Skip to main content
Article Review Undergraduate 399 words

Stephen Ambrose's plagiarism of Thomas Childers's work

~2 min read Ethics
✍️ How to write this paper — tools & examples ▾
Essay 399 words

Ambrose/Plagiarism

Purdue University's Online Writing Lab (OWL) is a respected resource for writers. In an introduction to its guidelines on plagiarism, it is noted that "There are few intellectual offenses more serious than plagiarism in academic and professional contexts" (Stolley, Brizee, and Paiz, 2013). The serious charges leveled at historian Stephen Ambrose -- that he plagiarized the work of Thomas Childers -- are valid.

Ambrose failed to properly credit Childers for his work. Childers' found a stash of letters and photographs in his grandmother's house and was able to build on the stash with additional information. Ambrose used his friend George McGovern as a primary resource. Although there may have been general similarities in the stories each author heard, recollections would have reflected the unique personalities of the principals involved. Just as no two attendees at a party will have the same accounting of events, the pilots and crews cited in Childers' and Ambrose's books would have likewise had different stories to tell, especially when stories were told years after the events took place.

Ambrose attempted to use a trick most often employed by high school students or college freshmen. He substituted synonyms in someone else's sentences and paragraph structure in an effort to make the writing his own. Ambrose does not use his own words and his own voice in these instances, for the writing still parallels too closely that of the original. In some cases, Ambrose's wording is identical. It is an egregious offence for a writer of Ambrose's caliber and reputation. It is difficult to imagine that Ambrose did not understand what he was doing or comprehend the serious nature of his actions.

79 Words Hidden
According to an article in The Weekly Standard, Childers was gracious about Ambrose's copy-catting, remarking only that he was "disappointed" (Barnes, 2002). There were no…

Already a member? Log in

Unlock the rest of this paper

135,000+ research papers · AI writing tools · Plagiarism & AI detection

Monthly

$12.99Per month

Renews at $12.99/month until canceled

Start Monthly
Best value

Annual

$99Per year

Renews at $99/year until canceled

Start Annual
  • Unlimited AI writing tools
  • Plagiarism and AI text detection tool
Secure checkout

Plan details

Unlimited AI writing tools are for individual, non-automated use and are subject to our Terms of Service and abuse-prevention measures.

TextChecker scans: 3 during the 7-Day Pass, or 5 per month with Monthly and Annual.

Prices exclude applicable tax.

References
3 sources cited in this paper
  • Barnes, F. (2002). Stephen Ambrose, Copycat. The Weekly Standard. Retrieved March 27, 2013, from http://www.weeklystandard.com/node/2035/atom/feed ↗
  • Stolley, K., Brizee, A., and Paiz, J. M. (2013). Avoiding plagiarism. Purdue University Online Writing Lab. Retrieved March 27, 2013, from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource ↗
  • /589/01/
Key Concepts in This Paper
Stephen Ambrose Thomas Childers plagiarism academic integrity intellectual property historiography attribution
Cite This Paper
PaperDue. (2013). Stephen Ambrose's plagiarism of Thomas Childers's work. PaperDue. https://www.paperdue.com/essay/ambrose-plagiarism-purdue-university-online-87010

Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.