Search News


Browse Archives

News

Saving Time or Betraying Trust?

November 12, 2007

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

It doesn't come as a surprise that a proposal to curb plagiarism would draw criticism from its intended targets. But at the University of Maryland at College Park, a plan to introduce text matching software has drawn fire not only from students but from their professors as well.

As at many research universities, the bulk of grading is often left to teaching assistants, and the amount of effort that goes into tracking down potential plagiarism has some graduate students complaining that they could be making better use of their time. At Maryland, a recent survey of graduate assistants found that they were working (on the TA duties they have on top of the graduate education) an average of 29.1 hours a week, well over the expected 20. The Ph.D. completion rate is under 50 percent, which some partially attribute to workload.

The idea to use automated detection software originated with Laura Moore, president of the Graduate Student Government, in January, largely as an effort to shift the burden from TA's to a program called SafeAssign, which Blackboard recently added as a free module for institutions that already subscribe to its enterprise course management package. At Maryland, according to an official at the Office of Information Technology, the module is currently disabled, but there is talk of starting a pilot program.

"I think in our case, TA workload has to be reduced. It’s affecting our success as graduate students. So we need to find ways to do that; this is a cheap and easy way to do it," Moore said.

Whether the plan ever gets past that stage depends on the outcome of discussions at various levels of the administration and faculty leadership. Last week, the University Senate's executive committee held informal discussions on Moore's proposal (among other issues) that ended without agreement or action, but members voiced concerns that the software could return false positives and create a presumption of guilt that students are cheating. Graduate students, meanwhile, argue that due process would be preserved and that any results from SafeAssign would have to be interpreted anyway.

"I’m not very keen on this idea, but I’ve never used it," said Kenneth G. Holum, a professor of history who sits on the executive committee. "I have Googled things on the Web, my teaching assistants have and we’ve actually found papers that were plagiarized ... it’s terrible but I think the relationship between faculty and students is more important than the few people who damage mostly themselves by engaging in that kind of conduct."

Blackboard added SafeAssign -- originally MyDropBox's SafeAssignment software -- to its offerings this summer. The program works much like the dominant player in the field, Turnitin, by scanning millions of documents on the Internet and various databases to search for matches to a student's work. According to Karen Gage, Blackboard's vice president of product strategy, the system checks a number of sources, including the results of Web searches (through Microsoft's Live Search engine), journal articles in the ProQuest database, all assignments submitted through SafeAssign at a particular campus, and a database of papers voluntarily submitted to a global database representing all member institutions.

If the module is made available, professors can also decide to let their students submit drafts to SafeAssign, although the student body president worries that matches on a preliminary version could be just as detrimental. Gage stressed that the results don't necessarily mean that a student has plagiarized; a grader must decide whether the match is real and if it constitutes a genuine breach of academic integrity.

Similar issues were raised several years ago when Turnitin approached the university about adopting its service. Since Maryland adopted a "modified honor code" in 1990 that evaluates cases individually (rather than a "single-sanction" approach), said Andrea Goodwin, the associate director of student conduct, "adopting something like Turnitin.com on a regular basis may be more detrimental to that trust-building and that community-building" necessary to "a culture of honesty and integrity."

Moore, who is a master's student in entomology, believes that's a legitimate concern, and she hopes that the campus has a chance to examine the issue thoroughly in the coming weeks.

"My interest in this particular tool stems in part from my experience as a TA," she wrote in an October e-mail to the University Senate. "When I TA'd for BSCI 105 and BSCI 106, much emphasis was placed on teaching students how to paraphrase original sources without plagiarizing. One of the first labs of the semester was devoted to learning about paraphrasing and plagiarism. Since many of our students were freshmen and were learning these concepts for the first time in a college setting, we felt that it was important to spend time emphasizing these concepts.

"TA's were instructed to check students' lab reports to ensure that referenced material was paraphrased appropriately. This took a tremendous amount of time. Each lab report typically took about 20 minutes to grade, and often up to 5-10 minutes of this was spent doing web searches on suspect phrases and researching original material. Since the plagiarism-detection portion of grading could potentially be automated, I thought this was worth investigating."

Initial meetings with IT officials were favorable to adopting SafeAssign, but the University Senate's response has been decidedly cooler. The outcome depends largely on which body makes the final decision. The student body president, Andrew Friedson, says he's concerned that the plan could "alter the relationship between the professor and the student" and "set a standard and a culture and expectation of cheating."

