Volume Two - Academic Conferences

Barbara Newland et al.
Table 2: Relationship between impact on academic, administrative and learning technologists roles
and practices and technical infrastructure
Infrastructure support eSubmission
3.3 eSubmission and plagiarism
Impact on roles and practices
Yes No Unsure
Yes 23 (61%) 2 (5%) 7 (18%)
No 1 (3%)
Unsure 2 (5%)
eSubmission is closely linked with plagiarism detection as electronic formats of assignments are
required to use plagiarism detection software. In most universities “TurnitinUK is integrated with our
VLE and is widely used for eSubmission because it helps to detect plagiarism.” HeLF members were
asked about plagiarism detection deployed in their institutions and whether is it across all courses.
They were also asked whether the emphasis is more on plagiarism detection (stick) or student
development (carrot). In most universities plagiarism software is available across all courses but not
necessarily used. It is generally used on an opt-in basis by individual academics or by a whole
department. For example, “Some staff use it routinely for all assignments, some staff use it when they
suspect plagiarism has occurred, some have never heard of Turnitin.” It may be deployed on all
assignments or a random sample of assignment or its use may be erratic. However, one member
stated that in their institution “We use TurnitinUK for all text based submissions. Students are given
access to their originality reports (and given training to understand and act on them) and can resubmit
an enhanced submission up to the deadline, in all bar 5% of our modules.” In another university it is
deployed across all first year modules.
There are contrasting views on whether the software is used for plagiarism detection or student
development. It appears that often the “development (carrot) approach is recommended, but the stick
approach is still implemented in some programmes.” It is “urged to use as a carrot, but currently used
as a stick.” One member stated “We recommend its use primarily in a formative way for student
development and learning around academic writing and integrity. However there is a feeling that
many staff are still using it for detecting and deterring plagiarism.” Similarly, “the clearest message
TurnitinUK is that it will detect plagiarism rather than it is a tool to assist students to improve their
academic writing skills. In staff training sessions, the emphasis is on techniques to avoid plagiarism
but this message gets drowned out somehow!” In contrast another member said “Institutional advice
is to use as a formative tool. My impression is that most staff genuinely accept the developmental
aspect, and are not just interested in the detection side.” Similarly, at another institution “It is
presented as a carrot model that will improve student academic writing and support is available to
support students having difficulty with paraphrasing, referencing etc.”
3.4 Role of HeLF
The HeLF members were asked if they think there is there a role for HeLF in collating and publishing
good practice in this area. This would be a new activity for HeLF in the way it achieves its aim of
promoting, supporting and developing eLearning. Currently, HeLF activities mainly focus of three face
to face events per year in the UK and responses to reports from government and other national
organisations. The events are organised around a theme each academic year. For example, the
theme for 2010/11 is “Strategy, Efficiency and Resource Management”. There have been events in
London, Manchester, Wolverhampton on “National Strategic Directions for eLearning” and
“Postgraduate Certificates in Education and eLearning.” HeLF has responded to papers such as the
Higher Education Academy’s consultation on the UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF) for
Higher Education (HEA, 2010).
The response was overwhelmingly positive to this proposed new role for HeLF to collate and publish
and share practice regarding eSubmission. Comments included “HeLF members have a role to
contribute and share good practice - that's one of the biggest benefits of the group.” “What other
group is well placed to draw together disparate work on this topic?” It was recognised that “not all
HeLF members may necessarily have the information available at their fingertips – it may be held by
Academic office, Quality Enhancement Unit, etc. instead.” “It is the collective aspect of HeLF, that
brings together a number of institutions that is important. It should be the voice of Heads of e-learning
583