Contextul cultural al eticii academice și a cercetării – o compilație și implicații pentru maturizarea organizațională

 

• Diferențe culturale în prezent ale fenomenului plagiatului (compilare din articole)
• Istoria culturală a fenomenului (compilare din articole)
• Aspecte instituționale ale fenomenului în contextual civilizației europene - nord-atlantice

Diferențe culturale în prezent ale fenomenului plagiatului - compilație

 

 

Akbar and Picard (2020):

 

·       Because of their own breaches and lack of understanding of academic integrity, academics are unable to communicate institutional expectations or contribute to building an institutional culture of academic integrity

·       Visible and enacted policy is particularly important to empower and protect subordinates to act when their seniors behave in ways that lack academic integrity

·       consistency in detection and punishment for staff and student academic integrity breaches has become challenging in many universities in the Muslim world due to a culture of nepotism and cronyism

·       The vicious cycle of nepotism (called Wasta culture in Saudi Arabia), cronyism and corruption are observable across institutional practices from admission processes, final assessment of student learning, to trading of degrees and certificates

·       Some of these faculty were labeled strict and killer-lecturer as they tried to transfer the principles and practices related to academic integrity over from the International universities they graduated from to the local context.

·       Equating academic integrity culture with western ideologies can result in a reaction against associated expectations

·       it is the methods of religious and traditional learning that are heavily reliant on memorization, repetition and exam-oriented assessment themselves that undermine critical thinking, creativity and originality and lead to breaches of academic integrity

·       It is not culturally accepted to change sacred texts and the statements of Islamic scholars. This practice poses challenges for students to adapt the concept of paraphrasing, synthesising and conventions of academic writing promoted by Western concepts

·       traditional teacher-centred classrooms encourage copying and imitating teachers as the centre of knowledge, leading to a lack of critical thinking

·       This prevalence of plagiarism materials in culturally valued sources can promote the misconception that plagiarism is acceptable among students

·       Collectivism found in some Muslim countries, for instance, obscures the concept of intellectual property. Some Muslim scholars tend not to object if they are not accredited through citation because of their perception that their academic works belongs to society in general, because knowledge is God-given and therefore belongs to the public not individuals

·       Furthermore, as mentioned earlier a culture of power misuse dubbed wasta in Arabic can lead to nepotism. This practice can widen opportunities for rule infringement throughout the institutional levels if this culture is practiced in the entire management of tertiary education. Although goal-oriented education resulting in a degree and certificate is rewarded, this is not the case with process-oriented education focussing on skills and knowledge development

·       nanny culture, which refers to house servants doing homework for the children of their employers, regularly occurs in middle to high class society and parental pressures among middle-low economic background parents who have not had the experience of university or higher level study themselves, undermine student ability for independent learning and tempt them to cheat, and become involved in contract cheating in their higher studies

 

England 2008:

·       Common knowledge – dynamic (link in references)

 

Bloch 2007:

·       Many Western educators believe that Chinese students neither understand Western concepts nor feel that such plagiarism is an unacceptable practice. And sometimes this view is true, especially when we define plagiarism in absolute terms.

·       While China has a long tradition of literacy, the importance it places on collectivism is often seen as dichotomous to the Western concept of individualism. It is often assumed that this collectivistic nature devalues the Romantic concept of authorship prevalent in the West

·       Scholars have shown that current ideas and practices related to intellectual property and plagiarism are socially constructed and therefore can change as social and economic factors change.

·       Liang Shiqiu, a Western-educated Chinese academic, comments ironically about that Chinese perspective on the relationship between imitation, originality, and plagiarism:

o   Copying from a book is called “Plagiarism”;

o   Writing a book based on ten is called “Reference”;

o   Writing a book based on a hundred is called “Creation.”

 

Ghazinoory et al. (2011):

·       The Western support of Saddam Hussein war of aggression against Iran created intense anti-West sentiments among many Iranians. One of the manifestations of these negative feelings was a breakdown of communications between Iranian universities and the universities of many western countries.

·       Consequently, little by little for the new generation of academicians and students, international academic norms became unfamiliar Since Islam appreciate science diffusion as a value, many Islamic theologians used to believe that when something scientific is created, it belongs to the society, no limitation should be placed on its publication, because it can be more useful when it is in the public domain and according to their beliefs their own scientific efforts were mostly aimed at helping mankind instead of financial gain (see for e.g. Tahrir al-Wasilah by Ayatollah Khomeini) though It doesn’t mean that they think plagiarism is justifiable. It’s not surprising that gradually Iran’s academicians began to pay less attention to the intellectual property rights.

 

 

Istoria culturală a fenomenului - compilație

 

Green 2002:

·       The Construction of Authorship and the History of Plagiarism (chapter) My claim, of course, is not that the Roman, Mishnaic, eighteenth century, and modern day conceptions of plagiarism are identical. Rather, I merely want to suggest that the idea of plagiarism is much older than is often assumed and to question the assumption that the obligation to attribute one’s sources necessarily presupposes either a strong notion of “authorship” and “originality” or the existence of a legal regime of the sort that was first developed in the eighteenth century.

