PLS 360: Judicial Politics Syllabus

Bradley University, Department of Political Science

Syllabus

Judicial Politics

Spring 2016, PLS 360, section 1

Instructor: Craig Curtis (Bradley Hall 486, 677-2492), e-mail: rcc@fsmail.bradley.edu

Text: Neubauer, David W. and Stephen S. Meinhold. 2013. Judicial Process: Law, Courts, and Politics in the United States (6^th ed.). Wadsworth Cengage (ISBN: 978-1-111-35756-6).

Class Meeting Information: MWF, 10:00 to 10:50 am, Bradley Hall, room 370

Instructor's Office Hours: Monday, Wednesday: 8:30 to 9:50 am, 2:00 to 2:50 pm,

Pre-Law office hours (Tuesday, Thursday: 8 to 11 am, Tuesday, 2 to 4 pm).

Course Description: This course is designed to familiarize the student with the way in which the judiciary fits in our unique political system. We will focus on the actors, structures, and folkways of our systems of justice in this country. It is not a law course, although we will spend a great deal of time talking about the law. When the class is over, the student should be able to explain to a friend, family member, employer, or professor in another class, how courts in the US are organized, who are the main actors in these courts, how trial courts and appellate courts work in a general way, what lawyers and judges do at work, how one becomes a lawyer, and how this all fits in the larger American political system.

Grading:

Your grade will be determined by a combination of activities:

Reading the text and completing the diagnostic tests online in Sakai – 15%
Participation in the in-class activities as assigned – 20%

10% comes from general attendance and participation
10% comes from completion of assigned tasks

Completion of a reflection paper on the importance of a recent Supreme Court case of your choosing to the larger political system – 15%
Two midterm take home essay assignments – 25% each

The final letter grade will be assigned according to the following scale:

A 90-100%	D 60-69%
B 80-89%	F below 60%
C 70-79%

Class policies: All students will be expected to do the readings (yes, actually read the text and the assigned readings posted on Sakai) before the class sessions for which an assignment is made. I will post diagnostic exams on Sakai prior to the end of each week and you will take them as part of the grade. I will also post class outlines in the form of Power Point slides the week before they will be covered so that you know I plan to have happen in class. I will also post hypothetical cases and fact patterns to be used in some of our in-class activities. These will include a civil case and a criminal case from the American Mock Trial Association case materials. I will need for you to read these cases prior to attempting the assignments as given. The take home essay assignments are the closest thing we will have to a traditional exam and will constitute a major part of the grade for the class. The reflection essay will require you to choose a Supreme Court case from the last four years (anything with a decision date of 2012 or after will do) and write an essay of approximately 1000 words on the issue of the importance of this case to our larger political system. More information about each of the components of the grade can be found later on in this syllabus.

Class sessions: The class sessions will start with your questions. I will plan brief lectures on specific topics related to the week’s topic, followed by a class activity, most often a discussion. If the questions lead us to something different than I have planned, and I think that this is useful, then we will abandon the plan and address what it is that you want to get out of the week’s materials. I do not intend to deliver lectures that cover what is in the text. I do intend to listen to what it is that you want to learn, but also to educate you about what is important concerning that week’s topic.

Course outline

Week 1: (1-20, 22) – Introduction to the class. On Wednesday we will go over the syllabus and talk about courts in a general way. On Friday, we will watch snippets from the movie to Kill a Mockingbird and talk about the relationship of the criminal courts to existing prejudices in a society.

Week 2: (1-25, 27 & 29) – Law Courts and Politics, Law and Legal Systems

v Read chapters 1 & 2 (diagnostic test must be finished by Sunday, 1-24, at midnight)

v Class Activities

Ø Monday – Discussion of The Supreme Court as a Policy Maker (Citizens United (just read the linked blog and the case syllabus) and Bush v. Gore) (Both cases are posted on Sakai. The focus question for the day is: Did the Justices decide the outcome first and then craft the rationale, or did they follow the law first, and attempt to ignore their ideological preferences?)

Ø Wednesday, distinguished guest Atlanta Super-Attorney Jeff Bogart will talk about what real prosecutors, judges, and defense attorneys do in criminal court. Mr. Bogart also has extensive experience with sports law and with providing trial advocacy training for lawyers. Please come prepared with questions.

Ø Friday – Discussion of the flaws of an adversary system. We will talk about eyewitness identification, line ups, and the rules of professional responsibility for lawyers. The focus question for the day is: Could we do a better job of learning the truth than under our current system?

