-1

So I submitted my work to my professor, he graded it and told me to make changes. I am submitting the same project to the same professor, however to make the changes I am writing in a new doc. I want to paste the part that doesn't need changes into the new doc.

Is this considered plagiarism?

closed as unclear what you're asking by corey979, Buzz, Morgan Rodgers, user3209815, problemofficer Dec 12 '18 at 12:27

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • Several things are unclear here. It appears you are not talking about publishing a scientific paper, but just a coursework assignment for a class – is that right? Next, why are you submitting it again? You say it's been graded. Did the prof explicitly said he want to see it again after you made changes? Are you two considering publishing this work in a journal then? – corey979 Dec 11 '18 at 18:46
  • 1
    It seems fine to me: the changed doc may include verbatim copies of portions not changed from the previous version. And, of course, you would publish at most one of the versions of this. (It sounds like you are not publishing it at all, which is fine.) – GEdgar Dec 11 '18 at 18:50
  • 1
    Are you talking about making a new file for the second version? Yeah, that's fine. – Anyon Dec 11 '18 at 18:50
2

No, it isn't plagiarism, nor even self-plagiarism, which is a bit different.

Plagiarism is claiming that something you write was created by yourself when you copy it without attribution to the real originator. It doesn't actually need to be a faithful (cut-paste) copy. Rephrasing is enough for it to be plagiarism. If you claim it for your own when it isn't, that is plagiarism. It is a kind of stealing.

But your earlier version is yours, so no plagiarism.

Self-plagiarism is a bit different and has a different purpose. If you write something and publish it, then, in the future if you want to copy from it in another publication, you should cite the original just as if it was written by another. The reason is that readers of your new work will want to trace back the ideas you present to their earlier form, so as to get a more complete context of the ideas. Copying your own published work without citing it prevents this chain of research to occur, so is considered wrong.

But you haven't published the first version, so there is no reason to even cite it. You can just copy. It is really just a new version of a work in progress.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.