I found the plagiarism workshop to be more difficult than I had imagined it would be. It was extremely difficult in the last task (where we had to write a paragraph using different plagiarized sentences), to create a paragraph that flowed smoothly and made sense. I found that in my plagiarized paragraph, little of what I had copied and pasted made sense when analyzed as a whole. Here is the paragraph I created:

“Students often prefer the convenience of accessing e-books online, especially late at night when a project is due tomorrow. However, we must think wisely about technology, so let’s compare the technology of the print book with that of the e-book. What are the far-reaching impacts of e-books? There are some subtle distinctions that favor print, which may matter in the long run. In one study involving psychology students, the medium did seem to matter. “We bombarded poor psychology students with economics that they didn’t know,” she says. Two differences emerged. First, more repetition was required with computer reading to impart the same information.Second, the book readers seemed to digest the material more fully. In any case, what serious writer would create exclusively for an e-reader? It’s like farting into the wind. Writers hope, mostly in vain, that their work will endure for a few years or even centuries, in handsome printed and bound volumes. Why bother at all if your words are to be digitized into instantly accessible and disposable battery-dependent gas?”

After reading this, I’m sure it is easy to tell where the different sources of plagiarism change.

http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2010/03/e-books_the_good_and_the_bad_o.html

http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/columns-and-blogs/soapbox/article/46793-books-without-batteries-the-negative-impacts-of-technology.html