Change Name of Plagiarism Framework

[zdeb]

Our faculty who are interested in using Turnitin as an Assignment option rather than an external tool have had a viscerally negative reaction to labeling the option "Plagiarism Framework".   This highly negative connotation will ensure very limited adoption of the option.   We recommend a change in the label from "Plagiarism Review"to "Originality Check".     

[Chris_Hofer]

Hi zdeb...

Could you please provide a screen shot of where you are seeing this?  I've used the Turnitin LTI / Canvas integration a little bit, and this terminology doesn't sound familiar to me ( @dhulsey ‌, how about you?).  I'm not sure if this is something that your school has come up with or if this is something that the folks at Turnitin would be responsible for.  Any additional info would be helpful...thanks.

[laurakgibbs]

If they are having a negative reaction, then that is probably for a very good reason that deserves discussion.

I would vote for engaging in that discussion with your teachers, not for changing the name of the tool.

I have the same reaction to TurnItin... and if you want to promote originality in student work, then what you need are creative, open-ended assignments with lots of human support and encouragement.

None of which can be supplied by TurnItIn whose very existence depends on people using cookie-cutter assignments that tempt students to copy off the Internet to begin with.

Alternatives to Turn-It-In: encouraging faculty to use the approaches recommended in James Lang's Cheating Lessons and Michelle Eodice's Meaningful Writing Project. Details here:

https://community.canvaslms.com/people/laurakgibbs/blog/2017/06/16/a-guide-for-resisting-edtech-the-... 

[zdeb]

Sure. Here's a screen shot: https://screencast.com/t/rI9ssbFDix

This is not the external tool integration, this is a new feature selectable

by checkbox within an Assignment. Our Instructure customer satisfaction

rep, Kelly Jermone, indicates that she is hearing similar concerns voiced

by other institutions about the feature label "Plagiarism Review" and

encouraged us to submit a feature idea to request a change.

Deb Mateik

Deborah Mateik

Director

Learning Technology Design

Academic Innovation & Technology

301-405-2945

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Chris Hofer <instructure@jiveon.com>

[Chris_Hofer]

Thanks for the screen shot, zdeb.  We don't yet have that for our Canvas instance.  Maybe I should check into this.

[zdeb]

It is new, just announced about 2 weeks ago, I believe. Our Turnitin

customer support person provided us with some training on it today (we were

able to enable it in a single course for testing purposes). We are trying

to decide if we want to enable the feature, but the terminology is

something of a show stopper for some of our faculty. Many of our faculty,

particularly those who teach writing skills (freshmen and junior writing

programs) have opted not to adopt Turnitin itself right now until they can

develop a strategy for making sure its use is educational and not

punitive. They have some discomfort with the assumption of guilt that the

word plagiarism stirs up. With these folks in mind, I know we will get

push back if the Assignment tool were to display a checkbox that says

"Plagiarism Review".

Deborah Mateik

Director

Learning Technology Design

Academic Innovation & Technology

301-405-2945

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 12:38 PM, Chris Hofer <instructure@jiveon.com>

[laurakgibbs]

The pushback is for very good reasons, and I would urge you to try to appreciate the message your faculty are sending you. Changing the name of the tool does not change the tool itself, and the message they are sending you is about problems with the tool. Problems that are very real.

TurnItIn is a policing tool, not a teaching tool. But there are other ways you can use online tools that can help students become enthusiastic and confident writers. I teach writing online; I have never used TurnItIn and I never will, but I am very grateful for all the ways that online spaces can help students learn and grow as writers.

[Stef_retired]

As zdeb‌ has stated, this is a very new integration that has not yet been broadly implemented. Deborah, the idea is open for voting; we have learned that you can change the wording with CSS, so while you're waiting for the Community to consider this, we hope you will pursue the CSS option.

[zdeb]

Thank you stephanie. We are looking into this option, as well.

Deborah Mateik

Director

Learning Technology Design

Academic Innovation & Technology

301-405-2945

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 2:27 PM, stefaniesanders <instructure@jiveon.com>

[dhulsey]

To the best of my knowledge, "plagiarism framework" is terminology coming from instructure when they implemented some web hook technology to boost the ability of plagiarism detection services for integrating with Canvas. Turnitin and other services are building out new versions of their services that take advantage of the work Instructure has done on the Canvas side. I do not know for certain, but I believe Turnitin simply adopted the Instructure terminology to help customers distinguish between the different ways Turnitin integrates with Canvas. At present, there are three versions: API (being phased out), LTI, and the plagiarism framework version (currently in Beta, I believe).

Perhaps, alyssavigil, the Turnitin community rep who keeps an eye on the Canvas forums, might have some thoughts‌ or at least be able to share zdeb‌'s feedback with the Turnitin product team. 

[alyssavigil]

Hi everyone,

Thank you for sharing your candid thoughts and feelings around the name "Plagiarism Framework", and thanks  @dhulsey ‌ for pulling the Turnitin team into the convo. 

Turnitin's tools have the capability to produce a Similarity Report, but this alone does not indicate a case of plagiarism. For this reason, we've communicated similar concerns about the naming to Instructure and are hoping they consider an update to better reflect the capabilities of our tool. We've heard you and shared this with Turnitin's Integration Product team (that was already aware and working on this in concert with Instructure).

Special thanks to stefaniesanders‌ for surfacing the CSS workaround for the meantime. Our team will continue to pursue an alternative name for this tool. 

