TurnItIn Reports

TurnItIn Reports
TurnItIn ( http://turnitin.com ) is probably now the best known of a number of offerings popularly known as plagiarism detection software. Have a read of some of the website. Its popular use is to generally allow teachers to set up assignments in the LMS so that full class sets of assignments can be auto submitted and analysed by comparison to databases of pre-existing documents and the Internet. The teacher then examines the 'Originality reports' for potential plagiarism, with intentions (tempered over the years after some legal challenges) ranging from disciplinary action to 'educating students about better writing'.
TurnItIn is quite happy for people to live with the impression that the software can detect plagiarism, but it treads more lightly when it comes to commitment to same. Here are a couple of links on Originality reports and how to interpret (note the cautions and warnings):
http://turnitin.com/en_us/training/instructor-training/viewing-originality-reports
https://guides.turnitin.com/01_Manuals_and_Guides/Instructor/Instructor_iPad_Manual/05_Originality_Report
Now keep that to the back of your mind. We aren't aiming to educate students about better writing. What we will be doing IS going to be aiming for the harder edge of plagiarism. You don't want to go accusing people of plagiarising, so you need to take notice of the warnings and know exactly what you are interpreting.
The first thing to know is that the software does NOT detect plagiarism. It is text-matching software only. Any conclusions drawn re plagiarism rely upon a person making the judgement.
The second thing to note is that it does not necessarily trace material back to 'original' sources. It matches text content - sometimes a number of documents or websites - but does not identify an exact original source (some of which could be pre-Internet). So be careful of accusing people of having used a specific source (they may well have used something else...)
Getting practical.
TII is also available in Connect in a somewhat limited functionality, for teachers to use as per above. If you get an original login, this will enable the full functionality.
You will be submitting individual papers, not setting up class assessments. New logins will require the Quick Submit tab to be enabled.

If you get a new login, under the User Info / Account settings, go to 'Activate quick submit', select yes, and submit.  You should then get the Quick submit tab.
You will be submitting content provided by staff, not students. However, TII does not differentiate, and will always refer to these staff items, bought content, or anything we put through as 'Student Papers'.








So login > Quick Submit tab > Submit > then you get to customise your search.

There are three databases to be enabled. They are
a) an Internet search (search engine not disclosed)
b) previously submitted 'student' papers (from all TIIs international subscriber Institutions). The important aspect to note here is that you are comparing your submission to every other item that our Unit, TAFE and every other RTO has previously submitted).
c) a literature database (database/s not disclosed. There are numerous subscription databases around. TII will use a general broad content database of journal articles etc).
Tick all three > Submit
Out of interest, because different 'anti-plagiarism' softwares use different databases and search engines, they will come up with different results.
You will then get the submission screen.

Put in your first/last name and a sensible Submission title - preferably the UoC code and maybe something additional if needed (e.g. LG, FG) > Choose the file from your computer. It will then load it up and ask to confirm, then provide a 'receipt'. Then click on 'Go to assignment inbox'.

It will take a few minutes for the paper to be processed, and until it is the similarity field will have a greyed out box. Grab a coffee, then refesh the screen and you should get the Similarity Percentage come up (with a colour code 'alert' depending on the percentage match).

Click on the percentage and it will load the document. Make sure 'Originality' (top LHS) is selected for it to load up all the details.

Have a very quick skim of the document to get a first impression of what you have from here, then go back to the start.
Before you do anything more go down to the bottom RHS and click on the filter icon.

This allows some filtering. The only thing I do here is exclude matches less than 1%

to get rid of the really minor stuff > Apply changes.
Now look at your Match Overview. This will list all the remaining matches TII generates, from highest to lowest (n.b. while you have filtered out the less than 1%, 1% will still be in there for those between 1 and 2%).

If you mouse over any of these you will get an arrow (view match breakdown)

• click on this and it will display more detail - the match or matches (in descending order).
  
  This also reveals the 'Exclude sources' button (bottom RHS) - click on that and tickboxes will appear next to each source.
  
  
  There is a possibility that you will get a 100% or very high match. Don't panic or get excited. This generally means that the document has been previously submitted (possibly as a draft). Have a look at the match (possibly appearing as a student paper submitted to TAFE Qld...), and exclude that offending source/s.
  Look at what is there. The first likely match you get will be to the Disclaimer and copyright statement. This is because every item we have put through previously on a template will match the template!
  
  So select the template items (others include student rules, symbols, table of contents…) and exclude.
  N.B. If you look under Match Breakdown it will often show a number of matches and the arrows here will allow you to navigate through the document for the matches to this source.
  
  Most of the time you can exclude EVERY source that matches the disclaimer / copyright statement as these are used by numerous organisations. If in doubt, or if you want to be cautious, check the last match/es to ensure they are still part of a template before you exclude the entire source. (N.B. Once you exclude a source it will be excluded completely (including any further non-template matches).
  Once you have selected a source a pop up of that match will appear e.g.
  
  If you then click on the Full Source View it will show ALL the matches to that specific source in the right hand panel. E.g.
  
