@dftbdftb Muhlenberg! always puts me in mind of one of my favorite John Prine songs…
As mentioned, there is a wide range out there of codes of conduct. Here I have quote some of those that allow/encourage/don’t expressly prohibit a wider range of discussion in regard papers.
It’s funny, I’ve been thinking about this disconnect a lot and I think that much of my attitude was shaped by my uncle, Grandma and Dad, all of whom were mostly about getting the best, clearest, widest ranging takes on the information you could and reworking it until you run out of energy or time. I think it is also coloured by my own academic career, particularly the amount of time I spend in the world of post-grad writing instruction. There collaboration is often required (in workshops - often to the writers’ horror and dismay) and a round-table of cohorts will sit and discuss and sometimes line-edit your work while you cringe and rage at their interference/poor revisions. Outside input is also encouraged, if not demanded. Readings with audience response is sometimes part of the curriculum. Much of it is geared toward hearing other’s reactions to your writing.
Anyway, here are a few places that are relatively more receptive to discussion/collaboration/proofreading.
Harvard: “…however, students need not acknowledge discussion with others of general approaches to the assignment or assistance with proofreading. If the syllabus or website does not include a policy on collaboration, students may assume that collaboration in the completion of assignments is permitted. Collaboration in the completion of examinations is always prohibited.”
University of Kent: “Coursework often requires some background research and evaluation of material. It is often helpful to discuss with others the value of particular sources and sharing and discussion of information sources is acceptable and often useful.
In producing a piece of work you should work individually and should determine for yourself whether to include or preclude a particular source of information. There is no problem in discussing grammatical or syntactic problems in your work or points that you discover you have not completely understood.”
University of Scranton: “C. Collusion: Ordinary consultation of faculty, library staff, tutors or others is legitimate unless the instructor has imposed stricter limits for a particular assignment. Any cooperative effort is forbidden which results in the work or ideas of others being presented as one’s own.”
USD: “Unauthorized Collaboration. Collaboration by a student engaged in the exercise with any other person, whether engaged in the exercise or not, if the supervisor of an academic matter has stated that collaboration is not permitted;”
Monash: expressly permitted proofreading/editing: “Proofreading: The process of identifying errors and suggesting corrections to a text. This must not involve rewriting passages of text in order to clarify meaning; amending the words used by the author (except to identify the correct spelling of the word used); rearranging passages of text or code, or reformatting other material; contributing additional material to the original; and checking calculations or formulae.”
And again, to this specific question: UVA President Sullivan:
Q: For three years in college, my father proofread and edited my papers. I never thought of this as cheating, and highly doubt that he did. What do you think?
A: I think it depends on the professor. In my own classes, I say to students: “It is fine with me if you consult with librarians, or writing tutors, or others, people who edit your work or give you suggestions about your writing. I don’t have a problem with that. But, the ideas and the final expression of those ideas must be your own.” So at least in my class, that would not have been cheating. But one of the things that’s really important is that professors do have to explain what their expectations are to the students. A problem we see pretty often happens in engineering classes, where the students have been divided up into work groups to do the work all through the semester, and then you get to the final exam, and the professor understands that’s to be independent work, but the students understand that they can still work with their groups. And so those conflicting assumptions need to get aired and addressed. And we try to actually spend time training the faculty as well as the students about the honor code, so the faculty know they have a serious responsibility to explain to students what they consider to be dishonest in this class.
And lastly, an interesting article on a situation at Stanford by the parent of a student: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/05/28/why-colleges-should-ditch-honor-codes/
so… discuss amongst yourselves.
