatchLowercase]{Liberation Sans}
%\setmonofont[Scale=MatchLowercase]{Inconsolata}

\usepackage[alwaysadjust]{paralist}
\setlength{\pltopsep}{0in}
\setlength{\plitemsep}{0.3em}

\usepackage{xspace}
\newcommand{\illustratefont}[1]{\fontspec{#1}#1\normalfont\xspace}

\newcommand{\sfbold}[1]{\textsf{\bfseries #1}}
\newcommand{\topichead}[1]{\sfbold{#1}\xspace}
%\newcommand{\topichead}[1]{\sfbold{\addfontfeature{Letters=SmallCaps} #1}\xspace}

%\newcommand{\sfbold}[1]{\textsf{\bfseries #1}}

\newcommand{\nohyphens}{\hyphenpenalty=10000\exhyphenpenalty=10000\relax}

\setlength{\parindent}{0in}
\setlength{\parskip}{0.5em}

\usepackage{hyperref}   % fancy hypertext references
\usepackage{hyperxmp}
\hypersetup{                  %    and provide some definitions
pdfauthor={Christopher N. Lawrence},%
pdftitle={Plagiarism Handout},
hyperindex,%
colorlinks,%
linktocpage,%
plainpages=false,%
linkcolor=Blue,%
citecolor=DarkGrey,%
urlcolor=DarkBlue,%
pdfstartview=FitH null,%
pdfpagelayout=SinglePage,%
pdfview={XYZ null null null},%
pdflicenseurl={https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/},%
pdfcopyright={Copyright © 2010–24 Christopher N. Lawrence},%
}
\RequirePackage{color}
\definecolor{Red}{rgb}{0.7,0,0}
\definecolor{Blue}{rgb}{0,0,0.8}
\definecolor{DarkBlue}{rgb}{0.1,0.1,0.4}
\definecolor{DarkGrey}{rgb}{0.15,0.15,0.15}

\urlstyle{sf}
\newcommand{\email}[1]{\href{mailto:#1}{\textrm{#1}}}
\renewcommand\descriptionlabel[1]{\hspace{\labelsep}\sfbold{#1}}

\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\pagestyle{fancy}
\renewcommand\headrulewidth{0pt}
\renewcommand\footrulewidth{0pt}
\fancyhead{}
\fancyfoot{}
\fancyfoot[LO,RE]{\footnotesize Lawrence, “What is Plagiarism?” \today}
\fancyfoot[RO,LE]{\footnotesize \thepage}

\title{What is Plagiarism? (and How to Avoid It)}
\author{Dr. Christopher N.\ Lawrence
  <\email{christopher.lawrence@mga.edu}> \\
  Professor of Political Science, Middle Georgia State University}

\begin{document}
\maketitle

\raggedright

\emph{\small Note: This document is intended as advice on how to avoid
  plagiarism; however, it is not a substitute for the university's
  published policy on plagiarism and cheating, which may be found in
  your syllabus and student handbook.}

Plagiarism is the most serious form of academic misconduct possible.
Put simply, plagiarism is taking the words or ideas of other
individuals without giving them proper credit.  It is important,
however, to note that it is appropriate---indeed, in many
circumstances, necessary---to reuse the ideas and even words of others
when writing or speaking.  The development and accumulation of
knowledge relies on building on the ideas of others.\footnote{Of
  course, there are some circumstances in college when it is
  \emph{inappropriate} to copy others' words and ideas; for example,
  during an examination it is usually considered cheating to copy from
  another student's paper, or to make use of outside help during the
  exam.}

The offense of plagiarism lies in the failure to give credit---the
failure to \emph{attribute} the ideas or words to their original
source.  So you can avoid plagiarizing by ensuring that when you use
someone else's ideas, you give them credit---usually, in an academic
paper, you would \emph{cite} the relevant source, while in speech you
might simply mention whose ideas or words you are making use of.

Plagiarism also includes \emph{falsely attributing credit to a source}
and \emph{falsification of sources}.  For example, on more than one
occasion, I have encountered student papers that have made quite
liberal use of material from Wikipedia.\footnote{I, and many other
  professors, generally frown on the use of Wikipedia as a source.
  Wikipedia---along with traditional printed encyclopedias, like the
  \emph{Encyclopædia Britannica}---can be a useful place to learn
  quickly about an area of knowledge, but encyclopedias are summaries
  of existing research rather than the original research itself; in
  college, one is expected to rely more on original sources rather
  than summaries.}  Rather than citing Wikipedia as a source, however,
students have claimed that the words they used directly from Wikipedia
(whether quoted or not---usually not) have come from other sources.
Similarly, many “large language models” like ChatGPT are known to
fabricate sources for claims they make in writing, either creating
sources out of thin air that do not exist or attributing ideas to
sources that do not support their claims.  This form of plagiarism is
also considered academic misconduct and is equally serious.

