Partnering to Picture a Plagiarism Prevention Pattern

1. Partnering to Picture a Plagiarism Prevention Pattern LOEX 2014 Frances Whaley Illinois Valley Community College

2. IVCC No place so close can take you so far Vision: Leading our community in learning, working and growing Mission: IVCC teaches those who seek and is enriched by those who learn

3. Information Literacy @ ivcc • Academic blueprint, faculty driven • SOUP Computer & Information Literacy • https://www.ivcc.edu/soup • Evaluating Sources Project (ESP) • WWWs of web site evaluation • Respecting Intellectual Property (RIP) • Citing Sources • Avoiding Plagiarism Tutorial

4. RIP Team • Jason Beyer, Philosophy • Mark Brown, English • Mel Keiser, Art • Keith King, Biology • Betsy Klopcic, Psychology • Kirk Lockwood, English • Adam Oldaker, English • Pat Pence, Nursing • Tara Ptasnik, English • Jeff Spanbauer, History • Emily Vescogni, Learning Technologies • Frances Whaley, Library

5. Considerations • Faculty choice in implementation • Accidental vs intentional plagiarism • Ease of implementation • Multi-disciplinary impact

6. More Considerations • Content • MLA vs multiple styles • Modules vs entirety • Learning vs evaluation • Replication vs unique resource • Access • Public vs college • Single format vs multiple • Wide distribution vs targeted • Proof of completion - student vs teacher

7. process • Team discussion • 3 writers (sub-team) • 1 editor/writer • Faculty forum • 2 editors • Team feedback • Web master & educational technologist • 2 editors/writers & web master • Team feedback • Student pilot • Faculty sessions • Roll-out • Faculty survey

8. Faculty feedback • “Between free speech and the Internet, children and adults alike need a filter system to dissect and use the information around them. Our tutorials are clear, concise and easy to use. If individuals have the opportunity to practice and apply the tutorials we have created; eventually, they will automatically apply the skills we have taught them, just like any other activity - cooking, pitching, golfing, painting or playing an instrument. Practice is the key addressing and mastering this topic. Most will not learn on their own. Thankfully, IVCC has embraced the plagiarism issue and has created resources that faculty, staff, students and even parents can use.” – Michelle Story, Computer Laboratory Instructor • “This tool reminds students that what they learned about plagiarism in English class still applies to their other classes. It is a great way to remind the students about avoiding plagiarism. It also shows them how to avoid plagiarism, and is a great review for those students who haven’t thought about plagiarism in a while. We have a lot of non-traditional students who might not have been in the classroom for a while, and it is a good way to get them back on track to understand and avoid plagiarism. This tutorial is an opportunity to remind my students how to avoid plagiarism without me having to use class-time to explain it myself. I didn’t work directly on the tutorial, but I enjoyed discussing the topic of plagiarism with faculty members outside of my discipline.” – Keith King, Biology Instructor

9. Creator feedback • Adam Oldaker, English Instructor • Co-chair of RIP Team • Tutorial draft writer and editor • Oldaker clip 1 • Oldaker clip 2

10. Creator feedback • Kirk Lockwood, English Instructor • Tutorial draft writer • Primary editor • Activity writer • Blackboard instructions writer • Trainer • Lockwood clip 1 • Lockwood clip 2

11. Student pilot • 34 students – 3 library student workers, 31 students in two history classes. • 34 responded the navigation was easy and the length was manageable. • 33 responded the writing style and language were easy enough to read and understand.  The 1 who said it was challenging to read and understand took 41 minutes for the entire tutorial and still said the tutorial would benefit students in all classes. • Students self-reported the amount of time it took per section to read the content and complete the corresponding activity.Section 2 average <7 min Section 3 average <8 minSection 4 average <10 min Section 5 average <8 min(Total calculated based on self-reported section times) Entire tutorial average <32 min • Per section the lowest time was 3 minutes to the highest of 25 minutes.  For the entire tutorial the highest time was 60 minutes • We asked if the tutorial would be beneficial to students in classes with writing assignments, in classes with writing or presentation assignments, in all classes (including career and technical education programs), or would not be beneficial to students.15 – all 12 – writing or presentation assignments 5 – writing assignments 0 – not beneficial • We asked students to select all that apply regarding the tutorial content – if the tutorial contained new information to me, repeated information I already knew, helped refresh information I had forgotten, or needs more information to be useful to me. (the sum will be greater than 34)15 – new 28 – refresh 22 – repeat 0 – needs more info to be useful

12. Student feedback • “I believe this tutorial is a wonderful idea and should be required for all of the students attending IVCC.  This would be benficial after winter and summer breaks because it can be difficult to remember all of this information. I never forget the main factors; however, a quick refresher at the beginning of every semester would benefit every student with a better grade and every teacher with a paper that is properly cited. As a future educator myself, I believe this a fantastic tool and great job by all of you who were involved.”

13. More student feedback • “I liked that it was just straight forward and easy to go through. Sometimes citing correctly can be difficult, but I'd come back to these pages if I was doing a paper to make sure I was following the steps.” • “The tutorial was clearly written and easy to follow. It is very useful for those who are unfamiliar with or need a refresher on plaigarism.”

14. Next steps • Revision • Make one menu button in Blackboard • Create an additional version besides Blackboard • Add a cumulative assessment • Renumber sections • Incorporate faculty survey responses as necessary • Survey classes of students • Survey faculty again

15. Process Summary • Faculty interest • Build team • Build awareness • Roles • Communicate!! • Pilot • Assess • Improve • Communicate!! • Common area • Cross disc; tech • Workshops; emails • Coordinator, creators, editor • Everyone might need to know • Develop tools; ask • Stay focused • Everyone might need to know

16. Lessons learned • Last stage of implementation is complicated • An editor will never stop editing • People are awesome & should be recognized • People may disappoint; still make progress • Blackboard just does weird stuff • Know factors and timing for improvements • Students don’t intuitively know how to avoid plagiarizing • Faculty need time to try new things • Check to see what’s already out there • Allot time for the entire process

17. Tutorial access Guest access to Avoiding Plagiarism Tutorialin IVCC’s Blackboardprovided upon request.

18. Your feedback • Would you like to use or adapt IVCC’s Avoid Plagiarism Tutorial? • What delivery format would you suggest we use rather than Blackboard? • How could you use a collaborative process like this one at your institution?

19. Questions?

20. Contact • Frances Whaley, Head Librarian • Illinois Valley Community College • Frances_Whaley@ivcc.edu • 815-224-0263