Developing assessment strategies which encourage original student work: an online guide

Introduction

This briefing paper will seek to highlight key strategies in developing assessment processes which eradicate opportunities for plagiarism, and encourage tutors to “teach and assess in ways which make plagiarism unthinkable” (MacDonald Ross, 2008). Whilst by no means an exhaustive list, the following areas, identified and volunteered by members of the academic community are key to this approach. The paper will draw on examples of good practice in assessment design in these areas, which enhance student learning and nurture a learning culture in which original thought is rewarded.

In many ways the Good Practice Guide, which was commissioned by the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) in 2001, and written by Jude Carroll and Jon Appleton from Oxford Brookes University is viewed as a blueprint for institutional thinking on plagiarism, and informed the model which would develop into the JISC-funded Plagiarism Advisory Service. The guide sees the assessment process as pivotal to this vision, and “designing out opportunities for plagiarism” (Carroll & Appleton, 2001), is a key strand in an holistic approach to ensuring authenticity in student work. The guide acknowledges the contribution made by academic staff and their role in this process and, accordingly institutions have sought to offer guidance on assessment design which discourages plagiarism to those assessing students, for example, the University of Surrey has created a short guide (Lee, 2008) in consultation with academic staff at the institution.

 

Key good practice examples in this area:

  1. Carroll, J. & Appleton, J. (2001) Plagiarism: a good practice guide. [Online]
    Available at: http://www.jiscpas.ac.uk/documents/brookes.pdf (Accessed: 7 November 2008)
  2. Lee, A. (2008) Designing out plagiarism: a brief guide for busy academics. [Online]
    Available at: http://www2.surrey.ac.uk/cead/resources/documents/Designing_out_plagiarism.pdf
    (Accessed: 18 November 2008)

Funding acknowledgement
This resource has been developed as part of the Higher Education Academy/JISC Collaboration initiative to support practitioners in further and higher education in their use of technology to enhance learning, teaching and assessment.

 
 

1. Develop an awareness of student study practices

Key to developing this learning culture and discouraging plagiarism is an awareness of how students study in today’s information-rich environment. This may be in stark contrast to more traditional models of teaching and learning, and to textbook theories of education. Students’ engagement with a range of technologies pervades all aspects of their lives, which means that the boundaries between social and educational use of such resources for researching and locating information are blurred. An enlightening and in some ways disturbing vision of student motivation and learning is provided in a YouTube clip, which presents 200 students’ responses to the question “what is it like being a student today?” (Mwesch, 2007). Therefore, it is clear that if the ways in which students learn differ so radically from the ways in which we teach, then how can we expect students to produce high quality, authentic and meaningful work? Increasingly, we need to assess students in ways which correspond with their learning styles, in order to encourage an effective learning experience. An attempt to develop this understanding forms the basis of a workshop by Mike Reddy at the University of Newport:

“The aim of the…workshop was to promote/evoke debate about the basic questions of HE pedagogy…to side-step current discussions about how to address plagiarism by attempting an ambitious discussion of the inherent flaws in current teaching and assessment practices.” (Reddy, 2008b)

Equally, a research project conducted by David Taylor at the University of Leeds seeks to address this “mismatch between what staff expect and what students do” (2008b) and investigated how information is collated, assembled and exchanged by over 1000 Business School students when studying at two institutions in the area (Taylor, 2008a). In particular the research reveals widespread practice, especially amongst overseas students, of working directly on computers and cutting and pasting content with little redrafting or rephrasing (Taylor, 2008a). Equally, the practice of exchanging final assignments between friends was also widely reported (Taylor, 2008a). The research calls for “clear, informed, consistent advice” (Taylor, 2008b) when developing assessment strategies which make it apparent to students what is acceptable practice and what is not.

 

Key good practice examples in this area:

  1. Reddy, M. (2008b) WHY/WHAT/HOW - Was research on plagiarism, Plagiarism discussion list, 7 November [Online].
    Available at: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0811&L=PLAGIARISM&T=0&F=&S=&P=5868 (Accessed: 20 November).
  2. Taylor, D. (2008a) How students work – an exploration of how Business School students in the IT age work together in individual assessed coursework assignments [Online] Available at: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/business/projects/detail/trdg/2007-08/How_Students_Work (Accessed: 18 November 2008)

Funding acknowledgement
This resource has been developed as part of the Higher Education Academy/JISC Collaboration initiative to support practitioners in further and higher education in their use of technology to enhance learning, teaching and assessment.

