PLAGIARISM

PRESENTATION
BY
DR. MUHAMMAD JAWAD IQBAL
IN-CHARGE
HEC SUB-OFFICE
BAHAWALPUR
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
TO AVOID PLAGIARISM, LET ME MAKE IT
CLEAR AT THE OUTSET THAT THIS
PRESENTATION IS BASED UPON THE LITTLE
BOOK ON PLAGIARISM PRODUCED BY
LEEDS METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY, UK
DEFINITION OF PLAGIARISM
CHAMBERS DICTIONARY DEFINES A PLAGIARIST AS
A KIND OF THIEF-ONE WHO STEALS THE
THOUGHTS OR WRITINGS OF OTHERS AND GIVES
THEM OUT AS HIS OWN.

WHEN THIS IS ALSO USED IN THE UNIVERSITY TO

GAIN CREDITS THEN AN ADDITIONAL DIMENSION
OF DISHONESTY IS ADDED. THIS IS INTELLECTUAL
THEFT
 CONTD
ACCORDING TO THE CONCISE OXFORD DICTIONARY,
PLAGIARISM IS DEFINED AS TAKING AND USING THOUGHTS,
WRITINGS AND INVENTIONS OF ANOTHER PERSON AS ONES
OWN

WITHIN ACADEMIA, PLAGIARISM BY STUDENTS, PROFESSORS

OR RESEARCHERS IS CONSIDERED ACADEMIC DISHONESTY OR
ACADEMIC FRAUD AND OFFENDERS ARE SUBJECT TO
ACADEMIC CENSURE.

FOR PROFESSORS AND RESEARCHERS, WHO ARE REQUIRED TO

ACT AS ROLE MODELS FOR THEIR STUDENTS, PLAGIARISM IS A
VERY SERIOUS OFFENCE AND IS PUNISHABLE.
 FORMS OF PLAGIARISM
PLAGIARISM TAKES MANY FORMS. THESE INCLUDE BUT ARE
NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING:

COPYING FROM A SINGLE SOURCE

THIS IS WHERE A RESEARCHER, BE IT A STUDENT OR A

TEACHER , USES ONE OF THE FOLLOWING AS BASIS FOR
COPYING AS A WHOLE OR A SUBSTANTIAL PART OF IT.

A PUBLISHED /UNPUBLISHED BOOK

A PUBLISHED /UNPUBLISHED ARTICLE
THE INTERNET
 CONTD
PLAGIARISM, THEREFORE, IS NOT COPYING FROM PUBLISHED
SOURCES ONLY.

UNACCEPTABLE EXCUSES:
A RESEARCHER WOULD JUSTIFY COPYING BY SAYING THAT "THE
BOOK/ARTICLE WAS CITED IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHY. NO A
BIBLIOGRAPHY IS A LIST OF SOURCES CONSULTED NOT COPIED
FROM.
A STUDENT PLAGIARIST WOULD SAY THAT THE BOOK/ARTICLE
WAS WRITTEN BY THE INSTRUCTOR AND HE/SHE WOULD EXPECT
TO FIND THEIR WORK REPEATED IN THE ASSIGNMENT.
NO THE INSTRUCTOR WOULD/SHOULD EXPECT SEVERAL
SOURCES TO BE READ AND USED AND WOULD/SHOULD NOT BE
FLATTERED TO FIND THEIR OWN WORK SIMPLY COPIED OUT.
 CONTD
COPYING FROM SEVERAL SOURCES
THIS IS SIMILAR TO COPYING FROM A SINGLE SOURCE, EXCEPT THAT
MORE THAN ONE SOURCE IS USED. A RESEARCHER /STUDENT ,FOR
INSTANCE ,OBTAINS 4 SOURCES OF INFORMATION, AND COPIES A
SENTENCE OR A GROUP OF SENTENCES FROM A, THEN ONE FROM B,
ONE FROM C AND ONE FROM D AND SO ON.
THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF PLAGIARISM WHERE A RESEARCHER MIGHT
GENUINELY HAVE THOUGHT THAT HE/SHE WAS NOT DOING ANY
THING WRONG. THE SOURCES USED MIGHT HAVE BEEN CITED IN THE
BIBLIOGRAPHY, THE ORGANIZATION OF THE MATERIAL MAY WELL BE
THE RESEARCHERS OWN.
HOWEVER, THIS IS STILL PLAGIARISM. THE REASON BEING THAT THE
WORDS ARE NOT OF THE RESEARCHER. RULES OF ACADEMIC
PRESENTATION REQUIRE THAT WHENEVER A DIRECT QUOTE FROM A
SOURCE IS USED, THIS SHOULD BE CITED/REFERENCED WITHIN THE
TEXT.
 CONTD
UNACCEPTABLE EXCUSES