Week 3: (2-1, 3, & 5) -- The Federal Court System

v Read chapter 3 (take diagnostic test by Sunday, 1-31, at midnight)

v Class activities

Ø Monday – Discussion of whether the federal court system is too big. Data on the case loads in the last year can be found at the end of Justice Robert’s 2015 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary, posted in Sakai. Two students will read the report in some detail and make a brief presentation of their findings with regard to case-loads in the system. The students can work together or separately – student choice.

Ø Wednesday – improvements to the ways that civil cases are handled in the federal courts. Changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are outlined in Justice Robert’s 2015 year End Report on the Federal Judiciary, posted in Sakai. Two students will read the report and make a brief presentation of their opinions of the changes. Particular focus should be given to the Chief Justice’s text regarding cooperation and collaboration, and on Electronically Stored Information. The students should work together to divide up the task.

Ø Friday – Discussion of the “federalization of criminal law.” Focus Question: Do special projects and initiatives like “Operation Crackshot” or “Don’t Shoot” actually work better than relying on state courts to prosecute criminals? Information about these two programs will be posted on Sakai. Two students will make presentations, one urging greater use of federal resources and one urging less.

Week 4: (2-8, 10, & 12) – State Courts

v Read chapter 4 (take diagnostic test – you know the drill by now)

v Class activities

Ø Monday – What is the trial all about in the criminal matter of State v Owens? Four students will be assigned to a presentation of what the main points the attorneys will try to prove in the trial, two from the point of view of the prosecution and two from the point of view of the defense.

Ø Wednesday – What is the trial all about in the civil matter of Davis v. HappyLand Toy Company? Four students will be assigned to a presentation of what the main points the attorneys will try to prove in the trial, two from the point of view of the plaintiff and two from the point of view of the defense.

Ø Friday – Texas and Oklahoma both have two state supreme courts, one for civil appeals and one for criminal appeals. One student will take the point of view that this model is better than having a single state supreme court like we do in Illinois. A second student will defend the one supreme court arrangement.

Week 5: (2-15, 17, & 19) – Lawyers

v Read chapter 5 and take diagnostic test

v Class Activities

Ø Monday – Discussion of the behavior of the prosecution in the matter of the State of Missouri v. Darren Wilson. The transcript of Officer Wilson’s testimony begins on p. 195 of volume 5 of the Grand Jury hearing, posted on Sakai. Two students are assigned to serve as experts for the day and will start by giving their opinions.

Ø Wednesday – What is life like for a practicing attorney? Three students will compose mock diaries entries of their day as attorneys and present them to the class. One will be an attorney in private practice in a large firm that primarily does civil work, e.g., insurance defense, contract negotiations, participation in regulatory hearings, etc. One will be a public defender in a large city. The third will be a sole practitioner in a small town with a general practice.

Ø Friday – law school, a good economic decision or not. One student will argue that borrowing a lot of money to go to law school is a good investment in the future while a second will argue that it is not a good idea right now.

Week 6: (2-22, 24, & 26) Judges

v Read Chapter 6 and take the diagnostic test

v Class Activities

Ø Monday -- Ruling on a motion to exclude evidence. Three students will play roles in a mock hearing over the admissibility of Cell Site Location Information in a variation on the State v. Owen case. For purposes of this assignment, we will assume that the prosecution has obtained Cell Site Location Information (CSLI) on Jackie Owens for June 16 and 17, 2008 and is seeking to introduce that evidence into the trial. One student will serve a prosecuting attorney and attempt to convince a second student, playing the role of a judge, to admit CSLI on Owen’s Cell Phone. A third student will serve as Owen’s defense attorney and attempt to block the evidence. There will be a motion to exclude evidence posted in Sakai. I will serve as Olivia Wolbert, an employee of the cell service provider, Midlands Wireless. Either side may put me on the witness stand and ask me questions. After hearing the arguments, the judge will rule. There will be a question and answer period following the ruling.

Ø Wednesday – Discussion – should we elect judges? One student will argue for merit appointments and one will argue for election for all judges.

Ø Friday – What difference does it make who wins the presidency this year for the Supreme Court – Instructor facilitated discussion.

