Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Training for using the plagiarism recognition system Urkund

Material, University of Helsinki, The educational technology centre, 2013
by

Pauliina Kupila

on 7 May 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Training for using the plagiarism recognition system Urkund

Topics
Recognising plagiarism at the University of Helsinki
A pedagogical perspective on plagiarism and using Urkund
Your personal Urkund login
How can I use Urkund in my own work/teaching?
Analysing the Urkund analysis report

Universities must arrange their activities so as to assure a high international standard in research, artistic activities, education and teaching in conformity with ethical principles and good scientific practice.

Using Urkund at the University of Helsinki
Rector’s Decision on the terms of use for the system 18 January 2013, amendment 23 April 2013
All second-cycle theses are inspected by the system when they are submitted for examination as of 1 August 2014 at the latest.
The faculty may also decide to follow another systematic procedure, e.g., that all doctoral dissertations or Bachelor’s theses are inspected.


Why use a plagiarism recognition system?
Internet enables (web search engine, information retrieval); a way of studying today
Temptation to plagiarise (situation specific)
Increase in teachers' workload
More difficult to confirm the validity of sources

See also the University’s guidelines for handling cheating and plagiarism among students (Instructions for the procedure on Flamma: Teachers >> Academic Administration >> Cheating and Plagiarism)
Indicators of plagiarism
Discrepancies and errors in the text
Discrepancies between the text in question and the student’s previous assignments
Discrepancies in the student’s behaviour
Other “red flags”
Good scientific practice
“Plagiarism, or unacknowledged borrowing, refers to representing another person’s material as one’s own without appropriate references. This includes research plans, manuscripts, articles, other texts or parts of them, visual materials, or translations. Plagiarism includes direct copying as well as adapted copying.”
Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity, 2012,
http://www.tenk.fi/en


Pedagogical implications
Teaching planning, appropriate scheduling, sufficient guidance and support as well as instruction in academic writing all have an impact on the prevalence of plagiarism.
1. Situation-specific plagiarism
When students struggle with organising their studies and keeping to a plan, even small changes or unexpected assignments or events can pose surprisingly significant challenges to studies.
This creates the temptation to plagiarise as a survival strategy.
It is important to focus on developing study skills and on recognising and using different types of resources.
Teaching methods that can help:
planning of studies
appropriate scheduling of studies
ensuring sufficient resources (individual capacity, time, peer support)

Instruction in academic writing
Urkund should be seen as a pedagogical tool for teaching and practicing academic writing.
Increasing the students’ awareness of plagiarism: all courses and all members of teaching staff should be involved
Giving essay topics and assignments that make plagiarism difficult, such as questions requiring the application of information, not “cut-and-paste” answers.

How does Urkund work?
Digital documents are sent or uploaded to Urkund.
Urkund analyses the text’s originality by comparing it to other sources, which include:
the open Internet (more than 10 billion pages)
publication databases
documents in the system (8.5 million in July 2013)
After analysing the text, Urkund generates a report which clearly indicates any similarities with other sources.

Using Urkund
Three methods to choose from:
Students send documents
via email
to the teacher’s Urkund address
Documents are analysed through the Assignment function
in Moodle
(see the teachers’ guide to Moodle)
Students log into the
Urkund interface
at www.urkund.fi and select the organisation and teacher their document will be sent to.

The Urkund login
Staff members who need Urkund may activate their Urkund teacher logins in the following manner:
Sign into Urkund at http://www.urkund.fi > Log in > “Login via Shibboleth – new method”
Choose "University of Helsinki" under "Organization”. Click the “Login using Shibboleth” button.
Enter your University of Helsinki username and password on the following page. Check the box to accept that your personal data can be turned over to a third party (this pertains to your name, email and home organisation).
On the next page, your email, name and username will be automatically filled in the Urkund user information.
Agree to the terms of service.
Finally, click on the “Create account” button.

