Plagiarism is a modern Western construct which arose with the introduction of copyright laws in the eighteenth century. Before this time, there was little sense of artistic "ownership". Since then, the ideas of "originality" in writing as well as the "autonomous text" have been highly valued. In the theoretical section of this dissertation I deal with plagiarism and referencing from three perspectives. After looking at problems of definition of plagiarism, I turn to the first perspective, the historical development of the notions of plagiarism and originality. Alongside this I discuss the notions of "autonomous text" and "decontextualized" language, and attempt to show that these concepts are problematic, and that language is intensely social at the levels of discourses, genres, and the word. The second angle is a snapshot of present-day writing genres, and how they deal with documentation in different ways. The third point of focus is on the development of the student writer, on whom present-day genres of academic writing, and the historically constructed notions of plagiarism converge. Here I centre on the development of the undergraduate student as a writer, and some of the things that may be happening when a student is seen to be plagiarizing. Some of these are the "alienness" of academic discourses, the hybridization of discourses, the need to "try on" academic discourses, the lack of authority of the student writer and her relationship to the authority of the sources, and the way in which languages are learned and reproduced in chunks. I look finally at what the meaning of authorship might be in an intensely social view of language, and at the complexity of developing authorial voice in writing. The dissertation is located in a postpositivist paradigm, and seeks to interpret as well as being oriented towards praxis. The research took place within the Political Studies Department at the University of Cape Town. The study included a discourse analysis of the departmental handbook, as well as analysis of academic essays, at the first year and third year level, which were selected for having problems with referencing, or having plagiarized. A few were selected for good referencing. Students who had written these essays, and tutors and lecturers who had marked them, were then interviewed. In the analysis I explore differing understandings of the role of referencing in the academic essay, what negative and positive consequences the practice of referencing and the monitoring of plagiarism have, with regard to authority and voice in student writing, what might be happening when students are thought to be plagiarizing, and what difficulties are experienced by students in developing an authorial voice when using multiple sources. The study found that there are a range of underlying causes for plagiarism in student writing, which indicate that plagiarism is more a problem of academic literacy than academic dishonesty. It also found that marking practices in detecting plagiarism may sometimes be based on problematic assumptions about the amount of background knowledge and independent ideas which students bring to their writing. I conclude by putting forward a pedagogy for plagiarism and referencing, which is based on 1) the negotiation of shared meaning around the concept of plagiarism, including an examination of assumptions linked to this concept in its monitoring and enforcement, leading to the development of written policy and guidelines emerging from this shared understanding. 2) The development of an academic literacy programme within the curriculum, with attention to the complexities of developing authorial voice whilst constructing a text based on the texts of others, with a focus on authors, which moves students towards an understanding of how knowledge is constructed.

A major contribution of research in workplace literacy has been to explore the part that writing plays in the knowledge-making practices of various professional groups. While such enquiry has revealed that writing is essential to the creation and use of specialized knowledge in the professions, it also points to the need to see writing as part of a larger network of symbolic activity. Researchers have shown that practitioners in certain professions---for example, engineering and architecture---do not produce knowledge solely through the social negotiations of language; rather, acts of writing and reading merge with other symbol-based practices in larger processes of knowledge-making. / A promising area for further research in this regard is the field of economics, where knowledge is constituted through a discourse combining language, mathematics, and visual forms such as graphs. The study reported here examines a particular site of such knowledge-making: the Ottawa head office of the Bank of Canada. Employing an ethnographic methodology that included interviews, informal conversations, on-site observations, reading protocols, tape-recorded meetings, and text analysis, the study examines an ongoing, writing-intensive activity known in the Bank as the "monetary policy process," in which the institution's economists generate knowledge about Present and probable future conditions in the Canadian economy and use this knowledge in formulating and implementing policy. / The central question guiding the study is this: what is the nature of the intellectual collaboration that enables the Bank's economists to transform large amounts of statistical data into focused written knowledge about the Canadian economy and then use this knowledge in making decisions about monetary policy? The study shows that the "monetary policy process" can be viewed as a communal activity in which the economists employ a set of written genres in combination with mathematical models---most importantly, the computer-run Quarterly Projection Model---to carry out their work. The joint, intermeshed use of writing and modelling gives rise to a distinctive pattern of social interaction and a style of collective thinking that allow the economists to produce specialized knowledge about the economy and apply this knowledge to decision-making.

No description available.

The title of this monography is Discourses of Writing in the Curriculum of the A-course in Swedish. The aim of this monograph is to find wich forms and discourses of writing that are emphasized and premiered in the curriculum for the first course in Swedish during secondary education in Sweden, grades 10-12. What kind of writing are presented to the students and what potentially miss due to the selection? Is any form of writing presented more thoroughly or as more important than any other in the curriculum? The professor of linguistics, Roz Ivanic, has formed different discourses of writing that she has found being used in education of writing. With these discourses of writing  I have applied them on the curriculum and then been able to see wich forms of writing that are premiered. By using close reading as a method of analyze I have been able to interpret the curriculum. I have connected close reading as a method with the hermeneutic analysis tradition. The discourses of writing is my tool and my theory wich holds different forms of writing that are connected to earlier science of writing that I present as a background in the monograph. The conclusion I have reached are that the curriculum holds four discourses of writing. That means that the form of writing that are presented to the students are a writing to imitate other types of texts, a grammatical correct spelling, a thotoughly processed text and knowledge about their own mental process that is activated during writing. The diskourse of writing that is presented as the most important in the curriculum is the skills discourse of writing. That leads to a form of writing in grammatically correct writing and prepares the students to adjust to a writing that is presented mainly in higher forms of education.

