Adventures in Technology Enhanced Learning @ UoP

Tag: moodle (Page 5 of 7)

The Portsmouth Moodle – Accessibility Snapshot

In January 2018 we were lucky enough to host a visit from Alistair McNaught, a JISC subject specialist on accessibility and inclusion. Alistair spent a day at the University as a “mystery shopper”, playing the role of a student with disabilities who was trying to access various digital resources and services. He looked at the full range of services – prospectus, website, Library platforms and Moodle – but here I’ll focus on his observations about the VLE.

The first thing to note is that Alistair had difficulty logging on to a PC in the morning: it took more than ten minutes for the desktop to appear. The student sitting next to him confirmed that, after the initial boot, it often did take a long time before a public PC was in a state that allowed work to take place. Not good for a student with ADHD!

Alistair confirmed that tab order (for keyboard navigation) works well in Moodle and the visual tracking of focus is good. There’s easy navigation with breadcrumb trails and a navigation side panel; this is important because good navigation assists all users, especially assistive technology users. The Moodle accessibility block is available and obvious on all pages, and Equality and Diversity information is easily discoverable. The self-enrol E&D course has lots of very good, easily accessible, generic awareness-raising resources; and there are easy-to-find PDF resources on equality data – these have good reflow and colour change possibilities. All this is good news and it allows us to build on – in Alistair’s words – conscious competence.

However, there are some things we need to think about. For example, some of our third-party resources have accessibility issues; we are to some extent a hostage to fortune in these cases, but at least now we are in a position to raise the points with the suppliers. Another issue was that some of our generic units have poor colour contrast; Alistair pointed us to a tool – the Colour Contrast Analyser from the Paciello group – which will help us identify these problems more readily. And once we are aware of them, it’s easier to fix.

Alistair also took a look (with the consent of the academics involved) at a couple of teaching units from ICJS. He was highly impressed with the pedagogical approach taken in these units, and he praised a number of aspects. A “lovely human [video-based] introduction adds value for many students” – but he added that it “would be even better with transcript or captions”. It was “great to see active use of rich media and a nice visual key to resources”; the “direct links to reading resource and final assessment” were useful; and the “impressive range of resources” were “well organised” and had “clearly scaffolded teaching with explanations and pointers to the purpose of the resources”. Where resources could cause access issues this has been recognised and a genuine attempt made to remedy it with a PDF alternative (however, the PDF had its own accessibility issues and so does the ‘Click here’ link text). Finally, a Useful News and Information block showed “great currency, with tie-in to contemporaneous issues”. So, again, there is a lot of conscious competence on which we can build.

These units had some issues; fortunately, they are easily fixed. For example, hyperlinks need unique and meaningful link text so that assistive technologies that gather page links together can give users meaningful information. If an author writes “Click here to browse an interactive timeline of key events” then the result from assistive technologies might be a long list of “Click here”s – which is entirely uninformative. Much better to write: “Click here to browse an interactive timeline of key events”. Another problem came from an interactive Articulate resource that failed to load; even if it did load, Articulate generally produces output with limited accessibility. And some structures had untitled navigation elements, which would cause problems for some users. (This last issue might be down to an underlying Moodle template issue; Alistair pointed us to another tool – the HTML5 Outliner plugin for Chrome – that will help us investigate this further.)

All in all this was a tremendously useful visit. We know there are areas of good practice we can build on, and there are issues we can fix.  And it truly is worth pursuing this: if we take an inclusive approach to Moodle and the content on it, all learners will benefit.

Feature image title:  Web Accessibility Word Cloud by Jill Wright is licensed by CC-BY 2.0 on Flickr

New Features of Moodle and Bespoke TEL Training Sessions

During August TEL (Technology Enhanced Learning) will be offering New Features of Moodle 3.5 and bespoke training sessions only. The usual timetabled TEL training sessions will resume in September.

 

New Features of Moodle 3.5 sessions

Each year new features are added and old tools are upgraded to improve functionality. The New Features of Moodle sessions will look at the latest features of Moodle that have changed since the roll over. Any updates or new features of our latest Moodle will be included in the session to help you keep up to date with the workings of the system.

