I teach a course on how to write a scientific paper. One of my requirements is no copy and pasting. Period. Including quotation marks and an inline citation does not get a student around this rule/instruction. I consider it to be plagiarism. The instructions on every writing assignment is it must be written in their own words.

Papers are run through Turnitin and TA's are instructed to look at the score and anything over 10% that is not due to common word usage (everyone does the same topic on the first paper and they are going to use a lot of the same words on the subject)is flagged for my review.

In my opinion, this is sloppy, lazy work and simply cheating. And I call it plagiarism. That is the way I was taught through undergrad and grad school and it simply was not acceptable at all.

Is there an actual 'rule' that considers this to be plagiarism or should I just call it cheating? Both are student integrity issues.

While it is not part of the grading rubric for the assignments, it is clearly spelled out in all instructions as well in the syllabus, and a tutorial they have to take and acknowledge they understood in Week 1.

Maybe the answer is to simply incorporate somehow into the Rubric itself so they lose significant points for not following this very clear instruction?

Any advice and information is much appreciated. I cannot get a clear answer from the university I work for.

  • 84
    Not even citations are allowed? What? Does this mean that students are supposed to write papers on completely fictional made-up topics just so they can practice writing? Or are all students expected to lay the foundations of completely new fields of science? Otherwise there is no way to get around building your work upon the works of others. What field you are in?
    – vsz
    Commented Mar 15 at 10:43
  • 73
    "Including quotation marks and an inline citation does not get a student around this rule/instruction. I consider it to be plagiarism." ─ Why do you consider it to be plagiarism, if the student is not claiming the words or ideas they quote to be their own?
    – kaya3
    Commented Mar 15 at 14:06
  • 21
    What is your core goal in disallowing explicit, acknowledged quotes of other work?
    – Brondahl
    Commented Mar 15 at 14:16
  • 68
    I see some votes to close this question. I urge people not to vote to close this question. It is disturbing that someone who does not at a very fundamental level understand what plagiarism is is teaching a class on how to write a scientific paper and enforcing this misunderstanding with potentially serious consequences for their students, but it's also commendable that they reached out for a second opinion, and the more answers this questions gathers, the more likely it is that the OP might change their mind and that their students won't have to face baseless accusations of plagiarism. Commented Mar 15 at 14:28
  • 1
    Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on Academia Meta, or in Academia Chat. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.
    – cag51
    Commented Mar 15 at 21:02

10 Answers 10


It is neither plagiarism nor cheating.

Plagiarism means presenting another person's intellectual contributions as your own. If sentence is in quotation marks and followed by [37], it is clearly not claimed as a contribution by the author. If you go and redefine what plagiarism means you are doing neither yourself nor your students a favour.

Of course you can have a rule that your student's essays musn't have any quotations in it. I think that's a bad idea, still, but not completely unreasonable.

However, if a student violates this rule it still isn't cheating. Cheating requires a level of dishonesty and deception, and having clearly-marked quotations in a text just doesn't fit the bill. I often set assignments where I am asking students to write a proof of something, and get answers that are definitely not proofs. This is not an academic integrety issue, this is just students failing to do the task they were given. They get 0 marks on it, and that's it.

  • 41
    A more reasonable constraint on quotations might be something like "quotations will not be counted towards the length of the paper", or otherwise limiting how often they are used. Not for issues of plagiarism, but for issues of successfully completing the intended assignment.
    – Bryan Krause
    Commented Mar 15 at 13:58
  • 16
    @PeymanMohamadpour It is not cheating. This is like having a rule students cannot use the letter "a" in their paper. Students who do use the letter "a" may fail the assignment, but they're not cheating. They did not properly complete the assignment, but there's no academic integrity issue.
    – marcelm
    Commented Mar 16 at 11:52
  • 11
    Further, the OP's approach causes problems for those of us that have to pick up the pieces when students has been exposed to these idiosyncratic and misleading definitions. Forbidding direct quotes is particularly problematic in two ways (i) it encourages students to think that paraphrasing is both necessary and sufficient to avoid plagiarism, and that plagiarism is about words not passing off someone else's work as your own; (ii) it teaches students that it's OK to change another author's wording. Sometimes the exact expression of an idea matters
    – Chris H
    Commented Mar 16 at 12:17
  • 2
    What @ChrisH said is particularly important: I'd rather have a quote from someone who spent significant time to get it just write, than a rewording that may be clumsy, hard to understand, and/or contain subtle errors that the original author was aware off and avoided.
    – gnasher729
    Commented Mar 17 at 8:52
  • 1
    @DanielHatton I completely agree! I do tell my students to avoid direct quotations, but I don't forbid them. And even if I did forbid them, I'd just mark them down for doing it anyway, rather than thinking even remotely of academic misconduct.
    – Arno
    Commented Apr 4 at 8:49

One of my requirements is no copy and pasting. Period. Including quotation marks and an inline citation does not get a student around this rule/instruction. I consider it to be plagiarism.