NB!
The Urkund account will be linked to your University of Helsinki main account, and after the initial registration, you may log into Urkund using your UH username.
The email address receiving the Urkund analysis reports will be linked to your helsinki.fi email address, so messages such as links to reports on student works will be delivered directly to your UH address.
Urkund and email
You will receive an
Urkund email address
(first.last.hy(a)analyysi.urkund.fi) when you create your Urkund username. This address will be linked to your helsinki.fi email address. When you begin using Urkund during your course, provide your students with your Urkund email address.
When a student submits a document for analysis to Urkund via your Urkund email address, the process takes some hours to be finished (maximum 24 hours).
Once the analysis is finished, you will receive a notification to your helsinki.fi email address. This email will include the percentage of equivalence between the document and the available databases as well as a mention of the longest consecutive quotation (word count). The email will also provide a link to the online report which will offer more detailed information on the text.
Please note that the percentage alone does not necessarily indicate plagiarism if the text includes appropriate source references!

Analysis report
Urkund cannot decide whether a text has been plagiarised! The system can only display the similarities in the text in comparison with other texts in the database or on the internet.
The teacher or examiner must inspect the Urkund analysis report and draw the necessary conclusions.


What are the consequences of academic cheating?
The assignment is failed.
The dean may reprimand the student or issue a warning (intended to guide the student). The warning should be issued in writing to protect both the student’ rights and maintain the principle of guidance.
The rector may issue a warning (in writing).
In serious cases or cases where the student continues to perpetrate academic misconduct despite warnings, the Board may suspend the student for up to a year. No studies may be pursued during this time, and the suspension does not indicate an extension to the maximum duration of the degree studies.
The warning and suspension are disciplinary measures provided for by the Universities Act.
The University cannot take other kinds of disciplinary action (such as a temporary ban from the course). However, consequences administered by other organisations may include, e.g., that a suspended student loses his or her student visa.
It may be possible to address the matter even if the cheating is only revealed once the assignment has been approved or the degree has been granted (e.g., a plagiarised Master’s thesis). In such cases, please contact the legal advisers of Academic Affairs in the Rector’s Office.

Support services
For students:
Helpdesk(a)helsinki.fi
For staff:
Ok-plagiaatti(at)helsinki.fi
The Älä kopsaa (Copy Right) page is available in English at
http://blogs.helsinki.fi/alakopsaa/?lang=en

In conclusion – remember these!
An educational dialogue with the students (on the practices of academic writing, plagiarism and its consequences)
Create your own Urkund account and mailbox (web inbox) (first.last.hy@analyysi.urkund.fi)
Inform the students if Urkund is being used systematically
Inspect the Urkund report thoroughly – do not just look at the percentage!
What to do in cases of plagiarism? The procedure guide is on Flamma: Teachers >> Academic Administration >> Cheating and Plagiarism
Instructions and additional material for both teachers and students on the Älä kopsaa (Copy Right) page at http://blogs.helsinki.fi/alakopsaa/?lang=en
Support address for teachers and staff: ok-plagiaatti(a)helsinki.fi

Discrepancies between the text in question and the student’s previous assignments
The language used by the student differs from the written text. A student’s spoken and written (English) language, for example, do not correspond to each other, or the student employs sophisticated vocabulary and phrases in the text, but never when speaking (Sutherland-Smith 2005).
The level of a completed assignment differs markedly from the student’s previous work.
The text expresses a level of maturity and experience uncharacteristic of a young or beginning writer (Laird 2011).

Discrepancies in the student’s behaviour
Schedule: The student finishes the work much faster than the others. Other students may only be beginning their assignment while the student in question has already handed in the completed work.
The work is handed in as a surprise. The student has not been in contact with the teacher for a long time, but suddenly turns in a completed assignment.

Other “red flags”
The teacher is familiar enough with the sources on the topic to recognise a plagiarised text.
Using source literature which is unavailable through the Helsinki University Library, Google Scholar, or other source.
Levels of plagiarism
Representing another person’s work as one’s own without obtaining permission from the original author.
Copying another person’s work or representing it as it is or superficially modified as one’s own without a reference to the original source.
Repeating text word for word with the appropriate reference but without quotation marks.
Translating a text word for word and using it without the appropriate reference and source notes.
Repeating one’s own texts without the appropriate reference or source notes (self-plagiarism).


Preventing plagiarism with questions that require the application of information
University studies should encourage the development of critical thinking (not the repetition of information).
As future experts, students must be able to process information effectively.
This entails selecting and linking facts, and connecting them to a wider context.
Questions that require understanding encourage in-depth learning (analysing information and interpreting it in relation to other contexts).
This is in contrast with surface learning, which means rote memorisation of fragmented facts.

