Most of us are used to our friends posting unflattering pictures and videos, but now it seems that teachers have gotten in on the act. The website turnitin.com allows faculty from subscribing institutions to submit a student’s paper, run it through plagiarism detection software and match it against essays in their database. I have nothing against preventing plagiarism, but that’s not the problem: The database automatically holds and stores every essay ever sent in. And that is a problem. Turnitin serves 8,500 institutions in 109 countries and has amassed roughly 90 million student papers. They have effectively become one of the largest libraries of student work in the world — and few students have ever heard of them.
In March of 2007, high school students from Virginia and Arizona sued iParadigms, the parent company of Turnitin, claiming that the site’s policy of amassing essays and profiting from unaltered student work infringed on their copyright. The case was eventually settled out of court, but it highlights a bizarre new precedent in the digital age: When you hand in a paper, you could potentially be handing over your intellectual property. In addition to worrying about whether or not you pass, students at institutions that use the program — like Georgetown and Harvard — have to worry if their work is being altered, used or sold to third parties without their knowledge.
Even worse, the security of Turnitin is questionable. Last year a plaintiff in the case AV v. iParadigms, LLC, was able to access the website by Googling a password. It is discomforting to think that errant teenagers, let alone hackers, could so easily access student work.
Administrators on campus understand the high stakes of giving away undergraduate intellectual property. Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies Hilary Herbold GS ’97, who deals with disciplinary issues and sits as secretary on the Committee on Discipline, wrote in an e-mail, “We prefer to assume that students’ work is their own … A requirement that by default student work must be submitted to a plagiarism detection service seemed to us not to reflect the basic trust that Princeton students deserve.” The Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students (ODUS) considered, but ultimately rejected, mandating a University-wide requirement for all essays to be put through plagiarism detection software.
Faculty, however, seem unaware of the discussions held by ODUS. Professor Jeff Dolven, the Director of Undergraduate Studies in the English department, wrote that he was unaware of any policy regarding suspected plagiarism and that professors may “pursue the question any number of ways — going to the suspected source, Googling [or] plagiarism detection sites.” Similarly, Professor Robert Wuthnow, chair of the sociology department, when asked about the plagiarism policy for his department, wrote in an e-mail, “No, I wouldn’t know about that.” I received a similar response from Professor Eldar Shafir, acting chair of the psychology department. Professors and department heads lack a consistent method for detecting plagiarism.
Top-level administrators seem to comprehend what is at stake when student work is handed off to third parties, yet there is a total disconnect between ODUS and the people who actually find plagiarism. What good is it if a dean in ODUS abstains from using unethical plagiarism detection software if professors use it? Currently, the University lacks any consistent policy on plagiarism detection software.
ODUS has started taking positive steps toward finding practical, efficient and ethical ways to deter plagiarism. Unfortunately, the path is a long one, and ODUS seems to have left out some of the most important players in discussion of plagiarism detection: students and faculty. An informed University-wide or department-specific policy regarding plagiarism detection must involve all stakeholders.
I urge the University to begin a serious campus-wide discussion about student work and the best way(s) to protect student rights and the University community. It’s time for the policy to become formalized so that teachers don’t accidentally sell away student rights.
Michael Collins is an anthropology major from Glastonbury, Conn. He can be reached at mjcollin@princeton.edu.
Read More
Why can’t lecturers win the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching?
Jerry ZhuLet’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Let’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Princeton’s administration of justice is Trumpian
Frances BroganThe disparity between the University’s approach to Giberson and its approach to pro-Palestinian protestors reflects a concerning trend of appeasing an increasingly emboldened right rather than resisting the threat it poses to academic freedom and the wellbeing of Princeton students.
Secular Opening Exercises? Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water
Frank StrasburgerThe secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
The secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
