Sources

*I summarized the sources into different categories and noted the source number of articles at the end of the
statement.

(1): Atkins, Thomas; Gene Nelson. (2001). Plagiarism and the internet: Turning the tables.
English Journal 90.4, 101-104.

(2): Young, Jeffrey R. (2001). Plagiarism and plagiarism detection go high tech. Chronicle of
Higher Education (July 6).

(3): Stebelman, Scott. (1998). Cybercheating: Dishonesty goes digital. American Libraries
(September), 48-50.

(4): Canzonetta, Jordan; Vani Kannan. (2016). Globalizing Plagiarism & Writing Assessment: A
Case Study of Turnitin. Journal of Writing Assessment 09.2.

(5): Vie, Stephanie. (2013). A Pedagogy of Resistance Toward Plagiarism Detection

Technologies. Computers and Composition 30.1 [Special Issue: Writing on the Frontlines],
15-Mar.

(6): *Critical Conversations About Plagiarism, Edited by Michael Donnelly, Rebecca Ingalls,
Tracy Ann Morse, Joanna Castner Post, and Anne Meade Stockdell-Giesler (An edited journal
with multiple articles)
Outline:

1. How does the development of the internet lead to an increase in plagiarism?

The massive library of information on the internet gives students easy and convenient
access to plagiarize materials (1)

More than 200 cheat sites such as “School Sucks” and “Evil House of Cheat” (1)

The era of cut-and-paste makes it easy to plagiarize (2)

The ease with which documents can be downloaded from the Web and altered, and
insidious forms of cheating is now available through translation software (3)

2. What are the negative effects of plagiarism on the internet?

Students will lose the chance and ability to think critically and independently (1)

Students digitally transmit their work friends, producing burdens on teachers since they
might not be able to remember all students’ works (it’s hard to give a fair grade to all
students if there exists plagiarism) (1)

Some students do not even see cheating as a big deal. These students have become so
accustomed to downloading music and reading articles free on the Internet that they see
it as acceptable to incorporate passages into their papers without attribution as well.
-> some students are not even aware of copyright problems (3)

3. How do we be careful with plagiarism on the internet?

We should be clearly aware of the definition of plagiarism. Keith Gresham wrote:

"Library users need to understand that information from the Internet is still a form of
intellectual property, that ethical and legal conventions apply to electronic information,
and that the creation of a bibliographic citation for attribution of such information is
possible." (3)

4. What plagiarism detectors are currently widely used? How do they work? (Using
Turnitin as an example)

Turnitin.com is currently helping high school teachers and university professors

everywhere bring academic integrity back into their classrooms...We encourage any
educator who values academic honesty to help us take a stand against online cheating
and become a member of the Turnitin.com educational community. -> the aim of
plagiarism detectors (4)
 Turnitin.com began in 1995 as Plagiarism.org, quickly expanding and becoming a
profitable plagiarism detection service. (Plagiarism.org -> Turnitin.com) ->origin of
Turnitin (5)

One of the more interesting developments from Turnitin in recent years is their
WriteCheck program, where for $6.95 per 5,000-word paper, a student can check their
writing for originality prior to its application in the OriginalityCheck program. (5)

formative assessment: “the lived, daily embodiment of a teacher’s desire to refine

practice based on a keener understanding of current levels of student performance,
undergirded by the teacher’s knowledge of possible paths of student development within
the discipline and of pedagogies that support such development” -> assessment of
Turnitin (4)

Summative assessment: “final evaluative judgment” of student writing -> assessment of

Turnitin (4)

Artificial intelligence for writing assessment, a program called “adaptive technology,” is

now marketed as a cutting-edge product for assessing student writing. The “Turnitin
Scoring Engine” website claims the platform can “Use your previously-graded sample
essays to identify patterns to grade new writing like your own instructors would. Give the
Engine a set of samples, and it will accurately score an unlimited number of new essays
quickly and reliably” -> how does it work (4)

highlights the same part–easier to see the plagiarized part (6)

Thus, Turnitin’s “intelligent assessment” alleges to grade papers like humans can on
categories of “lexical, syntactic, and stylistic features of writing, such as word choice and
genre conventions. It uses these features to assess content mastery and genre awareness
(“Turnitin Scoring Engine,” n.d). -> what does it cover (4)

