PLAGIARISME: JENIS-JENISNYA (Bagian

2 dari 3 tulisan)
Oleh SHIDARTA (April 2015)*

Plagiarisme biasanya dibedakan lagi ke dalam beberapa jenis. Elisabeth H. Oakes dan Mehrdad
Kia (2004: xlvii-xlviii) mengklasifikasikan plagiarisme menjadi direct, patchwork, dan
paraphrase plagiarism. Dalam tulisan berikut ini, pembedaan tersebut akan dikembangkan lagi
menjadi lima jenis. Kelima jenis ini dibedakan menurut pola penyajiannya. Jenis-jenis tersebut
adalah: (1) plagiarisme verbatim, (2) plagiarisme kain perca (patchwork), (3) plagiarisme
parafrasa, (4) plagiarisme kata kunci atau frasa kunci, dan (5) plagiarisme struktur gagasan.
Kelima jenis plagiarisme ini akan dibentangkan sekilas di bawah ini.

1. Plagiarisme Verbatim

Plagiarisme paling tinggi bobot pelanggarannya adalah plagiarisme verbatim, yaitu pengambilan
karya milik orang lain persis apa adanya, dengan memberi kesan sebagai karya pribadi pelaku
plagiarisme yang bersangkutan. Contoh penerapannya adalah sebagai berikut:

Tulisan dalam karya asliSarah Worthington
(2009: 184)
Copyright is clearly intangible property, but is
quite different from other forms of intangible
property such as debts. A debt gives its holder
the right to require someone to do something
ie pay money. Copyright, by contrast, and along
with other forms of intellectual property,is much
more like tangible property in that it gives the
holder the right to require others not to do
something, and make them pay compensation if
they do.
Contoh tulisan pelaku plagiarisme verbatim
(tanpa menyebutkan sumber):
In my opinion, copyright is clearly intangible
property, but is quite different from other forms
of intangible property such as debts. A debt
gives its holder the right to require someone to
do somethingie pay money. Copyright, by
contrast, and along with other forms of
intellectual property, is much more like tangible
property in that it gives the holder the right to
require others not to do something, and make
them pay compensation if they do.
2. Plagiarisme Kain Perca

Plagiarisme kain perca (patchwork) dilakukan dengan mengambil karya milik orang lain dari
berbagai sumber tanpa menyebutkan rujukannya. Potongan-potongan dari berbagai sumber ini
lalu dijahit sehingga menjadi sebuah karya baru dan dikesankan sebagai karya orisinal dari
pelaku plagiarisme. Contoh penerapannya

Tulisan 1 dalam karya asliSarah Worthington Tulisan pelaku plagiarisme kain perca (tanpa
(2009: 184) menyebutkan sumber):
Copyright is clearly intangible property, but is
quite different from other forms of intangible
property such as debts. A debt gives its holder We can distinguish copyright from other forms
the right to require someone to do something of intangible property such as debts. A debt
ie pay money. Copyright, by contrast, and along gives its holder the right to require someone to
with other forms of intellectual property,is much do something, i.e. pay money. Copyright, by
more like tangible property in that it gives the contrast, is much more like tangible property in
holder the right to require others not to do that it gives the holder the right to require others
something, and make them pay compensation if not to do something, and make them pay
they do. compensation if they do. Due to this, copyright
Tulisan 2 dalam karya asliEdward Rappaport is structured as a grant of exclusive rights to
(2002: 2) reproduction or use for a temporary period. The
Copyright is structured as a grant of exclusive exclusive period is temporary because the
rights to reproduction or use for a temporary system is a compromise between two goals,
period. The exclusive period is temporary creation and utilization. On the one hand,
because the system is a compromise between creation of works will be maximized if creators
two goals, creation and utilization. On the one enjy maximum possible rewards. On the other
hand, creation of works will be maximized if hand, exclusive ownership typiclly results in
creators enjy maximum possible rewards. On the restricted access to the work by the public.
other hand, exclusive ownership typiclly results
in restricted access to the work by the public.