"The reservation that I have is rooted in the fact that ... having a program like SafeAssign on our campus ... creates an assumption that people are cheating, and you have to prove yourself to have not cheated," he said.

For her part, Moore will continue pushing the plan, but she sees the issue as part of a larger problem. She's also working to pursue unionizing the university's graduate students.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Saving Time or Betraying Trust?

  • Living Under a Rock?
  • Posted by Joseoh Duemer , Professor at Clarkson University on November 12, 2007 at 7:25am EST
  • Have the faculty at Maryland been living under a rock for the last five years? My department mandated Turnitin several years ago & it works just fine. Actually, it improves the relation between teacher & student because it removes the teacher from the role of policing student writing. In our system, individual faculty are allowed to interpret the matches that turn up as well as to decide, within university policy, what penalty to assign when plagiarism is detected. As far as I know, there have been no false positives, and if there were, the student could appeal to the Academic Integrity Committee.

    I have chaired that committee as well as the faculty senate & it sounds to me as if those at Maryland who are suspicious of the system have not actually used it. I also suspect that if the exalted faculty members at Maryland had to do more of their own grading they would be clamoring for this tool.

  • Posted by John , Way under a rock on November 12, 2007 at 10:30am EST
  • It's unbelievable that a professor found examples of cheating with just a minimal Google search, yet has no interest in doing anything to prevent checking in the future because it will disrupt the student teacher relationship. The student that cheats has already disrupted that relationship, and not caring enough to stop it betrays all of the students in his course that did not cheat. This guy is just too lazy to do his job, and that encourages students to cheat in his class. He thinks it’s just a few who cheat, but how does he know if he doesn’t check? Now that word has gotten out, I’m sure that the cheaters will flock to his class. In the end, he’s the one cheating them out of an education.

  • Do We Take Plagiarism Seriously?
  • Posted by John Lobell , Professor at Pratt Institute on November 12, 2007 at 10:35am EST
  • What does “‘alter the relationship between the professor and the student’ and ‘set a standard and a culture and expectation of cheating.’” mean? Either we take plagiarism seriously or we play games.

    What if an automobile company said: If faulty bakes are detected in cars coming off the assembly line in X fashion, we fix them, but seeking them out in Y fashion is a breach of trust?

    The responsibility of the automobile company is to the consumer and others who rely on the brakes. The responsibility of colleges is to students and the culture that rely on graduates who can research, organize, and present material, not just clip it from the Internet. Perhaps it is because colleges have lost sight of this, that higher education is in such doubt in the larger culture.

  • Posted by Grad Student , ABD at A top 15 R1 on November 12, 2007 at 10:55am EST
  • In my experience with SafeAssignment, I've rarely found it a useful tool. My students frequently have difficulty converting files to the appropriate format and successfully uploading, while I find it adds a significant amount of time to my job. It isn't unusual for my fellow TAs and I to approach 45 hours in a grading week (not including our own coursework, grant writing, research and dissertation work, etc.), and the additional policing of student work is time consuming. With SafeAssignment I have to check every single student paper. Without it, I only check (via Google or a scan of Sparknotes) those sentences or paragraphs that strike me as beyond the student's capabilities.

    As for the "betraying trust" of the article's headline, isn't the initial betrayal found in the student's decision to cheat? Enforcing academic integrity is everyone's job.

  • I love Turnitin.com!
  • Posted by H. E. Baber on November 12, 2007 at 11:30am EST
  • I use Turnitin and it's superb. Freed of the policing function I can teach more effectively and give students more interesting, open-ended assignments. Before I started using Turnitin I had to be very specific and very directive about setting term paper topics for students. I made a point of not only limiting topics but asking very specific questions--not because I thought this was good pedagogically but to discourage plagiarism. Now I can let them write whatever they want.

    Much as we hate it higher education is an adverserial system. We credential and rank students competing for scarce resources and they duke it out for GPA to get decent jobs and places in graduate programs. Services like Turnitin at least take some of the policing function off our backs so that we can do more teaching.

  • Facts about Turnitin - What You don't Know
  • Posted by William on November 12, 2007 at 5:35pm EST
  • All,

    I suggest that you read this well-researched article concerning the negative impact of Turnitin:

    http://www.essayfraud.org/turnitin_john_barrie.html

    I guarantee that you'll be shocked by the facts.

