Week 7 Case Study

Part I

Questions to The Student

The first question that the grievances committee and I would ask will be: Do you know what plagiarism is all about and what it entails?

The second question would be: Are you aware of the consequences for any student who gets involved in plagiarism?

The first question will be asked to the student based on the fact that it is not right for the committee to assume that it is obvious that the student already knows what plagiarism is all about. The student might have plagiarized the work out of lack of knowledge on what plagiarism is all about. If in the event Susie sounds like she has no idea what plagiarism is all about, the grievance committee will be forced to investigate further from the faculty as to how a student can fail to understand a basic practice in the field of academia. It is from the response of the student that the committee will be able to make an initial step in analyzing the direction of the case. This question has been derived for one basic reason: not all students are aware of what plagiarism is all about (Bultas, Schmuke, Davis & Palmer, 2017). The question will also be meant to have her explain why she feels being 50 years as well as a non-English speaker should be considered as viable reasons to defend her plagiarized work. If indeed she knows what plagiarism entails, then age and language should not be a source of controversy.

The next question is much dependent on what she will give as the response in the first question. If the student indeed knows what plagiarism is, then it could be obvious that she knows the consequences associated with plagiarism. If the student already knows what the consequences are, then it could imply that she did plagiarize her work and ought to have been prepared for the consequences. The reasoning behind this question is that it should not be assumed that by a student knowing what plagiarism is, it is obvious that she knows the consequences. In any case, plagiarism has a threshold set for every institution, and this has to be made clear for every student. It is at this stage that she will be asked if she ever came across policies on plagiarism and if indeed she signed as a way of agreeing to abide by them.

Questions to Be Asked to The Faculty Member

The most probable question to ask the faculty member would be: Have you made students to be aware of what plagiarism is all about and the consequences they can be subjected to in case their work is found plagiarized?

What were the criteria used in expelling the student and are there any exceptionalities when it comes to plagiarism?

 The first question is derived based on the fact that policies may exist in writing, but at times, the chances are that a student may not have been made aware and even reminded from time to time the threshold set for plagiarism as well as the consequences associated with plagiarizing ones’ work. By asking this question, the committee will be seeking to understand who indeed is to blame. If indeed students are made aware of the effects, it will also be important to understand how often such information is repeated for clarity purposes (Cleary & Sayers, 2017). If there is enough evidence that students have enough information, then the committee will almost conclude that the institution has done its best and it is the student who was on the wrong.

The second question pinpoints the reasons that Susie has presented as she argues to defend herself. She has stated that English is not her first language and that she is a 50-year-old who is smart as she has forever been an A student. She is using such exceptionalities to justify why her work was justified, and so the question we can ask the faculty is if there are such exceptionalities that can warrant her being forgiven. It is also important for the faculty member to give the main reason as to why she was expelled by quoting a policy within the institution’s regulations and policies.

Part II

Key Points in The Plagiarism

The plagiarism policy for this part has been derived from the University of Washington School of Nursing that has provided the policies meant to address plagiarism in the nursing faculty. The three notable points in the policy are: a student should never borrow the structure of the phrases of another author as well as sentences without acknowledging the author from which the phrases were derived. Secondly, information which has been cited but the words used have been reproduced exactly they are in a printed source without putting quotation marks will also be considered as plagiarized information. Lastly, having another person write for you the task at hand.

The first method in the policy is one of the common ways through which students plagiarize their work. It is common ethical practice that an author is recognized whenever his/ her work is being used somewhere else. If for example, Susie maintained sentence structures as they appear in another article, failing to cite those authors will amount to plagiarism. In nursing, just like it is in other academic programs, citing another person in an article is enough evidence that recognition has been granted (Greenberger, Holbeck, Steele & Dyer, 2016). However, some students fail to understand that sentence structures should always be presented in a student’s own words and even the sentence structure ought to be changed.

The second component of the policy warns against a copy and paste approach which most students undertake. There should be no point where a student picks the exact words or phrases in the way that they appear in another paper and exactly reports them the way they are. Proper paraphrasing calls for such sentences/ phrases to be re-arranged and if possible synonyms used so that the meaning may still be inferred without necessarily using words the way they are in another person’s paper/ work. This kind of plagiarism is common since most students fail to understand what paraphrasing has to be undertaken in research. Even though such statements might be appropriately referenced, use of similar kind of words in a statement amounts to a very high percentage plagiarism rate (Lynch et al., 2017).

The last key point in the plagiarism policy is seeking for service from another person. A paper writing service is a common method through which work can be said to be plagiarized. For instance, using Susie’s case, assuming this method could have been used to plagiarize the work that she did, some of the reasons she could have used to justify her actions are the age (50 years) as well as the fact that English is not her fast language. She might have opted to seek the services of another person (probably younger and with knowledge of English) to undertake the tasks for her. The problem, however, comes in when the one seeking such services fails to upload the task in plagiarism checker programs such as Turnitin. The person may also end up undertaking self-plagiarism if he/ she is using individual published work in the area of concern.

Part III

Committee’s Final Decision

Since the committee has proven that indeed Susie breached the plagiarism policies, the question is whether that was intentional or lack of knowledge about how to undertake proper APA formatting. However, the first step that the committee should take is to highlight to Susie how plagiarism took place in her work. The evidence has to be presented to the student so that she is made aware that indeed her work was plagiarized regardless of whether she did it knowingly or unknowingly. After this, various options can be utilized for Susie’s case. The committee may opt to revoke the expulsion and: give a verbal or even written warning to Susie with the copy of such written warning being taken to the Academic Services. The student may also be required to undertake the assignment again or reduce the grade of the student based on the enlisted criteria in the course syllabus (Woodworth, 2016). The student can also be given zero for this specific assignment just as stipulated in the syllabus of that specific course. Other than the above possibilities, since the faculty had already expelled the student, it would also not be very proper to discredit the initial person who had handled the case by dismissing the student. Since it has been proven that indeed she had plagiarized her work and the only question that stands is whether it was intentional or otherwise, the committee may make recommendations that another party handles the case. The person who may be next in command to fix such a matter is a representative from the Dean’s office who will take the report from the grievances committee and the reasons as to why the instructor involved had dismissed the student in order to provide a final verdict. The sanctions in such a case may take the form of Disciplinary warning, a reprimand, restitution, disciplinary probation, a timeframe suspension or complete dismissal. The representative from the Dean’s office will have to write a letter that pro