Question

in the case below, the original source material is given along with a sample of student work. determine the type of plagiarism by clicking the appropriate radio button.

original source material
the philosophical position known as constructivism views knowledge as a human construction. the various perspectives within constructivism are based on the premise that knowledge is not part of an objective, external reality that is separate from the individual. instead, human knowledge, whether the bodies of content in public disciplines (such as mathematics or sociology) or knowledge of the individual learner; is a human construction.

references:
gredler, m. e. (2001). learning and instruction: theory into practice (4th ed.). upper saddle, nj: prentice-hall.

student version
\the philosophical position known as constructivism views knowledge as a human construction. the various perspectives within constructivism are based on the premise that knowledge is not part of an objective, external reality that is separate from the individual. instead, human knowledge is a human construction\ (p. 29).

which of the following is true for the student version above?

• word-for-word plagiarism
• paraphrasing plagiarism
• this is not plagiarism

hints

Explanation:

1. First, analyze the content: The student version rephrases the original source material's ideas about constructivism (views on knowledge as human construction, premise about knowledge not being part of objective external reality) and also includes a citation (p. 29) which implies proper referencing.
2. Word - for - word plagiarism would involve copying text exactly without proper citation, but here the wording is paraphrased. Paraphrasing plagiarism occurs when someone rephrases another's work without proper attribution, but in this case, the student has included a citation (even though we don't see the full reference match, the act of citing and paraphrasing correctly would mean it's not plagiarism). Wait, actually, the student's version is a paraphrase with a citation. Wait, no, let's check again. The original and student version: the student has rephrased the original ideas and included a citation. Wait, but does the citation match? The original reference is Gredler (2001), and the student has (p. 29). If the student is using the same source and properly citing, then it's not plagiarism. Wait, no, the key is: if the student has paraphrased the original content and provided a citation (even if the in - text citation is a bit minimal, but the act of citing and not copying word - for - word, and the ideas are properly attributed). Wait, actually, the student's version is a close paraphrase but with a citation. Wait, no, let's recall plagiarism types: Word - for - word is copying text exactly (or nearly) without citation. Paraphrasing plagiarism is rephrasing someone's ideas without proper citation. If the student has cited (even if the citation format is a bit simple, like (p. 29)), and the ideas are paraphrased, then it's not plagiarism? Wait, no, maybe I got it wrong. Wait, the student's text: "The philosophical position known as constructivism views knowledge as a human construction. The various perspectives within constructivism are based on the premise that knowledge is not part of an objective, external reality that is separate from the individual. Instead, human knowledge is a human construction" (p. 29). The original text has similar ideas. But the student has paraphrased (not word - for - word) and included a citation. So this is not plagiarism because they have paraphrased and cited the source (even if the citation is a page number, assuming it's from the same source). So the correct option is "This is not plagiarism".

Answer:

This is not plagiarism