Reflections on Course Concepts

When thinking about the most applicable concepts that will correlate with the future professional discipline, it was important to determine the concrete society which is involved in the concept due to the fact that people are main components of the scientific researches. Generally, they are based on the need of scientific works credibility so that the specialists who provide an analysis of some issue in the public health sector should rely on the scientific “brand” image. Moreover, these evidences are extremely important nowadays because of the significant rise of citizen population and, as a result, scientists, who write works that should be important for the society and them. I will implement these concepts in my academic practice so that I would facilitate my life by writing high-quality works.

Evidence Analysis or the process by which one evaluates the quality and credibility of source documents on which he or she bases his or her written work

To begin with, it is crucial to consider that a vast majority of sources provided by scientists for those who write the other work for a specific subject are not credible fundamentally to have a strong “reference” base. This is due to the fact that many scientific researches, which are important for society fundamentally, were executed by those who does not want to provide not an important resource for the future scientists, but the paper that contains his or her name. As a result, the popular tendency of publishing medical works for mentioning could be eliminated or decreased by changing the respectableness determination

To be more specific, one of the possible reason for writing works that just contains the author’s names and are full of unimportant material is that such authors are forced to write and publish some of the articles, as this is the main scientist’s fundamental capital. In the scientific society, the number of works published in popular scientific journals, and the number of citation provided are the most influential factors for assessing the medial author’s work. Turning to the possible approach for students and those who want a credible base of works is that they should settle the “credibility filters” when searching for the appropriate article (KATAGIRI, 2018). These are the filters that are provided by the person themselves.

Some of the possible filters might start from the year of publication. When the subject is in the trend, it is impossible to provide only those resources which are published earlier than three years from the moment of the reference base preparation (Mor et al., 2017). Moreover, the university reputation is also crucial as for the positive as for the negative experience of working with similar papers. Last but not least, the medical society should globally rethink the tendency of grading the scientists by the number of published works. Instead, they should think about the rating agencies, which will read and professionally analyze the credibility of the work, special approaches, and provide other services for credible resources database.

Discussion of plagiarism and proper attribution of credit to authors whose work informs our research and scholarly writing

When discussing the plagiarism and the consequences of it, considering that the extremely widespread of this tendency might significantly lower the level of the national intelligence. Moreover, this is the rising tendency, as many people who see the opportunities have already developed services which specialize on providing the database of credible works, essays, and other researches which are important for society. As a result, the USA may loose its prevailing status in medicine if they do not change their approach to plagiarism struggling measures.

First and foremost, the problem of plagiarism is so critical owing to the notion that the less individual works with his or her own brain, the harder it will be to execute some job in the future, even if the subject was not so important. Consequently, to go out of the negative “circle” of changing one plagiarists to another, it is crucial to provide a qualitative campaign against the plagiarism on every stage of the medical academic hierarchy (Jereb et al., 2018). By changing the negative tendency from the inside view, the medical society may gain more credibility of the scientific researches.

However, to build a database without plagiarism, it is significantly important to implement different mechanical strategies for all the works that pass through the academic redactors. Due to the need of checking many works for plagiarism, the most possible approach for plan executing is to introduce the new rules of the works submission via online (Foltýnek, 2020). To be more specific, when a work is presented in electronic variant first, it is easier to find plagiarized material instantly by providing the licensed application or service which will execute a constant high-quality plagiarism check.

By doing this, medical scientists and last courses students will be informed that their work it checked for a high-quality plagiarism-checker service. This may instantly cut a major part of full-of-plagiarism works and help to build a society with an access to the qualitative medicine, the rising tendency of which is based on the credible scientific works that generate even more interesting and cutting-edge disclosures.


Foltýnek, T., Meuschke, N., & Gipp, B. (2020). Academic Plagiarism Detection. ACM Computing Surveys, 52(6), 1–42.

Jereb, E., Perc, M., Lämmlein, B., Jerebic, J., Urh, M., Podbregar, I., & ŠPrajc, P. (2018). Factors influencing plagiarism in higher education: A comparison of German and Slovene students. PLOS ONE, 13(8), e0202252.

KATAGIRI, A., & MIN, E. (2018). The Credibility of Public and Private Signals: A Document-Based Approach. American Political Science Review, 113(1), 156–172.

Mor, N., & Reich, Z. (2017). From “Trust Me” to “Show Me” Journalism. Journalism Practice, 12(9), 1091–1108.

Cite this paper

Select style


ChalkyPapers. (2022, October 29). Reflections on Course Concepts. Retrieved from


ChalkyPapers. (2022, October 29). Reflections on Course Concepts.

Work Cited

"Reflections on Course Concepts." ChalkyPapers, 29 Oct. 2022,


ChalkyPapers. (2022) 'Reflections on Course Concepts'. 29 October.


ChalkyPapers. 2022. "Reflections on Course Concepts." October 29, 2022.

1. ChalkyPapers. "Reflections on Course Concepts." October 29, 2022.


ChalkyPapers. "Reflections on Course Concepts." October 29, 2022.