The basics of using SafeAssign plagiarism detection software in the higher-education classroom, including pros, cons, and recommendations.

1. Plagiarism Detection with
By Andrew Wolf
.

2. Safe Assign
• Plagiarism detection software
• Compares submitted assignments to a
database from:
– Documents on the World Wide Web
– Published articles in ProQuest / Inform databases
– Past student work voluntarily submitted to a
database nationwide
– Past student work submitted locally (not voluntary)
• Available at no additional financial cost
2

3. Originality Report
(Top Portion)
3

4. Originality Report
(Bottom Portion)
4

5. Benefits
• Easy to use
• Integrated with Blackboard grade center
• Students can submit drafts to evaluate
originality of their own papers
• Robust search features
– Large database of WWW and proquest
– Can detect some “disguised plagiarism”
• Creates a report providing easy methods for
faculty to investigate further
5

6. Concerns
• Privacy and intellectual property concerns
• Risk of false positives
• Risk of false negatives
• Pedagogical concerns
• Significant delays in report generation: hours to
weeks
6

7. Intellectual Property Concerns
– TurnItIn Lawsuit
• TurnItIn saves all student papers in a database in
perpetuity
• Database is used for comparison to all future
submitted assignments
• High school students in Mclean, VA sued company
for infringement of copyright
• Ruled in favor of TurnItIn – archiving of papers for
use in plagiarism detection was viewed as fair use
– Affirmed by appeals court, but settled prior to advancing to
supreme court
– http://to.pbs.org/x8h5HF
7

8. Intellectual Property Concerns
Lingering legal issues
• Ruling in favor of TurnItIn based in part by the
informed consent
– Students clicked a check box prior to submitting paper
that they understood how their paper would be used,
and agreed to such use
– Students may still question whether they may be
compelled to agree
– Students may raise legal objections if faculty upload
papers without their consent
• Office of Council is still considering legal
risks
8

9. Privacy Concerns
• Safe Assign is cloud based
• FERPA compliance has been questioned
– Students must:
• be informed of risks to privacy
• have the right to de-identify their work
• Not HIPAA compliant
– Student work must not contain patient identifiers
• Concern for unintentional HIPAA violations through
“unique characteristics” (rare diseases, place/time of
treatment)
9

10. Risk of False Positive:
Student falsely accused of plagiarism
• The software can not distinguish properly
cited quotes and plagiarism.
• The software can not distinguish between
common phrases, and plagiarism of truly
proprietary expressions.
10

11. Risks of False Negatives:
Student get away with plagiarism
• The software only searches web sources
and ProQuest.
• SafeAssign can even miss documents on
the World Wide Web. (Wikipedia).
• The software is not reliable against
“disguised plagiarism”:
– Point changes
– Mosaic plagiarism
11

12. Pedagogical Issues
• Risk of creating an adversarial climate if
SafeAssign is used a punitive tool
– Undermine motivation
– Change faculty-student relationship toward a
focus on policing and away from facilitation of
learning
12

13. Recommendations
1. Develop a pilot and test in 2-4 courses this spring.
2. Employ in courses that include plagiarism prevention
strategies
3. Require that the draft function always be turned on for
Safe Assign-ments so that students have the opportunity
to correct their work
4. Students must be informed of privacy issues, and given
the option to de-identify papers before submitting
5. Instructors should be advised not to use the direct submit
option
6. Students are informed of risks to HIPAA and clearly
instructed how to avoid violations
13

14. Recommended Plagiarism
Prevention Strategies
1. Require multiple drafts of assignments before
final submission
2. Design original assignments that are hard to
plagiarize
3. Provide aids to comprehension of complex texts
4. Provide multiple low-stakes assignments
5. Provide clear guidance on preventing plagiarism
6. Train faculty to interpret the originality reports
14