To view our training sessions, please see the TEL Training Calendar.

Bespoke Sessions

Informal 1-2-1 sessions can be held at your desk, or if there are several of you interested in a session we have a room available where you can request a more structured group session. Topics for bespoke sessions can be based around our traditional TEL programme, or we can tailor the session to answer any specific questions or needs that you require.

Please complete a Bespoke Training Request form (see below) and simply tick the box next to the session you would like training on. If you tick ‘Other’ please give a brief explanation of the topic you wished to be covered in the session. Complete with the date on which you would like your training session to take place, along with your preferred time and finish it by clicking ‘SUBMIT’.

Please click here for the Bespoke Training Request form:

Bespoke Training Request Form

Once we receive your form, a member of  the TEL team will contact you to confirm your training arrangements.

NB: Bespoke TEL training sessions can also be arranged throughout the year.

Background image credits: https://www.pexels.com/photo/adult-book-business-cactus-297755/

New Moodle theme

Over the past academic year members of TEL have been talking to people across the University about what Moodle should look like and what it should do.

We’ve conducted focus groups and had meetings with students, academics, support staff, “powers users”, IS, Marketing and Department of Student and Academic Administration (DSAA). This has allowed us to produce a requirements list of what Moodle users need in terms of the interface.

Drum roll please… we’re very pleased to announce that early adopters can now switch to the new theme for their Moodle units. This will enable academics and Online Course Developers to start developing content in time for September. Units will be automatically switched to the new theme when they are rolled over this summer.

(click image to enlarge)

To switch to the new theme manually press Course administration > Editing Settings > Appearance > UoP Boost

You can also view a demo course featuring the new theme by visiting this link.

We’d very much welcome your feedback on the new theme. Please complete this form if you have any ideas for us.

Student digital experience 2018 – results from the JISC tracker

For the past three years the University of Portsmouth has run the JISC student digital experience tracker – a survey that aims to capture students’ experiences of and attitudes towards the digital environment in HE. I’ve just made a preliminary analysis of the results from this year’s tracker, which ended on 20 April 2018.

One of the useful aspects of the tracker is that it enables us to benchmark our results against the sector. A total of 15,746 students at other English HEIs responded to the tracker, and it’s interesting to compare their experience with the 310 Portsmouth students who responded. (Note: the student profiles of those taking the tracker are slightly different, so the comparison isn’t perfect. We deliberately choose to avoid involving students at L5 and L6, in order to minimise any interference with the NSS. At English HEIs the distribution is ‘flat’: students at all levels take the tracker.)

The good news is that, for almost all the questions posed, Portsmouth students give more positive responses than their counterparts elsewhere! For most questions the difference is only a matter of a couple of percentage points, so it would be wrong to claim there is a statistically significant difference, but in some cases there really is a notable difference. For example:

  • 93% of Portsmouth students rate the quality of UoP’s digital provision as good or above, vs 88% for the sector
  • 85% of Portsmouth students rely on Moodle to do their coursework, vs 74% for the institutional VLE at other institutions
  • 77% of Portsmouth students say that digital tech allows them to fit learning into their life more easily, vs 70% for the sector
  • 76% of Portsmouth students use digital tech to manage references, vs 65% for the sector
  • 71% of Portsmouth students say when digital tech is used on their course they enjoy learning more, vs 62% for the sector
  • 67% of Portsmouth students regularly access Moodle on a mobile device, vs 62% for the institutional VLE at other institutions
  • 67% of Portsmouth students regard Moodle as well designed, vs 56% for the institutional VLE at other institutions
  • 64% of Portsmouth students say online assessments are delivered and managed well, vs 59% for the sector

Even more interesting than the percentages, however, are the students’ free text comments. Students were asked what one thing we could do to improve their experience of digital teaching and learning. From their responses, four clear themes emerged:  

  • Students want lecture capture and/or more use of video
  • Students want a more consistent approach to Moodle use, and a less ‘cluttered’ interface
  • Students want better training/help/support for themselves when it comes to using digital tech
  • Students want staff to make better use of existing technology  

Over the coming months we’ll be considering how best to address these challenges.

