The following techniques can be employed to address the issue of plagiarism in an online setting. Some of the techniques are specific to Desire2Learn while some are general guidelines to consider when creating assessments.
From Flickr
Turn-It-In Plagiarism Detection (D2L)
The Desire2Learn Dropbox allows students to submit written assignments in the form of documents. Enabling Plagiarism Detection sends the paper to Turn-It-In. Turn-It-In then compares the paper against its existing database of student work and internet resources and returns an originality report that appears in the D2L Dropbox.
Desire2Learn Quiz Randomization (D2L)
Desire2Learn Quizzing allows you to build Question Libraries, which are collections of quiz questions. For example: if you have a pool of twenty questions in a Question Library you can select fifteen random questions from the pool of twenty and these questions will be delivered in a random order to the students. Students may receive some of the same questions as their peers, but the questions will be in a different order. Randomized quizzes make it more difficult to share question answers.
You can ask your FITS Consultant for assistance setting up randomized quizzes.
Address Plagiarism (General)
A simple body of text placed in your syllabus or welcome email can often nip plagiarism in the bud. Here’s an example:
Original coursework is required in this class. If you notice your classmates cheating, please let me know right away. I submit all cases of suspected cheating for review. A charge of plagiarism could result in an automatic F in the course and possible expulsion. Further information on the Academic Integrity policy is available at http://academicintegrity.depaul.edu.
Vary Assessments (General)
Varying assessments each term is helpful to keep students from reusing work. Varying an assessment sufficiently to encourage original work is not difficult. If you would like to realign your assessments, your FITS Consultant is available to provide assistance.
Comparative Assessments (General)
Comparative assessments or assessments which advocate for a certain position are difficult to fake. For example:
For each of the example projects below, tell me which of the technologies we have discussed this quarter is most appropriate for implementing the project and explain why in 3-5 sentences:
- Description of Project
- Description of Project
These comparative assessments are also easy to vary. Simply change the description of the projects from quarter to quarter.
Avoid High Value Assessments (General)
Cheaters tend to focus on high-value assessments. If an assessment is worth 75 percent of the course grade, the risk of being caught is the same as cheating on a low value assessment but the reward for successfully cheating is quite high. If you assign the same weight to the various aspects of the course, there will be less incentive to cheat on one high-value assessment.
Self-Determined Project Assessments (General)
Allow students to select the topic of a project. When the student or group submits a proposal that is too similar to other recent project proposals, it can be rejected. Project-based assessments that include a group element are even more difficult to cheat on as the students are expected to work as a team and tend to self-police one another.
Discussion-based Assessments (General)
Similar to comparative assessments, discussion-based assessments are difficult to cheat on. Try building requirements into your discussion topics. For example:
Write an initial two-to-three sentence post about the topic you found most interesting this week (due Tuesday at Midnight, 2pts). Respond to two of your fellow students and make a connection to at least one other student’s initial post (due Sunday at Midnight, 2pts/ea).
Conclusion
Thank you for reading, If you’d like further information, have ways you combat plagiarism, or would like to discuss this or other topics please contact your FITS Consultant.
Anna Luce was an invaluable contributor to this document. Thanks Anna.