Week 7: (2-29, 3-2, & 3-4) – Using the Law to Achieve Political Ends

v Read chapter 7 and take the diagnostic test

v First Take Home Assignment posted on Friday.

v Class Activities

Ø Monday – Debate on the issue of whether the use of the courts by interest groups (such as the NRA (see, p. 209 -210 in the text), the ACLU, or the Natural Resources Defense Counsel is beneficial for our political system. The two assigned students will be assigned points of view. Questions will be taken from the audience after an initial 5 minute presentation from each point of view.

Ø Wednesday – Debate on the merits of the class action lawsuit as a tool for social change. The two assigned students will be assigned points of view. Questions will be taken from the audience after an initial 5 minute presentation from each point of view.

Ø Friday – Two students will debate the merits of the decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, posted in Sakai. Points of view will be assigned, although the students may swap if they so choose. Please note that the point of view in this particular instance usually depends very heavily on the partisan loyalty of the citizen in question.

Week 8: (3-7, 9, & 11) – How Criminal Trials Arise, Plea bargaining

v Read chapter 8 and take the diagnostic test

v First take home assignment due on Friday, 3-11 at 5 pm.

v Class Activities

Ø Monday – Mass incarceration is a major issue today, and the impact of the war on drugs, and mass incarceration in general, fall disproportionately on the poor and minorities. What are the origins of this problem and what can the courts actually do to make it better? Two students will give their opinions followed by class discussion. Students can get some information about this issue from http://www.sentencingproject.org/template/index.cfm.

Ø Wednesday – The Fourth Amendment and digital privacy. Two students will read the opinions in Riley v. California and make comments about the implications for how the courts will resolve some of the major issues arising from police use of stingray devices, and other digital information gathering technologies, as well as use of analytical software such as the Beware software currently being used in Fresno, CA., and PredPol being used in Oakland, CA. and Richmond, CA. Students should google those two software packages – look for news coverage about them and for the commercial vendors’ web sites.

Ø Friday – Black Lives Matter and qualified immunity. Two students will read the opinions in Tolan v. Cotton and Scott v. Harris, and comment about the implications of these decisions for the future of cases involving the use of deadly force by the police.

Spring Break

Week 9: (3-21, 23, & 25) – Plea bargaining, Expert Witnesses, and Sentencing

v Read chapter 9 and take the diagnostic test

v Class Activities

Ø Monday – Discussion: Resolved, plea bargaining should be abolished. The two assigned students will be assigned sides. Questions will be taken from the audience after an initial 5 minute presentation from each point of view.

Ø Wednesday -- Expert witnesses – We will have a discussion of the evidentiary value of experts. Students will read an excerpt from the OJ Simpson Trial in which a criminalist is examined (posted on Sakai). Two students will serve as experts for the day, giving their opinion of the value of this type of testimony.

Ø Friday – First part of class, sentencing hearing for State v. Owens. Assume that Jackie Owens is convicted of Murder. The range of possible penalty is 20 years to life in prison. Two students will play the roles of lawyers arguing for the state and the defense on what sentence should be imposed. A third student will serve as judge and render a sentencing decision. A pre-sentence investigation report on Jackie Owens is posted in Sakai.

Week 10: (3-28, 3-30, & 4-1) – How Civil Trials Arise – contingent fees and tort reform

v Read chapter 10 and take the diagnostic test

v Class Activities

Ø Monday – Pros and cons of the contingent fee. One student will argue that the contingent fee arrangement is fraught with all sorts of problems, including conflicts of interests between lawyers and clients, encouraging frivolous lawsuits, and encouraging unethical behavior (ambulance chasing) by lawyers. Another student will argue that the contingent fee arrangement allows for much greater access to the courts by the poor and should be kept in place, with minor changes. Reforms will be suggested by both students. A class discussion of their ideas will follow.

Ø Wednesday -- Discussion of Tort Reform: Two students will prepare and deliver a five minute statement on the issue of tort reform in the medical malpractice area. Each will present a set of ideas on how to lower the cost of malpractice insurance, but only one can take the Republican position that limiting of damages for pain and suffering is the best solution to the problem. The students will be assigned points of view.

Ø Friday – Worker’s compensation reform in Illinois. One student will take the point of view of Governor Rauner and argue for comprehensive reform of the system by which workers injured on the job are compensated. A pdf file of Rauner’s Tturnaround Agenda is posted in Sakai. A second student will take the point of view of unions (such as AFSCME) and the Trial Lawyers Association and argue that the cost savings to business from the proposed reforms are not worth the harm to workers and their families. An Illinois Trial Lawyers Association position paper is also posted in Sakai.