[laurakgibbs]

I don't think there's a lot of point in playing word games like "similarity report" when TurnItIn is the plagiarism-checking business. When you search at Google, here is the sponsored ad result that shows up for TurnItIn.com. The company does not sell themselves as a Similarity Checker; they sell themselves as a Plagiarism Checker:

Instead of trying to pretend things are other than what they are in some kind of marcomm name-game, I would suggest it is much better to talk to instructors when they raise objections; it's an opportunity. That friction is valuable, signaling a real need for dialogue about writing instruction.

And we can never have enough dialogue about writing instruction IMO. 

[kmeeusen]

I agree, laurakgibbs‌, it is an application of PC that I strongly detest - just call a spade, a "spade". I'll go one step further than you. If you think, as a teacher, that you need to use a plagiarism checker in your classrooms, then also call it plagiarism to your students, and tell them that plagiarism is a form of cheating - yes, "Cheating" and not some watered down alternate terminology. You are doing your students a favor, because the real world will call it worse things like fraud, embezzlement, crime, etc.

Just an old curmudgeon's $0.02!

[zdeb]

We have no problems with Turnitin itself. We currently use the external

tool integration. The only concern is the terminology "Plagiarism Review"

in association with the checkbox in the Assignment (akin to the Group or

Peer Review option checkboxes). We have found a way to change this

ourselves through the CSS and will do so if and when we enable the Canvas

Plagiarism Framework at our institutions.

My thanks, Deb Mateik

Deborah Mateik

Director

Learning Technology Design

Academic Innovation & Technology

301-405-2945

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 11:20 AM, dhulsey@nmjc.edu <instructure@jiveon.com>

[laurakgibbs]

I hear you,  @kmeeusen ‌!

And did you see waaaseee‌'s post on paper mills? They exist and thrive precisely because they can beat the plagiarism checkers (and they use plagiarism checking technology themselves in order to guarantee that "originality" to their customers):

What $25,352 worth in contract cheating looks like.  

There will never be technology solutions to these problems... but luckily there is a lot we can do as teachers to show students we really care. And one of the fundamental ways we can show we care is by giving students feedback on their writing (feedback based on actually READING what the students write), and then helping them to revise and improve. That's my 2 cents' worth. 🙂

[kmeeusen]

Absolutely, laurakgibbs‌ which is why, like you, that I hate plagiarism checkers - or at least one of my reasons!

[alyssavigil]

To your point of the value in talking to instructors, I whole-heartedly agree. Would you like to set up a time to talk? I'll reach out via email to coordinate if you'd like. 

[laurakgibbs]

I have no interest in any kind in TurnItin for reasons I've explained; I was referring to the instructors that "had a viscerally negative reaction to labeling the option Plagiarism Framework" whose objections prompted this feature request. My guess is that those instructors' concerns are legitimate, and a change in name will not address those concerns. 

[jpoulos]

Thanks everyone for the feedback on the new plagiarism framework, and thanks alyssavigil‌ for participating in the discussion.

Instructure is consider this discussion as a source of feedback, but we have not made a product decision yet; I don't have an ETA on when we will arrive at a change to the existing behavior. This isn't simply a matter of working with Turnitin, but the other vendors that use the platform as well. Clearly there are strong opinions regarding the appropriate language surrounding the terminology for similarity/plagiarism/originality detection tools. Furthermore, the existing "Plagiarism Review" option may some day expand into tools that have nothing to do with similarity/plagiarism/originality (e.g. perhaps portfolio services could allow submissions to be sent to their service so students can add submissions to a different space).

Until we can spend more time evaluating what this should look like by collaborating with more of our partners and customers while also considering the right approach for the future, I've worked with my team to produce some custom JS that can be added to the theme editor for an account or sub-account. This is in no way officially sanctioned by Instructure, I just work here and thought this might help people who are suffering :

$( window ).load(function() {

  var assignment_header = document.querySelector('#edit_assignment_header')
  if (assignment_header) {
    var label = document.querySelector('label[for="similarity_detection_tool"]');
    label.innerText = "Similarity Detection";
   document.querySelectorAll('option[title="Plagiarism Review Tool"]').forEach(function(el) { el.title = "Similarity   Detection Tool"})
  }
});

Please contact your CSM if there are questions on how to implement this workaround, or if you need custom CSS/JS enabled for your account.

Hopefully this helps.

Jesse Poulos

Associate Technical Product Manager, Platform and Partnerships
Instructure

[kmeeusen]

Thanks Deactivated user‌!

While I am of the "A rose by any other name is still.................." persuasion, I  know and accept that others are not  the same. Your provision of this small code snippet may prove helpful for some of them.

Kelley

[jbuchner]

Because the tool has a terrible name should not be a reason to not use the tool.

Because the tool can be subverted is not a reason to not use the tool.

Because you use free form assignments that allow for maximization of creativity does not mean your students aren't cheating them. (Again, the paper mill post applies just as much to creative work as cookie cutter.)

But also: don't use the tool because you are desperate to catch cheaters.

You use the tool because you can use the reports as you see fit: for example a discussion with individual students struggling with plagiarism issues.

You use the tool because we want your students to think about how to rephrase others ideas, because that helps foster actual learning.

You use the tool, and other instruments, and lessons, because you want your students to know you care about their ethical behavior. Whatever profession they go into, there are ethical codes, either written or assumed. Letting the students know the the community values ethical behavior will instill some with a desire to be ethical themselves.