Managing plagiarism cases
generic issues and Kent-specific procedures
Jude Carroll for
The University of Kent, January 2013
A quick intro activity
Into 2’s
Look at the cases before you.
Look at the levels of severity
Choose the level.
Write your choice on the whiteboard
1. Final year dissertation.
Turnitin report shows 47%
matches and when that is
checked, 20% is the
bibliography. 27% matches
material in Turnitin.
The 27% is in two chunks of
14% and 13% each.
The 13% ‘chunk’ is in the
discussion and conclusion
section of the
dissertation.
The 13% ‘chunk’ replicates
exactly the words of a
student in 2011 at
another UK university.
2. A coursework (essay) worth
50% of the module mark.
The marker spots strong
similarities with a standard
text (not digitalised for
checking).
Text and student: Same order of
points, same headings, same
examples and analogies,
same or similar words for
three of the 8 pages of the
essay.
The essay topic is technical: to
describe a well-used
process in the discipline.
This happens in Year, semester
1.
Principles for case management
Fairness
 Transparency
 Realistic work load
 Minimal ‘pain’ to the one who spots it
 Consistency
 Recorded [and evaluated for meeting the
above]

challenging, but achievable
Mechanisms for achieving principles

Fairness
Holistic approach



Transparency
Realistic workload
Minimal ‘pain’
Criteria-based decisions
Systems and specialists
Referral

Consistency
Focus for this session

Recorded
Central recording
mechanisms
The Holistic approach
1. Clear definition [Knowing what….]
2. ‘Rules of the game’: informing students
3. Skills practice : [Knowing how]
4. Designing programmes & assessments to
discourage copying, finding, faking
5. Spotting it when it happens
6. Dealing with cases: fast, fair, defensible,
consistent
Inconsistency can happen at many
places: for students

knowing what plagiarism is

having skills for scholarship/
use of sources

encountering well-designed
assessments

‘open eyes’ culture for
detection

use and understanding of
Turnitin

penalties awarded
What would lead to
greater consistency for
students?
Problem-solving groups (15
minutes)
Focus on your ‘point of
inconsistency’ for
students
Try and stay away from
others’ topics

Is there evidence that
this aspect causes
inconsistency for
students?
Try and spend 5 minutes
on this

What should be done
to make the
experience more
consistent?
Make a record of
recommendations and
be ready to report
back
inconsistency: teachers & university

induction

awarding penalties

written guidance

recording decisions

willingness to ‘spot’
cases

university using the
records for QA

teachers using
systems for managing
cases
Better consistency in action at Kent
The next section will cover:
what procedures are in place
 the penalty tariff
 plans for improving the way cases are
managed

Next steps: an interactive plenary
In pairs: the most important message from
the session
In fours: what the University needs to do
now (small number of actions!)
All: recommendations for action