1 / 9

Use of “Turn it in” in the University of Sheffield EEE Department

Use of “Turn it in” in the University of Sheffield EEE Department. R.C. Tozer Head of teaching EEE. Outline. History Using “Turn it in” Interpretation Sanctions Support and Guidance Conclusions. History. increasing problems with cut and paste from web increasing problem with collusion

cody
Download Presentation

Use of “Turn it in” in the University of Sheffield EEE Department

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Use of “Turn it in” in the University of Sheffield EEE Department R.C. Tozer Head of teaching EEE

  2. Outline • History • Using “Turn it in” • Interpretation • Sanctions • Support and Guidance • Conclusions

  3. History • increasing problems with cut and paste from web • increasing problem with collusion • very variable enthusiasm amongst staff for methodical detection led to • uneven playing field

  4. Using “Turn it in” • used (by us) only for plagiarism / collusion detection • key pieces of work in each year • students responsible for submitting their own work • department has appointed a plagiarism officer to manage the process

  5. Interpreting “Turn it in” reports • initial scan by plagiarism officer • group of 4 or 5 staff advise on penalty – would include project supervisor for project work • range of penalties • time consuming • contentious!

  6. Sanctions • plagiarism no action – tutor advice – advice letter – mark reductions (typically -2, -5, 10, -20) – see HOD – university discipline. • collusion interview with HOD and year tutor to identify the nature of the interaction – ie who copied from whom, etc – followed by appropriate sanction as above

  7. Support and guidance • small group tutorial exercises • extensive advice on referencing • do some student groups have more of a problem than others?

  8. Advice (based on our experience) • make sure staff agree… - which exercises to test - what constitutes unacceptable practice - on the relative seriousness of various infringements - on a small group who will scrutinise “turn it in reports” • submit assignment paperwork before students submit their work • thrash out conflicts in the small group – don’t let them get to an examiners meeting • create student guidance material

  9. Concluding comments Plus • very good at detecting collusion • good at detecting “lifted” web material • ineffective against copying from books • offers a level playing field Minus • we still need to interpret reports • time consuming • contentious • will not detect copied artwork

More Related