MT106 Unit 7 Academic Integrity Exercise Example

One Passage on Logistician Jobs, Paraphrased Twice: A Unit 7 Academic Integrity Exercise

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

MT106: Foundations for Success in Business and Management Careers

Unit 7 Academic Integrity Exercise

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The scenarios are composite and illustrative; the source passage is quoted exactly from the federal occupational handbook, and the sources cited are real.

Part 1: The Source

The passage below is quoted exactly from the "What Logisticians Do" section of the logisticians profile in the Occupational Outlook Handbook:

"Logisticians choose, integrate, and implement software for systems that help them to plan and track product movement. They use these systems to manage their organization's data and administrative functions, such as for procurement. Some logisticians have other duties, such as training and managing clerical staff." (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026)

Part 2: A Patchwritten Version

Here is the kind of paraphrase I might have written before this unit:

Logisticians pick, integrate, and put in place software for systems that help them plan and track how products move. They use the systems to handle their company's data and administrative tasks, for example procurement. Some logisticians also have other duties, like training and supervising clerical workers.

This version has three problems. First, it keeps the original's structure exactly: three sentences in the same order, each making the same point as its counterpart. Second, it keeps long strings of the original wording, such as "integrate," "for systems that help them," "data and administrative" and "Some logisticians also have other duties," with only a few verbs and nouns swapped. Third, it has no citation at all. Pecorari (2003) describes this pattern, which she calls patchwriting, as common among students learning academic writing, and often unintentional. Intent does not change the outcome: a reader would take the sentences as mine, and a similarity checker would flag them.

Part 3: A Proper Paraphrase

Here is a genuine paraphrase:

According to the federal handbook, much of a logistician's work runs through software: they select and set up the tracking systems that follow goods from order to delivery, then rely on those systems for record keeping and purchasing, and some also supervise office staff (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026).

This version changes the structure, folding three sentences into one built around a single idea, that the job runs through software. It uses new vocabulary, such as "select and set up," "follow goods from order to delivery" and "record keeping and purchasing." It cites the source. Credit is still owed even though no phrases were copied, because the description belongs to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The APA manual is explicit that a paraphrased idea needs a citation just as a quotation does (American Psychological Association, 2020).

The passage also matters to my own decision. My Unit 5 research found that analyst postings near me ask for warehouse system reporting, and this description confirms that systems work sits at the center of the occupation, not at its edge.

The reference entry for both versions is the same and appears in the list at the end of this exercise.

Part 4: Scenarios

In the first scenario, I wrote a strong career research paper in a previous course and want to submit it again here, since the assignment is similar. The principle is self-plagiarism. Submitting work already graded elsewhere, without permission, misrepresents it as new effort for this course. The right action is to ask my instructor whether I can build on the earlier paper, and, if allowed, to cite it and add substantial new work.

In the second scenario, a friend in my section suggests we split the career research summary: she researches one occupation, I research the other, and we each submit the whole paper. The principle is unauthorized collaboration. The assignment is individual, so each submission must be my own work. The right action is to decline the split, though we can discuss sources or study together if the course permits that.

In the third scenario, I find a salary figure for project managers on a blog that cites no source. The principle is source reliability. An unsourced figure cannot be checked and may be outdated or wrong. The right action is to find the figure in a primary source, such as the occupational handbook, and cite that instead.

Part 5: What I Will Do Differently

I used to take notes by copying sentences from sources and editing them later, which is how patchwriting happens. From now on I will read a passage, close it, write my notes from memory, and then check them against the source for accuracy and citation.

The patchwritten version would have felt like my own words because I had changed some of them.

References

American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1037/0000165-000

Pecorari, D. (2003). Good and original: Plagiarism and patchwriting in academic second-language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(4), 317-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2003.08.004

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2026). Logisticians. In Occupational outlook handbook. U.S. Department of Labor. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/business-and-financial/logisticians.htm