Institutional Plagiarism Policy and Turnitin Perceptions and Experiences of Staff and Students

1. Institutional Plagiarism Policy and Turnitin Perceptions and Experiences of Staffand Students Simon Starr Learning Technologist Canterbury Christ Church University LTEU Learning and Teaching Enhancement Unit

2. About the plagiarism policy

3. Plagiarism Policy • Educate to avoidfirst, detect and punish second LTEU Learning and Teaching Enhancement Unit

4. About our research

5. Research • Aims • gauge understanding and perceptions of policy • establish how Turnitin is used; impact • Data collected: • Interviews • Surveys LTEU Learning and Teaching Enhancement Unit

6. Findings understanding and perceptions of the policy

7. Findings – Perceptions • Policy = education • staff • Turnitin = detection • Turnitin = education • perceive educational approach more after using Turnitin • students • Policy = standards and rigour LTEU Learning and Teaching Enhancement Unit

8. Findings efficacy of Turnitin in support of the policy

9. Findings – Turnitin • More widely used than we thought • third of students representing 40+ programmes • used on a least one programme in most departments • High staff and student satisfaction • Non-users willing to adopt • Experience of Turnitin LTEU Learning and Teaching Enhancement Unit

10. Findings – Turnitin • Policy’s minimum requirements for use of Turnitin being met • Turnitin appears to contribute to detection in significant minority of plagiarism cases • Find also significant ongoingeducational use • Strategies for Using Turnitin • (as proportion of programmes analysed) LTEU Learning and Teaching Enhancement Unit

11. Findings – Turnitin Clear impact on education to avoid plagiarism, also some on referencing and writing generally … • Perceptions of Impact of Turnitin • (note student based on interviews – small sample) … demand also for more ongoingeducationaluse from students • “It has been fine to use and pretty clear in its use. In our first year we were are able to send drafts for originalty [sic] reports, however I believe our second and third years we are not allowed. It would be nice to continue to be able to do so as it was useful learning aid and would continue to be so in the future.” • “It would be helpful if we actually got to see the reports that are run on our submitted work. Then it will actually be a learning experience as opposed to a hoop we have to jump through.” • “It will help me to learn more about the style of writing, how to reference properly and to avoid using too many quotations; so I believe it will improve my work.” LTEU Learning and Teaching Enhancement Unit

12. Outcomes

13. Outcomes • We conclude: • educate-first approach of policy generally understood, but awareness needs raising amongst students • Turnitin effectivein supporting policy • We recommended: • policy reviewed with a view to extendinguse of Turnitin • awareness raising of educational potential of Turnitin • enhanced guidance on interpreting originality reports • Progress: • Revised plagiarism policy submitted for approval Summer 2011: • Turnitin for all coursework levels 4-7 • opportunity to self-check a draft every time • feedback/guidance on originality reports at early stages LTEU Learning and Teaching Enhancement Unit

14. Questions? Starr, S., Graham-Matheson, L. (2011) ‘Efficacy of Turnitin in Support of an Institutional Plagiarism Policy’ Available at: http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/TBC simon.starr@canterbury.ac.uk