STUDY UNIT 4 CITATION AND ACADEMIC ETHICS

A. OVERVIEW

1. THE EXCHANGE AND TRANSFER OF IDEAS IS VITAL TO THE ACADEMIC COMMUNITY, NO

ACADEMIC WORKS IN ISOLATION; HOWEVER THE THOUGHTS AND IDEAS OF OTHERS
MUST BE TREATED WITH RESPECT (I.E THEY MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED AND NOT
DISTORTED.)

2. THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS SHOW HOW TO DO THIS.

B. ACADEMIC ETHICS

1. ETHICS HAS A MORAL SIDE IT : CONCERNS BEING HONEST ABOUT

1.1 WHERE YOUR WORK COMES FROM

1.2 HOW YOU USE IT (NOT MISREPRESENTING INFORMATION)

1.3 CHECKING YOUR SOURCES CAREFULLY TO ENSURE YOU ARE NOT

PERPETUATING FALSE/FLAWED INFORMATION

2. ETHICS HAS A PRACTICAL SIDE: ACCURATE WORK BASED ON LEGITIMATE SOURCES

IS USEFUL AND RELIABLE TO OTHERS AND YOURSELF (YOU WILL LEARN MORE IF
YOU WRITE SOMETHING YOURSELF.)

3. ETHICS HAS A MENTAL SIDE: ITAS ALL ABOUT ACADEMIC RIGOUR TAKING CARE
OVER THE DETAIL OF YOUR WORK.

4. ETHICS HAS A TRUST SIDE: BEING UNETHICAL DESTROYS TRUST.

C. CITATION

1. CITATION (ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SOURCES) IS IMPORTANT FOR THE FOLLOWING

REASONS:

1.1 IT PREVENTS PLAGIARISM BY ENSURING THE PERSON/ SOURCE FROM

WHICH AN IDEA ORIGINATED IS GIVEN CREDIT

1.2 IT FORCES YOU TO CHECK THE ORIGIN AND VERACITY OF YOUR SOURCE
CAREFULLY

1.3 IT PROVIDES READERS WITH THE SOURCE DETAILS SO THAT THEY CAN:

1.3.1 CHECK AND SEE IF THEY AGREE WITH

1.3.2 USE THE SOURCE IN THEIR OWN WORK

D. CITATION STYLE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC FORMAT

1. A BIBLIOGRAPHY SHOULD ALWAYS GIVE CERTAIN ESSENTIAL INFORMATION ABOUT A

PUBLISHED WORK. IT IS CUSTOMARY TO GIVE THIS INFORMATION IN CERTAIN FORMAT,
WHICH MUST BE FOLLOWED TO THE LAST LETTER AND FULL-STOP. THE FOLLOWING
FORMAT MUST BE USED FOR:

1.1 BOOKS:

LAST NAME OF AUTHOR, FIRST NAME. YEAR. TITLE. EDITION IF NOT FIRST EDITION.
CITY/TOWN OF PUBLICATION: PUBLISHER.

NOTE: THE SECOND AND SUBSEQUENT LINES OF THE ENTRY MUST BE INDENTED.

EXAMPLE:

CITRON, MARCIA J. 1993. GENDER AND THE MUSICAL CANON. CAMBRIDGE:

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

EXAMPLE (WITH TWO AUTHORS): (NOTE THE ORDER OF AUTHORS’ SURNAMES AND
INITIALS HERE!)

COOK, N., AND M. EVERIST, EDS. 1999. RETHINKING MUSIC. OXFORD: OXFORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS.

1.2 ARTICLES:

LAST NAME, FIRST NAME. YEAR. ‘TITLE OF ARTICLE.’ NAME OF PERIODICAL ISSUE
NUMBER OF JOURNAL: PAGE NUMBERS WHERE ARTICLE STARTS AND ENDS.

EXAMPLE:

RYCROFT, DAVID K. 1975. ‘THE ZULU BOW SONGS OF PRINCESS MAGOGO.’ AFRICAN
MUSIC 5/3: 41-97.

