a&&tdka& CHEMICAL EDUCATION R-&f.---* The Sale andpurchase of Term Papers The services of commercial firms selling in-stock or written-to-order term papers and other assigned research papers have been available since 1970 to many students primarily in colleges and universities. These firms advertise and onerate onenlv. Althoueh - thev. claim to sell nothing more than backgmund material which the student can use to prepare his own paper; in resli'ty, the services are in the form of papers which can he submitted with little or no revision and need only to be retyped. The concern especially among the teaching and administrative staffs of educational institutions is understandable. Businesses which offer such services are an affront to the educational community, make a mockery of procedures andrequirements designed to help students get an education, and nullify the integrity of the student-teacher relationship. At first glance it would appear almost impassible to find any action that would prohibit these businesses from operating. But a surprising number of successful actions have been instituted. It is the purpose of this report to tell of one such action taken by the University af Wisconsin, Madison, and to consider briefly possible implications for us as teachers. The Department of Agriculture of the State of Wisconsin is charged with the administration and enforcement of the Fair Trade and Practices Act of that state. The Department of Agriculture under the Act may issue investigatory subpaenas, conduct hearings and issue injunctions. In May, 1972, a t the request of the Attorney General's office, the Department of Agriculture issued three investigatory subpoenas to three firms whieh had advertised the sale of term papers and similar materials in Madison. All subpoenaed materials became ~ u b l i cinformation. Following several investigative hearings, a complaint was filed by the Department of Justice against one of the firms alleging that its business consisted of arranging for and selling term papers which could he and were heing suhmitted by students as original work to meet course requirements at the University of Wisconsin and other similar institutions. The complaint further alleged that these practices constituted a violation of the Fair Trade and Practices Act in that they aided, abetted, and encouraged a fraud on the University, created an unfair relationship between students using the services and those who did not, and that students were being aided and encouraged in violating the University's policies of academic honesty and thus preventing the University from achieving its educational goals. Fallowing a hearing in June, 1972, the firm in question was enjoined by the Department of Agriculture from continuing its sale of such materials and no other firms in the same business are now in operation in the Madison area. The successful conclusion of the legal action taken in Wisconsin is encouraging. Furthermore, Legal action was successfully initiated in New York under existing law in 1972, and California passed a law making such activities illegal in 1972. These actions indicate that the public sale of such papers can be and will he halted as more and more universities and state governments take action under existing laws or laws which are enacted for that purpose. Because all suhpaenaed materials became public information, the University of Wi?eonsin was shle to obtain the names of students who had purchased and received papers and who might have submitted them as original work in meeting a course requirement. The name of each of these students with the evidence was turned over to the appropriate course instructor for further investigation and disciplinary action. These students were informed that their academic records would he held until it could he determined whether or not the alleged plagiarism had in fact occurred. Students were given the opportunity of examining the evidence and presenting their position. At the time this report was written allegations of plagiarism had been upheld in 76 % of the eases which had been resolved. Although a variety of sanctions were applied by the instructors, in most cases students received an F for the paper submitted. The pracess of determining guilt and administering appropriate disciplinary action was in many ways and for many different reasons a traumatic experience for these students and their teachers. Although it is impassible to give a full report on the motivations of these students, some of the impressions gained by faculty members involved are of interest and worth contemplating, Apparently, some students were "sold" on the acceptability of their action by the advertising, some felt that there was really nothing wrong with what they had done (copies of tests and papers have and do exist in campus files free for some students, at least), and some did not know how to proceed to write an original report and under pressure took advantage of a way out of their difficulty. Although these impressions reflect only the experience at Wisconsin, there is reason to believe that they are representative of feelings and concerns common tomany students on other campuses. It seems to me that it is important to ask ourselves to what extent, if any, does the academic community hear responsibility for student attitudes and behaviors whieh are in themselves self-defeating? Whether or not we feel a responsibility, we are obligated to reflect on these impressions and to do whatever we think may help students acquire a more wholesome and constructive view of what education is about. ~
~
James V. DeRose Member-at-Large Executive Committee
552
/
Journal of Chemical Education
