Track Teams Finish Sixth

By wpengine | February 17, 2003

Twenty five members from each of the men’s and women’s track teams propelled Cornell to two sixth place finishes this past weekend at the highly competitive Penn State Invitational while other track athletes turned out strong finishes here at home during the Kane Invitational, at Barton Hall.

Both teams finished sixth at Penn State. Their competition included track powerhouses Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, and eight other big-time teams from around the country.

The Red women turned out several impressive performances. Senior captain Katy Jay placed fifth in the 200m (24.59) and second in the 400m, setting a new school record with her time of 55.54s. Sophomore Kari Steed ran the third fastest 400m time in school history with her sixth place time of 56.76s.

Other Cornell women who scored points for the Red were Caitlin Ramsey, who took eighth place in the 60m hurdles (9.15); sophomore Kate Boyles, who placed third in the 5,000m (16:55.17); senior Carlan Gray, who placed fourth in the 5,000 (16:58.56); Natalie Whelan, who placed sixth overall in the 800m (2:11.42); freshman Emily McCabe, who placed fifth in the 3,000m (10:00.87); and IB Stanley-Ikhilioju, who took eighth in the long jump with a leap of 17-8 feet.

Additionally, two relays scored second and third for the Red. The women’s distance medley relay placed second (11:45.83), and the women’s 4x400m relay ran an outstanding race and placed third in 3:45.48.

Of his team’s performance, women’s head coach Lou Duesing said, “We had some extremely good competition from some of the best teams in the country, but we had a lot of fun, and everyone did the best they could.”

“I’m extremely pleased right now,” Duesing continued, “We’re two weeks away from Heps and everyone is running on all cylinders.”

The men’s team had a similarly successful meet. Junior Travis Offner was the best performer for the Red men, winning the pole vault by over a foot with his jump of 17-02.75 ft. Numerous other Red runners, throwers, and jumpers also scored points for their team. Top runners included senior Barry Kahn, who placed eighth in the 5,000m (14:52.99); junior Mike Nanaszko, who placed eighth in the 400m (48.46); sophomore Sam MacKenzie, who placed seventh in the mile (4:15.18); sophomore Brian Eremita, who took fourth in the 600m (1:19.81); and senior Geoff Van Fleet, who placed third in the 3,000m (8:17.18). The 4x400m relay also placed in the meet, finishing eighth with a time of 3:16.5.

Top throwers for the Red were junior Derek Kingrey, who placed fifth in the shot put with a heave of 16.87m; teammate Brett Coffing, who placed eighth in that event with a toss of 16.06m; and weight thrower, junior Giles Longley-Cook, who took sixth with a throw of 17.85m.

Finally, junior Mike Harbeck followed teammate Travis Offner in the pole vault with his fifth place jump of 16-02.75 ft.

Both teams will compete this upcoming weekend in their own Deneault Invitational.

Archived article by Everett Hullverson

Ease of Net Research Creates New Problems

By wpengine February 18, 2003

Online research has increased significantly over the past few years, but basic written requirements from professors might redirect students’ search for credible sources, according to the third part of a recent study by Philip M. Davis, life sciences librarian. The study is entitled “Effect of the Web on Undergraduate Citation Behavior: Guiding Student Scholarship in a Networked Age.” According to his report, which appears in the latest edition of the library sciences journal Portal, the use of book citations by undergraduates has dropped rapidly from the 30-percent mark it held in 1996. Davis’s main concern focuses on student discretion when selecting reliable sources. His study states that the University has seen a 44-percent drop in the number of reference questions asked to librarians, which indicates decreasing library use. During the same time period, the use of web-based sources has increased. “The study puts numbers to something that we knew was undeniably happening,” Davis said. “Numerical arguments tend to make strong arguments.” For his five-year study, Davis used a Microeconomics 101 class taught by John M. Abowd, Edmund Ezra Day Professor of Industrial and Labor Relations. In 2000, Abowd and Davis told students about the use of scholarly sources and proper citation for a semester project. These verbal instructions had little effect on the work. A year later, Abowd wrote basic requirements on assignment handouts, enforcing a minimum for scholarly source usage and proper citation. Failure to follow these requirements resulted in grade penalties. Davis said that students’ use of citations reflected these written guidelines. Abowd stated that students have been “scrupulously honest” with citing web-based sources. However, he says that the main problem lies in distinguishing relevant material. “We are trying to teach the students how to assess the credentials of the person whose opinion or results they are citing. The Internet makes it easy to find a lot of apparently relevant material. It doesn’t make it any easier to separate the good information from the bad,” Abowd stated. Cited URLs that were still valid after six months increased from 55 percent in 1999 to 82 percent in 2001. Web citations also decreased to 13 percent in 2001 from a high of 22 percent in 2000. “Setting minimum guidelines in assignments ensures that students will attempt to identify relevant scholarly literature in their subject field. There need to be expectations and punishments,” Davis said. According to Abowd, TAs checked all of the sources referenced by students. Students were unaware that they were the subjects of the study. Abowd said the main point of the project was to encourage the use of reliable resources outside of the Internet. “The main implication for the real-world assignment that I simulate is that bosses and supervisors need to stress the importance of using good research sources when they assess a work assignment,” Abowd stated. Davis emphasizes that the Internet should not be phased out of research, but rather be used with discretion, since research can be harder than it seems. “We can’t fool ourselves that a Google search is equal to scholarly research,” he said. “The Internet gives a false impression of the difficulty of what goes into research.” In addition to the study, Abowd invited librarians to introduce his students to University library resources. However, most students still feel that Internet research is faster and much more efficient. “It’s time-consuming to go to the library to find and search for books. Staying in your dorm and using the Internet is a lot easier,” said Christine Gallati ’06. Brett Owens ’03 believes that search engines such as Google are less time-consuming than researching in the library. He said that for one of his writing classes, “The only reason why I used print sources was because it was required.” “I think it’s easier to go on the web for legitimate sources,” said Ann Zatsman ’05. Even with the perceived advantages of online sources, Davis hopes his message catches on and that other faculty members will help emphasize the use of a variety of sources. “We are privileged to have such a deep library collection. If students don’t take advantage of it, they are really missing out,” Davis said. Archived article by Brian Tsao
Study shows 25 percent of students plagiarize

