« How to read a book | Main | And now for a word from our motivations »
September 23, 2006
Researching plagiarism solutions
For those of you who may be concerned: this is not a post about Turnitin. I know that I've been pretty wrapped up in the Turnitin business this week, blogging, emailing, drafting, and being interviewed not once but twice. And I'm far from the only person who's been consumed by a rather remarkable convergence of opportunities to publicize well-grounded critiques of what I consider to be the next-to-worst-possible response to plagiarism (the worst being no response at all). (Actually, now that I think about it, Turnitin and no response may be in a dead heat for worst possible response. Actually, Turnitin may actually be the winner.)
Today, however, is a breather from all that. Today my hard drive writing is on my handbook, and my blogging is on research. Really.
I've long been troubled by the fact that those purporting to have solutions to the problems of student plagiarism lack evidence for their claims. I include myself in that group. The honor code proponents have purported to have evidence of the effectiveness of honor codes. However, and ironically, many of the claims for the effectiveness of honor codes appear to be astroturfed: a scholarly article on honor codes will claim that honor codes reduce student cheating and will then offer a parenthetical list of sources that supposedly evidence that claim. My initial visits to those cited sources, however, reveals that they do nothing of the kind. Honor codes, in this discursive environment, become an act of faith rather than a solution that has been proven effective.
It appears, though, that some hard data is being produced that evidences the effectiveness of honor codes. Here [via the Plagiarism Resource Site] is media coverage of one.
Although I'm the furtherest thing from a quantitative scholar, I'm hoping to assemble a research team and project that will produce quantified data on the effectiveness of pedagogical practices. I could do one or more case studies that would get published and that might incite passing notice in comp/rhet, but they would have no effect whatever on public opinion. Only quantified data does. So it's my intention to produce it. Pray for me.
NB: Do be sure to read Clancy's and Mike's posts on Turnitin. And Mike has pictures! Does the fact that I open and close this post with Turnitin remarks mean that it really is about Turnitin, after all? Say it ain't so!
Posted by senioritis at September 23, 2006 06:25 AM
Comments
Hi Becky: sure we'll pray for you! - but should we pray because quantitative work is hard or because it's the work of the devil ;-) we are doing some quantitative/qualitative work on the use of i-maps to teach how to use secondary sources effectively and to prevent plagiarism. We have developed some good questionnaires which could be used for other tools. It might be a start...?
One of the questions we've faced is: if you are going to measure the extent of plagiarism after an intervention, quantitatively, what do you use to do it? Student reporting (which may be flawed?) or (dare I say it)Turnitin?
Lisa
Posted by: Lisa at September 25, 2006 01:22 AM
Hi Becky: sure we'll pray for you! - but should we pray because quantitative work is hard or because it's the work of the devil ;-) we are doing some quantitative/qualitative work on the use of i-maps to teach how to use secondary sources effectively and to prevent plagiarism. We have developed some good questionnaires which could be used for other tools. It might be a start...?
One of the questions we've faced is: if you are going to measure the extent of plagiarism after an intervention, quantitatively, what do you use to do it? Student reporting (which may be flawed?) or (dare I say it)Turnitin?
Lisa
Posted by: Lisa at September 25, 2006 01:22 AM