Over the past few days, there has been a lot of confusion and misinformation surrounding the proposal to allow usage of SafeAssign at the university. I knew when I first advocated this idea that it was bound to spark controversy, but I believe many of the fears people have are unfounded and I think it’s important to have an open discussion before making this important decision.
My interest in plagiarism-detection software stems from my time as a teaching assistant in BSCI105: Principles of Biology I and BSCI106: Principles of Biology II. Labs in these introductory biology courses ranged from running DNA samples to ascertaining the properties of various types of artificial blood products. However, one of the first labs of the semester was teaching students how to paraphrase and cite properly. In order to make progress, academics must use the work of those who have come before them. Citing others’ work and giving proper credit is an essential element of academic work, and it’s crucial we teach students how to do this correctly.
Much of my time as a TA was spent grading lab reports, and much of my time grading was spent confirming the academic integrity of these assignments. Nobody enjoys this part of teaching, but unfortunately it’s our responsibility. I wanted to spend my time as a TA becoming familiar with the material and how best to teach it, not tracking down cases of academic dishonesty. I believe this is true of most instructors. We didn’t become academics out of a desire to prosecute our students.
I’d like to address some specific points about SafeAssign in light of the reasons I support this program and some of the comments that have been made in reaction.
1. There is no automatic referral from SafeAssign to the academic integrity judicial process. SafeAssign will only provide warning to a grader. It is still the responsibility of that professor or TA to check for themselves if there is actual evidence of plagiarism. Any accusation of plagiarism would have to be made through the normal process currently in use.
2. Being flagged in SafeAssign does not constitute plagiarism, it is just a warning for the grader to check a particular reference or passage more closely. A flag in SafeAssign by itself, without any other supporting material, should never be admissible as evidence of actual misconduct during any judicial proceeding.
3. Professors and TAs already check for plagiarism. SafeAssign is not changing existing practice, it is simply a tool to help graders use their time more efficiently.
4. SafeAssign is completely transparent. Students can run a check on their own work in the exact same way that the grader does. The student sees what the grader sees.
5. SafeAssign can be a cost-effective way to reduce TA workload. According to the university’s own research, TAs work on average 29 hours per week, even though the university claims these assignments only take 20 hours per week. This has a direct impact on the experience of students in the classroom and contributes to the university’s low doctorate completion rate (currently under 50 percent, while the national average is 65 percent). Our working conditions are your learning conditions. I’d rather reduce the time I spend checking perfectly good work than hold fewer office hours or spend less time preparing for class. The less time I spend checking for plagiarism, the more time I can spend making meaningful comments on students’ work.
If anyone is interested in learning more, I would invite you to check SafeAssign’s website at www.safeassign.com. The website includes information on how the program works and provides sample reports. Also, I will be attending the Student Government Association meeting Nov. 28 to answer questions about this proposal. I think it is very important to have an open and honest discussion to address people’s concerns, and I invite anyone with questions to e-mail me.
Laura Moore is a graduate student and the president of the Graduate Student Government. She can be reached at laura@lauramoore.com.