It may be important to consider that your personal definition of plagiarism doesn't match that of most other courses or academia in general.

Students coming in will not expect a lecturer to have simply invented their own unique definition of plagiarism even if that lecturer has mentioned it in the syllabus.

You can make arbitrary class rules, you could declare that students will get a zero if they fail to wear red on a friday or fail to use the oxford comma.

But the university itself is unlikely to consider it a student integrity issue because in reality the students are simply not following some arbitrary rule. Like if you banned them from using the letter "Z" then tried to report them to the the university as an "integrity issue" or "cheating" when some of them didn't follow that instruction.

You can give them a low score but if it doesn't match the universities own definition of plagiarism then it's simply a waste of administrators time to report them claiming they've committed plagiarim.

  • 39
    Careful! You copied and pasted that first part!
    – Tashus
    Commented Mar 15 at 19:03
  • 13
    I have to wonder how many students' grades have been impacted by the instructor's incorrect understanding of plagiarism and cheating. It sounds like a review of grades is in order.
    – Eggy
    Commented Mar 15 at 23:28
  • 6
    @Eggy it's worse, because if they do well in following these rules, they're being set up to write bad papers later on - and even to commit actual plagiarism by the focus on eliminating textual similarities rather than the passing off of work.
    – Chris H
    Commented Mar 16 at 12:22
  • 7
    @LyndaElaine I think if you forcefully state a policy that is contrary to academic principles and is likely to harm students, you open yourself to criticism. Fairness applies to individuals, regardless of the percentage affected. I recommend reviewing the grades of any student whose grade was lowered because of this policy.
    – Eggy
    Commented Mar 16 at 12:33
  • 4
    @LyndaElaine w.r.t. Eggy's response, there are a lot of students out there who think that plagiarism is about not "using their own words" and not about dishonesty, so they write horribly plagiarised papers that just rephrase everything. This misconception then needs to be corrected (quite possibly by a trip to the academic integrity board, since 1: it is plagiarism, and 2: the students who deliberately plagiarize are doing the exact same thing, so it's hard to judge intent.) So everyone else here is needing to correct the incorrect definition you're teaching your students.
    – Ray
    Commented Mar 16 at 15:52

This is not plagiarism.

Plagiarism is taking credit for someone else's work. It is taking someone else's ideas and making the claim that they are the fruits of your own intellectual labor. Plagiarism can occur when one copies and pastes the precise words of another author without citation, but can also occur through paraphrasing without giving a proper reference.

Plagiarism is a major offense in academia, since those in academia live and die off of the ideas they produce. It is important in this setting that the people who first came up with an idea are properly credited, and that the entire chain of reasoning is laid out (since a flaw in a 50 year old paper by A. Adams might ripple down to preprint by Z. Zhang). We have to know where the ideas came from, hence there are strict cultural norms regarding citation and credit throughout the academy.

Good instruction will help students to understand these norms, and to inculcate them into the ethos of budding academics.

This is not cheating.

Assuming that students are copying and pasting in an appropriate manner—that is, they are not copying too much, are properly indicating which sections of material are direct quotes, and are correctly providing citations to the original work—they are not cheating. Indeed, this is standard practice in academic writing.

You are welcome to create your own rules for your assignments, such as insisting that students never copy-and-paste, but this is simply a standard which you would be setting in your own classroom. Failure to adhere to such a rule would not be cheating, and would only constitute a failure to complete the assignment as instructed (much as asserting that 2+2=5 would not be cheating—it would simply be incorrect).

The distinction here is that cheating typically requires some mens rea—in order to cheat, a student needs to know that what they are doing is immoral or unethical. But directly quoting another author (with appropriate citation) is not immoral or unethical. Indeed, it is a skill which we, as educators, should be teaching students to do correctly.