THE RESEARCHER WOULD SAY THAT THE SOURCES IN

QUESTION PUT IT BETTER THAN I COULD. NO. YOU ARE
EXPECTED TO USE THE SOURCES CONSTRUCTIVELY AND
DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU HAVE UNDERSTOOD THEM AND BEEN
ABLE TO USE THEM EFFECTIVELY IN YOUR WORK.

I DID USE SEVERAL SOURCES AND CITED THEM. NO YOU DID

NOT USE SEVERAL SOURCES, YOU COPIED FROM THEM, AND DID
NOT USE INVERTED COMMAS TO SHOW THAT IT WAS THEIR
WORDS AND NOT YOURS.
 CONTD
PARAPHRASING
THIS IS PUTTING SOMEONE ELSES VIEWS INTO YOUR OWN WORDS, AND
THIS IS ONE OF THE GREY AREAS IN PLAGIARISM.
UNACCEPTABLE EXCUSES:
A. I USED MY OWN WORDS. YOU MAY HAVE BUT IF ALL YOU
HAVE DONE IS SUMMARIZED SOMEONE ELSES IDEAS THEN YOU
HAVE STILL COPIED BECAUSE YOU HAVE MADE IT APPEAR AS IF THE
IDEAS, ARRANGEMENT OF MATERIAL ETC. WERE YOUR OWN.
B. I CITED ALL THE SOURCES IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHY "AGAIN, YOU
MAY HAVE, BUT THE ISSUE IS HOW YOU HAVE USED THE WORKS
CITED, AND SIMPLY TO SUMMARIZE THE WORK OF OTHERS
WHETHER OR NOT THE WORKS ARE IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHY IS STILL
TRYING TO PASS SOMEONE ELSES WORK OFF AS YOUR OWN.
 CONTD

SELF PLAGIARISM
ACCORDING TO WIKIPEDIA THE FREE ENCYCLOPEDIA, THE RE-
USE OF SIGNIFICANT, IDENTICAL, OR NEARLY IDENTICAL
PORTIONS OF ONE OWN WORK WITHOUT ACKNOWLEDGING
IS DEFINED AS SELF PLAGIARISM.
 HOW TO AVOID PLAGIARISM
USE OF QUOTATIONS
IF YOU USE THE EXACT WORDS OF OTHERS THESE
SHOULD APPEAR IN QUOTATION MARKS (.) AND
BE REFERENCED BY THE BOOK OR ARTICLE AND THE
PAGE ON WHICH THE QUOTE APPEARS.

TRY TO USE QUOTATIONS ONLY WHEN THE AUTHOR

HAS EXPRESSED SOMETHING SO WELL AND SO
CONCISELY THAT YOU FEEL THAT THE WORDS CAN
NOT BE BETTERED. IF YOU DO THIS, YOU WILL
PROBABLY REDUCE THE NUMBER OF QUOTATIONS
 CONTD
MAKING NOTES
DURING NOTE TAKING IT IS POSSIBLE TO USE THE LANGUAGE OF
YOUR SOURCE. TRY TO BE AWARE OF THIS. TO AVOID IT, TRY NOT TO
MAKE NOTES AS YOU READ, BUT READ FIRST, CONSIDER WHAT THE
AUTHOR HAS SAID, AND THEN MAKE NOTES. IF YOU DO THIS, YOU
WILL COPY LESS OF THE TEXT.
PARAPHRASING
ATTRIBUTE THE BROAD IDEAS OR CONTENT TO THE AUTHOR IN
QUESTION. YOU WILL PROBABLY CARRY OVER SOME OF THEIR
LANGUAGE, BUT AS LONG AS YOU ARE MAKING IT CLEAR WHICH
SOURCES YOU ARE USING, AND NOT ATTEMPTING TO PASS IT OFF AS
YOUR OWN WORK THEN YOU WILL AVOID PLAGIARISM.
 CONTD
CITE ALL SOURCES USED
YOU SHOULD CITE ALL THE SOURCES YOU HAVE USED. ALWAYS
CITE ANY WEB SOURCES USED JUST AS MUCH AS PRINTED
BOOKS OR ARTICLES.