 

Guest Blogger: James Brand – Lecture Capture in the Graduate School

The Graduate School training room (room 4.09, St Andrews Court) was one of the rooms that had the Ubicast lecture capture system installed as part of the University’s roll out of the system in 2016. This room hosts over 150 sessions throughout the academic year from the Graduate School Development Programme (GSDP) for postgraduate research students as well as the regular sessions for the Research Supervisor Events Programme (RSE) for research degree supervisors.

Information on how the system works and using Ubicast can be found in a previous post on the TEL Tales blog – Ubicast Lecture Capture. The Graduate School’s installation of the system is configured slightly differently to most of the installations around the University as the training room is not a lecture theatre, instead it is used for training workshops of approximately 30 people per session. The Graduate School’s installation of the lecture capture system incorporates a ceiling microphone that captures audio from a wide area at the front of the room. The major benefit of this approach is that a member of staff is not limited to standing at a podium nor are they required to wear a microphone for each recording. As the Ubicast installation is localised to the Graduate School, the recordings are managed entirely by myself on the media server with technical support from Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL).

Since the installation of the lecture capture system the Graduate School has recorded a large number of sessions, the majority of which come from the GSDP and RSE sessions. These are then made available to students and staff via Moodle. The system has also been used for other purposes including postgraduate research students recording presentations as a way to practice their teaching or presentation skills. The system allows a quick and easy method to capture sessions without having to provide much in the way of technical support. Since the system is integrated into the training room, we can capture sessions without staff having to worry about equipment like microphones or sound levels. Our policy now is to capture all GSDP and RSE sessions, however, these are not published without the session facilitators first checking the recordings and providing permission to release them.

The ability to pre-schedule recordings is a convenient feature of the system. I am able to schedule recordings in advance by date and time so that staff don’t have to worry about stopping and starting recording. The system is also unobtrusive which allows staff to teach their sessions as normal and have it captured as a high-quality video resource. These resources are primarily used as supplementary materials for the face-to-face sessions to allow students to re-visit the content that has been covered. However, they also provide a flexible training resource for students unable to attend our face-to-face sessions.

Configuring the system has been challenging at times and has required some trial and error to get to a stage where I am confident that the system can produce quality resources. TEL have supported the installation of the system and are able to perform remote assistance if necessary. It is worthwhile checking that equipment is functioning correctly on a regular basis though and before a session takes place as it can often take some time to troubleshoot issues.

Although we are now making a large number of recordings, I believe that one of the biggest challenges – to get maximum effectiveness out of the system and to create pedagogically sound resources – will be training staff on best practice usage of the system. We have a lot of talented and experienced teaching staff at the University, however teaching with lecture capture brings its own unique challenges. In the future it would be really useful to coordinate a training programme to help staff to get the most out of their use of lecture capture.

The system has a number of interesting features that require further exploration. For example, Ubicast provides the facility for live streaming from the training room so that sessions can be watched live. This has been discussed as a potential delivery method in the future to support distance learning students unable to attend our face-to-face workshops. It also opens up the possibility for collaborative training partnerships with other institutions if we can offer our sessions remotely. Other features of the system that need exploring include getting the most out of Ubicast’s rich media player. The ability to embed questions and attach other media into videos is available to further enhance video resources.

Ubicast opens up a lot of possibilities for the delivery of online teaching materials at the University and the Graduate School has made extensive use of the system over the past year. Whether lecture capture is the best method for creating online resources is something to be considered. However, the system has allowed us to quickly capture a large number of sessions and make them available as online resources which would otherwise be difficult to put online. We will continue to investigate how to use this exciting technology to create online training resources for our staff and students.