 
 

2. Discuss essay banks and bespoke essay services with students

Perhaps one of the biggest threats to promoting the beneficial effects of authentic work is from a growing number of services which offer bespoke solutions to assessment questions. In the past years the essay bank offering generic essays for download has evolved into a more entrepreneurial beast offering custom written work (Jones, 2008) at GCSE level and above. In 2006 the turnover of the bespoke essay writing market was estimated by the Guardian to be in the region of £200 million (Taylor & Butt, 2006). The proliferation of this industry, in spite of Google banning advertising for essay writing services (Coughlan, 2007) is demonstrated by a comprehensive list of sites compiled by the Subject Centre for Information and Computer Sciences (2008).

Most tutors would not doubt the beneficial effects of providing model answers to students, especially to those who may be less familiar with academic writing conventions, an approach which is encouraged by Carroll & Appleton (2001). However it is difficult to trust claims made by some sites that their services are purely for research purposes when they offer a “No plagiarism guarantee” (UK Essays, 2008), and a next day turnaround. With widespread use of plagiarism detection software students may perceive that bespoke, written to order services, offer less of a risk of detection than standard essay bank sites, where it is widely acknowledged that content is often replicated on multiple websites. Whilst some argue that use of such services clearly indicates a more risky premeditated attempt to cheat on the part of the student, akin to fraud, (Jones, 2008), more damaging perhaps are the lost opportunities for learning.

Discussing the existence of essay bank sites and making clear the risks involved in using a bespoke essay writing service can be a beneficial exercise to use with students. Whilst some tutors may view this as encouraging students to use such sites, instead it can not only illustrate to a student who may be considering using such a site that you, as a tutor, are very much aware of their existence, and also demonstrate the lack of quality control exercised by some essay banks over the material available. Again, such an approach is endorsed by Carroll & Appleton (2001):

“[some] regard it as naïve to believe students are unaware of such things, drawing an analogy with arguments against sex education…It also shows the low quality of many of these very expensive products and provides another ‘live’ opportunity for demonstrating the boundaries between poor practice and plagiarism”

Key good practice examples in this area:

  1. Plagiarism prevention and detection: cheat sites (2008) Available at: http://www.ics.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/assessment/plagiarism/onlinesites.html (Accessed: 8 January 2009)

Funding acknowledgement
This resource has been developed as part of the Higher Education Academy/JISC Collaboration initiative to support practitioners in further and higher education in their use of technology to enhance learning, teaching and assessment.

 
 

3. Engender a deep understanding of plagiarism

Undoubtedly, key to encouraging students to produce original work is to develop an informed understanding of what constitutes plagiarism and why it is unacceptable at an early stage in their academic career. It is accepted that a definition of plagiarism in a module handbook in isolation is not an effective means of communicating this important information to students so as to engender a deep understanding:

“Students receive about 3000 documents/pieces of information at the start of a three-year degree programme…Little of it is read yet many institutions tell students ‘It’s in the Handbook’ when sanctions are applied for plagiarism.” (Carroll & Appleton, 2001)

Whilst those students who have read this information may claim to understand its implications, such is the complexity of the concept that further education to assist with comprehension is invariably necessary. Therefore in order to engender a heightened understanding of plagiarism and associated academic conventions many institutions have created a range of high quality resources in user-friendly formats which frequently include real life examples and a self test facility. Access to these resources is often provided via an institutional Learning Management System (LMS).

An example of such a resource is the University of Northampton’s excellent Plagiarism Avoidance Course (known as UNPAC) (Pickard, 2008a). This animated student-focused course, set in a motoring context presents potential plagiarism hazards in order to develop an understanding of the “rules of the road”. Although the course is not compulsory for students at Northampton, feedback on the resource has been positive - with over 1000 registered users (Pickard, 2008b). A similar approach has been adopted by London Metropolitan University, which has also developed a package of resources, entitled Preventing Plagiarism (2008) including student views, resources and a quiz to test understanding; however, in this case, the target audience differs slightly in that it is used in the main with those students who have been accused of plagiarism.