国立情報学研究所で電子化したコンテンツを使用している。

The implicit position of writing during Research Higher Degree (RHD) candidature shapes how students in science approach the task of writing their theses. The dedication of universities to the principles of research has pushed writing to the fringes of the research higher degree. When writing is pushed to the fringes, it is rarely taught explicitly as an integral part of the postgraduate program. This research has found that students who are concerned with writing a thesis often require writing to be discussed explicitly during their education. In response to the absence of explicit instruction on writing, students turn to the principles of research to discover how to write their theses. However, students find that writing belongs to a different epistemological tradition than scientific research. This investigation found that as students realise that research is different from writing, they often write their theses by mimicking the work of other published authors in the same field. These findings emerge from eight semi–structured interviews with linguistically homologous students from a science faculty at a research-intensive university in Australia. These interviews show that students are initiating their own writing groups to learn more about writing. This research presents a case study which culminates in recommendations about how to re-position writing as an explicit discourse requiring attention during the research higher degree. These writing recommendations are developed in this research by analysing the principles of writing programs, examining the literature on writing groups, and reflecting the experience of students during the research higher degree.

Research paper (M.L.I.S.)--Victoria University of Wellington, 2010. / Includes bibliographical references.

No description available.

Submitted by Leonardo Lima (leonardoperlim@gmail.com) on 2016-04-11T14:36:12Z No. of bitstreams: 2 Seu Paulo - a escrita no barro.pdf: 4210919 bytes, checksum: 17d895ef7cf8318db86ed788f8e47f67 (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Aline Batista (alinehb.ufpel@gmail.com) on 2016-04-11T16:13:32Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 Seu Paulo - a escrita no barro.pdf: 4210919 bytes, checksum: 17d895ef7cf8318db86ed788f8e47f67 (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Aline Batista (alinehb.ufpel@gmail.com) on 2016-04-11T16:16:30Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 Seu Paulo - a escrita no barro.pdf: 4210919 bytes, checksum: 17d895ef7cf8318db86ed788f8e47f67 (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-11T16:16:39Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 Seu Paulo - a escrita no barro.pdf: 4210919 bytes, checksum: 17d895ef7cf8318db86ed788f8e47f67 (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-10-22 / Sem bolsa / A dissertação “Seu Paulo – a escrita no barro: um Outro Sujeito, um Sujeito Outro, uma Pedagogia Outra, uma Outra Pedagogia”, partilha da interação entre os pressupostos metodológicos que caracterizam o estudo de caso, a observação participante, a entrevista narrativa e a etnografia surrealista. Nesta dinâmica o “corpus” do trabalho indica como resultado a proposta da surrealização da escrita de pesquisa (BUSSOLETTI, 2013) problematizando a escultura enquanto narrativa dentro de um processo educativo de resistência cultural e social e capaz de mostrar Outros Sujeitos,Outras Pedagogias. Para o desenvolvimento dessa discussão são utilizados na centralidade autores como Walter Benjamin e Friedrich Nietzsche, aproximando-os da perspectiva da Pedagogia Crítica de Peter McLaren e de Henry Giroux e culminando através da cumplicidade com Miguel Arroyo na defesa dos denominados “Outros Sujeitos e Outras Pedagogias”. A proposta é de que através de um estudo deste caso único possamos ter elementos para estabelecer um diálogo entre educação e arte e reafirmar a educação nos marcos de uma Pedagogia da Fronteira. / The dissertation "Seu Paulo- a escrita no barro: um Outro Sujeito, um Sujeito Outro, uma Pedagogia Outra, uma Outra Pedagogia" (Seu Paulo- Writing in the Clay: Another Subject, an Other Subject, Another Pedagogy, a different Pedagogy) emerges from the interaction between the assumed methodologies that characterize the case study- participant observation, the narrative interview, and surrealist ethnography. In this vein, the "corpus" of the work explores the intentional use of surrealization of written research, problematizing the position of sculpture as a narrative working within an educational process of cultural and social resistance, as a medium capable of revealing alternative subjects and pedagogies. In the development of his argument, this author primarily draws upon the works of Walter Benjamin and Friedrich Nietzsche, as well as Peter McLaren and Henry Giroux's perspectives on critical pedagogy. Finally, this author applies the works of Miguel Arroyo in support of his defense of the so-called "other subjects and other pedagogies". The final proposal being that, through the study of this unique case, one might find elements that work in unison to establish a dialogue between the arts and education, and thus reaffirm education as one of the goals of Frontier/ Border Pedagogy.

This dissertation examines the figures of the shaman and the cyborg, arguing that both act as intermediaries between the organic world of bodies and the artificial world of culture and machines. Using the sf of Robert Holdstock, David Zindell and Kathleen Ann Goonan as starting points, new forms of embodiment in the context of the cyborg and the shaman's shared narrative of radical boundary dissolution are critically and imaginatively examined. Throughout this thesis, the works of Deleuze and Guattari, Sadie Plant, Manuel De Landa, Erik Davis, Donna Haraway, Terence McKenna, and other speculative theorists who operate at the nexus of technological culture and the shamanic imagination serve as guidelines. / English Studies / M.A.