According to Grabill, such corporate assessment programs are influencing vast student
populations—as Turnitin boasts, “30 million” students—across the globe. -> popularity
(4)

In 2015, Turnitin’s website claimed that the program was “used by over 1.6 million
instructors at more than 10,000 institutions in 135 countries, and is the world's leading
cloud-based software for evaluating student work” -> popularity (4)

obscure the company’s cooptation of student data and potential to undermine writing
program goals. (4) -> one negative side of plagiarism detectors

5. How does plagiarism detector lead to copyright problems?

 plagiarism does not equal to copyright infringement (6)

Through comparing and viewing thousands of pages of student work, reports of student
work lend themselves to “the panoptic logic that a structure of examination and
documentation does not preclude individuality but rather accounts for it and renders it
intelligible” (p. 691). （Turnitin的工作范围，比较学生之间的文章--copyright problems）
-> how does it lead to copyright infringement (4)

Students are watched to ensure their originality and individuality, which is then
legitimized by the machine that polices them. Another problem with PDSs—which
becomes even more serious as PDSs venture into assessment—is the unfettered access
teachers, institutions, and governments gain to student data. -> students being
monitored, copyright problems (4)

Particularly since students are likely to have their intellectual property rights violated by
the use of Turnitin as it is their writing, not the instructor's, uploaded to the site and
stored in perpetuity, a rhetorical analysis of the language and imagery used to describe
students in plagiarism detection sites as compared to paper mill sites would be rich for
discussion. -> students work being restored and compared in the database, copyright
problems (5)

6. How does plagiarism detector lead to mistrust between students and teachers?

This familiarity is part of its insidiousness—it situates instructors (presumed to be

members of the “Turnitin.com educational community”) as preservers of ethical and
moral standards, positioned antagonistically against students, and assumed to be
consistent across institutions and geographic locations. -> negative impact: antagonism
between teachers and students (4)

After all, plagiarism detection tools seem to imply a message of “guilty until proven
innocent,” assuming that students are likely to plagiarize and our goal is to catch them.
-> mistrust (5)

The fear caused by surveillance can be disempowering to students: “Using fear as a

deterrent is unethical because it forces students into behaviors based on their perceived
powerlessness... Students may see [this technology] as an all-seeing, determining, and
surveying mechanism” -> mistrust between students and teachers (4)

Turnitin is positioning itself to become the global plagiarism police. In promoting

western writing values internationally, programs like Turnitin are poised to standardize
writing globally in alignment with EAE and western conceptions of authorship, which
reinforces harmful ideologies that affect writing teachers’ authority to determine our
pedagogies and assess our students’ work. -> cultural differences concerning plagiarism
(4)
 Glossed over is the issue of coercion: because of inherent power differentials between
students and instructors, students may feel forced to submit their work to Turnitin to
receive a fair grade. (5)

WriteCheck's reviews showcase an undercurrent of trepidation, of getting caught, of

writing with fear. These testimonials highlight the power differentials and the culture of
fear surrounding plagiarism in the classroom; WriteCheck taps into that fear. (5)
-> students develop fear of writing and submitting their work

*deter rather than to detect, but do not reflect educational goals – a student’s lack of
researching methods and knowledge concerning citation practices and his/her overload
of work (6)

7. How do we minimize plagiarism through education? (5)

While the conversation regarding plagiarism is one central to writing-related fields, other
disciplines may not be as aware of the strong scholarly work that already exists related to
plagiarism detection services. Similarly, students may not be aware of the ethical and
legal concerns surrounding these sites without their being made aware through critical
studies of the sites and their uses. -> students should be aware of the definition of
plagiarism(4)

–Do we really have standards to identify and assess plagiarism?

–weakness of detection software: it identifies matching texts but do not define the
boundaries of plagiarized versus non-plagiarized papers.
–Turnitin presents students’ work on one side, original text on the other. Use colors to
identify different parts of the text–leaves a lot of room for individual interpretation
–train instructors to be critical of the weakness of such software (6)