Managing plagiarism cases

1. Managing plagiarism cases generic issues and Kent-specific procedures Jude Carroll for The University of Kent, January 2013

2. A quick intro activity Into 2’s Look at the cases before you. Look at the levels of severity Choose the level. Write your choice on the whiteboard

3. 1. Final year dissertation. Turnitin report shows 47% matches and when that is checked, 20% is the bibliography. 27% matches material in Turnitin.   The 27% is in two chunks of 14% and 13% each.   The 13% ‘chunk’ is in the discussion and conclusion section of the dissertation. The 13% ‘chunk’ replicates exactly the words of a student in 2011 at another UK university. 2. A coursework (essay) worth 50% of the module mark.  The marker spots strong similarities with a standard text (not digitalised for checking).   Text and student: Same order of points, same headings, same examples and analogies, same or similar words for three of the 8 pages of the essay. The essay topic is technical: to describe a well-used process in the discipline. This happens in Year, semester 1.

4. Principles for case management • Fairness • Transparency • Realistic work load • Minimal ‘pain’ to the one who spots it • Consistency • Recorded [and evaluated for meeting the above] challenging, but achievable

5. Mechanisms for achieving principles • Fairness • Transparency • Realistic workload • Minimal ‘pain’ • Consistency • Recorded Holistic approach Criteria-based decisions Systems and specialists Referral Focus for this session Central recording mechanisms

6. The Holistic approach • Clear definition[Knowing what….] • ‘Rules of the game’: informing students • Skills practice : [Knowing how] • Designing programmes & assessmentsto discourage copying, finding, faking • Spotting it when it happens • Dealing with cases: fast, fair, defensible, consistent

7. Inconsistency can happen at many places: for students • knowing what plagiarism is • having skills for scholarship/ use of sources • encountering well-designed assessments • ‘open eyes’ culture for detection • use and understanding of Turnitin • penalties awarded What would lead to greater consistency for students?

8. Problem-solving groups (15 minutes) Focus on your ‘point of inconsistency’ for students • Is there evidence that this aspect causes inconsistency for students? • What should be done to make the experience more consistent? Try and stay away from others’ topics Try and spend 5 minutes on this Make a record of recommendations and be ready to report back

9. inconsistency: teachers & university • induction • written guidance • willingness to ‘spot’ cases • teachers using systems for managing cases • awarding penalties • recording decisions • university using the records for QA

10. Better consistency in action at Kent The next section will cover: • what procedures are in place • the penalty tariff • plans for improving the way cases are managed

11. Next steps: an interactive plenary In pairs: the most important message from the session In fours: what the University needs to do now (small number of actions!) All: recommendations for action