ALSO IT IS NOT GOOD PRACTICE TO PAD OUT A BIBLIOGRAPHY

WITH LOTS OF TITLES WHICH YOU HAVE NOT READ. A SHORT LIST
OF WELL-USED SOURCES IS MUCH BETTER THAN A LONG LIST OF
SOURCES WHICH YOU HAVE NEVER LOOKED AT.

IT IS NOT ALWAYS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE A REFERENCE TO

EVERYTHING YOU SAY. IF THAT WERE SO, YOUR WORK WOULD
BE MORE REFERENCES THAN SUBSTANCE.
 DETECTION OF PLAGIARISM
PLAGIARISM CAN BE DETECTED/SUSPECTED BY REVIEWERS/PEERS
WHILE GOING THROUGH A RESEARCH WORK WHO MAY BE IN DOUBT
ABOUT THE ORIGINALITY OF THE RESEARCH WORK SUBMITTED OR
ACTION TAKEN ON THE COMPLAINT LODGED BY A PROFESSIONAL
RIVAL ABOUT THE ORIGINALITY OF THE WORK.

HOW TO DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF PLAGIARISM

COMMITTED:
THIS CAN BE DONE BY COUNTING THE WORDS COPIED FROM ORIGINAL
SOURCES EITHER:
MANUALLY
OR
ELECTRONICALLY
 CONTD
IF THE SOURCES FROM WHERE THE RESEARCHER HAS COPIED
ARE KNOWN, IT IS SIMPLY COUNTING THE WORDS COPIED
MANUALLY AND CONVERTING THE FIGURE INTO PERCENTAGE.
THIS IS REFERRED TO AS SIMILARITY/MATCHING INDEX.

MANUAL COUNTING OF WORDS IN A RESEARCH WORK SIMILAR

TO ALREADY PUBLISHED SOURCES , HOWEVER, IS A
CUMBERSOME PROCESS PARTICULARLY IN CASES OF A
PUBLISHED BOOK OR THESES.
 PLAGIARISM DETECTION SOFTWARES
THERE ARE NOW VARIOUS AND INCREASINGLY SOPHISTICATED
ANTI-PLAGIARISM ELECTRONIC AIDS/SOFTWARES TO ASSIST
REVIEWERS WHO MAY BE IN DOUBT ABOUT THE ORIGINALITY
OF THE RESEARCH WORK.
SOME OF THEM ARE:
INSTITUTIONAL SOFTWARE/SERVICES
ITHENTICATE/ TURNITIN (WEB-BASED CONTENT SEARCH SYSTEM)
JISC PLAGIARISM (ADVISORY SERVICE)
MOSS (MEASURE OF SOFTWARE SIMILARITY)- USED IN SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
COMPANY PROJECTS)

MYDROPBOX (A SUITE OF PROGRAMMES FOR PLAGIARISM PREVENTION)

 CONTD
INDIVIDUAL SOFTWARE/SERVICES

ESSAY VERIFICATION ENGINE-EVE2 (SOFTWARE WHICH CHECKS TEXT

FOR MATCHES)

GLATT (A SOFTWARE FOR DETECTING PLAGIARISM IN TEXT)

PLAGIARISM FINDER (INTERNET BASED MS WINDOWS APPLICATION)

GOOGLE (INTERNET SEARCH ENGINE)

 CONTD
HEC OPTS FOR ITHENTICATE/TURNITIN BECAUSE:
IT IS WEB BASED
IT REQUIRES NO INSTALLATION OR MAINTENANCE OF
ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE
IT HAS NO COMPATIBILITY ISSUE BETWEEN DIFFERENT
COMPUTERS AND OPERATING SYSTEMS
IT IS QUICK AND EASY TO OPERATE
IT IS A RELIABLE AND POWERFUL WAY TO VERIFY THE
ORIGINALITY OF RESEARCH WORKS AND MANUSCRIPTS
SUBMITTED FOR PUBLICATION INSTANTLY
 HEC'S PLAGIARISM POLICY
THE HEC IN ITS 13TH MEETING HELD IN 2007, APPROVED THE
PLAGIARISM POLICY UNDER WHICH VARIOUS PUNITIVE
MEASURES HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED TO THE FACULTY
MEMBERS GUILTY OF COPYING RESEARCH WORK OF OTHERS
AND PUBLISHING IT AS THEIR OWN .

