We went to Fargo today. I mostly spent the time in in Barnes and Noble and then the food court of the mall reading. Today, it was Tapscott’s new book – “Grown Up Digital”.
After getting back home, I decided to read and grade a few student papers. The first paper I read has me pretty agitated. I think it was first reading Tapscott (and some of the endorsements – e.g., Lessig). In the early stages of the book, Tapscott notes the writing of several authors who are concerned with some of the values and skills of the “net generation”. He pretty much dismisses the concerns of these writers (e.g., Bauerlein) with the exception of the concern that students reveal too much private information and this may come back to haunt them.
Anyway, I am one paragraph into the first paper and I immediately am concerned that the student did not write what I am reading. I Google a unique phrase from the first paragraph and locate the original source as the first hit. Unbelievable, I think. I turn the page of the paper and at the bottom of a two page section is the reference. OK, so this technically was not plagiarism. What do you call it when a page and a half is copied and pasted into a four page paper? Perhaps Lessig would describe this as “Remix”.
I asked students in my educational psychology class to identify an identifiable study strategy that they have never used, apply it in a course of their choosing for two weeks, and then write a 4-5 paper describing their experiences and evaluating the strategy. I tried to be fairly specific in outlining what I wanted in the paper. The first item on the list – explain the strategy you selected. I am assuming this is what prompted the cut and paste. Do you think a sophomore in college really assumes the instructor wants the actual words from the original source? If this would have been a hard copy paper instead of a digital file perhaps the first couple of pages would have been photo copied.
I really meant – explain the strategy. TRANSLATED – I want to be able to evaluate if you understand the strategy in the same way I understand the strategy. Should I really have to take the time to explain that I will not know if you understand the strategy if you give me the same thing to read that you read. Way back when I learned Bloom’s taxonomy (the original one), I was told that the way to evaluate “comprehension” was to seek an appropriate translation in the student’s own words.
I do understand some of the areas in which “remix” makes some sense. However, in promoting the constructive “use” of parts of the works of other people there is an important assumption that the nuances of using such works will be appreciated. As I have said before, what I fear is that such nuances are never taught or of even greater concern that a vague awareness of such nuances becomes an excuse for taking short cuts.
I sent the paper back and requested a redo. Perhaps I should have requested a remix.