By wpengine February 18, 2003

In a 2002 study conducted by Rochester Institute of Technology professors Patrick M. Scanlon and David R. Neumann, communications, results from surveys of approximately 800 college students from various universities indicated that about 25 percent of the sample sometimes or very frequently copied online text without citation. More than 50 percent of the students suspected that their peers cut and pasted text from the Internet. Because plagiarism is a pressing issue throughout the nation and in the University, administrators and faculty alike have developed ways to stop these growing trends. According to student opinion, however, teens seem to be confident in getting away scot-free. A U.S. News and World Report poll found that 90 percent of students believe that cheaters are either never caught or have not been appropriately disciplined. According to Isaac Kramnick, vice provost for undergraduate affairs, the University has taken substantial steps to encourage faculty to clearly outline the temptation and dangers of plagiarism and promote proper citation. Last year, the University subscribed to turnitin.com, an online commercial enterprise used to detect plagiarism. Professors could send in students’ work and the website helped to detect copied papers. “Students were notified that their paper might be handed in,” Kramnick said. However, this initiative did not last. The University later abandoned its subscription, citing legal problems caused by the website’s policy of keeping papers. Even after the cancellation, Kramnick encouraged faculty to continue using the Internet to verify students’ work. Administration promoted faculty use of search engines such as Google, which mostly have strong anti-plagiarism features. Information taught to freshmen in writing seminars also helps anti-plagiarism efforts, said Patricia Wasyliw, assistant dean of admissions and advising. During freshman orientation, administrators also introduce the Code of Academic Integrity, and peer advisors help reinforce expectations. Professors have also taken their own measures to prevent plagiarism. In Anthropology 102, unique topics are usually assigned for essays, said Prof. Kathryn S. March ’79, anthropology. March and her TAs also compare students’ work against that of their peers, former students and the Internet. Different exam versions are also distributed during test periods. Prof. Stuart Davis, English, lets students know at the beginning of the semester that he deeply cares about academic integrity. Davis and Prof. Paul Sawyer, English, also sent out a memo to their department earlier this year, outlining issues such as plagiarism prevention. Davis claims that much of the plagiarism he sees is due to desperation. According to Davis, out of the approximately 100 students he teaches each year, he suspects only three to five papers of containing copied material. Out of these, “one or two cases deserve prosecution.” Davis claims that although the low amount of plagiarism in his experience has not changed, other factors have. “What has changed is the World Wide Web. I don’t think we are in a blizzard of academic dishonesty, but the web is a powerful temptation.” For March, catching plagiarizers is easy most of the time, but she cautiously notes that “it does require knowing your material and your students.” Davis in this respect agrees with March, pointing out that the assumption of cheating is often not reliable, as students’ work depends on a variety of issues such as their social lives and other homework. Even though most professors claim that students are generally honest, there has been “a slight increase” in plagiarism cases, according to Wasyliw. “While the Internet has made the downloading of papers easier, it also makes detecting plagiarism easier through the use of search engines,” she stated. According to the Code of Academic Integrity, if a student is suspected of plagiarism, the professor will present the student with a charge, which is followed by a primary hearing. The hearing board, a unique committee within each college, will hear evidence from the faculty member and the accused student. After the hearing, the faculty member can either dismiss the charge, or if there is “clear and convincing evidence” that the student is guilty, he or she can hand out punishment no greater than the failing of a class. Further offenses, however, might result in harsher penalties. Although the University has taken many measures to prevent this type of behavior from occurring, Wasyliw stated that awareness needs to be raised. Davis agreed that the faculty needs to have open discussions about these topics. “We all hate this issue. We want to trust our students and ourselves,” Davis said. Wasyliw acknowledges that some violations are the result of ignorance. Students typically agree with this. “Sometimes [students cheat], but not on purpose,” said Erin Connolly ’05. “I don’t think a lot of people would [plagiarize], although I’m sure it happens.” Most students are not aware of cases of plagiarism, but they acknowledge that it is a major issue. “I don’t think professors and administrators would make a big deal if it wasn’t a problem,” said Matt Lowenstein ’06. Eric Powell ’05 acknowledged that while plagiarism makes research a lot easier because web searching reduces the amount of time spent on it, there are some drawbacks. “I think it’s easier to plagiarize [on the web], but it’s also easier to get caught,” Powell said. March emphasized that the mission of faculty members is educational, and that students “need to understand that they cannot just make off with ideas any old way they want to.” “The student who enters into a course with the intention of cheating in order to get through or to get a better grade and who contracts to have someone else do their work from the beginning is harder to identify; such a student would have to have the morals of a true criminal,” March said. She added, however, that “most students are not true criminals.” Archived article by Brian Tsao