% Plagiarism is something that the university, the College of Arts and
% Sciences, and I take very seriously---the \emph{minimum} penalty in
% most cases for intentional plagiarism at TAMIU is an \emph{F in the
%   course}, and I have reported several incidents of plagiarism over
% the past year to the University Honor Council for adjudication.

Plagiarism is taken very seriously by most professors and
universities; for example, at MGA the \emph{minimum} penalty in most
cases for intentional plagiarism is typically a zero grade on the
assignment in question,\footnote{Please refer to the
  \href{https://www.mga.edu/student-affairs/docs/MGA_Student_Handbook.pdf}{current
    MGA Student Handbook} for details.} and I have reported several
cases of academic misconduct in recent years.

Most of the time the question of plagiarism is fairly clear-cut.
However, there are two issues that students sometimes find tricky when
it comes to plagiarism; first, what ideas or words are unique enough
to require attribution, and second, when it is better to quote than to
paraphrase or summarize.

\textbf{Uniqueness:} Generally speaking, facts and information that
are not considered “common knowledge” should be attributed or cited.
This distinction isn't always clear, as one person's common knowledge
may be another person's hopeless obscurity.  Common knowledge also
depends on your audience and the context; for example, if you are
writing for a magazine read by bicycling enthusiasts, it may be common
knowledge among the readership that Bernard Hinault is tied for the
record for the most wins of the Tour de France, but that is not
exactly common knowledge among the public at large.

A good rule of thumb when it comes to factual information is to err on
the side of caution, and cite a source if in doubt.  I'd say that if
it's not something you'd expect a high school graduate to know, it's
probably something that should be cited.

When it comes to words or phrases, a general rule is that a source
should be cited (and the words and phrases quoted) if the words are
relatively unique.  The longer the phrase, the more likely this is to
be the case, but there are also relatively short (but obscure) phrases
that should be cited.  For example, in discussing the work of
political scientist Robert Dahl, you might come across the word
“polyarchy” (a term he uses to refer to representative democracies);
since this word is not widely used, and because Dahl is the first
person to use the word, it would be wise to mention Dahl as the source
for the term.  On the other hand, the word “democracy” is much more
widely used, and thus there is usually no need to discuss its origins
by citing an ancient Greek philosopher or three.

Also, it is possible to string together a few words that someone else
has said before; there are only so many ways to state certain facts
and ideas (for example, something like, \emph{George Washington won
  the election of 1792} or \emph{India is the world's most populous
  democracy}).  So long as you are not directly reusing something in
front of you, this form of repetition is usually fine and no quotation
marks are needed; however, you might want to cite a source that
supports the fact if it seems sufficiently obscure (as discussed
above).

\textbf{Quoting, Paraphrasing, and Summarizing:} When you make use of
someone else's ideas, you generally have three options: you can
directly quote the words they used; you can rewrite what they said, in
substantially your own words (while not significantly shortening what
they said); or you can summarize what they said (usually reducing the
length of their statement).  No matter what approach you use, you
still need to cite the source.

I have found that students often end up writing a very clumsy
paraphrase to avoid using direct quotes.  I suspect students do this
to avoid having their papers “flagged” by TurnItIn or other automated
systems for detecting plagiarism.  Regardless of the motivation,
however, it usually results in an unreadable mess, and it still does
not relieve you of the obligation to properly cite the source.  Why
butcher someone else's words if you don't have to?

In general, my advice is to try to summarize (rather than paraphrasing
or quoting) if at all possible.  The downside for you, the writer, is
that summaries are shorter than paraphrases and quotes---and thus if
you are trying to make some minimum page count, you may need to make
use of more sources or write more material of your own.  The upside is
that generally you will write a better essay or research paper when
you summarize, as that requires you to have more fully understood the
original author's (or speaker's) argument and so you will have a
better idea of how you can use their argument to help support yours.

You should almost never have the need to quote or paraphrase more than
a few sentences in a row.  There is virtually never a good reason to
have an extended quote that is more than a few sentences long, unless
you are translating or interpreting a document (which is rarely
necessary in the social sciences); even if you are discussing an
article originally printed in another language, it is probably best to
summarize the author's statements rather than attempting to include a
direct translation.\footnote{You may need to translate the article
  into English first to be able to summarize it, of course, but there
  is almost never any need to include the translation as part of your
  paper.}

If you are deciding between quoting or paraphrasing, my advice is to
quote when the author is using words or phrases that are relatively
unique or are difficult to improve upon.  For example, one would
almost certainly rely on quotes of the more colorful parts of the
Declaration of Independence (“When in the course of human events…”)
rather than paraphrases (“Sometimes in history…”).  It is also
important to use direct quotes in a legal context, as the specific
terminology used in the law or a court opinion may matter and a
paraphrase may subtly alter what is meant.

