Letter to the Editor

Letter to the Editor

It is agreeable that the students had committed an offence that is punishable in any academic institution. The two students were guilty of academic dishonesty yes, but punishment by expulsion is a very harsh one. The rule on plagiarism makes it clear that the students should clearly cite any information obtained from another academic source. The citation should involve an indication of the source of the information and the information in a paraphrased form (Kinzie, 2008). In a case where the information obtained is presented with the same words, then it has to be enclosed in quotation marks. Mark Gruntz had obtained information from Wikipedia but from his argument, he did the paraphrasing well and had cited the sources used.

The fact that Wikipedia is not a credible academic source, the student did not breach any rules of plagiarism. The punishment was then thus uncalled for and the student is not guilty of any form of academic dishonesty. The panel that handled the cases was also unfair to the students. According Kinzie (2008), Mark was not allowed any time or counsel to adequately prepare for the trial despite the fact that he was informed that he would have the trial. It is however recommended that any person facing a trial should be given adequate time to prepare for it. Routman was not pleased with the way the trials were administered and she was not allowed to have an advocate. The two students also had their appeals denied and in the end they were expelled. Being denied appeal alone is injustice and the nature of the offence that the students were suspected of commiting was not worth being punished by expulsion. The punishment was uncalled for and very harsh for the students.

Reference

Kinzie, S. (2008, August 10). An Education in the Dangers of Online Research. Washington Post,