JISC

The report produced in this project will be of use to anyone considering the use of plagiarism detection tools. However, some key items from these reports and from the discussion at the workshops are worth highlighting.

• There is a place for Electronic detection in institutions but as part of a wider approach to prevention. (Report by Oxford Brookes)
• The key to avoiding the possibility of plagiarism is the setting of the right assignments (Report by Oxford Brookes)
• The teaching of study skills is vital in combating plagiarism
• There is a need for a national advisory service, providing advice and guidance in the area of plagiarism prevention and detection for both academics and students
• There are legal issues surrounding the use of plagiarism detection software as well as wider issues regarding the electronic storage of students' work

It is clear that the solution to the problem of plagiarism is prevention and that this solution can and should come from within an institution, not from a detection product. Institutions need to review their procedures, staff support and student training and not rely solely on purchasing software. Institutions should therefore take a holistic approach to plagiarism by ensuring they follow the guidelines given in the Good Practice Guide by Oxford Brookes University.

The two areas noted as particularly important were training and institutional process.

Staff training

As noted in the notes of the workshops delegates highlighted a need for more support and training for staff. Institutions should consider staff training in this area. For example, guidance can be provided on setting assignments to avoid plagiarism, training given on how to deal with students who plagiarise in a fair but constructive way and advice offered on how to develop training on study skills at the department level.

Policy should be agreed at an institutional level and made clear to staff. Once this is in place, every effort should be made to ensure that staff are given the tools, support and time to implement the policy. To support staff, institutions should ensure their procedures assist staff in their endeavours to ensure academic rigour.

Student training

As noted several times in the report on the pilot project, students have serious concerns over their essay writing skills and their ability to avoid plagiarism. Institutions should therefore consider whether their current procedures for teaching study skills and essay writing really meet the needs of the students. This provision may vary among departments and schools and it is important that all students are given consistent access to a high quality of training.

Institutional procedures

As previously noted, policy and procedures should assist staff in their efforts to ensure academic integrity while ensuring students’ rights are upheld. Jon Appleton and Jude Carroll recommend in their Good Practice guide:

• All identified offences of plagiarism should be disciplined, although a fast track approach to minor offences should be included
• The issue of plagiarism discipline should be kept separate from the assessment process
• Institutions should provide the mechanisms for student work to be submitted securely to ensure work cannot be copied or stolen; this will also show students that the institution values their work and its originality
• Institutions shouldcreate an effective record keeping system to enable a consistent approach discipline
• Institutions should ensure there is a clear mechanism for detection and discipline, and more importantly that all staff involved understand their roles
• Institutions should provide support and training for staff and students in the area of plagiarism

Steering Group

Institutions might like to consider establishing a steering group on the issue of plagiarism. This group should be made up of senior management, lecturers/tutors, administration and support staff. This group should seek to find a consensus across departments/schools on a definition of plagiarism, common policies and definitions of breaches of this policy. It will also facilitate discussion between this wide group of interested parties and gather together their views. This arena may also help to address any frustration staff are experiencing over this issue. As with any issue, involving enthusiasts in possible cultural change will help in its implementation.

Policy

Policies on plagiarism should be clear to both staff and students. Institutions should take care to ensure that department policies do not conflict with their overarching policy. Institutions should seek to promote a knowledge and understanding of their plagiarism policy to students. This policy should be designed and written by a cross section of staff members (see above) .

Plagiarism definition

It was noted that, while, it might be useful to have a national definition of plagiarism, which people can use, it was clear that definitions of plagiarism vary dramatically across the country, and therefore unlikely that a consensus could be agreed.

Electronic detection - Its place in institutions

The deployment of electronic detection cannot be done in isolation. During her presentation at the dissemination workshops, Jude Carroll of Oxford Brookes University noted that ‘an institution must take an holistic approach to the issue of plagiarism.’

Consideration should be given to

• The setting of assignments
• The training of students on the issues of plagiarism and essay writing skills
• A clear policy on plagiarism at an institution (and at department level, if necessary)
• The process involved when plagiarism is suspected
• A unified institutional approach to the issue of plagiarism that avoids confusion by staff and students

Only if all these issues are taken into consideration can the problem of plagiarism be tackled. There is no quick fix; deploying electronic detection software must only happen as part of a wider institutional approach. Full details can be found in the report by Oxford Brookes University on the JISC web site

Electronic detection should therefore be just one part of a set of tools for dealing with this issue. Clear decisions should be made before setting assignments on how the results will be treated and what is expected from the students. The software can only highlight areas of text that have been found at another location, it does not identify plagiarism or a plagiarist. The results can be used to provide evidence of cheating but its main roles should be to inform the development of the students’ education and assignment design process. The monitoring of detection results can provide useful feedback so these processes can be continually developed to meet the needs of the students and prevent plagiarism.

This is backed up by the recommendations in the ‘Human and Organisational Issues Associated with Network Security’ report produced for JCALT by South Bank University and the University of Glasgow. They noted that rather than simply invest money in technical fixes to discovering plagiarism, more thought needs to go into the attitudes, practices and structures that underlie it, and how to best change them.

As noted above, there will probably always be a small proportion of students who intentionally plagiarise. However, the majority can be helped to avoid inadvertent plagiarism by training, guidelines and clear policies.

Integration of electronic detection into the assessment process

If an institution is considering the use of plagiarism detection software, it is important they consider how this will fit into their current assessment processes. The detection mechanism should assist tutors in the marking process, but not provide additional work and complication. This may include: considering if the software can fit into the current submission timetable, whether it can be integrated with existing electronic submission software and if electronic submission is not currently in use how the institution can move towards using it.

Electronic submission

It is predicted that, in the long-term students will all submit work via an electronic submission system. When institutions are considering this type of software they should consider linking it to other software providing additional functionality such as peer review, plagiarism detection and virus checking. However, it should be noted that the introduction of electronic submission is a vast undertaking and careful thought should be given to how it will assist staff in their duties, as well as the IT skills required for staff and students to use it.

Legal requirements

All institutions should have a clear policy on ownership of student copyright. If this is not already in place, institutions should consider this issue as a matter of priority. If ownership is left with the students, consideration should be given to the legality of electronically storing students’ work. To avoid these problems, institutions may wish to ensure that all students sign over their copyright to the institution when they sign up for a course. If ownership is assigned to the institution, they should consider their moral responsibility to negotiate the splitting of fees with students who produce work of financial benefit. The emphasis of institutional ownership of copyright should be compliance with the legal requirements of storage and not financial gain.