 

Haitch 2016:

·       More professors and institutions want to move from a detect-and-punish to an educate-and-prevent model for dealing with plagiarism.

·       Plagiarism has a cultural history tied to concepts of individual creativity, but its future may look quite different in an era with increased communal sharing of ideas and images.

·       Rudiments of the concept of plagiarism appear to have existed in Jewish tradition since before the first century. Pirkei Avot (, Chapters of the Fathers), a Mishnaic tract compiled between 500 and 300 B.C.E., seems to imply a positive norm of attribution: “The person who reports something in the name of the one who said it brings redemption to the world” (Green 2002, 178). This statement does not tell us all the reasons attribution was given, or often withheld, in antiquity.

·       Plagiarus means kidnapper or plunderer, in Latin, because in antiquity plagiarii were pirates who sometimes stole children. As plagiarism is considered intellectual theft some commentators have likened it to stealing the brain child of another. (East 2010, 70; cf. Robinson 2000, 32) It is worth asking whether this antiquity-referencing description is itself becoming anti quated. At least some brain children today are being birthed and raised communally, in an environment of Wikipedia or open-source software development.

·       Some centuries later, the label was reclaimed for the first time in English by Bishop Richard Montagu, in 1621.

·       According to one theory, the modern understanding of plagiarism did not truly take shape until the eighteenth century, when there was a new emphasis on authorship and originality. Before then, the process of education was different, in that imitation was deemed virtuous. Just as children today learn to memorize letters, then arrangements of letters (words), so students of classical oratory and writing were taught to memorize arrangements of words or even entire passages that they could use to piece together their speeches or writings. The opening and closing of a formal letter today is a vestige of this practice, but handbooks in the Middle Ages contained much longer formulae. Aristotle, Virgil, Shakespeare, Montaigne, and even later writers such as Dryden and Coleridge lifted passages from earlier works. By today’s standards, they were plagiarists; by theirs, they were paying homage and writing according to the custom of their day.

·       In the eighteenth century, however, there were two developments. First, art and litera ture became more connected to notions of individual, autonomous genius. Simultaneously, the law of copyright became more refine to protect the economic interests of publishers, booksellers, and authors. In short, during the eighteenth century originality became a more important cultural value, and the concept of property became attached to words and ideas. These two developments fueled each other (Green 2002, 176-7). Finally, in the early twentieth century, organizations such as the American Psychological Association (APA) moved to standardize citation in academic writing, to help ensure individuals received credit for their work

 

 

Aspecte instituționale ale fenomenului în contextual civilizației europene - nord-atlantice

 

Dougherty 2021:

·       identifies three impediments to institutional reform [to control plagiarism in USA]. They are: (1) a misplaced desire to preserve personal and institutional reputations; (2) a failure to recognize that attribution in academic writing admits of degrees; and (3) a disproportionate emphasis on the so called “intention to plagiarize.”

 

Iordache 2023, transition country (available here):

·       organizational maturity, research-education system maturity, diversifying the foundations of academic integrity for the resilience of the research and education process.

·       Hypotheses: the deontological foundation of knowledge production integrity is a cultural trait of the Judeo-Greek-Roman-Christian culture, the eudaimonic foundation is unhistorical (crosscultural), the utilitarian foundation is modern.

 

References

Akbar, A., Picard, M., 2020. Academic integrity in the Muslim world: a conceptual map of challenges ofculture. International Journal for Educational Integrity 16.

Bloch, J., 2007. Plagiarism across cultures: Is there a difference? Indonesian JELT: IndonesianJournal of English Language Teaching 3, 1-13.

Dougherty, M.V., 2020. Plagiarism in the Sacred Sciences. Philosophy and Theology 32, 27-61.

Dougherty, M.V., Hochschild, J.P., 2022. Magisterial Authority and Theological Authorship: TheHarm of Plagiarism in the Practice of Theology. Horizons 48, 404-455.

England, A., 2008. The dynamic nature of common knowledge. Originality, imitation, and plagiarism:Teaching writing in the digital age, 104-113.

Ghazinoory, S., Ghazinoori, S., Azadegan-Mehr, M., 2011. Iranian academia: evolution afterrevolution and plagiarism as a disorder. Sci Eng Ethics 17, 213-216.

Green, S.P., 2002. Plagiarism, norms, and the limits of theft law: Some observations on the use ofcriminal sanctions in enforcing intellectual property rights. Hastings LJ 54, 167.

Haitch, R., 2016. Stealing or Sharing?Cross‐Cultural Issues of Plagiarism in an Open‐Source Era. Teaching Theology & Religion 19, 264-275.