1998 Volume 121 No 1–4 - Phi Delta Theta Scroll Archive

[
THE CARDINAL PRINCIPLES
Learning through rectitude
By Rev. David Turner, O.S.B.
BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR A FEATURE
article in a regularly published
magazine or journal can have its
problems. People who write regularly,
especially those who do so for a living,
will tell you, without pulling a punch
that, success depends upon writing daily.
This must be the case, they say, even
when one is not "inspired." I am sure that
many a Brother Phi has experienced
looking at a blank sheet of paper when
faced with a theme assignment in college
and no inspirations are there. 1 always
find that the writers are correct: stick
with it and keep writing and the "material"
will somehow emerge.
The focus for this issue's column came
in something of an inspirational way as 1
was working with other faculty members
all of whom are responsible for teaching
the second required course in writing at
our University: Research Writing in Content
Fields. We teach sections that focus
on the social sciences, the sciences (with
separate sections for biology), and literature/humanities.
Because of a number of
news items that were being repeated on
National Public Radio, our seminar began
to focus on the issue of academic
honesty. The trigger point was the resignation
of a well-known writer with the
Boston Globe because of plagiarism.
It seemed to me that the issue of academic
honesty might be a good one to
examine within the framework of our
cardinal principles since we really could
tie two of them together in such a consideration:
scholarship and moral rectitude.
Scholarship is an important issue
because we need to focus on questions
that help us understand what is really
involved in a process of "sound learning."
Rectitude equally comes to the fore because
academic honesty/dishonesty
occupies an unusually larger place in
today's collegiate world than may have
been the case in the past.
In my own syllabus for the Rhetoric
102 course, you wUl find the following
statement which, in similar words, will be
found in the syllabi of other professors.
"Academic Honesty: Plagiarism is a very
serious issue and will result in a student
failing this course." Harsh Perhaps.
However, each professor also provides an
appendix to the syllabus (with an acknowledged
attribution to J.}. Weaver)
trying to explain the issues involved.
"How, may we ask, can
anyone write anything
that can be called original
Are we to learn nothing
from others"
We recognize well that
"students come to the university
to learn, and this
means acquiring ideas and
exchanging opinions and
evaluations with others.
However, we must remember
that no idea is genuinely
learned by copying it down in the
Father Tumer
phrasing of someone else. Only when a
writer has thought through an idea in
terms of personal experiences can it be
said that learning has taken place."
In another part of the appendix, the
claim is made that "plagiarism defeats the
ends of education. If students were given
credit for work that is not their own, then
course grades would be meaningless. A
college degree would become merely a
sheet of paper, and the integrity of the
university would be undermined."
From an historical perspective as we
look to December 26,1998, the actual
anniversary date for our sesquicentennial,
we might think back to the dreams
our founders had when establishing Phi
Delta Theta and their dedication to the
pursuit of truth in all branches of study.
While I admit that times have changed
and the body of knowledge has increased
geometrically over the past 150 years, we
nonetheless can review for ourselves the
whole issue of mastery learning. Can we
really "learn" Is it really possible, as
Thomas Aquinas asked in the D'*" cen-
tury, "for one man to teach another" In
his marvelous little work "On the
Teacher," Thomas tells us that no one can
teach anyone else anything! Now with all
the complaining I have heard over the
years about "learning absolutely nothing
from teacher X or teacher X' I still can go
back to Thomas and recognize that his
words were so true: one person can only
lead another person from
the unknown to the
known. The individual
must do the work of learning!
A great deal has been
written in the literature of
educational psychology
and the psychology of
learning about how learning
can take place in human
beings. As Euclid told
the king there was "no
royal road to geometry," perhaps our
own beginning can be to recognize what
the psychologists have been telling us for
so many years: it takes time and repetition!
One must, as it was claimed in my
first year algebra book in high school,
"get each daily lesson and review it often."
The old Romans had a saying.
"The Cardinal Principles" appears as the
first feature in the magazine. Its aim is to
return the Fraternity to its founding principles—a
goals of General Council President
Chucic Poore. We thought it
appropriate to asic Father David Turner,
Minnesota '70, a former General Council
member and chaplain of Benedictine
University, to write a series of columns on
living our principles. Fr. Turner welcomes
comments from readers. Write him at
Benedictine University, 5700 College
Road, Lisle Illinois 60532-0900 or e-mail
dturner@ben.edu.
http://www.phidelt-ghq.com
SUMMER 1998 THE SCROLL