DeNardo and Miranda 1

Jocelyn Sanchez DeNardo and Andrea Miranda

Professor Serviss
CTW
30 September 2015

Howard Summary Draft

In her article, Plagiarisms, Authorships, and the Academic Death penalty, published in
College English, Rebecca Moore Howard, an English professor at Syracuse University, argues
that academic policies on plagiarism must be reevaluated. Howard defines plagiarism as the
representation of a sources words or ideas as ones own (Howard, 799). She discusses
authorship, patchwriting, and the varying reasons why students plagiarize. Howards ultimate
goal is to suggest a plagiarism policy that would respect the textual values expressed in existing
policies but that would also revise policy to allow for alternative approaches (Howard, 789).

Howard begins by defining modern day authorship, saying that a true autonomous author
is unrealistic today, and is a modern day invention, quoting historian Giles Constable in saying
the concept of literary individualism and property [...] is distinctively modern (as quoted by
Howard, 789). Howard establishes this change as a result of the invention of the printing press
that allowed written work to be profitable, giving value to literary property. Prior to this shift in
the representation of authorship, authors would patch together fragments [from] multiple
texts, in a method called patchwriting, without crossing any academic or legal boundaries
(Howard 791, 794).

DeNardo and Miranda 2

In her article, Howard introduces is patchwriting, defining it as writing passages that are
not copied exactly but that have nevertheless been borrowed from another source, with some
changes (Howard, 799). However, Howard sees this step in student writing as essential to their
learning. Howard argues that most students engage in patchwriting because they may be reading
a topic they are unfamiliar with. As Glynda Hull and Mike Rose point out, we depend upon
membership in a community for our language, our voices, [and] our very arguments (as quoted
by Howard, 788). In her article, she presents Martin Luther Kings speech is as plagiaristic
work because King uses language and words that are found in other works, exemplifying voice
merging, a form of patchwriting, defined as applying textual practices of one community to his
writing in another (Howard, 792). When patchwriting is defined as plagiarism and is
punishable, Howard argues it prevents students self-discovery and learning, but it should be
used as a learning step to eventually help students move on from that so that they can truly learn
and understand what the text is about.

Howard presents plagiarism as an issue of both immorality and ignorance. She discusses
the view that plagiarism serves as either a synonym or a subset of academic dishonesty, in
which those who succumb to plagiarism have poor moral character, quoting Edith Skoms
AAHE Bulletin who says the plagiarist [is] less of a person (Howard, 789, 793). In contrast,
she also discusses how plagiarism is often unintentional, a result of an ignorance of citation
conventions and a lack of expertise on the subject students are to write about (Howard, 795).

Howards article argues that, We must redefine institutional policies... (Howard, 795).
She presents A Proposed Policy On Plagiarism, suggesting how institutions should decide
what is punishable and how, regarding plagiarism and its forms. Howard states that cheating and

DeNardo and Miranda 3

non-attribution, including passages copied exactly from the work of another without proper
citations and quotations, in a paper are morally wrong, therefore, costing the student an F in
the course or suspension from the university (Howard, 799). In regards to patchwriting, she
argues that when not done out of academic dishonesty or immorality, the professor should
request revision to the paper. When it is a students intent to deceive, the penalty should be an
F or suspension from the university, according to Howard (Howard, 799). Howards idea of
revising the education system, as she mentions, will only be able to last a few years due to
technological improvements, but her motives are to help and understand students, which is
ultimately the goal of an educator.

DeNardo and Miranda 4

Works Cited
Howard, Rebecca Moore. "Plagiarisms, Authorships, and the Academic Death Penalty." College
English 57.7 (1995): 788-806. Web. 12 Nov. 2007.