Analysis Of Winning Hearts And Minds In War On Plagiarism

Scott Jaschik discusses various situations of plagiarism in college in his article, “Winning Hearts and Minds in War on Plagiarism,” in order to argue that there are more efficient solutions to prevent plagiarism. Having his article published in an online news source, Inside Higher Ed, allows for Jaschik to have an audience of first year English and college instructors interested in learning about higher education. Jaschik writes in general to an audience who is interested in academic integrity and those who want to either stop or learn more about plagiarism. Jaschik employs various situations such as an online student discussion board and an assignment to purposely plagiarize in order to highlight common issues with why students plagiarize.

Since his audience consists of other professors and writing instructors, using a more formal language gives him credibility to a higher educated audience. Jaschik writes, “several people quipped” (262), which is persuasive to the audience because it is an example of how Jaschik uses more intellectual words in order to appeal to his audience of first year writing instructors. Jaschik chooses to use the word, “quipped,” instead of a more familiar word like “joke.” By having a more intellectual word choice, it establishes credibility by showing he is educated to other professors. Jaschik also says, “nuanced tricky demonstrations” (262), which appeals to his higher educated audience with the specific word choice of “nuanced.” It is persuasive because the average person would not use

Jaschik addressed this problem and offered the solution of instructors being more open minded to plagiarism in his article, “Winning Hearts and Minds in War on Plagiarism”. Jaschik uses many rhetorical choices, such as illustrations, formal diction, and expert testimonies in order to argue that, “we also need to make decisions on more than just legalistic approaches”(265), while also trying to teach students more about plagiarism. Jaschik successfully persuades his intended audience of first year writing instructors of why just punishing student’s for plagiarizing is not as effective as being more open-minded and teaching students more about