 

If you are interested in seeing the set-up of the Graduate School’s training room and configuration of the integrated Ubicast lecture capture system please contact graduate.school@port.ac.uk

Image credits: Photo by ShareGrid on Unsplash

Case Study – Gill Wray

The Shorthand Units

Gill Wray, an academic member of staff in the School of Social Historical and Literary Studies within the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences is responsible amongst other things, for the Journalism Shorthand units. I’ve been talking to her about some of the interesting elements of her units that she has implemented for students with the help of the Faculty’s Online Course Developers, Scott, Joe and Daren.

Journalism Shorthand units run in the first and second years as a core requirement aiming to teach shorthand to those taking a Journalism course. As part of her teaching Jill has been involved with the development of some interesting interactive elements on her Moodle site.

I think this sort of work is worth highlighting to others as it shows how Moodle can be much more than just a repository for work, and handouts. Moodle allows an incredible amount of flexibility in terms of what content you can make available for students – it doesn’t just have to be downloadable PDF revision sheets!

The Test Your Shorthand WebApp

The ‘Test Your Shorthand’ app for practicing shorthand knowledge has been around for a while, though due to problems with audio playing on an older version, has recently been rebuilt as a responsive web app to remain functional on various devices across a variety of screen sizes.

The app, which you can see in the screenshots here, gives a student three different difficulty levels to test a student’s shorthand knowledge. Choosing one of these gives a short multiple choice shorthand quiz tuned to the difficulty of the option the student selected. The app also provides a series of shorthand ‘outlines’ (the squiggles that form the core part of journalistic shorthand) as revision aid, as well as 10 different voice recordings to practice note taking on. The audio is offered in 100, 110 and 120 words a minute format, perfect for a student learning to record what they hear.

The app is available as part of the Shorthand Year One Moodle site, and is offered as a supplement to the existing course content, which includes videos that are timed to release to students each week, and also other more traditional worksheet activities.

Digraph Train

Gill’s Shorthand site also includes The Digraph Train. When I asked her why she had added this interactivity to her Moodle site she said:

“One of the main challenges has been the inability of some students to recognise that digraphs ‘sh’, ‘ch’, ‘th’ and ‘wh’ make specific sounds.  We therefore produced a very simple ‘early learning’ style visual in the form of a moving train with carriages adding letters one at a time. There is audio as each carriage joins the train. This helps students understand how two letters come together to make a particular sound.”

The Digraph Train was produced by Gill, with the help of the Online Course Developers in the School, using a software package called Articulate Storyline. When I spoke with Joe Wright, who was responsible for the project, about why he chose Storyline he said:

“I chose to use Storyline because I found it gave me all the tools that would fulfil the task in hand. It is a great e-learning package which you can use to create unique projects using triggers and timing. It’s simple to use as it uses an interface similar to the Microsoft packages which makes it very easy to navigate, to add animations, images and sound to the project. Gill told me that the students found the end result to be very engaging”.

It’s worth mentioning, that both these projects took time, and required skills that are not reflected across every faculty. If you have an idea for something you want to create, but don’t know where to start, visit your Online Course Developers first more often than not they’ll be happy to help. If you think your idea might benefit students (or staff) in a faculty other than your own Technology Enhanced Learning would also be happy to work with you to get your idea off the ground.

Highlighting your own creative and innovative use of Moodle is a difficult thing. There is no University wide platform, no place a member of staff can go and say ‘hey! I helped make this and I think it’s good!’ Case studies like this are our way of putting good work out there for people to see. Currently both of these projects are available only to students studying the Shorthand units on Journalism courses.

Gamification in Moodle – a brief introduction

Learning through play is obviously nothing new, it is one of the main ways children learn. The fun element in play means that children become absorbed in what they are doing, not even realising they are acquiring useful skills. Gamification, however, is not simply about learning through playing, it’s about “the application of game dynamics and game mechanics to make learning goals more appealing and achievable” (Squire, K  2003). Moodle provides an excellent set of tools that can be harnessed to bring an element of gaming into learning, but more on that later.