  This is very useful as this view enables a quick check of the whole source, comparison to possible 10% figures, smaller matches vs slabs to be reworked etc. However, bear in mind it still may not be the original source… It may sometimes pay to have a look at the start and finish of these for information such as more source details, copyright statements etc.
  
  After template items, the second likely set of matches you might get will be content from Training.gov i.e. details of the UoC from the Training Package such as the UoC name and code, elements, performance criteria etc. Quite often these will not be matched to Training.gov but to some other source, such as another RTO or dual sector University. If you recall the note about not necessarily matching original sources, this is what is happening here. And this is the ONE EXCEPTION about original sources, as it can reasonably be assumed that it originates from Training.gov. I take the view that if this is a match, it DOES originate from Training.gov, and is therefore virtually an essential part of the content required by TAFE, other RTOs, Unis etc - and copyright free and thus ALL such sources can be excluded. (Occasionally you might like to quickly navigate through the matches to make sure).
  
  Just to show how clever the software is, sometimes even page numbers can generate matches ! Happily delete the source for these.
  From here on in you might need to think some more and start selectively examining matches. Here are some common categories or items that can be excluded:
  Bought content. Yep, you can run this through, but it isn't easy to interpret. We are buying this material in good faith that it is clear. It is unlikely (but not impossible) that the vendor has run their content through TII. It is more possible that another RTO may have bought the same material and included it in content that it has submitted to TII (which means that RTO will show a match, and the original vendor will not). If any match here is to something other than another RTO then that might be worth a look. Can get messy...
  Free content. A classic VET example here would have been the Flexible Learning Toolboxes (increasingly less likely since the site has closed).
  Content that has been duplicated by CWs between UoCs. This is difficult as any matches will be to 'a Student Paper' - and you can't get access to student papers unless you go through hoops including contacting the teachers at the other end etc. Unlikely ...
  Correctly attributed material. Again the software cannot distinguish between what has been correctly attributed and what hasn't. A correctly attributed quotation is not plagiarism and can be excluded, unlike one that has not been attributed and thus requires attention.
  Reference lists. Chances are that other people will have compiled reference lists. You may get a lot of matches in this area. Again these are not plagiarism - though if every item in a list comes up from the same source I'd suggest having a look at it... some of the other content might come from there too...
  From there on in it becomes questions of judgement.
  Some common ones to look out for:
  a) Manual or similar content (e.g. Standards, Equipment manuals, operator instructions, Microsoft help pages etc). VET being a practical area, the best and most concise material is often from manuals or company Internet Help pages - a tempting cut and paste option.
  b) Tables. These generally take a bit of work, so it is often easier to cut and paste...
  c) Glossaries...same as above.
  d) Dead links. Occasionally – and probably more frequently as time passes – you will get content matching to a website which is no longer found. This means the TII database has found it before, but the page has since been deleted or replaced. Information is no longer permanent like it may have been in a book reference. As part of the 'digital dark ages' it may simply have disappeared. E.g. imagine a government website after a departmental name change, restructure and a website rebuild. In such cases there is a match – but it is no longer there. You can't spend time searching the Wayback machine forever… Thus there is no longer – as far as TII can uncover - a copyright breach! I'd probably delete that match and see if any others replace it that are still alive, or cut and paste some of the key text into a search engine like Google and see if it comes up with a match.
  
  
  Depending on what you are using TII for, ultimately, the consideration is the risk involved. You might feel it is safe to use info from other .gov websites, or possibly .org, or a resource such as legislation, appropriately attributed, but obviously be wary if it looks like it has some commercial value e.g. from a paywall protected site.
  Saving files
  TII will allow you to save marked up files as PDFs.
  Once you have your paper to the level where you feel it is appropriately representative i.e. you have deleted all the sources you consider safe, leaving only the questionable ones, then you can save the paper in that state of markup by going to the bottom left hand corner and selecting the small printer icon
  
  You will be given three options - select download PDF of current view:
  
  These files can be quite large. If they are to be saved I would recommend saving with the final working documents (e.g. with Validation documents).
  Important note: the original file will remain in TII (unless deleted) in the markup state it was in when closed. The file as submitted can be partially or fully restored by going to the 'Exclude sources icon (bottom right hand side, next to the filter)
  
  You can then view the excluded sources with tickboxes e.g.
  
  and restore some or all
  
  
  
  
  Alternative strategy
  This is based on using TurnItIn as a Quick Submit option, which is the most convenient. It is also possible to go to more trouble and create 'Classes' and 'Assignments' that may enable some different recording. This is how the teachers will use the reduced functionality available in the LMS. For example, creating a 'Class' could be used as a Qualification, with each 'Assignment' as a Unit of Competency. Individual files can be submitted at this level.
  
  
  
  For a bit of fun run one of your current or old study assignments through and see how accurate it is. There have been many studies of 'plagiarism software'. For example, some have done 'paste-urizing' (cut and paste as assignment from a variety of sources), and found a lot of matches - but not the sources they used!
  Just out of interest, in June 2014 iParadigms (TII) was bought out by a private equity firm (usually a speculative build a business up to sell at a profit asap move) for $752m. There have also been comments that TII has paid expenses associated with presenters of pro TII papers to conferences …
  
  Hope this helps!
  Brad Jones