THE POLICY HAS BEEN CIRCULATED BY HEC TO ALL THE

UNIVERSITIES IN OCT, 2007 FOR ADOPTION AND
IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH THEIR STATUTORY BODIES.
 PENALTIES FOR PLAGIARISTS
a. PENALTIES FOR TEACHERS, RESEARCHERS AND STAFF
DEPENDING UPON THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE PROVEN
OFFENCE, THE AUTHORITY SHOULD TAKE ANY ONE OR A
COMBINATION OF THE FOLLOWING DISCIPLINARY ACTION(S)
AGAINST TEACHERS, RESEARCHERS FOUND GUILTY OF
PLAGIARISM:
i. MAJOR PENALTY:
A. DISMISSAL FROM SERVICE IN CASES WHERE MOST OF
THE PAPER HAS BEEN EXACTLY COPIED WITHOUT GIVING
REFERENCE TO THE ORIGINAL WORK
B. BLACK LISTING- INELIGIBLE FOR EMPLOYMENT IN ANY
ACADEMIC/RESEARCH ORGANIZATION
C. PUBLICIZING BLACK LISTED- IN PRINT MEDIA
 CONTD
II. MODERATE PENALTY
A. DEMOTION TO THE NEXT LOWER GRADE- IN CASES
WHERE SOME PARAGRAPHS INCLUDING KEY RESULTS HAVE
BEEN COPIED WITHOUT CITATION
B. BLACK LISTING AND PUBLICIZING THEM- IN PRINT MEDIA
AND WEBSITES
III. MINOR PENALTY
A. WARNING IN CASE A FEW PARAGRAPHS HAVE BEEN
COPIED WITHOUT CITATION
B. FREEZING OF ALL RESEARCH GRANTS
C. STOPPING PROMOTIONS/ANNUAL INCREMENTS
D. DEBAR THE OFFENDER FROM RESEARCH FUNDING,
TRAVEL GRANT ETC.
 CONTD
B. STUDENTS
(i) In the case of thesis the responsibility of plagiarism will be
of the student and not of the supervisor or members of the
Supervisory Committee.

(ii) The offender may be expelled/ rusticated from the

University and from joining any institution of Higher Education in
Pakistan for a period as deemed appropriate by the "Plagiarism
Standing Committee. A notice may be circulated among all
academic institutions and research organization to this effect.

(iii) The offender may be relegated to a lower class.

(iv) The offender may be given a failure grade in the subject.

(v) The offender may be fined an amount as deemed

appropriate
(vi) The offender may be given a written warning if the
offence is minor and is committed for the first time.

(vii) The degree of a student may be withdrawn if AT ANY

TIME it is proven that he/she has presented Plagiarized work in
his / her MS, MPhil or PhD dissertation if the extent of plagiarism
comes under the category of major penalty as conveyed in Para
11(a-1).

(viii) The notification of the plagiarism by the author(s) may be

published in the print media or may be publicized on different
websites at the discretion of the Vice Chancellor / Rector / Head
of the Organization.

(ix) HEC or the University / Organization may debar the

offender from sponsorship of research funding, travel grant,
scholarship, fellowship or any other funded program for a period
as deemed appropriate by the "Plagiarism Standing Committee".
Additional Actions Required:
In addition to the above punishments, the following additional
common actions must be taken if the offence of Plagiarism is
established:
a) If the plagiarized paper is accessible on the web page its access will
be removed. The paper itself will be kept in the database for future
research or legal purposes.
b) The author(s) will be asked to write a formal letter of apology to
the authors of the Original paper that was plagiarized, including an
admission of plagiarism. Should the author(s) refuse to comply then
additional punishments as deemed fit may be recommended by the
"Plagiarism Standing Committee.
c) If the paper is submitted but not published yet, the paper will be
rejected by the Editor-in-Chief or the Program Chair without further
revisions and without any further plagiarism investigation
conducted.[1]
However, Warning may be issued to the author/ co-author.
Appeal:
As the penalties are severe, the affected person(s) will
have the right to appeal to the Chairman HEC / Vice
Chancellor / Rector / Head of the Organization for a review
of the findings or may submit a mercy petition within 30
days from the date of notification. Such appeals / petitions
will be disposed off within 60 days of receipt, by following
the laid down procedures regarding such appeals.
Penalty for Wrong Reporting / False Allegation:

If the case of Plagiarism is not proved and it is confirmed

that a false allegation was lodged, the Vice Chancellor /
Rector / Head of the Organization will inform the
complainants Organization and will recommend disciplinary
action against the complainant, to be taken by his / her
parent organization.