Jude Carroll wrote:
> it seems to be not the report but the
> discussion that is central.
>
Jude,
I don't really have much in the way of data, but my experience (or
should I say impression?) is that presenting the evidence of poor
paraphrasing, poor citation, etc in the context of the student's *own*
work is what counts. And doing so when we are not looking at a formal
assessment. My approach is to get the students to submit a draft for
comment before the final submission date, put it through Turnitin, then
present them with the OR. It is individual, but discussion is very brief.
The process requires careful scheduling to make sure that the draft
submission date doesn't clash with anything else the students have to
do, otherwise the exercise doesn't work. And it is only possible
because it is a very small module (about 18) with very high attendance.
But the result (when we got the scheduling right) was NO un-cited text
in the final submissions!!!! [The down side was many rather long, though
properly cited, quotations. I have tried the same approach with larger
groups, but it is much harder and less obviously successful].
jamesM
*************************************************************************
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
*************************************************************************
|