3. Plagiarisme Parafrasa

Plagiarisme ini dilakukan dengan cara mengubah kalimat dari penulis asli menjadi kalimat baru
dari pelaku plagiarisme. Jika pengutipnya jujur, seharusnya kalimat si penulis asli tersebut akan
diformulasikannya menjadi kutipan langsung dan dicantumkan referensi tempat kutipan itu
diperoleh. Namun, pelaku plagiarisme parafrasa akan melakukannya dengan mengambil alih
kutipan tadi dan menampilkannya sebagai kutipan tidak langsung, lagi-lagi dengan tidak
menyebutkan sumber rujukannya, sehingga memberi kesan bahwa kutipan tadi orisinal berasal
dari pelaku plagiarisme tersebut. Plagiarisme parafrasa juga berlaku dalam hal tulisan asli itu
diterjemahkan dari satu bahasa ke bahasa lain tanpa menyebutkan sumber aslinya.

Tulisan dalam karya asliSarah Contoh tulisan pelaku

Worthington (2009: 184) plagiarisme parafrasa (tanpa
menyebutkan sumber):
Hak cipta sebagai benda tak
Copyright is clearly intangible berwujud berbeda dibandingkan
property, but is quite different dengan bentuk-bentuk hak
from other forms of intangible kebendaan lainnya, misalnya
property such as debts. A debt dengan hak yang timbul dari
gives its holder the right to perjanjian utang-piutang. Dalam
require someone to do hutang, si pemegang hak
somethingie pay money. (kreditur) memerlukan tindakan
Copyright, by contrast, and along dari pihak debitur, dalam hal ini
with other forms of intellectual membayar hutangnya. Ini berbeda
property,is much more like dengan hak cipta atau hak
tangible property in that it gives kekayaan intelektual lainnya. Hak
the holder the right to require cipta justru mencegah agar tidak
others not to do something, and melakukan sesuatu terkait hak itu.
make them pay compensation if Jika ia lakukan, haruslah dengan
they do. izin, dan untuk itu ia mendapat
kompensasi.

4. Plagiarisme Kata Kunci atau Frasa Kunci

Plagiarisme parafrasa yang lebih terselubung adalah plagiarisme kata kunci atau plagiarisme
frasa kunci. Di sini pelaku plagiarisme hanya mengambil sejumlah kata kunci atau frasa kunci
dari tulisan aslinya. Selanjutnya ia memformulasi ulang kalimat-kalimat dalam tulisan aslinya,
tetapi tetap memasukkan di sana-sini kata kunci atau frasa kunci dari si penulis asli, tanpa mau
menyebutkan sumber rujukannya. Dalam contoh di bawah ini, perhatikan kata-kata kunci yang
sengaja ditebalkan!

Tulisan pelaku plagiarisme kata

Tulisan dalam karya asliSarah
kunci atau frasa kunci (tanpa
Worthington (2009: 184)
menyebutkan sumber):
Copyright is clearly intangible Perbedaan antara hak cipta (serta
property, but is quite different hak kekayaan intelektual lain)
from other forms of intangible dan hak-hak kebendaan pada
property such as debts. A debt umumnya terletak pada
gives its holder the right to kenyataan bahwa jika pada hak
require someone to do kebendaan secara umum
somethingie pay money. seseorang dituntut untuk
Copyright, by contrast, and along melakukan sesuatu (to require
with other forms of intellectual someone to do something), maka
property,is much more like pada hak cipta justru sebaliknya
tangible property in that it gives yakni menuntut orang-orang lain
the holder the right to require agar tidak melakukan sesuatu (to
others not to do something, and require others not to do
make them pay compensation if something), kecuali dengan izin.
they do.