A slightly different approach to developing understanding and skills development is taken by the Write Now CETL, who have created the Student Authorship Project (2008), a tool to assist students in Psychology (although equally applicable to other disciplines). The resource includes a presentation with notes which can be used by tutors to address the concept of authorship and plagiarism with students. The 'before and after' quiz which accompanies the presentation has been particularly successful in developing first year students’ understanding of authorship (Elander, 2008).

In terms of discipline-specific resources, the University of Leicester has developed a series of 15 student-focused interactive tutorials in a range of subject areas (2008). Shiva Sivasubramaniam has created a range of materials incorporating hands-on exercises and workshops to aid his students’ understanding of plagiarism in his teaching in the School of Science and Technology at Nottingham Trent University (Sivasubramaniam, no date). Use of these exercises over a period of several years, which include graphical examples drawn from specific subject areas, has proved highly effective in developing students’ awareness of the need for originality:

“The turnout for my seminar has tremendously increased (compared to pre-2006). Most of the students claimed this web based exercise has made them realise the word plagiarism is much more complicated than simple copying.” (Sivasubramaniam, 2008).

Key good practice examples in this area:

  1. Avoiding plagiarism online tutorial (2008) Available at: http://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/ssds/slc/resources/writing/plagiarism/plagiarism-tutorial (Accessed: 18 November 2008)
  2. Pickard, J. (2008a) University of Northampton Plagiarism Avoidance Course Available at: http://nli.northampton.ac.uk/mmb/smc/cg/blackboard/UNPACmay08/unpac_captivate.htm (Accessed: 24 November)
  3. Preventing plagiarism (2008) Available at: http://learning.londonmet.ac.uk/TLTC/learnhigher/Plagiarism/ (Accessed: 18 November 2008)
  4. Student authorship project (2010) Available at: http://www.writenow.ac.uk/outcomes/resources/student-authorship/ (Accessed: 25 August 2010)
  5. Sivasubramaniam, S. Teach yourself to avoid plagairism in scientific writing, (no date) Available at: http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/documents/shiva/index.htm (Accessed: 24 November 2008)

Funding acknowledgement
This resource has been developed as part of the Higher Education Academy/JISC Collaboration initiative to support practitioners in further and higher education in their use of technology to enhance learning, teaching and assessment.

 
 

4. Encourage an individualised approach to learning

Fundamental to discouraging students from turning to essay banks and sites which offer bespoke work is to avoid generic assessment questions where answers can be easily obtained from these services. Creating individualised tasks, and adding unique elements to generic assessment questions will undoubtedly also prove more stimulating and rewarding for students:

“Just about any measure to make plagiarism less likely will also have the added advantage of improving the quality of student learning” (MacDonald Ross, 2008)

Not surprisingly a wide range of good practice in many subject disciplines exists in this practice.

For art and design students the notion of individuality is embedded into the very nature of their teaching programmes:

“Students in the arts want to be different, do not want to be considered a copyist” (Blythman, Orr & Mullin, 2007)

The desire for originality rather than derivation is highly refreshing in a discipline traditionally associated with homage and artistic subversion. A JISC-funded case study. written for the Plagiarism Advisory Service showcases a wide range of practical assessment tasks in arts-based disciplines ranging from photography to fine art, where the boundaries of acceptability are considered, and where students are required to use the work of others solely as a “starting point for your own creative vision” (Blythman, Orr & Mullin, 2007)

George MacDonald Ross at the University of Leeds practices a wide range of techniques in his teaching in the history of philosophy which would be equally applicable to other disciplines. In a paper presented at the 3rd International Plagiarism Conference he makes the bold claim that his students “do not plagiarise” (MacDonald Ross, 2008) and promotes a learning culture in which students are encouraged to demonstrate personal interaction and inspiration (MacDonald Ross, 2008). One particular example of this approach to is to promote self-assessment of students’ work, and a model is presented in which assessed work is returned to students without an overall mark, and with comments only, in order to encourage students to read the feedback provided rather than viewing the summative mark in isolation. Students must then provide their own grade for the work and discuss with this with their tutor (MacDonald Ross, 2008). Clearly, a drawback of any highly personalised approach to assessment, such as this, as encountered by MacDonald Ross (2008) is that it may potentially be at odds with widespread institutional requirements for anonymous marking of student coursework.