Introducing elements of gamification may be fun, but does it bring with it positive benefits and improved outcomes for the learner? On the face of it, research would seem to show that gamification does indeed lead to improved student engagement and motivation. For example an experiment involving High School students in America showed that where game elements were used in Moodle, enthusiasm and motivation levels were higher among the group using gamification as opposed to the group not using it 1. There was an even greater (negative) effect on motivational behaviour where gamification was used and then removed. Similarly a review of literature on gamification found  that “indeed, gamification does work” 2. While both studies came with caveats (the main one being the relatively small size of the study groups), indications are that more gaming dynamics should be used in Moodle, exploiting both the competitive and collaborative traits most people naturally possess. This in turn can improve student engagement and motivation, both important (but by no means sole) elements in improving overall attainment. Speaking anecdotally, introducing a competitive element in learning does, under certain circumstances, seem to improve student achievement especially among boys.

The issue of educational underachievement among certain social groups was highlighted in a 2016 report by the Guardian Online 3 which published research showing that just 24% of white boys from poorer backgrounds achieved the benchmark of five good GCSEs, the figure for girls was 32%. While other groups, from the same economic background, showed a significant improvement in achieving this benchmark, this was not the case for white working class boys among whom attainment levels remain “stubbornly low”. Thus while all students would seem to benefit from gamification, I have seen it particularly help boys from poorer backgrounds where engagement in the learning process can be more problematic. Poor achievement at GCSE level often impacts on achievement at a higher level, but even at HE level the use of “serious games” can “intrigue learners during the process of learning” 4 . So while gamification should be used for the benefit of all students, perhaps its main benefits will be among those groups who struggle more than others to fully engage with their learning.

Moodle contains a wide range of opportunities for gamification without necessarily needing specific game style technology. A standard Moodle course can be designed in such a way as to incorporate game orientated activities. In a paper presented at the international eLearning conference 5, Somova provided just such an example whereby the different sections of a Moodle course were designed as a games level. Each level requires students to achieve specific learning objectives with points and badges awarded when predetermined criteria were met. Conditional access, based on activity completion, is used to direct students through the various ‘game’ levels with learners receiving points for assessed activities, which in turn are used to award badges. A badge per level is available, earned as activities are completed and a set level of attainment is reached (eg 70% for a quiz).  As the learner progresses so the levels are made more demanding and involve different type of activities such as group activities to encourage collaboration.

In ‘Gamification with Moodle’ 6 Denmeade (2015) identifies, among others, the following Moodle activities ideal for gamification:

Forum posts – these can be set up for peer ratings or brain teasers.

Quizzes – either team or individual leaderboards can be used to create a competitive element to the exercise.

Feedback module – can be used to set up an interactive pathway based on answers. If questions are answered incorrectly, students can be directed to further reading.

Assignments – custom grading can be used to quickly set up gaming levels, for example Bronze, Silver and Gold

Lessons – progress through lessons can be gamified by setting up prerequisites, such as time limits etc, with advancement to subsequent lessons being made increasingly difficult (or easy depending on ability, or the final goal of the lesson). Lessons can also be used to create different pathways through an exercise, based on student responses to questions and so allow for differentiation by task.

H5P – H5P contains a variety of tools that contain an element of gamification, though the drawback is that the outcomes of some exercises may not be saved in Moodle.

Beyond Moodle there are a huge variety of online gaming tools that can be used by students. https://sites.google.com/site/technologyenhancedlearning/ contains an index of a wide range of eLearning tools that can be used as stand alone learning ‘games’.

While careful initial planning is needed to ensure the above activities are properly prepared to be both academically robust and contain elements of game dynamics, once created they are reusable, and much of the marking is done by Moodle itself. If, at the end of the day, students are more engaged and more are achieving required learning outcomes then the time spent preparing is time well spent. Gamification is clearly not the only answer to tackling underachievement, or a guarantee of improving student outcomes, but it might provide a useful additional tool in helping engage students in their learning.