Week 11: (4-4, 6 & 8) – How Civil Cases End

v Read chapter 11 and take the diagnostic test

v Class Activities

Ø Monday -- Settlement discussions. Assuming that the parties agree before trial that HappyLand toys is liable for the wrongful death of Joey Davis. Two students will conduct a public negotiation on the appropriate damages to be awarded. Sides will be assigned. After the negotiation runs for a maximum of 15 minutes, there will be a class discussion of the appropriate amount to award.

Ø Wednesday – Enforcing a judgment. For purposes of the exercise, let’s assume that Owens was found not guilty in his criminal trial, but Mariah Bennett has successfully prosecuted a wrongful death lawsuit against Jackie Owens. Let’s also assume that ten million dollars in damages were awarded. A panel of three students serving as attorneys for Mariah will conduct a brainstorming activity to generate ideas to get money out of Owens for the client. A summary of Owens’ assets is posted on Sakai.

Ø Friday – Concussions and sports. Two students will talk about the fairness of the recent NFL settlement for retired players who suffer from Neurocognitive impairment or other concussion related conditions.

Week 12: (4-11, 13 & 15) – Trials and Juries

v Read chapter 12 and take the diagnostic test

v Class Activities –

Ø Monday – Selecting a jury in racially charged cases. A current case pending before the Supreme Court is Foster v. Chatman. The case involves a challenge to the prosecution’s use of peremptory challenges to remove all African American jurors from the venire. Two students will serve as our experts for the day. They will do a bit of research on the facts of the case and give their opinions about the potential decision of the Court. A discussion of the problems that the court will have in selecting juries for the police officers charged with the murder of Freddie Gray in Baltimore will follow.

Ø Wednesday – Real trials. We will look at the transcripts of a real trial (excerpts from The OJ Simpson trial are posted on Sakai) and compare that with popular entertainment version of trials. Two students will serve as experts, comparing what they read with their favorite courtroom scenes from TV or the movies.

Ø Friday – Direct versus cross examination. Three students will participate in an exercise based on the mock trial case of State v. Owens. We will assume that Casey Maxwell has agreed to a plea bargain in which s/he will testify against Jackie Owens in exchange for a reduced sentence. One student will serve as a prosecuting attorney conducting a direct examination of Casey Maxwell. One student will play the role of Casey Maxwell. A third student will serve as a defense attorney for Jackie Owens and will conduct a cross examination of Maxwell. I will serve as judge, ruling on any objections made by either attorney.

Week 13: (4-18, 20, & 22) – Appellate Courts

v Read chapter 13 and take the diagnostic test

v Class Activities

Ø Monday – What is the legal basis of an appeal? Students will read the Brief for Evan Miller, posted on Sakai, as well as look at the syllabus in the decision in Miller v. Alabama, also posted on Sakai. Two students will serve as experts, telling the class what the case was about and speculating as to why Miller’s counsel proceeded as he did. We will also listen to the beginning of the oral argument in this case.

Ø Wednesday – The issue of political questions and access to the courts to challenge redistricting. Under current law (League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry (2006), a political party can, if it can gain control of the process, self-consciously manipulate the process for its own gain. Technically, this is a violation of the Constitution, but the Court has not been able to agree on a standard of review. Two students will read the syllabus to above mentioned case and present their ideas on how to resolve cases in which one political party alleges that it has been harmed by redistricting under the control of the opposition party. A class discussion will follow. Let’s be mindful of the ongoing effort to put an Independent Map Amendment on the ballot in Illinois in November.

Ø Friday – What happens when you win on appeal. Two students will review the court decisions in three cases, one a famous Supreme Court case, and the other two follow up cases to it. The cases are United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. ___, 132 S.Ct. 945 (2012), United States v. Jones, 918 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2013), and United States v. Jones, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95395 (D.D.C. 2014), and report back to the class on what happened to Antoine Jones after his major “win” at the Supreme Court. All are posted o Sakai. Students are encouraged to find out for themselves what has happened to famous criminal defendants who have won at the Supreme Court. For example, Ernesto Miranda was retried and convicted again, paroled, and then killed in a knife fight in 1976.

