St Marks School of Texas - Marksmen Yearbook (Dallas, TX)

Page 23 text:

administration headmaster, john t. whatley dean of students, alain beauvois head of upper school, john connolly head of middle school, michael teitelman head of lower school, chloe gursch director of development, michael pybas business manager, roger c. west chaplain, rodman p. kypke director of college placement, benson murray superintendent of maintenance, joe a miske

Page 22 text:

W I M

Page 24 text:

I. PLAGIARISM The commonest forms of impropriety are comprehended by the term Hplagiarismf' Professor Harold C. Martin of Harvard University defines these forms so clearly in his The Logic and Rhetoric cy' Exposition that we have secured his permission to reprint his definition here. A DEFINITION OF PLAGIARISM' BY HAROLD C. MARTIN The academic counterpart of the bank embezzler and of the manu- facturer who mislabels his product is the plagiarist, the student or scholar who leads his reader to believe that what he is reading is the original work of the writer when it is not. If it could be assumed that the distinction between plagiarism and honest use of sources is perfectly clear in everyone's mind, there would be no need for the explanation which follows, merely the warning with which this definition concludes would be enough. But it is apparent that sometimes men of good will draw the suspicion of guilt upon themselves fand, indeed, are guiltyj simply because they are not aware of the illegitimacy of certain kinds of borrowing and of the procedures for correct identification of materials other than those gained through independent research and reiiection. The spectrum is a wide one. At one end there is word-for-word copying of anotherls writing without enclosing the copied passage in quotation marks and identifying it in a footnote, both of which are necessary. CThis includes, of course, the copying of all or any part of another student's paper.j It hardly seems possible that anyone of.col- lege age or more could do that without clear intent to deceive. At the other end there is the almost casual slipping in of a particularly apt term which one has come across in reading and which so admirably expresses one's opinion that one is tempted to make it personal property. Between these poles there are degrees and degrees, but they may be roughly placed in two groups. Close to outright and blatant deceit- but more the result, perhaps, of laziness than of bad intent-is the patching together of random jottings made in the course of reading, generally without careful identification of their source, and then woven into the text, so that the result is a mosaic of other peopleis ideas and words, the writer,s sole contribution being the cement to hold the pieces together. Indicative of more effort and, for that reason, some- what closer to honesty, though still dishonest, is the paraphrase, an abbreviated fand often skillfully preparedi restatement of someone elseis analysis or conclusion without acknowledgment that another per- sonis text has been the basis for the recapitulation. ' From The Logic and Rhetoric fy' Exposition, by Harold C. Martin. Reprinted by permission of the author and of Hom, RINEHART AND WINSTON, Inc., copyright 1958. 5