5. Plagiarisme Struktur Gagasan

Di antara semua jenis plagiarisme, plagiarisme struktur gagasan adalah jenis yang paling
tersembunyi dan paling sulit dilacak. Di sini pelaku plagiarisme mencontek gagasan orang lain
dan kemudian gagasan ini dituangkan kembali melalui rangkaian kalimat, dengan kata kunci atau
frasa kunci yang berbeda. Gagasan orang lain itu bisa saja berasal dari sumber tertulis, film, atau
bahkan tuturan lisan yang disampaikan melalui berbagai forum. Dalam konteks ini, kata kunci
dan frasa kunci dari si pemilik gagasan awal memang sudah tidak lagi dipakai, tetapi struktur
gagasannya masih sama. Pencontekan ide seperti ini sulit untuk dibuktikan karena kesamaan
gagasan seperti itu bisa diakui terjadi secara kebetulan. Perhatikan contoh berikut ini:

Tulisan pelaku plagiarisme

Tulisan dalam karya asliSarah
struktur gagasan (tanpa
Worthington (2009: 184)
menyebutkan sumber):
Copyright is clearly intangible
property, but is quite different
Untuk membedakan antara hak
from other forms of intangible
cipta dan hak-hak kebendaan
property such as debts. A debt
pada umumnya, dapat
gives its holder the right to
diperhatikan segi tuntutan
require someone to do
perbuatan yang diarahkan kepada
somethingie pay money.
orang lain. Pada hak cipta, bentuk
Copyright, by contrast, and along
tuntutan perilakunya adalah
with other forms of intellectual
negatif (jangan lakukan kecuali
property,is much more like
mendapat izin), sedangkan pada
tangible property in that it gives
benda-benda pada umumnya
the holder the right to require
justru tuntutan perilakunya adalah
others not to do something, and
positif (harus lakukan sesuatu).
make them pay compensation if
they do.

Bersambung ke tulisan bagian ke-3 (terakhir): PLAGIARISME: PELANGGARAN HAK CIPTA

Navigation Aids

Skip to Sidebar
Skip to Main Search
Skip to Main Content

Library Home Choose a Library Ask Us/Get Help Site Guide Penn

Mobile Site Printer Friendly Page

Research Guides

FindIt:

Sidebar
ESE Senior Design Project

Course Guide
Guides to Research Literature
Standards
Dictionaries
Directories
Encyclopedias
Handbooks
Manufacturers & Components
Technical Reports
Electrical Engineering Style Guide
Plagiarism
Research Guides

Area Studies
Business & Management
Health & Life Sciences
Humanities
Science & Engineering
Social Sciences
Ask Us/Get Help

Reference contacts by department

Chat with Us
How Do I...(FAQ)
Library Subject Specialists
Request Library Services
Research Guides
Staff
Suggest a Purchase
Support for Faculty
Workshops & Instruction

Main Content

Plagiarism - What it is and how to avoid it

The following document has been reproduced with the permission of the Zoology Department of the
University of British Columbia.

1. INTRODUCTION

2. WHAT IS PLAGIARISM?

3. AVOIDING PLAGIARISM

4. EXAMPLES

1. INTRODUCTION

Plagiarism is a serious academic offence. Each year a number of cases of plagiarism

are brought to the attention of the Dean of Arts and the Presidents Office. Depending
on the severity of the offence, students found guilty of plagiarism may lose credit for the
assignment in question, be awarded a mark of zero in the course, or face suspension
from the University.
2. WHAT IS PLAGIARISM?

Complete plagiarism
Near-Complete plagiarism
Patchwork plagiarism
Lazy plagiarism
Self plagiarism

Most simply, plagiarism is intellectual theft. Any use of another authors research, ideas,
or language without proper attribution may be considered plagiarism. Because such
definitions include many shades of accidental or intentional plagiarism, these need to be
described more fully.

Complete Plagiarism

This is the most obvious case: a student submits, as his or her own work, an essay that
has been written by someone else. Usually the original source is a published journal
article or book chapter. The use of unpublished work, including the work of another
student, is just as serious.