 

A further example, drawn from a non arts-based discipline of a personalised approach to the assessment process, is from the Plagiarism in Statistics Assessment (PiSA) project, jointly funded by the HEA Maths, Stats and OR Network and the Royal Statistical Society Centre for Statistical Education (2007). The report presents various practices from the academic community which use personalised assessment tasks, such as using randomised data sets, the novel use of students’ ID number, and allowing students to collect their own unique data within defined criteria. The report observes that the benefits for ensuring work is original outweigh the additional time spent in marking such unique assessment tasks (Bidgood et al., 2007).

Key good practice examples in this area:

  1. Bidgood, P., Hunt, N., Payne, B. & Simonite, V. (2007) PiSA: Plagiarism in statistics assessment [Online]
    Available at: http://www.coventry.ac.uk/ec/~nhunt/pisa.pdf (Accessed: 18 November 2008)
  2. Blythman, M., Orr, S. & Mullin, J. (2007) Reaching a consensus: plagiarism in non-text based media [Online]
    Available at: http://www.jiscpas.ac.uk/documents/blythman_casestudy.pdf (Accessed: 18 November 2008)
  3. MacDonald Ross, G. (2008) Why my students don’t plagiarise: a case study
    Third International Plagiarism Conference, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK 23-25 June. Available at:
    http://www.plagiarismconference.org/media/2008papers/P16%20MacDonald%20Ross.pdf (Accessed: 4 November 2008)

Funding acknowledgement
This resource has been developed as part of the Higher Education Academy/JISC Collaboration initiative to support practitioners in further and higher education in their use of technology to enhance learning, teaching and assessment.

 
 

5. Make innovative use of technology

The all-pervasive nature of technology means it is easy to take for granted the contribution it makes to education and the assessment process. The wealth of technologies at our fingertips offer almost limitless possibilities for innovative assessment techniques which engage with students in a culture they are at ease with, whilst encouraging original contribution. A range of technologies, from formal institutional structures, such as Learning Management Systems, to those which offer more informal means of communication, such as forums, discussion lists, blogs, wikis and other Web 2.0 and social networking tools all potentially have a part to play in the assessment process. A recent report, commissioned by JISC, applauds the possibilities offered by the Web 2.0 environment in particular:

“It has been widely argued that the Web 2.0 will fundamentally change learning and teaching, by making the students partners in the creation of knowledge rather than passive consumers.” (Franklin & Harmelen, 2007)

An example of providing students with innovative means of actively producing their own work is provided by Phil Scown, at Manchester Metropolitan University, who describes the beneficial effects of allowing students the option to submit their work by video podcast:

“Within the podcast group there were no failures, and there were no detected cases of plagiarism. Since the student is required to appear in the podcast there is a reduced opportunity for plagiarism. In addition, it was the experience of the tutor that the students attempting the podcast had higher levels of engagement.” (Scown, 2008)

The collaborative nature of many Web 2.0 tools where content is created by interactions between learners is central to social constructivist approaches to education and assessment (Franklin & Harmelen, 2007). A third year module with health and social care students at the University of the West of England harnesses a similar student-centred enquiry-based learning approach in an online environment:

“A design that encourages students to learn through participation, re-iteration, peer-review and reflection” (Hughes, Ventura & Dando, 2004)

 

This approach, within boundaries clearly defined by the assessment, develops students’ group working skills, whilst the online asynchronous environment allows for valuable personal reflection (Hughes, Ventura & Dando, 2004) and discourages any potential opportunities for plagiarism. The module also encourages students to review and provide feedback on each other's work as part of the assessment:

“Present their assignment for scrutiny by the group before submission. Thus a principal of the academic community is introduced.” (Hughes, Ventura & Dando, 2004)