This is a bad policy.

There are at least two major consequence I see coming from this policy:

  1. Students will get better at actually cheating. You have created a situation in which you are muddying the actual definition of plagiarism, while also teaching students the skills that they need to plagiarize more effectively without getting caught. Naive cheaters plagiarize by passing off direct quotes as their own work. Sophisticated cheaters learn to pass off paraphrased and uncited text as their own work. You are rewarding the sophisticated cheaters.

  2. You are failing to actually teach students what "plagiarism" is. Real academic writing requires the incorporation of ideas which were originally thought up by others. Most academic writing is incremental, and builds slowly on previous work—it is very rare for anything completely original and revolutionary to be published (in my own field, even revolutionary work like that produced by Newton, Leibniz, Gauss, or Fourier built on the work of others). Good academic style quotes others when they phrase something better than anyone else, and gives credit where credit is due, but paraphrases and condenses when required. Students need to learn when to quote, when to paraphrase, and how to properly give credit in either case. Banning direct quotation fails to teach this skill, and muddies the waters around academic integrity and real plagiarim.

A better policy?

My guess (my hope?) is that the goal of such a policy is to prevent "patchwork papers", in which students write a paper by directly quoting several authors and contribute very little of their own analysis or original thought. If so, there are better ways of handling this. For example:

  1. Set limits on direct quotes. Explain to students that they can (and probably should) directly quote earlier work from time-to-time, but that the bulk of their writing should be original. Set a limit on how much direct quoting they can incorporate into their work as part of your rubric. Making up numbers off the top of my head, something like "At least 90% of the words you turn in must be your own original writing."

  2. Don't count quotes. If the assignment is supposed to be 500 words (or 50 pages, or whatever), don't count quoted text towards that word limit.

  3. Grade drafts / allow revision. Keep in mind that the goal of any assignment should be to help students to learn or practice some skill (if your goal isn't helping students, you should consider another profession). Rather than having students put all of their eggs into the one basket of a final paper, collect and grade their work at important checkpoints—have them turn in a rough draft, and give feedback on that draft. This gives you an opportunity to point out excessive quoting before the final document is turned in, and gives you the chance to indicate how that rough document would be graded if it were turned in as a final draft.

In addition, as has been pointed out by several commenters (both below the question, and below this and other answers), excessive use of direct quotation is poor style. It isn't dishonest, or cheating, or plagiarizing—it is just bad writing. It is entirely reasonable to dock students points for bad writing, but it needs to be clear that this has nothing to do with "academic integrity" or "plagiarism". You are docking them points (or should be, anyway) because you are trying to teach them to be better writers, not because you are trying to punish them for violating academic ethics.

  • 14
    I really like this answer, it hits all the major points. From my own experience, one of the reasons for using verbatim quotes I've been given by my PhD students that just started was that "the opinion of this author is surely more interesting than mine" and "how could I ever hope to come up with a better phrasing than the one the original authors did". I found the issue was the mismatch in the understanding of what the purpose of the writing exercise was -- this started improving as soon as the student understood that the whole point is kinda to express their opinion, not (just) collate others
    – penelope
    Commented Mar 15 at 15:01
  • 3
    @LyndaElaine "Simply plunking down chunks of copied information teaches them nothing." Okay, but copying a bunch of passages from other texts, plopping them into GPT and having it rephrase those passages, then copying those into a paper is also not helping your students to learn anything. But this is exactly what the students who would have written a patchwork paper are doing right now. Your policy is not encouraging students to think critically---it is encouraging them to find better ways of hiding the fact that they are really doing the work. Commented Mar 16 at 12:20
  • 1
    If you want them to think critically, don't outright ban quoting. Rather, help them to learn when it is appropriate to quote, and when it is appropriate to add their own thoughts, and what you mean by their own thoughts (in my world, paraphrasing another author is not any different from simply quoting another author---real writing requires some analysis and synthesis). Commented Mar 16 at 12:22
  • 2
    @XanderHenderson "Okay, but copying a bunch of passages from other texts, plopping them into GPT and having it rephrase those passages, then copying those into a paper is also not helping your students to learn anything" - Not quite true: if they're doing it without citations, it teaches them how to get away with actual plagiarism.
    – Ray
    Commented Mar 16 at 16:04
  • 3
    The "patchwork" paper is the real issue. Rather than making a moralistic (and dubious) claim about "cheating," try just taking off points for bad writing. Help them learn to use their own voices.
    – Elin
    Commented Mar 17 at 15:47

I think splitting up your guidelines will help enforcement. I don't know if it will help compliance though... You're mixing two separate things together and trying to cover them with one policy.