In such cases, plagiarism cannot be "avoided" by paraphrasing the original or

acknowledging its use in footnotes. The work is the property of another author and
should not be used. See Example #1

Near-complete Plagiarism
A student may also lift portions of another text and use them in his or her own work. For
example, a student might add her or his own conclusions or introduction to an essay. Or a
student might scatter his or her own comments through a text taken substantially from another
source.

These practices are unacceptable. Even with some attribution, the bulk of the work has
been done by another. See Example #1

Patchwork Plagiarism

In many cases, a student will lift ideas, phrases, sentences, and paragraphs from a
variety of sources and "stitch" them together into an essay. These situations often seem
difficult to assess. Most essays, after all, are attempts to bring together a range of
sources and arguments. But the line between plagiarism and original work is not difficult
to draw. See Example #2

Lazy Plagiarism
Lazy plagiarism crops up in many student essays, and is usually the result of sloppy
note-taking or research shortcuts. Examples include:

inadvertent use of anothers language, usually when the student fails to distinguish between
direct quotes and general observations when taking notes. In such cases, the presence of a
footnote does not excuse the use of anothers language without quotation marks.
use of footnotes or material quoted in other sources as if they were the results of your research.
sloppy or inadequate footnoting which leaves out sources or page references.

Although it may not be the students intention to deceive, it is often difficult for
instructors to distinguish between purposeful and accidental plagiarism. See Example
#3

Self Plagiarism

The use of an essay written for one course to satisfy the requirements of another
course is plagiarism. Students should not use, adapt, or update an essay written for
another purpose.

This is not intended to discourage students from pursuing specific interests.

If you want to use a previously completed essay as a starting point for new
research, you should receive the instructors approval and provide her or
him with a copy of the original essay. If you want to use substantially similar
essays to satisfy the requirements of two related courses, you should get
approval from all the instructors concerned.

3. AVOIDING PLAGIARISM

Research
Writing
Footnoting
Editing

It is not hard to draw the distinction between original and thoroughly plagiarized work.
But the "grey areas" between these extremes are more vexing. Students should avoid
any hint of dishonesty by maintaining good research habits and paying attention to a
few basic rules of writing and documentation.

Research

Most written assignments begin with the collection of research notes -- a combination of
ideas or quotes from other sources, and the students own ideas. Whether you keep
notes on index cards, in a loose-leaf binder, or on old envelopes in a desk drawer, it is
important to record and organize them in such a way that vital information is not lost.
Keep careful and complete track of sources. Accurately copy the author, title, and other
information about the source publication, including the number(s) of the page(s) from
which notes or quotes were taken.

Distinguish carefully between your ideas and the ideas of others. This is a simple
question of intellectual honesty. If you use anothers conclusions, acknowledge them. If
you come to the same conclusions as another on your own, you should still
acknowledge the agreement.

Distinguish carefully between your own words and those of others. If necessary,
highlight or use coloured index cards for directly quoted material.

Writing

As you begin to tie your ideas together in written form, consider the following:

Begin by organizing your essay in an original manner. Avoid mimicking the pattern or
order of argument used by others. Remember: this is your humble contribution to a
debate or a body of research; it is not (in most case) an attempt to summarize or
paraphrase the work of others.

As you weave the ideas and language of others into your work, make clear choices
about the use of quoted material. In other words, either quote directly, or state the
idea(s) in your own language. Do not mess around with close paraphrases or purely
cosmetic changes. See Example #4

Read the first draft carefully. Is the distinction between your work and the work of others
clear and unambiguous? You might even take an early draft and highlight all those
passages that summarize, paraphrase, or quote other sources. Is there enough of your
own work left in the essay?

Footnoting

Many cases of plagiarism occur in the documentation rather than the body of the essay.
You should have a clear idea of the variety of purposes a footnote (or endnote) may
serve, and many different ways you can acknowledge the work of others. For specific
cases See Example #5. Also note the following:

Always record your source of the information; never use or rely on another authors
footnotes.

