Basically we archive and mark the electronic copy. The paper copy is only a
backup.
Carol Higgison
Senior Adviser on e-Learning, University of Bradford
Tel 01274 233291, Email [log in to unmask]
http://www.brad.ac.uk/acad/tqeg/information/staff/carol_higgison.php
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Plagiarism [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Burkhard
> Schafer
> Sent: 11 January 2007 16:27
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: How do you find using Turnitin?
>
> This was indeed one of the options we discussed. What was pointed out to
> me though was: how do you know that electronic copy and backup are
> identical? A clever student could upload a bad but "own work" essay, and
> submit the plagiarised one for assessment...
> The alternative was to submit electronically, and then our teaching
> office would print them out for the lecturer - which has costs
> implications with very large classes
>
> Burkhard
>
> Sandy Steacy wrote:
> > Just a couple of suggestions based on the last post.
> >
> > In order to make things as easy as possible for the lecturers, we
> > require our students to submit their work twice - once in hardcopy for
> > marking the other electronically for plagiarism assessment. The latter
> > is via submit.ac.uk, in other words our students upload their own work
> > to the website, we do not.
> >
> > I then use the system in two ways: i) I skim the reports for any
> > assessments getting high scores and ii) I check up on any papers that
> > seem suspicious to me when I mark them. Note that all my teaching is at
> > undergraduate level.
> >
> > Sandy
> >
> > Burkhard Schafer wrote:
> >> Dear Janet
> >>
> >> I trialled it for our LLM some time back and recommended against it,
> >> BUT mainly because of the specific issues of our programme.
> >>
> >> In a "mock essay" for improving essay writing skills, and with a
> >> cohort of 35 students, I asked three to plagiarise in their essay,
> >> the others were supposed to follow guidelines and procedures, and as
> >> there was nothing at stake, I assume they did.
> >>
> >> Nonetheless, the system returned 33 as "potential plagiarism" - law
> >> students simply have to use literal quotes a lot, from court cases and
> >> statutes,and as these are all online, and the system as it then was
> >> did not identify properly cited references (and the particularities
> >> of citing court cases makes this difficult anyway), they of course
> >> all got lots of material highlighted. Of the two who were not so
> >> identified, one would simply have failed precisely because s/he did
> >> not refer to any authorities. The other one was one of my "intentional
> >> plagiarisers" who was really clever. The other three were identified
> >> - but not for the material they had actually plagiarised! By
> >> contrast,I had identified all three unassisted by technology - though
> >> the test was easy for me, and tough on Turnitin:
> >>
> >> One had handed in a translated chapter from a German textbook (cheeky
> >> sod), the other had copied from an article that was only ever
> >> published on paper, and rightfully forgotten, so nobody ever quotes it
> >> in an online document (one of mine, as a matter of fact, double
> >> cheeky sod)and the third had changed the sentences sufficiently to get
> >> away with it.
> >>
> >> Even though the system was free at the time, there were some "costs" -
> >> moving to electronic essay delivery, increased admin also for the IP
> >> waiver form, and for me, I found reading/marking the analysed essays
> >> on screen rather a strain on the eyes, time consuming and difficult.
> >> While none of these costs were prohibitive, the system would have to
> >> have provided more benefits - by marking the essays in the traditional
> >> way, was much faster AND more reliable/efficient in detecting
plagiarism.
> >>
> >> Couple of comments:
> >> the newer versions of the system ought to be better, and I was asked
> >> to test it again by my school. If the number of false positives is
> >> deceasing significantly, that would change things.
> >>
> >> The lack of benefits was clearly linked to the nature of the
> >> course,and one of my conclusions was that it is not good to make a
> >> central decision, but to devolve it to subjects or even degree
> >> programs. For instance, if we used essays in the much larger
> >> undergraduate classes, my answer might haven been different:
> >> collaboration more than plagiarism would be the main concern and
> >> turnitin is good for that. For plagiarism, we would expect more of the
> >> simple "cut and paste" variety than from our more sophisticated Master
> >> students, also the issue of plagiarism from foreign language material
> >> would be less of an issue. The manageable size of the master class
> >> allowed me to set more personalised questions which made collusion
> >> difficult, and using essay banks impossible - again, with different
> >> types of classes, this may not always be possible and they may profit
> >> from turnitin as the "second" (or third) best alternative
> >>
> >> As a geek, I'm in theory rather a fan of the system and its
> >> technology, and it helps sometimes to investigate individual pieces
> >> which are already looking suspicious. I do have some concerns
> >> regrading its impact on the sector as a whole, and the potential for
> >> further de-skilling of academics, but that's a different story
> >> altogether
> >>
> >>
> >> Burkhard
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Burkhard Schafer
> >> Senior Lecturer
> >> University of Edinburgh
> >> School of Law
> >> Joseph Bell Centre
> >> Old College
> >> Edinburgh
> >> EH8 9YL
> >> [log in to unmask]
> >> 0044-(0)131-6502035
> >> http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/staff/view.asp?ref=69
> >>
> >> Janet Gladstone wrote:
> >>> Colleagues,
> >>>
> >>> My Institution (Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College)is
> >>> hopefully commencing a pilot of Turnitin in the near future. I have
> >>> been asked to find out what the practical experience of other
> >>> Institutions has been with this system and would be most grateful for
> >>> your input.
> >>>
> >>> As well as being interested in your general experiences there are
> >>> also a number of areas where we have specific queries:
> >>>
> >>> Do your students have to give permission for their work to be
> >>> electronically scrutinised?
> >>>
> >>> Does electronic submission cause any issues?
> >>>
> >>> Does using Turnitin increase staff workload significantly? Have you
> >>> had any issues regarding Intellectual Property Rights?
> >>>
> >>> Many thanks for your input on this.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>>
> >>> Janet Gladstone
> >>> Senior Assistant Registrar (Quality Assurance)
> >>> Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
*************************************************************************
> >>>
> >>> You are subscribed to the JISC Plagiarism mailing list. To
> >>> Unsubscribe, change
> >>> your subscription options, or access list archives, visit
> >>> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/PLAGIARISM.html
> >>>
*************************************************************************
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
*************************************************************************
> >> You are subscribed to the JISC Plagiarism mailing list. To
> >> Unsubscribe, change
> >> your subscription options, or access list archives, visit
> >> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/PLAGIARISM.html
> >>
*************************************************************************
> >>
> >
>
> *************************************************************************
> You are subscribed to the JISC Plagiarism mailing list. To Unsubscribe,
change
> your subscription options, or access list archives, visit
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/PLAGIARISM.html
> *************************************************************************
*************************************************************************
You are subscribed to the JISC Plagiarism mailing list. To Unsubscribe, change
your subscription options, or access list archives, visit
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/PLAGIARISM.html
*************************************************************************
|