GOGSoc Episode V: The GOG Strikes Back

I know the feeling. I need to work more efficiently. I took two hours off today to go to a seminar on Roman Religion. I probably shouldn't have but I need to do something...properly intelligent rather than archaeology bull****.

Ooh, do tell!

Ooh, do tell!

Ah I figure you might like it, but it was pretty basic stuff actually. It was a discussion of haruspicy and in particular the phrase "usque at litatio": whether the Roman sacrificers truly could just sacrifice again and again until they got the omens they wanted or whether there's textual problems etc.

It was...well I suppose it was rather interesting since the speaker elected to rightfully remove the confusing schematisation previous scholars have imposed upon these passages (trying to discern whether something is "indigenous Roman" or "Etruscan import" etc) and took everything in its own context.

I left entertained, reflective and generally glad I stick with the Greek stuff though.

Sounds interesting actually! I've been working on a short article that deals with haruspicy (or actually with an incident of incorrect haruspicy, with dramatic catastrophic effect for the Romans ) and my supervisor's latest book is on divination, so it sounds right up my street!

I don't see how plagiarism in an undergraduate essay (ie. an essay which will never go anywhere anyway) is any worse than copying in an exam. Yet people get so worked up about it...

I don't see how plagiarism in an undergraduate essay (ie. an essay which will never go anywhere anyway) is any worse than copying in an exam. Yet people get so worked up about it...

I don't see how plagiarism in an undergraduate essay (ie. an essay which will never go anywhere anyway) is any worse than copying in an exam. Yet people get so worked up about it...

At UCL everything we write for assessment is put through anti-plagiarism software (TurnItIn). Is this not standard practice?

At UCL everything we write for assessment is put through anti-plagiarism software (TurnItIn). Is this not standard practice?

We had to do it at the institution I was at for my PhD (it's a pile of **** as a piece of software though). It wasn't done at undergraduate nor at master's over the water.

Plagiarism and inaction is often a sign that your departmental colleagues would rather sell a testicle than sit on a plagiarism board at the end of an exam season. That and, as Alba suggests, kids are paying a lot of money for courses and if they shortchange themselves then so be it. The thing with plagiarism is that we all do it just not often consciously. For example a published article by my former supervisor can be pulled apart and almost everything shown to be pulled from an entirely separate source. It's not referenced as such but you can tell. It's not a lack of integrity to say that actually plagiarism doesn't matter when it comes to undergraduate work. If the kids aren't willing to learn then they will be found out if the exam system is rigorous enough. If it isn't, then they will be found out in other ways.

I don't agree as a matter of principle that it isn't anything to do with integrity. Maybe I'm over-analysing, but to me this teaches people that it's OK to cheat to get ahead with life; it's not just about writing essays.

It also remains fundamentally unfair to others on the course who do approach their work properly.

Well the person marking the stuff will knock them down and if they aren't good enough to do the work then their exams will be shoddy. Wasting a lot of effort on going through the motions on plagiarism is precisely that. Those who do their work properly and effectively will benefit in their own way and will get marks just as they deserve. Learning is, after all, an individual thing. I don't care if my classmates are cheating to get ahead, I know I've done the work and will get the marks I deserve.

Also ... people cheat to get ahead in life all the time, given we live in a capitalistic-materialistic society that seems actually to be part of the rules of the game.