Is the student’s consent necessary?
Students must be aware that the system is being employed, as the student's consent cannot be assumed for something he or she is not aware of.
Students find out about the use of Urkund on websites and in the course catalogue. Teachers should also inform students if they intend to use Urkund systematically during a course.
Situation-specific
Unintentional
Intentional
2. Unintentional plagiarism
The most common “reason” for plagiarism
Teaching methods that can help:
instruction in academic writing
assisting students in cultivating their own “voice” as authors (Angélil-Carter 2000, etc.).
It is important to create an atmosphere which allows room for the learning process without the undefined fear of punishment and repercussions often associated with plagiarism or the stress related to avoiding plagiarism.
The plagiarism recognition system should be seen also as a learning tool for students practicing academic writing.

3. Intentional plagiarism
An immature attitude towards studying and the studies may result in intentional plagiarism.
Researchers have strongly advocated introducing students to the significance of ethical principles and the concept of academic integrity (Gullifer & Tyson 2010, etc.).
Teaching methods that can help:
Encourage students to consider what they think constitutes good learning and what kind of writer they want to become.
Discuss the nature of university studies and the kind of learning they are intended to inspire at the earliest possible point in the studies.

Gullifer, J. & Tyson, G.A. (2010).
Exploring university students’ perceptions of plagiarism: a focus group study. Studies in Higher Education, 35(4), 463-481.

Angélil-Carter, S. (2000).
Stolen Language? Plagiarism in Writing. London: Pearson Education.

By Myyry, L. & Joutsenvirta, T. Sulautuvia tenttikysymyksiä verkossa. Workshop at Sulop-seminar 12.3.2010

Students have the right to see the report on their work:
Students must be given the opportunity to read the report together with the assessment of the completed assignment (typically this takes place during the teacher’s consultation hours).
The teacher may also send a link to the report directly to the student, or indicate in the settings that the report is to be visible to the student automatically (Moodle only).
It is not necessary to send or show the report to the students automatically, but the report must be made available on request.

NB2!
You may change your account settings in the Urkund interface.
Instructions are available on the Älä kopsaa (Copy Right) page.
Do not change your name or email address!
Choose the method of delivery for the inspection report based on whether you access Urkund via email or through Moodle.
If you use Moodle, uncheck the box “Report via email”

http://blogs.helsinki.fi/alakopsaa/urkund/urkund-guide-to-teachers/?lang=en
For an example report, see the link
http://bit.ly/1cOkIIv
Useful links
Urkund Quick Start:
http://www.urkund.fi/documents/URKUND_quickstart.pdf
User manual:
http://www.urkund.com/int/en/documents/URKUND_Manual_View%206_EN.pdf
Sutherland-Smith, W. 2005. Pandora’ box: academic perceptions of student plagiarism in writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4, 83-95.
Laird, E. 2001. We all pay for internet plagiarism. Chronicle of Higher Education, July 13, 47(44), p B5.
Discrepancies and errors in the text
The student’s text is of uneven quality. The language ranges from suspiciously high-register, elegant and polished to inelegant, or the text is grammatically “too polished” (suggesting it has been professionally edited) (Sutherland-Smith 2005).
The text features terminology that is inappropriate for the context (Sutherland-Smith 2005).
The historical or geographical context of the text contains discrepancies. For example, the text uses “this nation” to refer to the United States in an essay written at the University of Helsinki, or discusses Muammar Gaddafi as if he were still alive.
The grammatical case fluctuates. For example, a text written in the passive voice or first person singular suddenly begins referring to “us”.
The references include discrepancies or errors, for example duplicating errors from the original text.

Walker, J. (2010). Measuring plagiarism: researching what students do, not what they say they do. Studies in Higher Education, 35(1), 41-59.

Sources:
Sutherland-Smith, W. 2005. Pandora’s box: academic perceptions of student plagiarism in writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4, 83-95.
Laird, E. 2001. We all pay for internet plagiarism. Chronicle of Higher Education, July 13, 47(44), p. B5.
Löfström, E. & Kupila, P. (2013) The Instructional Challenges of Student Plagiarism. Journal of Academic Ethics. Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 231-242 .
Full transcript