Week 14: (4-25, 27, & 29) – The Supreme Court

v Read chapter 14 and take the diagnostic test

v Final Take Home essay assignment will be posted on April 29, 2016.

v Class Activities

Ø Monday – Selecting the justices. Since at least 1986, when Robert Bork’s nomination was rejected by the Senate, the process for selecting Supreme Court justices has been so highly contentious that many regard the system as dysfunctional. What needs to be done to make the system functional? Two students will each make a 3 to 5 minute oral presentation on how they think the system should be reformed. The Constitution can be amended if that is what is needed. A class discussion will follow.

Ø Wednesday – The Court as a leader of the entire federal judicial system. Chief Justice Robert’s 2014 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary has some interesting points to make about the slowness of the judiciary to adopt to new technologies. One student will be assigned to argue that the Supreme Court, and all federal courts, should allow cameras in the courtroom during all proceedings and one will have to argue that they should not. Each student will make a brief presentation of their position followed by a discussion. Additionally, two students will each develop and present brief presentations on the affects that new media will have on courts. Again, there will be a brief question and answer period to follow.

Ø Friday – The Court as a small group. Justice Scalia is famous for his biting dissents in which he attacks his brethren. Sometimes he even attacks his fellow conservatives – see, e.g., Maryland v. King (2012), and Navarette v. Cal. (2014). What happens to the working relationships on the Court if Scalia retires or is forced from office by poor health or death? I will facilitate this discussion.

Week 15: (5-2) – Wrap up and prepare for final

v Read chapter 15 and take the diagnostic test

v Reflection Essay Due by 5 pm on Monday, May 2

v Class activities

Ø Monday – review for final take home assignment and do student evaluations

Final Take home essay assignment is due on Saturday, May 7, 2016, at 11 am. No late essays will be accepted.

Weekly Diagnostic Tests

Students have long lamented the 50 or 75 minute lecture. I am going to respect that criticism and conduct this class without any long lectures. In order to make that work, you will have to be responsible in two key ways. First, you must participate in the class activities in a responsible way – more on that later in this document. Second, you must read the book. In order to assess how well and consistently you are doing this, I am assigning diagnostic tests for each chapter which must be completed before the class sessions for which a reading assignment has been made. These tests will be timed (30 minutes) so you will have to read the assignments before you start the tests. There will not be time to look up all the answers, but you should not be especially pressed for time to do the questions and likely will have time to refer to the book for some questions. You will have to log on to Sakai and take the diagnostic tests prior to midnight on the day before the first class session of the week. You can take the tests twice. The deadlines will always be midnight on Sunday. There will be no make-up tests. If you forget, you have to live with the consequences of your actions. The tests will appear not later than Friday of each week and you will be sent an e-mail notice that they are ready. Together, these 14 tests will constitute15 percent of the course grade (I will count the highest score twice).

In –class exercises

Each class session will start with an opportunity for you to ask me questions about the quiz and the chapter, or to bring pertinent news items to the attention of the class. I will also have a few words to say about the objectives for the day and any key concepts that I think need to be emphasized. Once that is passed, we will proceed to the planned class activity for that day.

The detailed course outline above lists the activities for each day of the class. On days where we are using materials from the American Mock Trial Association, you will need to have familiarity with the basic cause of action and with the witness’ affidavits in order to do these assignments. Please read the mock trial cases posted on Sakai carefully. They are detailed and each has specific rules. I will also post the rules of evidence under resources on Sakai for the use of those leading these activities. For some assignments, there will be some basic reading (posted on Sakai) or background research to be done. You need to do this faithfully and diligently for the class to work optimally.

I will provide notice so that students will know the week before for which class activities they are responsible. The power point slides will have information on who does what for the week, and I will also post that information on the Home Site Information Display in Sakai. For the first two full weeks of the class, I have assigned class discussions for which I will serve as facilitator. Once we get just a bit farther into the semester, I will devolve more responsibility to you as students. Currently, assuming we stick to the plan, there are more than enough slots for each student to have three opportunities to serve as leaders. I will also monitor attendance since regular participation by all students is part of the course. I will assign grades for participation based on my perception of your effort and accomplishment when leading the class as well as on class participation on other occasions.

It is my intention to go in alphabetical order with the assignments for in-class activities. I will be accommodating for students who have legitimate scheduling needs if they work with me ahead of time, or if there is a documented emergency.

Take Home Essays

The take home essay assignments are designed to diagnose whether you can take the information and concepts from the class and use them to discuss both real world problems and issues of democratic theory. The assignments will be posted at least one week prior to the due dates. All assignments to be turned in will be subject to late penalties at the rate of 10% of the grade per business day. The final take home essay assignment is in lieu of a final exam and must be turned in on time, with no exceptions allowed.