  • Reply to William
  • Posted by Joseph Duemer , Professor at Clarkson University on November 12, 2007 at 7:40pm EST
  • The web page you link to is mostly a hectoring attack on professors rather than a considered critique of Turnitin. The piece assumes professors are using the tool because they are lazy without offering any evidence that the assertion is true. The piece raises some interesting & important issues, though it does so without any notion that professors and administrators had thought about them, which is manifestly not the case. On the technical side, of course those of us who use the system are aware that there are kinds of plagiarism Turnitin won't catch. That will be true of any system whether machine or human based; in fact, the combination of human and machine is ideal. On the pedagogical side, I simply have not seen the atmosphere of distrust the article asserts that the software creates. Of all the issues raised, the intellectual property problem seems most troubling & I am willing to let a student opt out of the program if they are willing to document their sources in an alternative way.(I always explain that student essays become part of the database, but have never had a student opt out.) Actually, most of the student essays I read may be "property" but calling them "intellectual" is a stretch. (That's a joke, son, as Foghorn Leghorn used to say.) In summary, the piece you link to is heavy on assertion & innuendo supported by very selective use of supposedly damning quotation. I am not convinced, let alone "shocked."

  • Joseph, your attitude proves the article valid!
  • Posted by William on November 13, 2007 at 4:15am EST
  • Joseph, your stance is weak. The article contains the word, "lazy," only 2 times amongst its 11,000 total words! You are obviously sensitive to that word and trying to distract others from the many disturbing FACTS that the article addresses. Why?

    I'm not surprised that you disrepect students' work. Do you do so to each student in-person, or just behind all of their backs in public forums?

    You would have people believe that the article refers to ALL professors as "lazy." Wrong. The article specifically reads "some professors" or "many professors." The article is also very clear in commending the many educators who have taken a stance against Turnitin.

    You also claim that there is no proof that many professors are lazy. Here's your proof:

    "Save yourself time and take the guess-work out of marking papers with Turnitin!"
    http://www.stjohns.edu/academics/libraries/turnitin1_F07.stj

    That is a glaring example of how and why many professors--even from the most "reputable" universities--REALLY use Turnitin, for personal reasons, at the expense of students' rights. Many professors allow Turnitin to GRADE for them. Let's get real for a minute--THAT is why Turnitin is so popular with most of the teachers who champion it. Intrusive, violating software makes their jobs easier. Screw the kids.

  • Posted by Joseph Duemer on November 13, 2007 at 6:50am EST
  • William, you don't know anything about my teaching & your response runs very, very close to being a personal attack. Your tone is insulting. One question: Are you actually a teacher? By the way, Turnitin cannot actually grade papers, as you seem to assert, though it offers certain tools for inserting marks & comments into student work. Note: It takes me the same amount of time to grade a batch of papers with Turnitin as it does the old-fashioned way; the difference is, since the program semi-automates some repetitive tasks like marking comma splices, etc I spend more time responding to the content of students' writing. As I've already noted, my whole department uses the program & we are consistently rated among the best teachers at my university by our students, the ones you claim we are alienating & in whom we are engendering a culture of distrust.

  • turn it off
  • Posted by bradley bleck , instructor at Spokane Falls CC on November 15, 2007 at 12:15pm EST
  • I'm no fan of turnitin. I think it's the sort of thing that promotes lazy teaching and fosters the adversarial views of students. Frankly, the day I start feeling the need to police all of my students, having them all need to prove themselves NOT cheats, is the day I should find another line of work.

    None of this addresses the intellectual property rights of students. Why should they contribute their work to the turnitin database so turnitin can make more money? Why should faculty and institutions compel them to do so? I'm troubled by the ethics of the software and its use.

  • Turn It In - A godsend in an age of Xerox "scholarship"
  • Posted by Scrawed on November 17, 2007 at 3:35pm EST
  • Thank God for Turnitin.com! I submitted several papers available online from an advanced engineering course (almost entirely populated by international students). Turnitin pointed out that ALL the submitted papers had significant problems with plagiarism. Subsequent investigation showed that not only did Turnitin often correctly identify stolen passages, but that there was even more material taken from online sources than it identified. There were whole "borrowed" pages in there! Often stealing occurred from multiple sources, without even attempts to credit them (which I believe demonstrates intent to cheat and obscure the presence of plagiarism rather than "ignorance of the rules concerning references").

    Frankly I believe that the exposure of this kind of dishonesty and chicanery at present is far more important than being concerned about the ethics of such a service.