Used in this way. Technology can be a great enabler, and a “peer moderators marking system” (Wilkinson, 2008) such as WebPA, developed at Loughborough University in which students grade each other’s contributions to a group project can help to develop a sense of accountability within the cohort which discourages any non-original work (Wilkinson, 2008)

Key good practice examples in this area:

  1. Hughes, M., Ventura, S. & Dando, M. (2004)
    On-line interprofessional learning: introducing constructivism through enquiry-based learning and peer review,
    Journal of interprofessional care, vol. 18, no.3, pp 263-268
  2. Scown, P. (2008) Using students' assignments to create a library of re-usable learning objects,
    Learning and teaching in action, vol. 7, no.1 [Online]. Available at: http://www.celt.mmu.ac.uk/ltia/issue15/scown.php
    (Accessed: 18 November 2008)
  3. Web-PA (2008) Available at http://webpa.lboro.ac.uk/login.php (Accessed: 18 November)

Funding acknowledgement
This resource has been developed as part of the Higher Education Academy/JISC Collaboration initiative to support practitioners in further and higher education in their use of technology to enhance learning, teaching and assessment.

 
 

6. Assess real life situations

Asking students to address real life situations and scenarios as preparation for future practice can help to develop key skills which are directly relevant to their chosen career path, and can also be a key mechanism for ensuring original work is produced. This practice may be pertinent to more vocational courses of study, especially those where plagiarism may have a detrimental effect on students’ future professional practice. An example of this kind of assessment practice comes from social work, where students are given an exercise in which they are required to develop responses to emerging real life events as they would be presented to a newly qualified professional (Farooq et al., 2008). In this particular case study from the Social Policy and Social Work Subject Centre (SWAP), students are made very aware of the implications that submitting unoriginal assessed work can have on their professional fitness to practice and the impact on future career aspirations.

In less vocational courses this approach can also be highly effective, especially when combined with other assessment techniques such as problem solving and role play, which can serve to make the process more rewarding and relevant for students. In her teaching on a third year module in business, Amanda Relph (2008) at the University of Hertfordshire employs a varied range of assessment techniques in her teaching in order to make the learning experience enjoyable and rewarding for her students. In particular, in her teaching on a third year module in business she uses a similar role play scenario in which students take on the roles of a consultant team and client in order to identify key problems and to generate solutions.

Key good practice examples in this area:

  1. Farooq, Y., Boxall,K., McClelland, N. & Smeeton, J. (2008)
    Plagiarism, 'controlled conditions' and the assessment of social work skills in 'real time' [Online].
    Available at: http://www.swap.ac.uk/resources/publs/casestudies/yfarooq.html (Accessed: 18 November)
  2. Relph, A. (2008a) Assessment Examples [Online] Available at: http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/documents/Relph%20assessment%20egs.doc (Accessed: 24 November)
  3. Relph, A.(2008b) Interviewed by Gill Rowell, 21 November [Online]. Available at: http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/documents/mp3s/rec_amanda.relph_21_Nov_2008_10_18_18.MP3 (Accessed: 25 November)

Funding acknowledgement
This resource has been developed as part of the Higher Education Academy/JISC Collaboration initiative to support practitioners in further and higher education in their use of technology to enhance learning, teaching and assessment.

 
 

7. Use detection tools to encourage learning

Just as the widespread use of technology in teaching and learning is often viewed as a key factor in increasing concerns about submission of unoriginal work by students, equally it also provides tools for verification and tracking of student work. One such tool, the JISC-endorsed plagiarism detection software, TurnitinUK is used by over 95% of UK universities. Whilst widely viewed as a mechanism for detecting unoriginal student work, it is arguably of greater value when used in the assessment process as a formative tool. The PiSA project reports on good practice in which tutors set students a minor task early in the module which is marked for potential academic misconduct, which can then be addressed (Bidgood et al., 2007). Similarly, TurnitinUK can be used in the same way as a diagnostic tool for developing referencing, citation and information literacy skills whilst encouraging appropriate use of electronic sources. Practice at Northumbria University focuses on using TurnitinUK in this way “as part of a preventative toolkit” (Home, 2008), within the context of their academic regulations and assessment strategy. Tutors are encouraged to follow prescribed models of formative use within their institutional LMS (Turnitin UK (Plagiarism Detection Software), no date), an approach endorsed as an exemplar by the CETL in Teaching and Learning in Assessment for Learning at Northumbria:

“Students write draft essays, which are then submitted to the detection service with the output report returned to individuals and then discussed in class sessions. This has addressed a key problem that students find difficulty in expressing their own understanding without relying too heavily on the sources they use, since the detection service highlights potential plagiarism problems in such over-reliance.” (McDowell, 2006)

Likewise, TurnitinUK has been used extensively in this formative context by Mary Davis at Oxford Brookes University. Her research has focused on use of the software to assist international students to develop their knowledge of UK academic conventions, in particular to improve writing techniques and learn more about using sources appropriately, and “unlearning” (Davis, 2007) practices from their previous educational background, as one student comments:

“’in my country, I can copy a whole assignment, without writing a word, and get an A. Here it is different, and at the beginning I didn’t know anything. Turnitin helped correct a lot of my mistakes.’”(Davis, 2007).

The research noted “significant improvements” (Davis, 2007) in these areas based on formative use of TurnitinUK, with 70% of those using the software, indicating that it “helped them to write citations more accurately”, served to assist students with their understanding of how to paraphrase and reword others’ words and, interestingly also helped to demonstrate where a particular source had been over-used (Davis, 2007). Overall, the software was generally seen to greatly enhance the learning process, although the need for tutors’ input in assisting with interpreting the Originality Report was noted (Davis, 2007) just as academic input is required in any instance of determining whether plagiarism has occurred. Based on this work the Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange (ASKe) has produced a short practical guide for tutors on using TurnitinUK formatively with students (2008).

Key good practice examples in this area:

  1. Davis, M. (2007) The role of Turnitin within the formative process of academic writing: a tool for learning and unlearning?, The Brookes ejournal of learning and teaching, vol. 2, no. 2 [Online]. Available at: http://bejlt.brookes.ac.uk/article/the_role_of_turnitin_within_the_formative_process_of_academic_writing/ (Accessed 18 November)
  2. Davis, M. (2008) Interviewed by Gill Rowell, 21 November [Online]. Available at: http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/documents/mp3s/rec_maryjdavis_21_Nov_2008_11_05_27.MP3 (Accessed: 25 November)
  3. Turnitin UK (Plagiarism Detection Software) eLP Link (no date) [Online] Available at: http://plagiarismadvice.org/documents/Home%20TurnitinUK.doc (Accessed: 24 November)
  4. Using Turnitin to provide powerful formative feedback, (2008) [Online]. Available at: http://www.brookes.ac.uk/aske/documents/Turnitin.pdf (Accessed: 18 November)

Funding acknowledgement
This resource has been developed as part of the Higher Education Academy/JISC Collaboration initiative to support practitioners in further and higher education in their use of technology to enhance learning, teaching and assessment.

 
 

References

Avoiding plagiarism online tutorial (2008)
Available at: http://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/ssds/slc/resources/writing/plagiarism/plagiarism-tutorial (Accessed: 18 November 2008)

Bidgood, P., Hunt, N., Payne, B. & Simonite, V. (2007) PiSA: Plagiarism in statistics assessment [Online]
Available at: http://www.coventry.ac.uk/ec/~nhunt/pisa.pdf (Accessed: 18 November 2008)

Blythman, M., Orr, S. & Mullin, J. (2007) Reaching a consensus: plagiarism in non-text based media [Online]
Available at: http://www.jiscpas.ac.uk/documents/blythman_casestudy.pdf
(Accessed: 18 November 2008)

Carroll, J. & Appleton, J. (2001) Plagiarism: a good practice guide [Online]
Available at: http://www.jiscpas.ac.uk/documents/brookes.pdf (Accessed: 7 November 2008)

Coughlan, S. (2007) Google bans essay writing adverts BBC News, 22 May [Online]
Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6680457.stm
(Accessed: 31 October 2008).

Davis, M. (2007)
The role of Turnitin within the formative process of academic writing: a tool for learning and unlearning?,
The Brookes ejournal of learning and teaching, vol. 2, no. 2 [Online]
Available at: http://bejlt.brookes.ac.uk/article/the_role_of_turnitin_within_the_formative_process_of_academic_writing/ (Accessed: 18 November).

