Turnitin or Turnitoff?
Academic Integrity
The UWS approach
Liz Curach
University Librarian
UWS
Plagiarism: a new phenomenon?
"In comparing various authors with one
another, I have discovered that some of the
gravest and latest writers have transcribed,
word for word, from former writers, without
making acknowledgement.”
Pliny the Elder (23 AD-79 AD), Natural History
http://www.quotationspage.com/search.php3?homesearch=pliny+the+elder
Plagiarism defined ..
 Plagiarism is the presentation of the
thoughts or work of another as one’s own
St James Ethics Centre
 … to take and use the writings of another
(from the Latin ‘plagiarus’, meaning
kidnapper)
Oxford English Dictionary
Plagiarism on the rise?
 18,000 participant study confirmed that internet
plagiarism was prevalent across 23 US
institutions:
– 38% of participants had engaged in more than 1
instance of ‘cut and paste’;
– 44% believed such behaviour trivial and not cheating;
– 90% of students believe cheaters are never caught or
disciplined.
 Plagiarism from books and paper based materials
remains slightly more popular than internet
plagiarism.
Rutgers University, 2003
http://ur.rutgers.edu/medrel/viewArticle.html?ArticleID=3408
Plagiarism on the rise? (cont’d)
75% of respondents never plagiarised
9% plagiarised once
18% plagiarised more than once
3% believe that plagiarism not cheating
78% classify plagiarism as moderate to
severe cheating
 Detection rate is only 3%
 83% of respondents disapprove of
plagiarism





JISC Plagiarism Advisory Service (UK), 2004
It’s easy to cheat ….
 Verbatim copying – copy / paste
 Recycling: same assignment submitted
more than once for different courses
 Ghost writing (including mum and dad)
 “Paper mills” and cheat sites (250+) offer
many resources (free and fee based) for
student “success”
Why do students plagiarise?
 Poor time management or research skills
 Lack of interest in the subject
 Lack of knowledge or ability to write / research an
assignment
 Problems of writing in a second language
 Poor citation skills
 Low likelihood of detection
 Ease of cut and paste from web and cheat sites
 Over-emphasis on grades vs learning
 Lack of knowledge of what constitutes plagiarism or
academic integrity
The UWS approach to plagiarism
prevention
 Clear and widely promulgated policies;
 A whole of institution commitment to
academic integrity;
 UWS values Scholarly Rigour and Integrity
 University wide support structures;
 Availability of Turnitin text matching
software
Turnitin
 Electronic text matching software (digital
‘fingerprinting’);
 Developed in US by Prof James Barrie;
 Demonstrates highest rate of detection
from amongst a range of subscription
checking tools;
 UWS focus on prevention rather than
detection.
What text is matched?
 Internet resources (4.5 bill www pages,
including archived pages;
 Proprietary databases (Gale, Proquest, ebooks, newspaper collection)
 Previously submitted student papers (10
mill +)
 Assignments obtained from paper mills
What is not matched ..
 Print based materials;
 Range of proprietary databases – e.g.
Psychinfo, Ebsco …..;
 Diagrammatic, pictorial representations,
mathematical formulae;
 Anything pre www
Plagiarism detection?
 NO!
 Turnitin does not detect plagiarism; Matched
text does not necessarily translate to plagiarism;
 Turnitin cannot ‘think’ or apply qualitative
judgements;
 Turnitin does not differentiate between legitimate
citation and unsourced secondary text used either
in error or illegitimately
How Turnitin works ….
Originality reports
 Highlight matched sentences / phrases;
 Provide links to original source;
 Indicate overall percentage of matched text
- ‘similarity index’;
 Colour coding assists in interpretation;
 Academic judgement must be applied in
interpreting the originality reports.
Turnitin as an educative tool
 Students self submit draft assignments prior
to due date for originality checking;
– Multiple submissions permitted up until due date;
– Students review originality reports, correcting citations,
paraphrasing etc. prior to final submission;
– Academic may or may not wish to review final
originality report.
Turnitin as a punitive tool
 Mandated use of Turnitin across university;
 Students not granted access to originality
reports;
 Turnitin reports used to “catch out”
potential plagiarists.
The punitive approach will fail!
 The primary goal should be prevention
rather than punishment.
Turnitin detractors ….
 Turnitin database does not include all
internet accessible materials;
 Does not include print based materials;
 “Matches” commonly used words and
phrases;
 Makes profit from student work by storing
submitted material in database.
However ….
 Turnitin is but one tool in the academic integrity
toolbox:
– Design assessment to minimise potential plagiarism;
– Make expectations clear to students;
– Monitor, detect and respond to incidences of possible
plagiarism;
– Teach skills of summarising and paraphrasing;
– Teach skills of referencing and citation;
– Teach skills of critical analysis and interpretation;
– etc
Centre for the Study of Higher Education, 2006
Turnitin claims …
“Students will realise that they can no
longer “borrow” intellectual materials
without being at risk of being caught. They
will submit their own work, and as a result
educational quality, student morale and
ethics will improve”
Discussion and questions ….
Turnitin,
or
Turnitoff ??