Amriani, A et al (2013,October) An empirical study of gamification impact on e-Learning environment. Retrieved from
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6967110/#full-text-section

2 Hamari J et al Does Gamification Work? — A Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Gamification 2014, 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Science. Available via https://people.uta.fi/~kljuham/2014-hamari_et_al-does_gamification_work.pdf

3 Weale, S. (2016, November) Schools must focus on struggling white working-class pupils, says UK charity retrieved from 
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/nov/10/schools-focus-struggling-white-working-class-pupils-uk

Somova, E. and Gachkova, M. An Attempt for Gamification of Learning in Moodle Available via http://www.elearning-conf.eu/docs/cp16/paper-31.pdf

Somova, E. and Gachkova, M. An Attempt for Gamification of Learning in Moodle Available via http://www.elearning-conf.eu/docs/cp16/paper-31.pdf

6 Denmeade, N. (2015). Gamification with Moodle.  Birmingham: Packt Publishing Ltd

Image credits: Photo by Clem Onojeghuo   and pan xiaozhen on Unsplash

Guest Blogger: Mary Watkins – Using Turnitin to increase consistency in assessment marking and feedback

The School of Education and Childhood Studies (SECS) have used electronic submission since 2015 with all students asked to submit their artefacts through Turnitin, Moodle Assignments or Moodle Workshops. SECS reviewed our electronic submission process at the end of 2016/17 and looked for ways we could improve the process for students as well as markers.

Student feedback suggested that changes could be made to improve the consistency of feedback across units as well as the transparency of grades and the ways in which grades could be improved in the future.

Using Rubrics

Joy Chalke (Senior Lecturer) and Chris Neanon (Associate Head Academic) worked with Mary Watkins (Senior Online Course Developer) to create an electronic version of the School’s new grade criteria/mark sheet for each level of study from level four undergraduates through to level seven postgraduates. The electronic version was created using a Turnitin rubric which reflected the four key areas students’ submissions are marked by:

  1. research,
  2. content,
  3. argument and analysis,
  4. organisation, style and presentation.

The new Turnitin rubrics help to ensure that all markers evaluate student work via the same set criteria, in this case based on these four key areas, and therefore respond to the students’ request for consistent marking.

Having attached the rubric to all Turnitin dropboxes, markers were able to indicate to students areas of strength as well as areas for improvement in the artifact submitted and link these to the sections on the rubric. Upon receiving this feedback students have been able use the rubric to see how improvements to their research, content, argument, and organisation will increase their grade in future submissions.

Using QuickMarks

Joy and Mary also worked together to create sets of ‘QuickMarks’, a tool in Turnitin that allows markers to drag and drop comments on to students’ submissions and therefore reduces the need for online markers to type the same comments repeatedly.

Joy drafted a set of QuickMarks for each level of study which Mary converted into corresponding sets of QuickMarks. Markers were then able to drag and drop relevant comments from the set on to students’ submissions, amending or adding to the comment(s) as appropriate.

A pilot was conducted in two units with large numbers of markers on the UG programmes and trialed in a unit on a PG program. SECS will be monitoring this process throughout 2017/18 and using feedback from students as well as staff to improve the way marking is conducted and feedback is given to our students.

Moodle – Teaching Block 2 Units

One query which we often receive from students here in TEL (Technology Enhanced Learning), is that they are concerned that they have one or more units missing from their Moodle homepage. This is usually because the unit(s) they are enquiring about, are for Teaching Block 2.  

Teaching Block 2 units are normally hidden from student view until the day students return from the Christmas vacation, which this year is Monday 8th January 2018.  However, this is not always the case as some units have two different cohorts of students attached to them. These units may have a short name that looks similar to this: UXXXXX-17SEP & -17JAN or this UXXXXX-17SEP & UXXXXX-17JAN.  Depending how the unit has been set up, both cohorts may have access to the unit in September, or maybe the January cohort won’t be able to see the unit until the lecturer releases it to them at a later date.

Lecturers decide when to release their Teaching Block 2 unit(s). Some lecturers prefer to release them when the students break up for the Christmas vacation so that they can start looking at them, while others wait until the first day back or when the first session starts. Some students may be able to see their Teaching Block 2 units now.  It really is up to the individual lecturer.