For each assignment, there will be choices of questions and a grading rubric provided. These essays need not be lengthy. A length of 500 to 1000 words per essay is sufficient. You may need to do background research for a given assignment item. Whenever you use a source outside of the text and your class notes, please provide full citation, using the APSA citation style. A copy of the APSA style guide is posted in Sakai under resources.

The due dates for these two assignments are already posted in the course outline. For the first take home essay assignment, the questions, and grading rubrics, will be posted on or before 10 am on Friday, March 4. It will be due by 5 pm on Friday, March 11. Late essays will be penalized at the rate of 10% per business date late. The final assignment will be posted before 5 pm on Friday, April 29. It will be due on or before 11 am on Saturday, May 7. No late essays will be accepted.

Reflection Essay

All students are assigned the task of writing a short essay in which they become very familiar with a recent United States Supreme Court case of their own choosing. Any case with a decision date of 2012 or after is fine with me. You want to choose a case that is important in that it changes something significant in our political system. For example, the decision in Miranda v. Arizona changed police procedure for every police officer in the nation. That is pretty significant. You might want to avoid some of the more arcane commercial cases.

Finding the cases is really easy. You can search a variety of places, but the best, in my view, is to go to the Legal Information Institutes term summaries. See, e.g., https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/supreme_court_2014-2015_term_highlights, http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/supreme_court_2013-2014_term_highlights, and, http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/supreme_court_2012-2013_term_highlights. For cases this term, I would suggest you go to SCOTUSBLOG -- http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/terms/ot2015/, but most of those cases have not yet been decided.

The essay must be between 1000 and 2000 words, with full citation to any outside sources that you use. You are directed to use APSA style for your citations. A grading rubric will be posted in Sakai under resources for you to use in writing your essay. The essay is due on Monday, May 2, 2016, before 5 pm. Late essays will be penalized at the rate of 10% per business day.

Turnitin

We will be using the “turnitin” software provided on Sakai for all assignments. I will make the report available to you and allow two submissions so that you can get the benefit of feedback from the software before you finalize a document. I have not penalized a student for academic dishonesty since I started using turnitin, but I believe that use of turnitin has helped students to avoid problems when first drafts were not properly cited.

Academic Dishonesty Policy

Any instance of academic dishonesty, e.g., plagiarism of essays, will be dealt with as severely as university rules allow.

You are expected to do your own work. Plagiarism will be punished as severely as university rules allow, i.e., a zero for the paper will be awarded and the matter will be reported to the Chair of Political Science and the Executive Director of Housing, Residential Life and Student Judicial System.

Plagiarism, according to the Random House Dictionary of the English Language (unabridged edition), means, "appropriation or imitation of the language, ideas and thoughts of another author, and representation of them as one's own work." Any of the following examples of academic dishonesty constitutes plagiarism:

1. Directly copying a phrase, sentence, passage or paragraph from another author and presenting it as one's own (i.e., without proper quotation marks and full citation. You are assumed to know how to properly use quotation marks and citations).

2. Paraphrasing a sentence, passage or paragraph from another author without so indicating by proper citation to authority. When in doubt, cite!

3. Knowingly presenting, as one's own, a thought, idea, analytical framework, or theory advanced by another author. Turning in a term paper you did not write, e.g., one you bought or copied is plagiarism.

I am well aware that there are Web sites with papers that you can download and will require you to submit a Turnitin report with each essay you turn in. I will make the turnitin reports available to you before you finalize the assignment so you can see for yourself if the system identifies a problem and fix it yourself before finalizes the essay. I am also aware that many high school students learn to write papers by cutting and pasting text from web sites. Whenever you use language written by someone else, you must fully credit the author by a complete citation. Try to limit the use of direct quotes in any event. I want your words, not a bunch of related quotations.

If you paraphrase text from a source, you are using the ideas of someone else. Whenever you rely on ideas from someone else, you must give credit to the originator of the idea. When in doubt, you should cite. The unit of analysis for determining whether to cite is the sentence, not the paragraph.

The university’s new plagiarism awareness module and quiz (http://www.bradley.edu/sites/plagiarism/) is a valuable tool. If you have not reviewed the module and taken the quiz, please do so, even if you are not required to do so by the university. The existence of this module means that ignorance of what constitutes plagiarism is not a valid excuse for engaging in academic dishonesty.