The footnote should allow the reader to find or check the material being cited. Provide exact
page numbers for direct quotes, and a range of page numbers for more general points.

If you included more than one source or reference in a footnote, the relevance or order
of the various sources should be clear to the reader.
Editing

Once your essay is complete, consider each portion that is drawn from another source,
and ask yourself the following:

Is the idea or argument expressed entirely my own?

Is the general language or choice of words (including even phrases or rough paraphrases) my
own?

If either answer is "no," the work must be credited to the original author. And if the
answer to the second question is "no," the passage should either be quoted directly or
rewritten in the students own words and credited directly.

EXAMPLES

EXAMPLE #1

Complete or Near-Complete Plagiarism

Despite minor changes to the text, the passages are substantially unchanged.

In the first case, the plagiarist also lifts the footnote from the original. Note that the use
of even very brief passages (such as the "wings of aspiration") constitutes plagiarism.
Use of such passages throughout an essay would constitute complete plagiarism; use
of such passages occasionally would constitute near-complete plagiarism. [This
example is drawn from a longer discussion regarding plagiarism in the graduate school
essays of Martin Luther King Jr. Students interested in a well-illustrated discussion of
student plagiarism, might want to consult this: "Becoming Martin Luther King --
Plagiarism and Originality: A Round Table," Journal of American History (June 1991, pp.
11-123. The example used below is on p. 25.]

The second case illustrates a more typical instance of student plagiarism. Even the
footnote to the original does not excuse the substantial use of the originals language.

CASE 1
Original

It is Eros, not Agape, that loves in proportion to the value of its object. By the pursuit of
value in its object, Platonic love is let up and away from the world, on wings of
aspiration, beyond all transient things and persons to the realm of the Ideas. Agape, as
described in the Gospels and Epistles, is "spontaneous and uncaused," "indifferent to
human merit," and "creates" value in those upon whom it is bestowed out of pure
generosity. It flows down from God into this transient, sinful world; those whom it
touches become conscious of their own utter unworthiness; they are impelled to forgive
and love their enemies....because the God of grace imparts worth to them by the act of
loving them.* [footnote* is to Anders Nygren, Agape and Eros. (New York, 1932), pp.
52-56]

Plagiarized Version

As Nygren set out to contrast these two Greek words he finds that Eros loves in
proportion to the value of the object. By the pursuit of value in its objects. Platonic love
is let up and away from the world, on wings of aspiration, beyond all transient things and
persons to the realm of the Ideas. Agape as described in the Gospels and Epistles, is
"spontaneous and uncaused," "indifferent to human merit," and creates value in those
upon whom it is bestowed out of pure generosity. It flows down from God into the
transient, sinful world; those whom it touches become conscious of their own utter
unworthiness; they are impelled to forgive and love their enemies, because the God of
Grace imparts worth to them by the act of loving them.*
[Footnote* is to Nygren, Agape and Eros, pp. 52-56]

CASE 2

Original

The strike officially began on May 29, and on June 1 the manufacturers met publicly to
plan their resistance. Their strategies were carried out on two fronts. They pressured
the proprietors into holding out indefinitely by refusing to send new collars and cuffs to
any laundry. Also the manufacturers attempted to undermine directly the unions efforts
to weather the strike. They tried to create a negative image of the union through the
press, which they virtually controlled. They prevented a few collar manufacturers in
other cities from patronizing the unions cooperative laundry even though it claimed it
could provide the same services for 25 percent less. Under these circumstances, the
collar ironers tactics were much less useful.