Davis, M. (2008) Interviewed by Gill Rowell, 21 November [Online]. Available at: http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/documents/mp3s/rec_maryjdavis_21_Nov_2008_11_05_27.MP3 (Accessed: 25 November)

 

Duggan, F. (2008) Higher Education Academy Subject Centre resources on plagiarism [Online]
Available at: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/learning/assessment/plagiarism
(Accessed: 4 November 2008).

Elander, J. (2008) Email to Gill Rowell, 24 September.

Farooq, Y., Boxall,K., McClelland, N. & Smeeton, J. (2008)
Plagiarism, 'controlled conditions' and the assessment of social work skills in 'real time' [Online]
Available at: http://www.swap.ac.uk/resources/publs/casestudies/yfarooq.html
(Accessed: 18 November)

Franklin, T. & Harmelen, M. (2007) Web 2.0 for content for learning and teaching in higher education [Online]
Available at: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/digitalrepositories/web2-content-learning-and-teaching.pdf
(Accessed: 4 November 2008).

Home, M. (2008) Email to Gill Rowell, 13 November.

Hughes, M., Ventura, S. & Dando, M. (2004)
On-line interprofessional learning: introducing constructivism through enquiry-based learning and peer review,
Journal of interprofessional care, vol. 18, no.3, pp 263-268.

Jones, M. (2008) Essays for sale: time for legal regulation?
Third International Plagiarism Conference,Newcastle upon Tyne, UK 23-25 June. Available at: http://www.plagiarismconference.co.uk/images/conferenceimages/025_P23%20Jones.pdf
(Accessed: 31 October 2008).

Lee, A. (2008) Designing out plagiarism: a brief guide for busy academics,/i>. [Online]
Available at: http://www2.surrey.ac.uk/cead/resources/documents/Designing_out_plagiarism.pdf
(Accessed: 18 November 2008).

MacDonald Ross, G. (2008) Why my students don’t plagiarise: a case study
Third International Plagiarism Conference, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK 23-25 June. Available at:
http://www.plagiarismconference.co.uk/images/conferenceimages/029_P16 MacDonald Ross.pdf (Accessed: 4 November 2008).

McDowell, L. et al. (2006)
Assessment for learning: current practice exemplars from the Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning in Assessment for Learning [Online]
Available at: http://northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/cetlpdf/exemplars.pdf (Accessed: 18 November).

 

Mwesch (2007) A vision of students today. Available at: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o (Accessed: 5 November 2008.)

‘Nurse suspended for six months for cheating in university dissertation’ (2008), Sussex Express, 13 November. [Online]. Available at http://www.sussexexpress.co.uk/479/Nurse-suspended-for-six-months.4693030.jp (Accessed: 17 November 2008).

Pickard, J. (2008a) University of Northampton Plagiarism Avoidance Course Available at: http://nli.northampton.ac.uk/mmb/smc/cg/blackboard/UNPACmay08/unpac_captivate.htm (Accessed: 24 November)

Pickard, J. (2008) Email to Gill Rowell, 26 September.

Plagiarism prevention and detection: cheat sites (2008)
Available at: http://www.ics.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/assessment/plagiarism/onlinesites.html
(Accessed: 18 November 2008).

Preventing plagiarism (2008)
Available at: http://learning.londonmet.ac.uk/TLTC/learnhigher/Plagiarism/
(Accessed: 18 November 2008)

Reddy, M. (2008a) Dr. Strangecut: how I learned to stop worrying and love cut and paste.
Third International Plagiarism Conference, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK 23-25 June.
Available at: http://www.plagiarismconference.co.uk/images/conferenceimages/026_Reddy.pdf (Accessed: 4 November 2008).

Reddy, M. (2008b) WHY/WHAT/HOW - Was research on plagiarism, Plagiarism discussion list, 7 November [Online]
Available at: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0811&L=PLAGIARISM&T=0&F=&S=&P=983 (Accessed 20 November).

