TurnItIn Debate

If you read my last response, you understand that even some of the faculty at GVSU does not view TurnItIn.com as the best solution to the plagiarism problem.  While searching around for a strong defending argument of the program, I came across an actual response to the article I responded to that focuses on the helpfulness of TurnItIn:

Turnitin is not designed to replace instruction. As any educator knows,
teaching students how to read thoughtfully, write fluently, and cite
properly is an inherently complex and difficult task. There is no software,
book, or automated process that can ever replace a dedicated teacher.
However, today’s increased student access to media of all kinds poses
special challenges to even the most determined of educators. While the
internet has made productive and valuable research easier than ever, it has
also undoubtedly made bad research, poor citation, and outright plagiarism
into more significant issues than they have been in the past.  Turnitin is
valuable because it helps relieve hard-working educators of the added burden
of validating the originality of student work. Like any system, it is not
foolproof– the sheer magnitude and dynamic nature of available sources make
any “perfect system” an impossibility. But while it may not be perfect,
Turnitin has proven to be an enormously effective antidote to plagiarism
when used responsibly, especially in conjunction with time-honored, good
teaching practices.

OK, so I understand that really is a lot of quoted information, but I feel that it addresses many of the issues raised by the faculty members from GVSU.  Michael Bruton, who wrote this response, has been working with schools and the implementation of the program for three years.  It is obviously important for him to take the concerns of professors and students and attempt to help them understand that this program is a tool to be used rather than a substitution for teaching.  My main concern was that certain teachers were ignoring the fact that students need to be taught the correct and incorrect ways to cite published information they find, and Bruton does a good job defending his position that teachers still need to teach. 

Bruton does not claim that the program is perfect.  He understands that with all the technology available to students, some will still get away with plagiarism, but he explains that TurnItIn is helpful to the teachers that have a large number of papers to check in order to save some time.  I do believe that TurnItIn is a helpful program for teachers to check for cheating and I think that, combined with educating students about the writing process, TurnItIn can be beneficial, but Bruton does not address all the problems that the GVSU faculty discussed and some of the problems I had.  In fact, if you are extremely interested in this topic,  I suggest you click the link below because the response turns into a long debate.

I still feel that the trust of students has decreased for many professors as the usage of the internet increases.  Bruton doesn’t address this issue and I find myself still asking questions.  Although the program may be a helpful tool if the teacher still educates the students fully, there may be tension in the classroom.  Is that a risk that teachers will have to take in the future in order to insure that students will not cheat on assignments?  Is there a way to make students feel comfortable having their papers analyzed to prevent them from being dishonest?  Should teachers not trust students?  I am torn because as much as I would like to believe that if a teacher fully educates a student about citing published work and using the internet as a collaborative tool, I understand that students will still cheat for various reasons.  Let me know what you think.

 TurnItIn’s Response to Recent Posts Discussing Proper Pedagogy

by Michael Bruton

September 15, 2006