“Hey, I Didn't Say That!”: Teaching Textual Integrity through Misrepresented Quotes

Abstract

Courses: Introductory Communication Course, Public Speaking, and Business and Professional Communication

Objective: The goal of this single-class activity is to show students the importance of accurately representing texts while conducting research.

Introduction and Rationale

Despite specialized areas of expertise, communication instructors are unified, to a large extent, by a singular belief: the meaning people give words produces behavioral ramifications (Mead, 2009). As communication instructors, we revere language's ability to reflect both meaning and reality. Yet, we also are tasked with the responsibility of conveying the care required for word selection to our students. Universities echo this demand by establishing plagiarism and academic integrity policies, which instructors typically mention in passing when reviewing the syllabus on the first day of class. After that, we quickly move on to our other learning objectives (Price, 2002).

Instructors, however, need to revisit how we teach textual integrity—appropriately using and referencing any given text. The capacity to access large amounts of information through various technologies has contributed to the sharp increase in reported plagiarism among college students (Walker, 2010). Common student errors include inattention to the context of a source, not referencing the original source, as well as over-reducing research to the point where key points are left out entirely. Outside of the classroom, employers are actively calling for more “integrity” from their applicants (Ashkenas, 2011). Although teaching these lessons should not be the responsibility of communication instructors alone, it is a fitting place to start, as we have built our field around the importance of message meaning (Blumer, 1969).

This single-class activity teaches the significance of thorough research in determining a message's intended meaning. This exercise can be easily incorporated into a lesson focusing on persuasion, ethical communication, or communication in the workplace. The objective of this activity is to show the importance of adhering to the spirit of intent of any given text. For the purposes of this exercise, I use spirit of intent to refer to the original purpose for which a given text was created.

In this activity, students are given a famous speech and asked to misquote or “quote out of context” one or more lines to create an argument against the author's intentions. The pervasive and potentially costly ramifications of textual misrepresentations substantiate this assignment (Ruane, 2013). For instance, DiGiorno® recently used a trending hashtag, created to educate others on the complications of leaving abusive relationships, to promote their pizza (#whyistayed you had pizza) (Petri, 2014). In response to these types of blunders, this activity provides the opportunity for students to engage in a dialogue over communication integrity in their academic and professional lives.

The Activity

This activity can be done either as a single-class activity or as a take-home assignment. The following section provides instructions for the in-class version of this activity.

Preparation

To prepare for the activity, the instructor should lead the class in a 5–10 minute discussion urging students to consider carefully the importance of textual integrity. First, the instructor should ask students, “Why are academic institutions vigilant about plagiarism?” Allow them to respond before asking, “How is the concept of integrity pertinent to life outside of college?” The subsequent discussion usually elicits comments regarding honesty, intellectual ownership, and the need to give credit properly to the author(s). When the conversation wanes, ask students, “Is it still plagiarism if you quote someone correctly, but infringe on the spirit of intent an author had for the original text?”

Instructors may need to provide an example of how the spirit of intent for a particular text can be violated. For instance, the U.S. Interior Department recently removed the inscription on the Martin Luther King Jr. memorial statue in Washington, D.C., that read, “I was a drum major for justice, peace and righteousness” (Ruane, 2013). Yet, the inscription was a paraphrased version of Martin Luther King Jr.'s 1968 sermon at Atlanta's Ebenezer Baptist Church:

If you want to say that I was a drum major, say that I was a drum major for justice. Say that I was a drum major for peace. I was a drum major for righteousness. And all of the other shallow things will not matter. (King, 1968)

According to Maya Angelou and other critics, the original memorial inscription made King sound arrogant. In essence, the inscription violated the spirit of intent of King's speech by selecting which words to exclude. In the end, and almost a million dollars later, the sculptor removed the inscription altogether (Ruane, 2013).

Conducting the Activity

After walking through the initial probing questions and the above example, students should be able to recognize the importance of textual integrity. At this point in the lesson, divide the class into groups of two or three students. Once students are divided into groups, hand out a copy of the chosen text to each member of the group. However, make sure that each individual group has a different manuscript—this helps produce a more lively discussion. Examples of different texts include Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, King's “I Have a Dream” speech, famous letters from presidents, or even corporate statements such as the one given to Congress by General Motor's CEO, Mary Barra, on the fatal ignition switch defect. Direct each group to read their manuscript together and pick out a quote that could be used to argue for something the author did not intend. For instance, in John Adam's (1817) letter to Thomas Jefferson on religion, he writes, “This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!” However, he subsequently writes, “without religion this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company, I mean Hell…” Taken out of context, students could use the first part of Adam's quote to argue mistakenly that the founders of our country opposed religion.