1.3 SCORES:

COMPOSER’S LAST NAME, FIRST NAME. YEAR (OF PUBLICATION OF THE SPECIFIC
SCORE). TITLE OF THE SCORE. EDITOR. PLACE OF PUBLICATION: PUBLISHER.

EXAMPLE:

BACH, J. S. 1958. ENGLISCHE SUITEN. EDITED BY R. STEGLICH. MUNICH: HENLE.

1.4 INTERVIEWS:

PERSON INTERVIEWED. YEAR. INTERVIEWER, DATE. MATERIAL FORM OF INTERVIEW

(TRANSCRIPT, CASSETTE TAPE, RADIO INTERVIEW, ETC). CITY WHERE INTERVIEW
TOOK PLACE, COUNTRY.
 EXAMPLE:
KHUMALO, MZILIKAZI. 2000. INTERVIEW BY M. JORRITSMA, 12 JUNE. TRANSCRIPT.
JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA.

1.5 UNISA STUDY GUIDES:

LAST NAME, FIRST NAME OF AUTHOR. YEAR. FULL NAME OF MODULE. ONLY STUDY
GUIDE FOR MODULE CODE. PLACE OF PUBLICATION: PUBLISHER.

EXAMPLE:

JORRITSMA, MARIE, ED. 2007. MUSIC AND SOCIETY. ONLY STUDY GUIDE FOR
MHS2602. PRETORIA: UNISA.

1.6 UNISA TUTORIAL LETTERS:

LAST NAME, FIRST NAME OF AUTHOR. YEAR. TUTORIAL LETTER NUMBER. TUTORIAL
LETTER FOR MODULE CODE. PLACE OF PUBLICATION: PUBLISHER.

EXAMPLE:

VOKWANA, T., M. JORRITSMA, AND G. KING. 2007. TUTORIAL LETTER 501/2007.

TUTORIAL LETTER FOR HIM330D. PRETORIA: UNISA.

1.7 GROVE MUSIC ONLINE ENTRIES

[PLEASE NOTE THAT THE [O] IN THESE EXAMPLES INDICATES THAT THIS IS AN
ONLINE SOURCE]

AUTHOR OF ARTICLE. YEAR. ‘TITLE OF ARTICLE.’ [O]. GROVE MUSIC ONLINE. EDITED
BY EDITOR’S NAME AND SURNAME. ACCESSED ON DAY MONTH YEAR. AVAILABLE:
ADDRESS OF WEBSITE.

EXAMPLE:

RYCROFT, D.K., AND ANGELA IMPEY. 2007. ‘INDIGENOUS SOUTH AFRICAN MUSIC:
NGUNI MUSIC.’ [O]. GROVE MUSIC ONLINE. EDITED BY L. MACY. ACCESSED ON 14
DECEMBER 2007. AVAILABLE: HTTP://WWW.GROVEMUSIC.COM.

1.8 INTERNET SITES:

AUTHOR/COMPANY/NAME OF SITE. YEAR. ‘TITLE OF ARTICLE/WEBSITE PAGE.’ [O].

ACCESSED ON DAY MONTH YEAR. AVAILABLE: WEBSITE LINK OR ADDRESS.

EXAMPLE:

MBEKI, THABO. 1998. ‘STATEMENT OF DEPUTY PRESIDENT THABO MBEKI AT THE

OPENING OF THE DEBATE IN THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY ON “RECONCILIATION AND
NATION BUILDING.” ’ [O]. ACCESSED ON 28 MARCH 2002. AVAILABLE:
WWW.ANC.ORG.ZA.

2. THE DISCOGRAPHY
 2.1 LIST THE AUDIO AND/OR VISUAL SOURCES THAT YOU USED UNDER A
SEPARATE TITLE, ‘DISCOGRAPHY’, AFTER YOUR BIBLIOGRAPHY

2.2 COMPACT DISCS:

COMPOSER. YEAR. TITLE OF PIECE. PERFORMERS. RECORDING LABEL AND

NUMBER. TYPE OF RECORDED MEDIA (E.G. COMPACT DISC, CASSETTE TAPE,
LONG-PLAYING RECORD, ETC.).