Relph, A. (2008a) Assessment Examples, [Online] Available at: http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/documents/Relph%20assessment%20egs.doc (Accessed: 24 November)

Relph, A.(2008b) Interviewed by Gill Rowell, 21 November [Online]. Available at: http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/documents/mp3s/rec_amanda.relph_21_Nov_2008_10_18_18.MP3 (Accessed: 25 November)

Scown, P. (2008) Using students' assignments to create a library of re-usable learning objects,
Learning and teaching in action, vol. 7, no.1 [Online]
Available at: http://www.celt.mmu.ac.uk/ltia/issue15/scown.php (Accessed: 18 November 2008)

Student authorship project (2010)
Available at: http://www.writenow.ac.uk/outcomes/resources/student-authorship/ (Accessed: 25 August 2010).

Sivasubramaniam, S. (2008) Email to Gill Rowell, 31 October.

Sivasubramaniam, S. Teach yourself to avoid plagairism in scientific writing, (no date) Available at: http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/documents/shiva/index.htm (Accessed: 24 November 2008)

Sugden, J. (2008) Half of Cambridge students admit cheating Times Online, 31 October. [Online]
Available at: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/student/article5054310.ece (Accessed: 31 October 2008)

 

Taylor, D. (2008a) How students work – an exploration of how Business School students in the IT age work together in individual assessed coursework assignments [Online]
Available at: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/business/projects/detail/trdg/2007-08/How_Students_Work (Accessed: 18 November 2008).

Taylor, D. (2008b) You mark it- but how do they do it? A study of how students work. [Presentation].

Taylor, M. & Butt R. (2006) Q: How do you make £1.6m a year and drive a Ferrari? A: Sell essays for £400, The Guardian, 29 July. [Online]
Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/jul/29/highereducation.education (Accessed: 31 October 2008).

Turnitin UK (Plagiarism Detection Software) eLP Link (no date) [Online] Available at: http://plagiarismadvice.org/documents/Home%20TurnitinUK.doc (Accessed: 24 November)

UK Essays (2008) Available at: http://www.ukessays.com/guarantees.php (Accessed: 18 November 2008).

University had 65 cheats and 801 plagiarists (2008) Times Online, 29 September. [Online]
Available at: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article4842448.ece (Accessed: 31 October 2008)

Using Turnitin to provide powerful formative feedback, (2008) [Online]
Available at: http://www.business.brookes.ac.uk/learningandteaching/aske/Turnitin.pdf (Accessed: 18 November)

Web-PA (2008) Available at http://webpa.lboro.ac.uk/login.php. (Accessed: 18 November)

Wilkinson, N. (2008) Email to Gill Rowell, 7 October.

Funding acknowledgement
This resource has been developed as part of the Higher Education Academy/JISC Collaboration initiative to support practitioners in further and higher education in their use of technology to enhance learning, teaching and assessment.

 
 

Contributors

Many thanks to the following who contributed their content and resources to this guide.

Jo Badge, University of Leicester.

Margo Blythman, University of the Arts London.

Mary Davies, Oxford Brookes University.

Gabriel Egan, Loughborough University.

James Elander, Write Now CETL, Derby University.

Sharon Flynn, National University of Ireland, Galway.

Nilou Hawthorne, Roehampton University.

Margaret Home, Northumbria University.

Matt Hughes, University of the West of England.

Neville Hunt, Coventry University.

Martina Johnson, Social Policy and Social Work Subject Centre, University of Southampton.

Stuart Johnson, University of Leicester.

Ann Lee, University of Surrey.

George Macdonald Ross, Philosophical and Religious Studies Subject Centre, University of Leeds.

Andy Mitchell, Learnhigher CETL, London Metropolitan University.

Jill Pickard, University of Northampton.

Amanda Relph, University of Hertfordshire.

Mike Reddy, University of Newport.

Phil Scown, Manchester Metropolitan University.

Shiva Sivasubramaniam, Nottingham Trent University.

David Taylor, University of Leeds.

Nicola Wilkinson, WebPA Project, Loughborough University.

 

Funding acknowledgement
This resource has been developed as part of the Higher Education Academy/JISC Collaboration initiative to support practitioners in further and higher education in their use of technology to enhance learning, teaching and assessment.