Journal #3

Title: A War of Words. Author: Jim Patterson.
T-H-E Journal, Sept 2007.

This article is an examination of the increased problem of student plagiarism since the advent of easy access to the Internet as an infinite source of text. The author cleanly describes the existence of a current riff between teachers and software developers.

Teachers seem to be opposed to software tools that are designed to simply scan a student work for similarities to other work in a large data base. This technique, they claim, is ineffective because it does nothing to prevent plagiarism; it only polices plagiarism after the fact. If a student work failed to pass software detection muster the student is presumed to have plagiarized. Students and teachers alike claim this approach is less than optimal because at the very least it is not a constructive aid to discouraging plagiarism. They also hint that it may be a violation of a student’s civil rights and/or intellectual property rights to assume guilt based on a determination by the detection software.

Software developers defend the use of anti plagiarism software by stating that its sole purpose is not as a policing tool. They claim it is best utilized when teachers warn students that their work will be subject to anti plagiarism software scrutiny once submitted. The developers liken this approach to that of an umpire on a field or a proctor overseeing a test. These are not utilized because everyone would cheat but to deter potential cheating.

The article also examines the teaching trend to adopt a more proactive, constructive approach to the problem. Here, the article first describes the use of a alternative type of software design that emphasizes preventing plagiarism before it takes root. These products are geared to teach students the proper way to research, take notes, paraphrase, and site sources while developing a research strategy. Also described is a more basic approach utilizing role-playing to illustrate the effects of plagiarism in hopes of deterence.

The author does a very good job showing all sides of the problem without bias or conclusion towards any one solution. He instructs on the current issues and leaves the question of the solution to each to ponder. He also clearly reminds us that we will have to find some method of our own to address this problem.

Question #1 Will I use plagiarism detection software? No I would not. This article persuaded me that it is ineffective. By the time a student has resorted to plagiarism, it is too late. A teacher’s better effort is to help students learn that plagiarism is unecessary. Good work habits and clear instructions will help keep students from straying.

Question #2 Is it fair to students to assume plagiarism based on software determination? No. It seems too destructive a method. It could easily result in accusing an innocent student. Granted the software can detect the similarity of the student’s text to that of thousands of others in a data base but what level of proof is that. Is it beyond a reasonable doubt, clear and convincing, preponderance or what? Since its one piece of non scientific evidence it seems its level of proof would be of the lowest order. We’re not talking about DNA here. The randomness of how students write on a similar topic is unknown and therefore there is nothing to compare the software’s findings to. So why assume guilt?