Hi

putting CopyCatch in place in our faculty, we have not just used it across
one cohort but 'dump' each cohort into a bin for comparison with the next.
the problem we have is that high comparison scores are shown because of the
type of assessment we use: when a student reflects on their peer review of
another student and of the review of their own then they are likely to use
examples of the other students' work. Furthermore, they often use similar
references and definitions. Consequently, we have to ignore any score below
60%!

In terms of time CopyCatch takes 20 mins or so to load 400 (4000 word)
scripts into the 'check' side and a further 30 plus mins into the comparison
side and I go to lunch while it actually runs. This could be because of the
way our online submission system is set up. I still think it's worth it.

Matt

Matthew Hughes
Senior Lecturer/Learning Technologist
Faculty of health & Social Care
University of West of England
Glenside Campus
Bristol BS16 1DD

Tel: (0117) 344 8585
Mob: 0794 162 1966

-----Original Message-----
From: Plagiarism [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Jude
Carroll
Sent: 25 June 2003 08:38
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Software


Dear David and Mailbase readers

Im following this discussion with interest as to the relative merits of
various detection tools.

I also read the legal issues as you do, David i.e. that if no electronic
record is kept, the data protection laws do not apply.  The JISC service
does keep a database and whilst this is the source of difficulty as far
as student permission is concerned, it's also a potential strength
because a database could eventually  allow cross- institution and
inter-institution checking.

But my main point:  As I understand it, CopyCatch and "the JISC service"
[Turnitin etc] are checking for different kinds of plagiarism.
Copycatch looks for collusion across a cohort, where students copy from
students;  the other looks for web-based copying.  I recently collected
all the cases in my own institution over the previous 12 months and a
third were collusion with nearly a half specifically mentioning
web-based copying.  So perhaps comparing the two is like comparing
hammers and screwdrivers:  they do different things. I think my
institution needs both.



Jude Carroll
Staff Developer and Course Leader
Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development, Oxford Brookes
University, Gipsy Lane, Oxford OX3 0BP UK


-----Original Message-----
From: Plagiarism [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David
Davies
Sent: 24 June 2003 23:31 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Software

> It may be painless but if the law requires you to get student
permission to
> upload material then surely that includes uploading material to
CopyCatch.

Gill

I don't think CopyCatch is working in the same way as the JISC service
in
the context of maintaining a permanent record of a student's assessment.
In
that sense one doesn't upload student work to CopyCatch, no log of the
student's ID or written assessment is made, so the DPA probably has
little
to say in this context.

I equate the use of CopyCatch to the use of MS Word's 'compare document'
feature. Indeed I also used this method to verify the matches that
CopyCatch
found. No permanent store of the student's work is made. The document is
opened, compared with one or more others to look for a match, then
closed
again. It's not stored in a database and certainly is not available to
other
institutions, unlike data in the JISC database.

The only store of the student's work is on the hard drive of me as
module
coordinator or in our School administrative offices in just the same way
that we'd keep their written scripts. As John pointed out, many
institution's already have a straightforward mechanism for informing
students that their work is kept on file in this way and of obtaining an
agreement from the student on the DPA implications of this.

Cheers,

David

************************************************************************
*
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
*************************************************************************