Academic Use of Sources

Background

TPS requires and assumes until determined otherwise that all work submitted by a student is original to that student. Any work submitted — including essays and written work, visual arts, calculations, programming code, translations, or any other — that is substantially derived from another source – including texts, web sites, peers, parents, or any other – cannot be credited to the student and may receive a zero score. If the improper use of sources is found to be recurring in a course or occurring in multiple courses, it can also result in removal of credit for the course or all courses.

Allowed Academic Use of Sources in TPS

• Allowed sources for study and assignment include the textbook, novels, readers, or documents assigned in the course.
• Other allowed sources include authoritative source documents (e.g., historical documents, published peer-reviewed research studies) related to the course content.
• For assignments that require explanation of understanding or original composition, the work must be in the student’s own words to demonstrate the student’s own understanding, not “rote” copied, transcribed, or memorized from another source.
• For assignments that require calculations or demonstrations (e.g., derivations, proofs), the work must be the student’s own calculations or demonstrations that demonstrate the student’s own understanding, not “rote” copied, transcribed, or memorized from another source.
• Any quoting or use of blocks of essentially similar content from another source must always be properly attributed and cited (even if the source content is used from “memory”). The academic responsibility to identify content from other sources is always entirely the active responsibility of the student, where inadvertent or intentional failure to attribute content to its sources are both equally academically discreditable.
• This list of allowed sources provides examples and is not exhaustive. Sources or sites not listed or provided in the course should be considered as disallowed by default unless explicitly approved by the teacher.

Disallowed Academic Use of Sources in TPS

• Web sites or texts not assigned or listed in the course, including but not limited to study help sites and exam help sites.
• Blogs, sites, or texts that lack formal academic peer review.
• AI sources (e.g., ChatGPT) for creating, rewriting, editing or any part of the assignment process.
• Automated or online translators (e.g., Google Translate).
• Secondary source sites (e.g., Wikipedia or other encyclopedias).
• Editorial or opinion articles or books (unless called for in the assignment).
• Content from other students, past or current, including siblings. (Note that in cases of disallowed sharing of work, all involved students will lose the credit, regardless of which student originated the work).
• Substantial content or editing from tutors, parents, siblings, or peers.
• Rote (copied or memorized) content from outside sources in response to questions asking the student to explain or demonstrate individual understanding of a topic or concept (i.e., explanations must be original to the student in the student’s own words for the purpose of demonstrating individual student understanding).
• Rote (copied or memorized) calculations in response to questions asking the student to set up a problem and calculate a result (i.e., problem-solving and calculations must be original to the student with all work shown so the the problem-solving approach demonstrates individual student understanding).
• This list of disallowed sources provides examples and is not exhaustive.

Method

In an information age and digital environment (i.e., online school), “copying” becomes an ambiguous term that is difficult to define and apply (e.g., copy-and-paste, manual transcription from another device or source, review and recall from memory, text notes or exchanges, etc.). The method by which non-original content may be included in the student’s original work is generally irrelevant for the purpose of determining credit for the work.

Motive

In a multicultural environment, “plagiarism” becomes an ambiguous term that is difficult to define and apply (different countries and cultures have different intellectual property rights and laws). In a home education environment, “cheating” becomes an ambiguous term that is difficult to define and apply (each family has its own standards and values for defining academic integrity in the use of sources). An academic determination by TPS that a work is not sufficiently original for credit does not imply an accusation of intent to cheat or steal. TPS considers the academic aspects of original work and the proper use of source materials in our courses to be under our purview and authority; we respect that the broader moral and behavioral aspects are under the purview and judgment of parents. The motive by which non-original content may be included in the student’s original work is generally irrelevant for the purpose of determining credit for the work.

Safe (and Effective) Study Practices

The best way to avoid accidentally or intentionally submitting work that is substantially derived from another source is to study only from approved sources like the textbook, novels, readers, or documents assigned in the course, and to avoid or limit exposure to sources that are disallowed, including the work of other students, study help sites, exam help sites, or secondary source sites. Parents and tutors should also refrain from providing direct input or excessive coaching on assignments. The more exposure to disallowed sources is pursued or permitted, the more likely it becomes that these sources influence the student’s work, and the more likely that the work may become uncreditable for the student.

Application and Enforcement

Experienced teachers can usually discern when the submitted work is not original, particularly after years of working with the same content across hundreds or thousands of students. The teacher may use various means to verify this, including locating disallowed sources, modifying test or assignment questions and parameters, reviewing other work by the student, and more. In the world of globally-accessible indexed information, if the student could access it, the teacher probably can as well – and likely already knows about it.

When there is concern for whether an assignment (or part of an assignment) is the original work of the student, the teacher will ask TPS for a review. Experienced TPS teacher(s) and academic staff will consider the following factors:

• Is the student’s questionable content essentially similar to content derived from another identified source (based on a review of the source(s))?
• Is the student’s questionable content essentially inconsistent with and dissimilar from other work submitted by the same student (including in-class participation) and known to be original to the student?
• Is the questionable content submitted by the student essentially inconsistent in content or method with the assignment and the allowed sources for study and assignment that are core elements of the course content?

The student will be credited for the work unless the reviewers agree beyond a reasonable doubt that the questionable content is not the original work of the student. If the reviewers consider it to be reasonably possible that the work is original to the student, the student will be credited with the work.

If the review determines that the submitted work is not creditable in part or in whole, the teacher will use the assignment feedback process to communicate the determination that some or all of the work is not creditable with brief explanation of the determination.

The student or parent may appeal the determination by writing to TPS (support@pottersschool.org), where the appeal may address only the three factors of consideration used by the reviewers (i.e., not method or motive, which are not questioned or considered). TPS retains final authority to academically credit or not credit the work to the student.