Allow 10 minutes for each group to generate an explanation of their manuscript, corresponding quote, and how it could be used to argue a point contrary to the author's intention. At the end of the 10-minute activity, an elected speaker from each group gives a brief presentation to the class. The goal at this point is to see students demonstrate their ability to recognize and apply the concept of spirit of intent to their particular text.

Debriefing

Following the activity, instructors should lead the class in a 10–15 minute discussion. The following questions help guide this debriefing session:

1. What was surprising in this exercise? Was it easier/harder than expected to find something to misrepresent?

2. How certain were you after reading the text that you knew the spirit of intent the author had for the text? At what point in reading the text did you determine the spirit of intent?

3. When reading through your text, what outside information would have been helpful to have (i.e., historical information or context)? How would you make sure outside information is accurate?

4. In the future, how would you appropriately cite this text in order to account for its original intent?

5. Think back to past experiences where you have been asked to give a message to another person (i.e., friend, family, or teacher). Tell me about an experience where the original meaning of a message was changed intentionally/unintentionally? In what other ways does textual integrity have personal implications in our personal and professional lives?

6. How does communication technology, particularly those characterized by low cue level messages (i.e., texts, email, or tweets) change how we interpret message intent?

Appraisal

This activity provides a starting place for communication instructors to begin addressing how textual misrepresentation violates one of our core beliefs: we act on the basis of the meaning we gives words, thus we must chose them judiciously (Mead, 2009). According to the Harvard Business Review online blog, Ron Ashkenas makes the point that “solely relying on compliance functions, policies, rules, and audits—the integrity police—is usually inadequate” in tackling the problem of plagiarism (2011). This deficiency of attention to integrity and plagiarism has resulted in both academic institutions and businesses calling for further consideration of these issues (Walker, 2010). Certainly, the first step in working toward a more widely practiced application of textual integrity is to acknowledge the pervasiveness and ease of misrepresenting texts.

In conducting this activity, I find that once students understand the idea of spirit of intent, they are able to generate their own examples of this concept. This activity also provides students exposure to historical texts and develops an appreciation for the effort required to investigate a certain subject comprehensively. Many students come to realize that they failed to research topics thoroughly in their past, or that they “didn't know they were misquoting something.” In my experience, completing this activity before assigning a research-intensive project is a good primer for producing quality outcomes.

This activity also urges students to think beyond the classroom and explore how textual misrepresentation may have serious consequences in their personal and professional lives. In particular, the debriefing question asking students to describe a time “where the original meaning of a message was changed intentionally/unintentionally” helps elicit stories from students' personal lives. Lastly, this activity encourages students to be more careful consumers of persuasive messages from others.

Although this activity is adaptable to either an in-class or take-home assignment, instructors should be aware of some challenges that may arise in this exercise. First, instructors should be sure to select texts that are manageable for students to finish in 10 minutes. Second, students may want to use their computers to look up additional information about their text, which can add more depth to the activity, but it also requires more time. Instructors looking for a single-day activity should assign the groups and reading as homework prior to class. This allows for the in-class discussion to proceed more quickly and with greater depth.

As previously noted, this activity is adaptable for various classroom settings and sizes. One modification to this activity would be to make the textual examples more recognizable to the students. For instance, allow students to choose their own text to misrepresent from a book, movie, or song. Additionally, this assignment can be used to teach impromptu speaking. In this version of the activity, the instructor cuts excerpts from various texts and has students incorporate them into a brief speech. Afterward, instructors should give each student the full version of the text they have unknowingly quoted from, and have students reflect on how, or if, their quote was misinterpreted. Regardless of whether this activity is completed in a group setting, for an impromptu speech, or as a take-home research assignment, it is an initial step toward promoting increased awareness of textual integrity. It is an opportunity that communication instructors must not overlook considering the present flurry of academic plagiarism (Walker, 2010).