Plagiarized Version

The strike began on May 29, and on June 1 the manufacturers met publicly to plan their
response. They had two strategies. They pressured the proprietors into holding out
indefinitely by refusing to send new collars and cuffs to any laundry, and they attempted
to undermine directly the unions efforts to weather the strike. They also tried to create a
negative image of the union through the newspapers, which they virtually controlled.
They prevented a few collar manufacturers in other cities from using the unions
cooperative laundry even though it could provide the same services for 25 percent less.
Under these circumstances, the collar ironers tactics were much less useful.1

1. Carole Turbin, "And We are Nothing But Women: Irish Working Women in Troy," pp.
225-26 in Women of America. Edited by Mary Beth Norton (Boston: Houghton Mifflin,
1979).
EXAMPLE #2

Patchwork Plagiarism

Here two sources are combined to create a new passage. As it stands, the passage is
clearly plagiarized. If a footnote were added acknowledging the sources, the substantial
use of the language of the original passage would still open the student to charges of
plagiarism. An example of an honest and acceptable use of the information derived from
these sources is provided at the bottom of the page. Note that the "acceptable version"
uses the facts of the original sources, but organizes and expresses them in the
students own language.

Originals

Source 1:

"Despite the strong public opposition, the Reagan administration continued to install so
many North American men, supplies, and facilities in Honduras that one expert called it
"the USS Honduras, a [stationary] aircraft carrier or sorts." (Walter LaFeber, Inevitable
Revolutions (New York, 1989), 309.)

Source 2:

"By December 1981, American agents--some CIA, some U.S. Special Forces--were
working through Argentine intermediaries to set up contra safe houses, training centres,
and base camps along the Nicaraguan-Honduran border." (Peter Kornbluh,
"Nicaragua," in Michael Klare (ed), Low Intensity Warfare (New York, 1983), 139.)

Plagiarized Version

Despite strong public opposition, by December 1981 the Reagan Administration was
working through Argentine intermediaries to install contra safe houses, training centres,
and base camps in Honduras. One expert called Honduras "the USS Honduras, a
stationary aircraft carrier or sorts."

Acceptable

In the early 1980s, the Reagan Administration made increasing use of Honduras as a
base for the contra war. The Administration set up a number of military and training
facilities--some American, some contra, and some housing Argentine mercenaries--
along the border between Nicaragua and Honduras. The country, as one observer
noted, was little more than "a [stationary] aircraft carrier," which he described as "the
USS Honduras."2
2. See Walter Lafeber, Inevitable Revolutions (New York, 1989), p. 307-310 (quote p.
309); and Peter Kornbluh, "Nicaragua," in Michael Klare (ed), Low Intensity Warfare
(New York, 1983), 139.

EXAMPLE #3

Lazy Plagiarism

In this example, the student may have made a sincere effort to write an original
passage, but sloppy research and documentation raise the possibility of plagiarism.
Note the characteristic errors: confusion of original and students language, quotation
marks in the wrong place, improper or incomplete footnotes.

Originals

Source 1:

"Despite the strong public opposition, the Reagan administration continued to install so
many North American men, supplies, and facilities in Honduras that one expert called it
"the USS Honduras, a [stationary aircraft carrier of sorts." (Walter LaFeber, Inevitable
Revolutions (New York, 1989), 309.)

Source 2:

"By December 1981, American agents--some CIA, some U.S. Special Forces--were
working through Argentine intermediaries to set up contra safe houses, training centres,
and base camps along the Nicaraguan-Honduran border." (Peter Kornbluh,
"Nicaragua," in Michael Klare (ed), Low Intensity Warfare (New York, 1983), 139.)

Plagiarized Version

Despite strong public opposition, the Reagan Administration "continued to install so

many North American men, supplies, and facilities in Honduras that one expert called it
the USS Honduras, a stationary aircraft carrier or sorts."3

In December 1981, American agents--some CIA Special Forces--were working through

Argentine intermediaries to set up "contra safe houses, training centres, and base
camps along the Nicaraguan-Honduran border."4

3. Walter Lafeber, Inevitable Revolutions (New York, 1989), p. 309

4. Michael Klare (ed), Low Intensity Warfare (New York, 1983).

EXAMPLE #4

Close Paraphrasing
Students anxious about committing plagiarism often ask: "How much do I have to
change a sentence to be sure Im not plagiarizing?" A simple answer to this is: If you
have to ask, youre probably plagiarizing.