Situation 1: If a student copies and pastes text without citation that is plagiarism full stop. In that case just give the student a 0 on the assignment (or handle it however you want). I would expect nothing less from a college level course. Your university must have some generic statement on academic integrity/plagiarism you can reference. Your syllabus should mention the class/university plagiarism policy explicitly.

Situation 2: If a student quotes text and cites it properly that is, by definition, not plagiarism. Despite it being against your class rules, you are not going to get official support calling it "plagiarism" because it isn't technically plagiarism. So this really can't (or shouldn't) be covered by the same policy. Again, it isn't plagiarism—regardless of your personal view. You could implement a separate quotation penalty. Just communicate it clearly and you're set.

Unfortunately, in my experience, there are lots of students who just don't get it when it comes to plagiarism. You can talk till you're blue in the face, and they just keep coming back with work that isn't really up to par. It can be lack of effort, lack of understanding, or lack of knowledge (i.e., they are not able to synthesize the topic well enough to not unintentionally plagiarize). It might be worthwhile to explore these possibilities—it sounds like you are actually communicating expectations well enough as it is. So maybe it isn't your policies or grading, but something else entirely.

  • I probably wasn't clear enough. I was just referring to a specific issue. They don't cite at all it is a flat zero and a warning letter. The 2nd time it goes to student integrity. Their second writing assignment is coming due in a few weeks. I added a penalty for copy/pasting. It is large enough to get their attention. They can resubmit as many times as they want to before the final due date/time. Calling this plagiarism is how I was taught in undergrad and grad school. It was simply not acceptable at all. I never saw an official 'rule' about it. My professor said don't do it,I didn't. Commented Mar 16 at 4:23
  • 8
    We're trying to point out that you weren't taught correctly in graduate school. You have an opportunity now to learn what plagiarism really is and how proper use of quotations can help students develop critical thinking skills. Moreover, learning this is important for your own research and writing career.
    – Eggy
    Commented Mar 16 at 12:37
  • @LyndaElaine, you are absolutely complete misguided. Now I went to university in a free country, not the USA, and you can believe me that if my highly regarded professor doing Analysis I had come up with this nonsense, we would have fought to the teeth to get him removed.
    – gnasher729
    Commented Mar 17 at 9:01
  • 1
    @gnasher Well, your wording is a bit harsh, but I do believe the OP is opening herself up to student complaints that could end badly for her. She has already hinted at a lack of support from the university on this issue. One of these days a student who has been downgraded is going to look up the definition of plagiarism and discover the truth.
    – Eggy
    Commented Mar 17 at 16:40

Your students are going to hate your guts with such an absurd rule. Citations are by definition, not plagiarism.

Nearly all research is based on, or is at least tangentially related to someone else's work, how do you expect your students to research a topic without being able to reference previous research? That's absurd and makes their job needlessly more difficult.

I would strongly recommend dropping this rule unless your intention is to bring down the average grade.

  • 16
    @penelope I dare say the no-quoting rule is pretty absurd because it actually forces people to go one step towards plagiarism: Rewriting someone else’s words superficially to not trigger plagiarism detection. Commented Mar 15 at 15:19
  • 2
    @MisterMiyagi My thoughts exactly, hopefully OP posted this as a joke and is not being serious because this is asking for a substantial increase in plagiarism in the future.
    – ChellCPlus
    Commented Mar 15 at 15:29
  • 2
    I've in the past encountered students that liked verbatim quotes way too much. Nearly every claim made by another paper was included verbatim, with quotation marks (and a citation) which I found extremely bad practice; anywhere between 90 and 100% of those should've been paraphrased. I did explain the nuance, but that was possible as I was working with that student 1-on-1. In a class setting, I can actually see how forbidding verbatim quotations could be more beneficial than detrimental overall.
    – penelope
    Commented Mar 15 at 16:24
  • 2
    @penelope obviously overuse of verbatim quotes can be an issue for some students but they do serve an important role and shouldn't be blanket banned. OP could have just deducted marks for excessive or inappropriate verbatim quotes but instead chose the nuclear option.
    – ChellCPlus
    Commented Mar 15 at 16:31
  • 2
    @penelope Sure, but that's a writing style issue, not an academic dishonesty one.
    – Ray
    Commented Mar 16 at 16:08

I agree with those who say that this isn't a great rule. There's nothing wrong with using literature, and quoting and citing where appropriate.