Paraphrasing---as opposed to summarizing or quoting---should be used
sparingly.  Paraphrase does have an important place, however, when you
are writing a literature review; when reading academic articles, you
will often find that they are not very well-written, and so
translating from “academic-ese” to plain English will improve your
argument.  Paraphrase is best used to simplify and clarify; however,
if the source material is written relatively clearly, it is usually
unnecessary.

Paraphrasing may also be useful when you are trying to make your own
argument; shoe-horning someone else's quotes into your own sentences
is not always the best strategy, particularly if you need to rework or
butcher the original quote to make it fit.

Two other pieces of advice: first, students of late seem to have
gotten in the habit of copying-and-pasting material from a source and
then trying to edit it into a paraphrase or summary. This rarely
works; almost always you will end up with a “paraphrase” that just
changes some of the words, which isn't really a paraphrase at all. The
only reason to copy-and-paste into a document is to directly quote
something.

Second, there are tools on the Internet that will “helpfully”
transform text into something that may appear at first glance to be a
paraphrase of the original source by substituting synonyms for most of
the words. However, these tools will almost invariably produce
something that is not even close to idiomatic English; our language's
rich vocabulary leads to synonyms that often have subtly different
meanings, words that are spelled the same but have entirely different
meanings, or synonyms that vary depending on the sense in which the
original word is used. The end result of using such a tool is
typically \emph{word salad}, and often incomprehensible, even if it
doesn't end up being highlighted on a TurnItIn report.

% \textbf{The Dreaded Cite Dump:} There is one form of summary, however,
% that is somewhat frowned-upon, at least in the social sciences: the
% “cite dump” or “drive-by citation” style.  A cite dump is a
% sentence that list several sources that support a general proposition.
% While the cite dump does have its place, on occasion, it is not
% generally useful for supporting the \emph{main argument} of your paper
% or essay.  In particular, one should avoid using the cite dump as a
% means of trying to meet a “minimum number of sources” requirement in
% a paper.  You will find them used

\textbf{How To Quote:} There are, of course, a large number of style
guides available on both quotation and citation.  Here follows some
brief advice, however.

\emph{In-line quotes should not be stand-alone sentences.} Do not
quote a full sentence within a paragraph.  Direct quotes within a
paragraph should usually be worked into a sentence, rather than
standing alone.

\emph{Longer “block” quotes can contain full sentences.} Style guides
differ on how long a quote must be before it can be set off as a block
quote; generally speaking, however, anything of a full sentence or
more in length should be in a block quote.  (Again, however, I refer
you to my advice above that long quotations are to be avoided in most
cases.)

\emph{When using an inline citation style, the citation goes at the
  end of the sentence or phrase, after the closing quote mark (if the
  quote ends the sentence), but before a trailing period or comma.}
See the following examples.

(Correct:) Sidlow and Henschen state that a presidential signing
statement attached to a bill “indicate[s] how the president
interprets that legislation” (286).

(Incorrect:) Sidlow and Henschen state that a presidential signing
statement attached to a bill “indicate[s] how the president
interprets that legislation.” (206)

(Correct:) “In an open primary, voters can vote for a party's
candidate” even if they are not members of that party (Sidlow and
Henschen 2010, 208).

(Incorrect:) “In an open primary, voters can vote for a party's
candidate” (Sidlow and Henschen 2010, 208) even if they are not
members of that party.

Of course, in both of these cases there was no real need to directly
quote the authors.  For example:

(Also correct:) Sidlow and Henschen describe a presidential signing
statement as a message from the president indicating how he plans to
implement and interpret a bill passed by Congress (286).

(Also correct:) Unlike closed primaries, open primaries allow voters
to vote in party primaries without being registered with that party
(Sidlow and Henschen 2010, 208).

\section*{Works Cited}

\noindent
Sidlow, Edward and Beth Henschen.  2010.  \emph{GOVT,} 2010 edition.
New York: Cengage Learning.

\section*{Copyright and License}

\small{This document is Copyright © 2010–24 Christopher N. Lawrence.
  You may modify, reuse, and redistribute this document under the
  terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License,
  version 4.0 or later.  The text of this license is available at the
  Creative Commons website,
  \url{https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/}, or by mail
  from Creative Commons, 171 2nd Street, Suite 300, San Francisco,
  California, 94105, USA. If you do distribute a modified version of
  this document, you should replace or supplement the authorship
  information at the beginning the document with your own and include
  this copyright notice (including the original author's name) in the
  modified document.}

\end{document}
% LocalWords:  Deupree Kernell CQ ISBN Slann Longman Strunk White's SPSA Aug lc
% LocalWords:  Sep Oct Nov PLSC MTW Millsaps Shively Philips Schacht ICPSR MLA
% LocalWords:  roadmap inline APA lp ANOVA TBD cont'd Bivariate SPSS Aspelmeier
% LocalWords:  TAMIU Kellstedt Whitten TurnItIn Encyclopædia Sidlow
% LocalWords:  Henschen