PLAGIARISM, ORIGINALITY, AND ASSEMBLAGE

PLAGIARISM, ORIGINALITY, AND ASSEMBLAGE

Required originality levels

I think that the overall originality level for an essay at the college level should be no more than 20%. Also, plagiarism levels should not be greater than 14 words and less than 5% from a single source. I stipulate that my writing should have plagiarism levels of less than 10% to portray a high degree of originality in my work. The article did not change my views on the required originality levels since no specific levels have been outlined in the article. The article has only stated the disciplinary responses undertaken by learning institutions in dealing with plagiarized work. As such, Writing Program Originality Forms have been provided to test the originality of students’ work in various learning institutions (Johnson-Eilola & Selber, 2007).

Assemblage of thoughts

Writing has ever been presented to me as an assemblage of thoughts by highlighting rhetorical dimensions needed to address a challenging view. As such, the assemblage often resulted in remixed texts in a derivative way to form different plagiarized contexts (Johnson-Eilola & Selber, 2007). At one point while writing, I primarily utilized existing texts to solve specific problems in my writing skills. The assemblage practice proved vital while composing content for my multimodal writing though it was not an easy undertaking. Since then, I have always yearned to put my content together in a more organized manner before starting writing on any topic. Thus, I have developed an action-oriented approach to essay writing by using interdisciplinary contexts within my writing.

Difference between copying and assembling

Copying involves the duplication of information by avoiding the process that originally produced the content. As such, copying entails the process of making similar and identical products. Thus, in writing, copying implies the act of imitating the work done by others, posing to be an individual’s original piece (Johnson-Eilola & Selber, 2007). I believe copying is highly perceived as academic plagiarism and should not be advocated for any learner. On the other hand, assembling refers to the act of bringing together different writing aspects and contexts to provide desirable meaning. So, assembling tends to address legal, ethical, and pedagogical concerns in writing based on the available background material. Unlike copying, assembling requires an individual to understand the background information to successfully assemble available evidence.

Johnson-Eilola claims

Johnson-Eilola and Selber claim complement stipulations by Minkel in that writing aim at changing its goals towards achieving desirable goals relative to provided context. The authors articulate that the final document produced by the students should have successfully assembled the different parts rather than portraying the original idea. Assemblage, therefore, helps integrate original contexts with learners’ ideas based on the provided instructions and assessment criteria. Also, the authors outline that students must recognize the value carried by original contexts to avoid inappropriate borrowing resulting in plagiarized work (Johnson-Eilola & Selber, 2007). The sentiment is similar to Minkel’s since he articulates the need to promote academic integrity to distinguish original work from borrowed context. Finally, the authors state modern times have been characterized by unrealistic artifact due to technological innovation hence jeopardizing the originality of students’ work.

Authors suggestions

Johnson and Selber suggest that the use of design elements while addressing a context’s writing instructions to ensure that students do not feel the need to cheat (Johnson-Eilola & Selber, 2007). Also, the authors suggest that social forces should be utilized to encourage students to use correct citations to cite resource materials. Besides, a problem-posing strategy should be utilized by learners to outline some of the specific texts, possibly having inherent values. Also, the authors state that teachers should encourage students to produce their own original work, thus ensuring that the learners do not feel the need to cheat. I agree with the stipulations provided by both authors since they provide strategic approaches required to curb the increased plagiarism cases.

Information gathering

The authors utilize Datacloud to gather pertinent information on plagiarism, assemblage, and originality of any set of data. Also, the author contexts provided by the history of originality, such as disciplinary approaches to the highly spiking concerns over plagiarism cases (Johnson-Eilola & Selber, 2007). Besides, the authors gathered information from articles. The findings show that plagiarism has blurred many students in the digital era due to the increased utilization of technology developments. Also, the author used personal experience during his time in college.

Porter argument

The idea provided by Porter provides an avenue to address the challenges we face during writing. Previously I have written a paper on literacy practices that required other people’s input to develop a deep insight into how they could be applied to the classroom context. Also, I have written a paper that did not rely on the work of other people. The paper required me to write on my writing journey based on abilities and competence. I feel that the stipulations by Porter are correct since writing is an exercise that compels us into identifying constraints in the local community.

References

Johnson-Eilola, J., & Selber, S. A. (2007). Plagiarism, originality, assemblage. Computers and Composition, 24(4), 375-403.