This is important. Avoiding plagiarism is not an exercise in inventive paraphrasing.

There is no magic number of words that you can add or change to make a passage
your own. Original work demands original thought and organization of thoughts. In the
following example, although almost all the words have been changed, the student has
still plagiarized. An acceptable use of this material is also provided below.

Original

Shortly after the two rogues, who pass themselves off as a duke and a king, invade the
raft of Huck and Jim, they decide to raise funds by performing scenes from
Shakespeares Romeo and Juliet and Richard III. That the presentation of Shakespeare
in small Mississippi towns could be conceived of as potentially lucrative tells us much
about the position of Shakespeare in the nineteenth century. (Lawrence Levine,
Highbrow, Lowbrow: The Emergence of a Cultural Hierarchy in America (Cambridge,
1986), p. 10)

Plagiarized Version

Soon after the two thieves, who pretend they are a king and a duke, capture Huck and
Jims raft, they try to make money by putting on two Shakespeare plays (Romeo and
Juliet and Richard III). Because the production of Shakespeare in tiny Southern towns is
seen as possibly profitable, we learn a lot about the status of Shakespeare before the
twentieth century.

Acceptable Version

As Lawrence Levine argues, casual references to Shakespeare in popular nineteenth

century literature suggests that the identification of "highbrow" theatre is a relatively
recent phenomenon.5

Note that this version does not merely rephrase or repeat the material from the passage
cited above, but expands upon it and places it in the context of the students work.

EXAMPLE #5

Varieties of Footnotes

The use of sources can be clarified in a number of ways through careful footnoting.
Consider the different forms of documentation and acknowledgement in the following:

With the election of Ronald Regan, covert operations in Latin America escalated
rapidly.6 "The influx of American funds," notes Peter Kornbluh, determined "the
frequency and destructiveness of contra attachs."7 In the early 1980s, the Regan
Administration increasingly used Honduras as a base for the contra war. The
Administration set up a number of military and training facilities--some American, some
contra, and some housing Argengine mercenaries--along the border between Nicaragua
and Honduras. "[T]he USS Honduras," as one observer noted, was little more than "a
[stationary] aircraft carrier."8 These strategies seemed to represent both a conscious
acceleration of American involvement in the region, and the inertia of past involvements
and failures.9

6. The following paragraph is drawn from Walter Lafeber, Inevitable Revolutions (New
York, 1989), p. 307-310; and Peter Kornbluh, "Nicaragua," in Michael Klare (ed), Low
Intensity Warfare (New York, 1983), pp. 139-149.

Note: FOOTNOTE 6 provides general background sources.

7. Peter Kornbluh, "Nicaragua," in Michael Klare (ed), Low Intensity Warfare (New York,
1983), p. 139.

Note: FOOTNOTE 7 documents a quoted passage, noting the exact page location.

8. Observer quoted in Walter Lafeber, Inevitable Revolutions (New York, 1989), p. 309.

Note: FOOTNOTE 8 documents a secondary quotation.

9. Peter Kornbluh, "Nicaragua," in Michael Klare (ed), Low Intensity Warfare (New York,
1983), stresses the renewal of counterinsurgency under Reagan; Walter Lafeber,
Inevitable Revolutions, stresses the ongoing interventionism of the U.S. (New York,
1989), p. 307-310.

Note: FOOTNOTE 9 distinguishes your argument from that of your sources.

Prepared by:

Dr. Colin H. Gordon

(Department of History, UBC)

Professor Peter Simmons

(Presidents Advisory Committee on Student Discipline, UBC)

Dr. Graeme Wynn

(Associate Dean of Arts, UBC)

The Faculty of Arts