Howard Dialectical Notebook

There’s no solution to stopping plagiarism. It seems that we are in prevention and consequence mode.	Yet the more I study student plagiarism, the more I identify problems not susceptible to pedagogical solution (219).
Does it? I think that intentional plagiarism if an issue out of the classroom, however, accidental is definitely something for us to deal with.	Whether it is in teaching moral codes or citation rules, an assumption that runs throughout the discourse of plagiarism is that the “solution” to it lies in the classroom (220).
The causes are not pedagogy and the prevention is not pedagogy.	I wish to explore a contrary perspective: that the causes of plagiarism exceed pedagogy (220).
Ouch. Agreeable, but still, there is a separation in this statement that I’m not sure is projected well.  Yes, we are in different systems but do we want it to be apparent and intimidating? I prefer it not to be.	Pedagogy can’t fix plagiarism, because students and faculty are too much working from different economic systems (220).
How do the students get to complete it without taking the invitation? Is this something to be evaluated in the class expectations?	These instructors design their classes to invite students into that intellectual enterprise, and they are annoyed by those who complete the course without ever accepting the invitation (221).
They have to want to write it. Throw in Murray’s autobiographical text conversation and encourage tem to make it their own.	“Many students write poorly and with deplorable styles simply because they do not care; their failures are less the result of incapacity than the lack of will” (224).
Geez.  I don’t believe the statement, let alone want to answer it.	And why, in fact, should we care about students who are so much our intellectual inferiors? (225).
This is true. Is he from Portsmouth? (haha)  They do come to college to flee the lower end and, in some cases, for a means of income. We can only encourage those students to understand their motivation and want to be a leader to change it for others.	Keith Rhodes, for example, asserts that students come to college today not to become leaders but to “flee the drying lower end of our national economy” (226).
That’s why the subjects need to be interesting to them. The combination of the economic system difference between student and teacher allows for a gap of miscommunication of what each student truly wants to write about and is interested in. Everyone has done something because they had to, as quickly as possible, and I guarantee it’s because they weren’t interested. Make it interesting.	A student’s purpose, as she begins to compose an assigned college text, may not be original thought; it may be the completion of the task at hand by the most expeditious means possible (228).
It is about degrees for economic gain but this is where counseling for picking the right degree comes in.	Students may, in short, see college writing assignments as a means of acquiring the institutionalized variety of cultural capital of academic degrees (228).