We’re often are asked why does the January code not reflect the new year – for example, why does the code say 17JAN and not 18JAN, as in 2018. This is because the code is taken from the year that the academic year started in, so as this academic year started in 2017, the code is 17JAN.

This is not to be confused with courses that actually start in January 2018 where there might be the odd short name that does end in 18JAN.

It’s all very confusing at times, but whatever course you’re on and whenever it started, as long as you can see your unit when the lecturer says you should be able to see it, that’s the main thing. If you can’t see your unit(s), please email us at servicedesk@port.ac.uk.

In the meantime, the TEL Team would like to wish everyone Season’s Greetings and a Happy New Year.

Image credits:   https://pixabay.com/en/sparrows-christmas-christmas-time-2900850

Turnitin – What’s in a number?

The University of Portsmouth uses the Turnitin service to provide facilities for plagiarism detection, online marking and as a development tool for academic writing, although most users are interesting in one thing – a number.

Contained within the Originality Report is a Similarity Score out of 100, which many users wrongly believe to a be plagiarism score with a magic number, at which in can be conclusively determined whether plagiarism has or has not occurred. The problem is, this figure can be manipulated, there will also be mitigating circumstances and lastly let us not forget the system is not perfect either – there will be some margin for error.

Crudely speaking the Similarity Score number is a percentage of the words in your document which matched text from other documents that Turnitin searched against. For shorter assignments with a direct question and consequently a more concise correct answer may well therefore see higher score when compared to a longer assignment with more scope to include to include diverse material.

The number of students in your class and whether the assignment has been set in previous years (or at different institutions) may limit the scope for truly original material, that’s not to say a very high score is necessarily acceptable however it does mean that the latest content may not be unique for genuine reasons. An assignment based upon group work is also a recipe for a higher than usual Similarity Score since students are likely to be working from the same research, data and figures so will in all likelihood draw the same conclusions.

What does Turnitin check an assignment against? There are stored student papers in both a global central repository and the University of Portsmouth own repository (where we might store more sensitive documents). Turnitin also searches against material found on the internet and can check journals, periodicals and publications. Personally I would check against everything, if the service is available, use it.

Turnitin offers several filters which may be toggled, for example whether to include or exclude bibliographic references. Personally I cannot think of a reason why you want to include bibliographic references in the Similarity Score as citing sources is a requirement of good academic writing. That said if the assignment were a lab report and references were not expected then it might be safer to include bibliographic references just in case the Turnitin software incorrectly identified a bibliography and consequently excluded all of the text that followed. You can also toggle quoted material, quotes would not normally be considered within a plagiarism report although the volume of them may indicate a lack of original content from the author. Where quoted material is excluded from the Originality Report, Turnitin helpfully points out when more than 15% of the paper is quoted material. The final filter is for small matches, usually matches of 3-4 words are rather inconsequential, you may also have longer phrases that appear repeatedly throughout the assignment – you can exclude this from being repeatedly matched and skewing the Similarity Score using the ‘exclude small matches’ filter. Personally I use all the filters, excluding bibliographic references, quoted material and small matches – I can always turn them back on later when reviewing a paper if I am suspicious.

So after searching against all of the available material, excluding bibliographic references, quoted material and small matches, what is the magic number? Well, the magic number is… the number at which you become suspicious of course!

Finally, to wrap up this post, and just in case a concerned student has stumbled across this blog post, I would like to emphasise that if they know they have not deliberately plagiarised then they have nothing to worry about. If they are concerned that they have used another source and may not have referenced it properly, then guidance is available from the Academic Skills Unit (https://kb.myport.ac.uk/Article/Index/12/4?id=2747)

 

Email: academicskills@port.ac.uk

Telephone: +44 (0)23 9284 3462

Or, visit the Academic Skills Unit in person during our opening hours:

Third floor Reception, The Nuffield Centre

St Michael’s Road

Portsmouth

PO1 2ED

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2024 Tel Tales

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