Good day to you all,
I am representing an Open University student who was "investigated" for plagiarism. The case is now with the OIAHE and I am asking for the Complaint Decision to be reopened for reasons I plan to explain and explore more fully here in the future if permitted. To be brief for now, I have knowledge of repeated instances of students being misled as to what are clear and specific exceptions to the "normative" policy applying to their specific course/module. At a later date, students have then found themselves cautioned formally or informally for infringing the "normative" policy. Three examples:
1. Students were advised in one module they could "recycle" module or non-module material without needing to reference the fact. It was explained "recycling" was the term used in that module in place of "paraphrasing". Half way through the course the students were alerted to the "serious" issue of plagiarism, such as "paraphrasing".
2. The student I represent, having fallen for many many statements as above, including being advised explicitly and provably (in an online tutorial ironically about plagiarism) they could even "quote" and "directly quote" module material without needing to reference the fact, and then being accused of plagiarism (hence the complaint to OIAHE), and was then in their next module told by an exasperated tutor they did not need to reference every quote they used. The student declined to follow that "advice" as many would expect given their earlier experience. Other student protestations about this "advice", based on their own previous experiences and consequent cautions, were summarily dismissed because "we are out of time".
3. In yet another module, students were advised they could quote module material and not reference the fact. Yet again students with previous experiences challenged the advice and were told, "well perhaps only a sentence here or there, but no more".
Briefly, it has become clear to me that the Open University and it appears the OIAHE too in examining complaints against plagiarism penalties, use the institutionalised and "lawfully" supported , "joker card" of calling a plagiarism decision a matter of "academic judgement" and is almost I suggest (one or two possible exceptions) a cloak of total and unquestionable infallibility for ACOs etc
My reason for joining this forum are twofold:
1. To ascertain how prevalent the instances are of tutors of all levels at the OU giving advice and directions which explicitly contradict what I call the documented "normative" policies about what is plagiarism and to what extent, students have, either respecting the "tutors" "authoritative" advice, or naively being misled by such advice, have consequently fallen foul of following that advice.
2. Whether my supportable knowledge of such high instances in so few modules is an aberration or not, I want to warn present and future OU students of the real possibility they may too be misled in the exampled ways described above, unintentionally or for some other reason, and that they DO NOT fall into a similar, "unintentional" or for some other reason, trap set by misleading advice from "tutors" even as authoritative as the chair of a course and the head ACO of that faculty.
My impression is, from my experience so far, the burden of proof of guilt and/or innocence is heavily slanted in favour of the institution who use their "infallible" authority to the furthest extent they can get away with to avoid any of admission of "error" or "malpractice" on their part, or their employees part.
MY QUESTION:
Are there any students on this forum, who have, or know of other students who have "naively" been misled in similar ways to the above few examples and have consequently been warned or cautioned for plagiarism at the Open University? (Or any other university!)
I use in life the trope: "once is an accident, twice is a coincidence, and three times or more is a pattern". I look forward to any feed back about this issue.
Christopher