That said, I get it in some ways. Direct quotes are not how we write in the sciences, where paraphrasing and providing citation are the rules of the road, unless the exact language used is critical (in which case, we go back to quotation and citation). When students who don't know better go out of their way to include a quote, it can just look and sound silly. This isn't how it works for every discipline, though, and people of letters use quotes more. It's just stylistic.

You're free to use whatever instructions and rules you please though, but you can't call a failure to follow directions academic dishonesty. You're free to reduce grades for failure to follow your specific and clear directions -- but it's neither plagiarism or any other form of dishonesty, unless, of course, quotes and citations are missing. IMO, though, it would just be better to tell students that in the sciences, we always use citation, and tend to choose to paraphrase rather than quote.

  • 1
    I agree and this is the type of advice I am looking for here. Apparently the way I was taught through grad school wasn't exactly correct. This course is an ACE requirement for undergrads at this university. My course is one of many choices. The topic is Insect Biology so assignments revolve around that. They are learning to write a research paper based a specified experiment using the scientific method, they are not actually conducting. And each assignment adds a new component. I took over this course and have been slowly revamping it I appreciate your advice. Thanks Commented Mar 16 at 4:36
  • 4
    @LyndaElaine You don't like the example I gave. That's fine, perhaps it doesn't apply to your field. But all of the answers you've received are indicating that you need to back up, understand what plagiarism is, and revamp your policy. You come across as strident in your question, asking us to provide justification for a harmful policy, and then defensive toward people who are trying to explain what plagiarism is. I'm shocked that you don't know what plagiarism is. How low have you been teaching? There are many resources online where you can learn about plagiarism.
    – Eggy
    Commented Mar 16 at 12:51
  • @Eggy -- this doesn't sound defensive to me at all. The poster is amassing and evaluating feedback, and incorporating where they deem appropriate. Commented Mar 16 at 15:28

I don't see the wisdom of your rule against copying and pasting quotations and properly citing them. In fact, learning to do this is an essential academic skill. Here's an (invented) example:

The majority of studies in the last 10 years have found that saturated fat in the diet does not cause high cholesterol. In fact, Chen and James (2022) state, "Our meta-analysis of 568 studies conducted on three continents and involving more than 350,000 patients over a period of 25 years found almost no correlation between fat in the diet and lipid profiles" (p. 236). Among the small number of studies that found a positive correlation, 89% involved fewer than 25 patients.

If you're saying that such a use of copying and pasting is wrong, I can't agree. Here the writer is appropriately using an authoritative quotation to explain and support the writer's argument.

  • It is not the way scientific papers are written. The use of copy paste is discouraged. This can easily be rewritten in your words, properly inline cited and then an analysis done. In this course, until the student reaches the discussion and conclusion section, there are NO supporting arguments. They are providing the required information per the instructions in their words and properly cited. The Madagascar Hissing Cockroach is an insect only found in the wild on the Island of Madagascar. It belongs to the order ?, family ?, species ?, and the scientific name is ?. (Citation, date). Commented Mar 16 at 4:42
  • They have to parse this out of the references, 3 of which are provided for their first paper. If I let them just copy and paste, they might as well just tell me to look at the reference and figure it out for myself. These are VERY basic papers. The second builds on first one (different insect) and they have to create a methods section and develop a hypothesis. Then discuss. The third one they get to pick any insect or arachnid, ask a question that of interest to them, be able to find actual research on that topic and create an experiment. Based on their research, they then discuss. Commented Mar 16 at 4:46
  • For the third one, they have to send their question to me so I can bring them back down to earth and help them be more realistic. We aren't looking at the big questions in this course. What you described is the type of thing I would see in a stats course I am taking. Not in Entomology which is my field. Nor are we doing literature reviews. Anyway, I appreciate your comments. Commented Mar 16 at 4:50
  • 16
    You should be careful with saying this isn't how scientific papers are written. I have colleagues that do interdisciplinary work (engineering/science focused with human factors concerns included) and frequently use direct quotes in their work. You are being too general with your statements and philosophy. Direct quotes are for sure rare in straight up math, physics, and chemistry papers, but they are fairly commonplace in other sciences like medicine and biology. You are teaching your students bad academic behavior. Commented Mar 16 at 6:34

It's neither cheating nor plagiarism. If you want to make a rule that quotes aren't allowed (even with a citation), this seems rather arbitrary to me, but I suppose that you're free to do so if you insist. However, it's definitely not cheating or plagiarism. Look up what those words mean in a dictionary and you'll see why this is incorrect.