EXAMPLE:

VOLANS, KEVIN. 1990. WHITE MAN SLEEPS. PERFORMED BY THE KRONOS

QUARTET. ELEKTRA NONESUCH 792752. COMPACT DISC.

2.3 DVDS/VIDEOS:

COMPOSER/AUTHOR/PRODUCER/DIRECTOR. YEAR. TITLE OF DVD. LENGTH

OF FILM IN MINUTES. FILM COMPANY. TYPE OF MATERIAL (DVD/VIDEO
CASSETTE, ETC.).

EXAMPLE:

HIRSCH, LEE, AND SHERRY SIMPSON. 2002. AMANDLA!: A REVOLUTION IN

FOUR-PART HARMONY. 103 MIN. ARTISAN HOME ENTERTAINMENT. DVD.

E. THE ACADEMIC PROCESS AND PEER REVIEW

1. THE ACADEMIC PROCESS:

1.1 ACADEMIC SUBMITS BOOK MANUSCRIPT TO A PUBLISHER

1.2 PUBLISHER ENGAGES SERVICES OF SUBJECT SPECIALISTS WHO SCRUTINISE (READ)

THE MANUSCRIPT AND GIVE THEIR OPINIONS ON THE USEFULNESS AND CONTENTS
OF THE BOOK.

1.3 IF APPROVED THE AUTHOR THEN WORKS CLOSELY WITH EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT
TO CLARIFY DETAIL AND TIGHTEN UP LANGUAGUE TO EFFECIENTLY CONVEY IDEAS.

1.4 COPYRIGHT STATUS OF MATERIAL TAKEN FROM OTHER SOURCES CHECKED AND
PERMISSION TO USE SOURCES OBTAINED.

1.5 AUTHOR SUBMITS FUTHER DRAFTS AS CORRECTIONS ARE MADE.

1.6 BOOK IS READY FOR PUBLICATION.

2. PEER REVIEW PROCESS

 2.1 WHEN AN ARTICLE IS SUBMITTD TO A JOURNAL/ PERIODICAL FOR PUBLICATION IT IS
SENT TO A PANEL OF PEER REVIEWERS.

2.2 PEERS (A PERSON EQUAL TO YOU) CONSIST OF ACADEMICS WITHIN THE BROAD
FIELD WITH WHICH THE PERIODICAL DEALS.

2.3 PEER REVIEWERS SUBMIT REPORTS T0 THE EDITOR GIVING THEIR OPINION ABOUT
THE ARTICLE AND ITS WORTHINESS FOR PUBLICATION.

2.4 THE EDITOR WILL ASK AUTHOR TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE ARTICLE BASED ON THE
REPORT

2.5 EDITORS AIM TO CHOOSE AN ARTICLE FOR PUBLICATION BASED ON ITS

CONTRIBUTION TO THE FIELD (NOT ITS MONEY MAKING POTENTIAL)

2.6 THE PEER REVIEW PROCESS IS REQUIRED AS A MUST FOR PERIODICALS TO BE

ACCREDITED (BY FOR EG THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCTAION) IN ORDER TO
MAINTAIN ACADEMIC STANDARDS.

3. THE INTERNET AND ACADEMIC PROCESSES

3.1 THE INTERNET IS NOT SUBJECT TO ACADEMIC PROCESSES AND PEER REVIEW

3.1.1 MUCH INFORMATION IS WRITTEN ANNONYMOUSLY THEREFORE CANNOT

VALIDATE EXPERTISE OF THE AUTHOR

3.1.2 INFORMATION IS PROVIDED WITHOUT CITATION THEREFORE ONE CANNOT

CHECK SOURCE

3.1.3 CUT AND PASTE PERPETUATES MISTAKES AND INNACURACIES ACROSS WEB
PAGES.

3.1.4 RESULTS DISPLAYED OFTEN THE RESULT OF ADVERTISING THEREFORE THE

FIRST RESULT IS NOT NECESSARILY THE MOST CREDIBLE.

3.2 WEB PAGES THEREFORE NEED TO BE CHECKED FOR ACCURACY