In my opinion, this is sloppy, lazy work and simply cheating.

It's not cheating - by definition, cheating involves deception of some kind. The Cambridge Dictionary defines cheating as

to behave in a dishonest way in order to get what you want

If they cite the quote, they're not being dishonest and therefore not cheating.

Whether it's "lazy" or "sloppy" is a matter of opinion.

And I call it plagiarism.

Call it what you like, but it's not plagiarism.

Webster's defines plagiarizing as

to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own: use (another's production) without crediting the source

The Cambridge Dictionary defines it as

the process or practice of using another person's ideas or work and pretending that it is your own

Oxford University's plagiarism policy defines plagiarism as follows:

Presenting work or ideas from another source as your own, with or without consent of the original author, by incorporating it into your work without full acknowledgement. All published and unpublished material, whether in manuscript, printed or electronic form, is covered under this definition, as is the use of material generated wholly or in part through use of artificial intelligence (save when use of AI for assessment has received prior authorisation e.g. as a reasonable adjustment for a student’s disability). Plagiarism can also include re-using your own work without citation. Under the regulations for examinations, intentional or reckless plagiarism is a disciplinary offence.

The point being, the accepted definition of plagiarism always includes the element of passing off someone else's work as if it was your own. If they clearly credit the source, it's literally not plagiarism. I remember my 4-year-old niece insisting that a picture of a giraffe was actually a picture of a moose. When corrected, she said "well, I want to call it a moose!" (The classic answer: "Call it what you like, but it's a giraffe!")


Science needs to be efficient.

If someone has written a good paper on a subject, and I need the results of the paper, then the right thing to do is quote the paper verbatim, and give a citation so that everyone interested can check the original paper, and nobody believes that I am incredibly clever for finding these results. And it happens that this paper may be much more important than mine: There is a minor problem that people want to be solved, and I figured how this great and famous result can be used to solve the minor problem people want solved. So the quote might be 95% of my whole paper. Still, my five percent added to science.

So what would be gained if I paraphrase this paper? I still need a citation, because whether it is paraphrased or not doesn't make one bit of difference to plagiarism. So now all I have achieved by paraphrasing is that the same subject is handled twice in the literature, in slightly different ways, which can only be confusing. Worse, while the original paper was written by someone highly knowledgable of the subject, the second paper is written by a rank amateur in the matter, so you expected it to be unclear, not very readable, and possibly to contain subtle mistakes that are not there in the original paper. Does paraphrasing it correctly demonstrate that I'm clever enough to paraphrase a complex matter? Sure, it does. But nobody asked for that. Nobody wants the paraphrased result. It's value is not just zero, it is negative.

So now I am supposed to put substantial effort into something that is of negative value. I can use my time in better ways. I can create more useful science. Or I can use the time to lie on the beach, which is still producing a zero result as far as science is concerned, and not a negative one.

What happens if you read my paper with the paraphrased result? You may look at it and verify that it supports my paper. But you don't know whether the paraphrased result is actually true. If a quote the original verbatim, then you know that a lot of people have checked this, and it's most likely true. Nobody has checked my paraphrased result. You don't know whether it is true. You cannot trust it unless you verify it. Or better, if you substitute the original and check whether the original supports my paper. In which case again, I just created unnecessary work for myself and for you.


Your approach is aligned with academic integrity standards. While there might not be a specific rule, copy-and-pasting without proper citation is considered plagiarism. Incorporating this requirement into the grading rubric can reinforce its importance and deter cheating. If there's ambiguity from your university, seeking further clarification or support may be helpful.

  • 1
    There is more to plagiarism than copy-pasting, actually.
    – Buffy
    Commented Apr 3 at 12:48
  • 2
    Reading the question, it seems that it is about forbidding copying-and-pasting entirely, and not just copying-and-pasting without proper citation. Copy-pasting is not, in and of itself, plagiarism. Commented Apr 3 at 17:20

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .