Jump to content

Turnitin: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Revert to revision 1123968316 dated 2022-11-26 17:59:39 by Alaney2k using popups
add {{ill}} for "Michele Cortelazzo"
 
(45 intermediate revisions by 33 users not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
| name = Turnitin
| name = Turnitin
| logo = Turnitin logo (2021).svg
| logo = Turnitin logo (2021).svg
| company_type = Subsidiary, Privately held company
| company_type = [[Subsidiary]]
| location = 2101 Webster Street Suite 1800 [[Oakland, California|Oakland]] California 94612
| location = 2101 Webster Street Suite 1800 [[Oakland, California|Oakland]], California 94612
| country = United States
| country = United States
| founded = 1998
| founded = 1998
Line 18: Line 18:
| users = {{ubl|30M+ students|(15,000 institutions)}}
| users = {{ubl|30M+ students|(15,000 institutions)}}
}}
}}
[[File:2101 Webster St, Oakland.jpg|thumb|Location of Turnitin's Oakland office]]
⚫
'''Turnitin''' (stylized as '''turnitin''') is an Internet-based [[similarity detection]] service run by the American company Turnitin, LLC, a [[subsidiary]] of [[Advance Publications]].


⚫
Founded in 1998, it sells its licenses to universities and high schools who then use the [[software as a service]] (SaaS) website to check submitted documents against its database and the content of other websites with the aim of identifying [[plagiarism]]. Results can identify similarities with existing sources and can also be used in [[formative assessment]] to help students learn to avoid plagiarism and improve their writing.{{Citation needed|date=January 2023}}
⚫
'''Turnitin''' (stylized as '''turnitin''') is an Internet-based [[plagiarism detection]] service run by the American company Turnitin, LLC, a subsidiary of [[Advance Publications]].


⚫
Students may be required to submit work to Turnitin as a requirement of taking a certain course or class. The software has been a source of controversy, with some students refusing to submit, arguing that requiring submission implies a [[presumption of guilt]]. Some critics have alleged that use of this [[proprietary software]] violates educational [[privacy]] as well as international [[intellectual property|intellectual-property]] laws, and exploits students' works for commercial purposes by permanently storing them in Turnitin's privately held [[database]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://hybridpedagogy.org/resisting-edtech/ |title=A Guide for Resisting Edtech: the Case against Turnitin |date=2017-06-15 |access-date=2021-01-04 |website=hybridpedagogy.org}}</ref>
⚫
Founded in 1998, it sells its licenses to universities and high schools who then use the [[software as a service]] (SaaS) website to check submitted documents against its database and the content of other websites with the aim of identifying [[plagiarism]]. Results can identify similarities with existing sources and can also be used in [[formative assessment]] to help students learn to avoid plagiarism and improve their writing.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Let Them Plagiarise: Developing Academic Writing in a Safe Environment |postscript=. (PDF Download available.) |journal=Journal of Academic Writing|doi=10.18552/joaw.v1i1.10|date=October 2011|author1=Christopher Ireland|author2=John English|volume=1 |pages=165–172 |s2cid=155065742 |url=https://publications.coventry.ac.uk/index.php/joaw/article/view/10/41 }}</ref>

⚫
Students may be required to submit work to Turnitin as a requirement of taking a certain course or class. The software has been a source of controversy, with some students refusing to submit, arguing that requiring submission implies a [[presumption of innocence|presumption of guilt]]. Some critics have alleged that use of this [[proprietary software]] violates educational [[privacy]] as well as international [[intellectual property|intellectual-property]] laws, and exploits students' works for commercial purposes by permanently storing them in Turnitin's privately held [[database]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://hybridpedagogy.org/resisting-edtech/ |title=A Guide for Resisting Edtech: the Case against Turnitin |date=2017-06-15 |access-date=2021-01-04 |website=hybridpedagogy.org}}</ref>


Turnitin, LLC also runs the informational website plagiarism.org and offers a similar plagiarism-detection service for newspaper editors and book and magazine publishers called [[iThenticate]]. Other tools included with the Turnitin [[Software suite|suite]] are GradeMark (online grading and [[corrective feedback]]) and PeerMark (student peer-review service).
Turnitin, LLC also runs the informational website plagiarism.org and offers a similar plagiarism-detection service for newspaper editors and book and magazine publishers called [[iThenticate]]. Other tools included with the Turnitin [[Software suite|suite]] are GradeMark (online grading and [[corrective feedback]]) and PeerMark (student peer-review service).


⚫
In the UK, the service is supported and promoted by [[Jisc|JISC]] as 'Plagiarism Detection Service Turnitin UK'. The Service is operated by iParadigms, in conjunction with Northumbria Learning, the European reseller of the Service.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Turnitin UK 2021-2022|url=https://bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/secretary/documents/student-rules-and-regs/turnitin-plagiarism-detection-service.pdf|website=University of Bristol}}</ref>

==Company history==
In March 2019, [[Advance (company)|Advance Publications]] acquired Turnitin, LLC for {{USD|1.75 billion}}.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/advance-publications-nearing-deal-to-buy-plagiarism-scanning-company-turnitin-for-1-75-billion-11551887268|title=Advance Publications to Buy Plagiarism-Scanning Company Turnitin for Nearly $1.75 Billion|first=Melissa|last=Korn|newspaper=Wall Street Journal|date=March 6, 2019}}</ref>
In March 2019, [[Advance (company)|Advance Publications]] acquired Turnitin, LLC for {{USD|1.75 billion}}.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/advance-publications-nearing-deal-to-buy-plagiarism-scanning-company-turnitin-for-1-75-billion-11551887268|title=Advance Publications to Buy Plagiarism-Scanning Company Turnitin for Nearly $1.75 Billion|first=Melissa|last=Korn|newspaper=Wall Street Journal|date=March 6, 2019}}</ref>


In 2021, Turnitin acquired competing software company, Ouriginal, itself the result of a merger between Urkund and [[PlagScan]].<ref>{{cite web |title=CEO's statement on Ouriginal's acquisition by Turnitin, November 30, 2021 |url=https://www.ouriginal.com/statement-on-ouriginals-acquisition-by-turnitin/ |language=en-us |date=30 November 2021}}</ref>
⚫
In the UK the service is supported and promoted by [[Jisc|JISC]] as 'Plagiarism Detection Service Turnitin UK'. The Service is operated by iParadigms, in conjunction with Northumbria Learning, the European reseller of the Service.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Turnitin UK 2021-2022|url=https://bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/secretary/documents/student-rules-and-regs/turnitin-plagiarism-detection-service.pdf|url-status=live|website=University of Bristol}}</ref>


==Functionality==
==Functionality==
The Turnitin software checks for potentially unoriginal content by comparing submitted papers to several databases using a proprietary [[algorithm]]. It scans its own databases and also has licensing agreements with large academic proprietary databases.
The Turnitin software checks for potentially unoriginal content by comparing submitted papers to several databases using a proprietary [[algorithm]]. It scans its own databases and also has licensing agreements with large academic proprietary databases.

=== Artificial Intelligence Content Detection {{Anchor|AI detection accuracy}} ===
In early 2023, Turnitin released a feature that aims to detect content generated by artificial intelligence applications like [[ChatGPT]], however the accuracy of [[Artificial intelligence content detection|AI content detection]] remains a topic of debate.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Fowler |first=Geoffrey A. |date=April 3, 2023 |title=We tested a new ChatGPT-detector for teachers. It flagged an innocent student. |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/04/01/chatgpt-cheating-detection-turnitin/ |url-access=registration |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]}}</ref>

Later that year, some schools have disabled Turnitin's [[Artificial intelligence content detection|AI detection]] software due to concerns that, like all other AI detection tools,<ref name=":0">{{Cite news |date=2024-04-04 |title=Can Using a Grammar Checker Set Off AI-Detection Software? |url=https://www.edsurge.com/news/2024-04-04-can-using-a-grammar-checker-set-off-ai-detection-software |access-date=2024-04-25 |website=EdSurge |language=en}}</ref> the software is not entirely accurate.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Quach |first=Katyanna |title=Some universities reject Turnitin's AI-writing detector |url=https://www.theregister.com/2023/09/23/turnitin_ai_detection/ |access-date=2023-11-23 |website=www.theregister.com |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-10-04 |title=University removes AI detection feature from Turnitin |url=https://www.sjuhawknews.com/university-removes-ai-detection-feature-from-turnitin/ |access-date=2023-11-23 |website=The Hawk Newspaper |language=en-US}}</ref> Concerns arose after cases were brought with students alleging Turnitin falsely accused them of using AI.<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Klee |first=Miles |date=2023-06-06 |title=She Was Falsely Accused of Cheating With AI -- And She Won't Be the Last |url=https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/student-accused-ai-cheating-turnitin-1234747351/ |access-date=2023-11-23 |magazine=Rolling Stone |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Young |first=Jeffrey R. |date=4 April 2024 |title=What happened after this college student's paper was falsely flagged for AI use after using Grammarly |url=https://www.fastcompany.com/91074029/can-using-grammarly-set-off-ai-detection-software |work=[[Fast Company]]}}</ref> This has happened when students use the grammar-correcting software [[Grammarly]], which is recommended for student use by many schools.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Menezes |first=Damita |date=2024-03-04 |title=Student fights academic probation for using Grammarly |url=https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/education/4506271-student-fights-ai-cheating-allegations-for-using-grammarly/ |access-date=2024-04-25 |website=The Hill |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Steere |first=Elizabeth |title=The Trouble With AI Writing Detection |url=https://www.insidehighered.com/opinion/career-advice/teaching/2023/10/18/faculty-should-know-tools-students-use-beat-ai-detection |access-date=2024-04-25 |website=Inside Higher Ed |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Leoffler |first=Kim |date=2024-02-20 |title=Georgia college student used Grammarly, now she is on academic probation |url=https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/grammarly-georgia-college-student-academic-probation-plagiarism-allegations |access-date=2024-04-25 |website=FOX 5 Atlanta |language=en-US}}</ref> Turnitin says that they believe about 1% of the papers they flag as AI-written were actually written by humans, and that a much higher rate is generated by AI but not flagged.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Coffey |first=Lauren |title=Professors Cautious of Tools to Detect AI-Generated Writing |url=https://www.insidehighered.com/news/tech-innovation/artificial-intelligence/2024/02/09/professors-proceed-caution-using-ai |access-date=2024-04-25 |website=Inside Higher Ed |language=en}}</ref>


===Student-paper database===
===Student-paper database===
Line 38: Line 46:


===Classroom integration===
===Classroom integration===
Students typically upload their papers directly to the service for teachers to access. Teachers may also submit a student's papers to Turnitin.com as individual files, by bulk upload, or as a [[ZIP (file format)|ZIP]] file. Teachers can also set assignment-analysis options so that students can review the system's "originality reports" before they finalize their submission. A peer-review option is also available.
If requested by teachers, students can upload their papers directly to the service, for teachers to access them there. Teachers may also submit student papers to Turnitin.com as individual files, by bulk upload, or as a [[ZIP (file format)|ZIP]] file. Teachers can further set assignment-analysis options so that students can review the system's "originality reports" before they finalize their submission. A peer-review option is also available.


Some [[virtual learning environment]]s can be configured to support Turnitin, so that student assignments can be automatically submitted for analysis. [[Blackboard Inc.|Blackboard]], [[Moodle]], [[ANGEL Learning|ANGEL]], [[Instructure]], [[Desire2Learn]], [[Pearson Education|Pearson Learning Studio]], [[Sakai (software)|Sakai]], and [[Studywiz]] integrate in some way with the software.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.turnitin.com/en_us/support/integrations/overview |title=Turnitin Integrations |year=2012 |access-date=July 11, 2012|publisher=iParadigms, LLC}}</ref>
Some [[virtual learning environment]]s can be configured to support Turnitin, so that student assignments can be automatically submitted for analysis. [[Blackboard Inc.|Blackboard]], [[Moodle]], [[ANGEL Learning|ANGEL]], [[Instructure]], [[Desire2Learn]], [[Pearson Education|Pearson Learning Studio]], [[Sakai (software)|Sakai]], and [[Studywiz]] integrate in some way with the software.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://help.turnitin.com/new-links.htm |title=Welcome to help.turnitin.com, the new home for guides |year=2022 |access-date=2023-01-03 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221229220514/https://help.turnitin.com/new-links.htm |archive-date=2022-12-29 |url-status=live |website=turnitin.com |publisher=Turnitin, LLC}}</ref>


===Admissions applications===
===Admissions applications===
Line 46: Line 54:


==Reception==
==Reception==
{{Undue weight|section|small=yes|date=August 2023}}
===Privacy===
===Privacy===
The [[Dalhousie Student Union|Student Union]] at [[Dalhousie University]] has criticized the use of Turnitin at Canadian universities because the American government may be able to access the submitted papers and personal information in the database under the [[USA PATRIOT Act]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://dalgazette.com/tag/turnitin/ |title=Turnitin |access-date=November 18, 2020 |work=[[The Dalhousie Gazette]] |publisher=[[Dalhousie University]]}}</ref> [[Mount Saint Vincent University]] became the first Canadian university to ban Turnitin's service partly because of implications of the Act.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.excal.on.ca/?p=2996 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101211163248/https://www.excal.on.ca/?p=2996 |archive-date=December 11, 2010 |title=Schools' reliance on turnitin.com questioned |access-date=November 18, 2020 |date=December 1, 2010 |work=[[Excalibur (newspaper)|Excalibur]] |publisher=[[York University]]}}</ref><ref name="msvu.ca">{{cite web |url=https://www.msvu.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/MinutesMar606.pdf |title=Minutes of Meeting |access-date=November 18, 2020 |date=March 6, 2006 |publisher=[[Mount Saint Vincent University]] |website=msvu.ca}}</ref>
The [[Dalhousie Student Union|Student Union]] at [[Dalhousie University]] has criticized the use of Turnitin at Canadian universities because the American government may be able to access the submitted papers and personal information in the database under the [[USA PATRIOT Act]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://dalgazette.com/tag/turnitin/ |title=Turnitin |access-date=November 18, 2020 |work=[[The Dalhousie Gazette]] |date=November 4, 2011 |publisher=[[Dalhousie University]]}}</ref> [[Mount Saint Vincent University]] became the first Canadian university to ban Turnitin's service partly because of implications of the Act.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.excal.on.ca/?p=2996 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101211163248/https://www.excal.on.ca/?p=2996 |archive-date=December 11, 2010 |title=Schools' reliance on turnitin.com questioned |access-date=November 18, 2020 |date=December 1, 2010 |work=[[Excalibur (newspaper)|Excalibur]] |publisher=[[York University]]}}</ref><ref name="msvu.ca">{{cite web |url=https://www.msvu.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/MinutesMar606.pdf |title=Minutes of Meeting |access-date=November 18, 2020 |date=March 6, 2006 |publisher=[[Mount Saint Vincent University]] |website=msvu.ca}}</ref>


===Copyright-violation concerns===
===Copyright violation concerns===
Lawyers for the company claim that student work is covered under the theory of implied license to evaluate, since it would be pointless to write the essays if they were not meant to be graded. That implied license, the lawyers argue, thus grants Turnitin permission to copy, reproduce and preserve the works. The company's lawyers further claim that dissertations and [[thesis|theses]] also carry with them an implied permission to archive in a publicly accessible collection such as a university library.<ref name="Turnitin US legal document copyright">Foley & Lardner, ''Id.'', pp. 3–5</ref>
Lawyers for the company claim that student work is covered under the theory of implied license to evaluate, since it would be pointless to write the essays if they were not meant to be graded. That implied license, the lawyers argue, thus grants Turnitin permission to copy, reproduce and preserve the works. The company's lawyers further claim that dissertations and [[thesis|theses]] also carry with them an implied permission to archive in a publicly accessible collection such as a university library.<ref name="Turnitin US legal document copyright">Foley & Lardner, ''Id.'', pp. 3–5</ref>


Line 68: Line 77:
In one well-publicized dispute over mandatory Turnitin submissions, Jesse Rosenfeld, a student at [[McGill University]] declined, in 2004, to submit his academic work to Turnitin. The University Senate eventually ruled that Rosenfeld's assignments were to be graded without using the service.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/01/16/mcgill_turnitin030116|title=McGill student wins fight over anti-cheating website|access-date=April 15, 2007|date=January 16, 2004|publisher=[[CBC News]]|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050306021041/http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/01/16/mcgill_turnitin030116 |archive-date=March 6, 2005 }}</ref> The following year, another McGill student, Denise Brunsdon, refused to submit her assignment to Turnitin.com and won a similar ruling from the Senate Committee on Student Grievances.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mcgilldaily.com/view.php?aid=4615|title=Students: 2, Turnitin: 0|access-date=April 15, 2007|last=Churchill|first=Liam|date=December 2, 2005|work=[[McGill Daily]]|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070517093213/http://www.mcgilldaily.com/view.php?aid=4615|archive-date=May 17, 2007}}</ref>
In one well-publicized dispute over mandatory Turnitin submissions, Jesse Rosenfeld, a student at [[McGill University]] declined, in 2004, to submit his academic work to Turnitin. The University Senate eventually ruled that Rosenfeld's assignments were to be graded without using the service.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/01/16/mcgill_turnitin030116|title=McGill student wins fight over anti-cheating website|access-date=April 15, 2007|date=January 16, 2004|publisher=[[CBC News]]|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050306021041/http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/01/16/mcgill_turnitin030116 |archive-date=March 6, 2005 }}</ref> The following year, another McGill student, Denise Brunsdon, refused to submit her assignment to Turnitin.com and won a similar ruling from the Senate Committee on Student Grievances.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mcgilldaily.com/view.php?aid=4615|title=Students: 2, Turnitin: 0|access-date=April 15, 2007|last=Churchill|first=Liam|date=December 2, 2005|work=[[McGill Daily]]|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070517093213/http://www.mcgilldaily.com/view.php?aid=4615|archive-date=May 17, 2007}}</ref>


In 2006, the Senate at [[Mount Saint Vincent University]] in Nova Scotia prohibited the submission of students' academic work to Turnitin.com and any software that requires students' work to become part of an external database where other parties might have access to it.<ref name="msvu.ca" /> This decision was granted after the students' union alerted the university community of their legal and privacy concerns associated with the use of Turnitin.com and other anti-plagiarism devices that profit from students' academic work. This was the first campus-wide ban of its kind in Canada,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gazette.uwo.ca/article.cfm?section=news&articleID=632 |archive-url=https://archive.today/2012.07.30-231200/http://www.gazette.uwo.ca/article.cfm?section=news&articleID=632 |url-status=dead |archive-date=July 30, 2012 |title=Mount St. Vincent bans Turnitin.com |access-date=November 28, 2011 |last=Amarnath |first=Ravi |date=March 15, 2006 |work=[[UWO Gazette|The Gazette]] }}</ref> following decisions by [[Princeton University|Princeton]], [[Harvard University|Harvard]], [[Yale]] and [[Stanford University|Stanford]] not to use Turnitin.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.dailyprincetonian.com/article/2006/04/university-opts-not-to-turnitin-2 |title=University opts not to 'Turnitin' |access-date=November 18, 2020 |date=April 4, 2006 |work=[[The Daily Princetonian]]}}</ref>
In 2006, the Senate at [[Mount Saint Vincent University]] in Nova Scotia prohibited the submission of students' academic work to Turnitin.com and any software that requires students' work to become part of an external database where other parties might have access to it.<ref name="msvu.ca" /> This decision was granted after the students' union alerted the university community of their legal and privacy concerns associated with the use of Turnitin.com and other anti-plagiarism devices that profit from students' academic work. This was the first campus-wide ban of its kind in Canada,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gazette.uwo.ca/article.cfm?section=news&articleID=632 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120730231200/http://www.gazette.uwo.ca/article.cfm?section=news&articleID=632 |url-status=dead |archive-date=July 30, 2012 |title=Mount St. Vincent bans Turnitin.com |access-date=November 28, 2011 |last=Amarnath |first=Ravi |date=March 15, 2006 |work=[[UWO Gazette|The Gazette]] }}</ref> following decisions by [[Princeton University|Princeton]], [[Harvard University|Harvard]], [[Yale]] and [[Stanford University|Stanford]] not to use Turnitin.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.dailyprincetonian.com/article/2006/04/university-opts-not-to-turnitin-2 |title=University opts not to 'Turnitin' |access-date=November 18, 2020 |date=April 4, 2006 |work=[[The Daily Princetonian]]}}</ref>


At [[Toronto Metropolitan University]] in Toronto, students may decide whether to submit their work to Turnitin.com or make alternate arrangements with an instructor.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ryerson.ca/senate/documents/students.doc|title=Turnitin.com Information for Students|access-date=March 20, 2009|date=December 5, 2006|publisher=Ryerson University|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120930185146/http://www.ryerson.ca/senate/documents/students.doc|archive-date=September 30, 2012}}</ref>
At [[Toronto Metropolitan University]] in Toronto, students may decide whether to submit their work to Turnitin.com or make alternate arrangements with an instructor.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ryerson.ca/senate/documents/students.doc|title=Turnitin.com Information for Students|access-date=March 20, 2009|date=December 5, 2006|publisher=Ryerson University|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120930185146/http://www.ryerson.ca/senate/documents/students.doc|archive-date=September 30, 2012}}</ref>
Similar policies are in place at [[Brock University]] in [[Saint Catharines]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.brocku.ca/webfm_send/28409|title=Brock Academic Integrity Policy|access-date=March 8, 2016|date=October 3, 2013|publisher=Brock University}}</ref>
Similar policies are in place at [[Brock University]] in [[Saint Catharines]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.brocku.ca/webfm_send/28409|title=Brock Academic Integrity Policy|access-date=March 8, 2016|date=October 3, 2013|publisher=Brock University}}</ref>


On March 27, 2007, with the help of an intellectual property attorney, two students from [[McLean High School]] in [[Virginia]] (with assistance from the Committee For Students' Rights) and two students attending [[Desert Vista High School]] in [[Phoenix, Arizona]], filed suit in [[United States Circuit Court]] (Eastern District, Alexandria Division) alleging copyright infringement by iParadigms, Turnitin's parent company.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dontturnitin.com/images/iParadigms_Amended_Complaint.pdf|title=A.V., et. al. v. iParadigms, LLC: Amended Complaint for Copyright Infringement|access-date=March 20, 2009|last=Vanderhye|first=R.|date=April 16, 2007|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090320160405/http://www.dontturnitin.com/images/iParadigms_Amended_Complaint.pdf|archive-date=March 20, 2009}}</ref> Nearly a year later, Judge Claude M. Hilton granted [[summary judgment]] on the students' complaint in favor of iParadigms/Turnitin,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hilton|first=Claude|year=2008|title=Memorandum Opinion|url=http://www.iparadigms.com/iParadigms_03-11-08_Opinion.pdf|publisher=United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100705110536/http://www.iparadigms.com/iParadigms_03-11-08_Opinion.pdf|archive-date=July 5, 2010}}<!-- also found here: https://www.scribd.com/doc/2355720/iParadigms-031108-Opinion --></ref> because they had accepted the [[Clickwrap|click-wrap agreement]] on the Turnitin website. The students appealed the ruling,<ref>{{cite web|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081206132341/http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2008/04/23/students_appeal_ruling_favoring_plagiarism_detection_service/|archive-date=December 6, 2008|url=http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2008/04/23/students_appeal_ruling_favoring_plagiarism_detection_service/|title=Students appeal ruling favoring plagiarism detection service|author=Barakat, Matthew|date=April 28, 2008|access-date=April 29, 2008|publisher=[[Boston.com]]}}</ref> and on April 16, 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Judge Hilton's judgment in favor of iParadigms/Turnitin.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Wilkinson, Motz, Traxler|title=Appellate Decision|publisher=United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit|date=April 16, 2009|url=http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/081424.P.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090419174448/http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/081424.P.pdf|archive-date=April 19, 2009}}</ref>
On March 27, 2007, with the help of an intellectual property attorney, two students from [[McLean High School]] in [[Virginia]] (with assistance from the Committee For Students' Rights) and two students attending [[Desert Vista High School]] in [[Phoenix, Arizona]], filed suit in [[United States Circuit Court]] (Eastern District, Alexandria Division) alleging copyright infringement by iParadigms, Turnitin's parent company.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dontturnitin.com/images/iParadigms_Amended_Complaint.pdf|title=A.V., et. al. v. iParadigms, LLC: Amended Complaint for Copyright Infringement|access-date=March 20, 2009|last=Vanderhye|first=R.|date=April 16, 2007|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090320160405/http://www.dontturnitin.com/images/iParadigms_Amended_Complaint.pdf|archive-date=March 20, 2009}}</ref> Nearly a year later, Judge Claude M. Hilton granted [[summary judgment]] on the students' complaint in favor of iParadigms/Turnitin,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hilton|first=Claude|year=2008|title=Memorandum Opinion|url=http://www.iparadigms.com/iParadigms_03-11-08_Opinion.pdf|publisher=United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100705110536/http://www.iparadigms.com/iParadigms_03-11-08_Opinion.pdf|archive-date=July 5, 2010}}<!-- also found here: https://www.scribd.com/doc/2355720/iParadigms-031108-Opinion --></ref> because they had accepted the [[Clickwrap|click-wrap agreement]] on the Turnitin website. The students appealed the ruling,<ref>{{cite web|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081206132341/http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2008/04/23/students_appeal_ruling_favoring_plagiarism_detection_service/|archive-date=December 6, 2008|url=http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2008/04/23/students_appeal_ruling_favoring_plagiarism_detection_service/|title=Students appeal ruling favoring plagiarism detection service|author=Barakat, Matthew|date=April 28, 2008|access-date=April 29, 2008|publisher=[[Boston.com]]}}</ref> and in 2009, the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit]] affirmed Judge Hilton's judgment in favor of iParadigms/Turnitin.<ref>{{cite court|litigants=A.V. ex rel.Vanderhye v. iParadigms LLC|vol=562|reporter=[[Federal Reporter|F.3d]]|opinion=630|court=[[United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit|4th Cir.]]|date=2009|url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15240513588305555716}}</ref>


==Flaws==
==Flaws==
Line 86: Line 95:


===Turnitin's response===
===Turnitin's response===
Several years later, Turnitin published an article titled "Can students trick Turnitin? Some students believe that they can 'beat' Turnitin by employing various tactics".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.turnitin.com/blog/can-students-trick-turnitin |title=Can students trick Turnitin? Some students believe that they can "beat" Turnitin by employing various tactics |last=Campbell |first=Audrey |date=September 25, 2019 |website=turnitin.com |access-date=November 17, 2020}}</ref> The company denied any technical issues and said that "the authors of these 'tricks' are mostly [[essay mill]]s." The article then listed a few possible "tricks" and how Turnitin intended to take care of them, without mentioning scientific literature, technical [[treatise]]s or examples of [[computer code]].
Several years later, Turnitin published an article titled "Can students trick Turnitin? Some students believe that they can 'beat' Turnitin by employing various tactics".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.turnitin.com/blog/can-students-trick-turnitin |title=Can students trick Turnitin? Some students believe that they can "beat" Turnitin by employing various tactics |last=Campbell |first=Audrey |date=September 25, 2019 |website=turnitin.com |access-date=November 17, 2020}}</ref> The company denied any technical issues and said that "the authors of these 'tricks' are mostly [[essay mill]]s." The article then listed a few possible "tricks" and how Turnitin intended to take care of them, without mentioning scientific literature, technical [[treatise]]s or examples of [[source code]].


==Further criticism==
==Further criticism==
The Italian scholar [[Michele Cortelazzo]], [[full professor]] of [[linguistics]], who also studies [[Attribution (copyright)|copyright attribution]] and [[Content similarity detection|similarity between texts]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cortmic.eu |title=Michele Cortelazzo |access-date=November 18, 2020 |language=it}}</ref> noted that, paradoxically, it is impossible to tell if Turnitin's [[source code]] has been plagiarized from other sources, because it is not [[open source]].<ref name=cortmic>{{cite web |url=https://cortmic.myblog.it/tesi-software-antiplagio/ |title=Luci e ombre (tante) dei software antiplagio |date=September 17, 2015 |access-date=November 18, 2020 |language=it |trans-title=Lights and (many) shadows of anti plagiarism software}}</ref> For the same reason, it is unknown what [[scientific method]]ologies, if any, Turnitin uses to assess papers.<ref name=cortmic />
The Italian scholar {{interlanguage link|Michele Cortelazzo|it}}, professor of [[linguistics]] who also studies [[Attribution (copyright)|copyright attribution]] and [[Content similarity detection|similarity between texts]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cortmic.eu |title=Michele Cortelazzo |access-date=November 18, 2020 |language=it}}</ref> noted that, ironically, it is impossible to tell if Turnitin's [[source code]] has been plagiarized from other sources, because it is not [[open source]].<ref name=cortmic>{{cite web |url=https://cortmic.myblog.it/tesi-software-antiplagio/ |title=Luci e ombre (tante) dei software antiplagio |date=September 17, 2015 |access-date=November 18, 2020 |language=it |trans-title=Lights and (many) shadows of anti plagiarism software}}</ref> For the same reason, it is unknown what [[scientific method]]ologies, if any, Turnitin uses to assess papers.<ref name=cortmic />


In 2009, a group of researchers from [[Texas Tech University]] reported that many of the instances of "non-originality" that Turnitin finds aren't plagiarism, but are just the use of [[jargon]], course [[Terminology|terms]] or [[phrase]]s that appeared for legitimate reasons. For example, the researchers found high percentages of flagged material in the topic terms of papers (e.g. "[[global warming]]") or "topic phrases", which they defined as the paper topic with a few words added (e.g. "the prevalence of [[childhood obesity]] continues to rise").<ref name=ihe09>{{cite web |url=https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/03/13/false-positives-plagiarism |title=False Positives on Plagiarism |date=March 13, 2009 |access-date=December 4, 2020 |author=Scott Jaschik |publisher=[[Inside Higher Ed]]}}</ref>
In 2009, a group of researchers from [[Texas Tech University]] reported that many of the instances of "non-originality" that Turnitin finds are not plagiarism but the use of [[jargon]], course [[Terminology|terms]] or [[phrase]]s that appeared for legitimate reasons. For example, the researchers found high percentages of flagged material in the topic terms of papers (e.g. "[[global warming]]") or "topic phrases", which they defined as the paper topic with a few words added (e.g. "the prevalence of [[childhood obesity]] continues to rise").<ref name=ihe09>{{cite web |url=https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/03/13/false-positives-plagiarism |title=False Positives on Plagiarism |date=March 13, 2009 |access-date=December 4, 2020 |author=Scott Jaschik |publisher=[[Inside Higher Ed]]}}</ref>


Turnitin was also criticized for paying [[Panel discussion|panelists]] at [[conference]]s on education and writing.<ref name=ihe09 />
Turnitin was also criticized for paying [[Panel discussion|panelists]] at [[conference]]s on education and writing.<ref name=ihe09 />
Line 97: Line 106:
==See also==
==See also==
* [[iThenticate]]
* [[iThenticate]]
* [[Artificial intelligence content detection]]


==References==
==References==
Line 110: Line 120:
[[Category:Plagiarism detectors]]
[[Category:Plagiarism detectors]]
[[Category:Companies based in Oakland, California]]
[[Category:Companies based in Oakland, California]]
[[Category:Computer-related introductions in 1997]]
[[Category:Internet properties established in 1997]]
[[Category:Advance Publications]]
[[Category:Advance Publications]]
[[Category:2019 mergers and acquisitions]]
[[Category:2019 mergers and acquisitions]]

Latest revision as of 00:41, 23 July 2024

Turnitin
Type of businessSubsidiary
Type of site
Online SaaS editor
Founded1998
Headquarters2101 Webster Street Suite 1800 Oakland, California 94612,
United States
Area servedWorldwide
IndustryEducation
ParentAdvance Publications
URLturnitin.com
CommercialYes
RegistrationYes
Users
  • 30M+ students
  • (15,000 institutions)
Content licence
Proprietary
Location of Turnitin's Oakland office

Turnitin (stylized as turnitin) is an Internet-based similarity detection service run by the American company Turnitin, LLC, a subsidiary of Advance Publications.

Founded in 1998, it sells its licenses to universities and high schools who then use the software as a service (SaaS) website to check submitted documents against its database and the content of other websites with the aim of identifying plagiarism. Results can identify similarities with existing sources and can also be used in formative assessment to help students learn to avoid plagiarism and improve their writing.[citation needed]

Students may be required to submit work to Turnitin as a requirement of taking a certain course or class. The software has been a source of controversy, with some students refusing to submit, arguing that requiring submission implies a presumption of guilt. Some critics have alleged that use of this proprietary software violates educational privacy as well as international intellectual-property laws, and exploits students' works for commercial purposes by permanently storing them in Turnitin's privately held database.[1]

Turnitin, LLC also runs the informational website plagiarism.org and offers a similar plagiarism-detection service for newspaper editors and book and magazine publishers called iThenticate. Other tools included with the Turnitin suite are GradeMark (online grading and corrective feedback) and PeerMark (student peer-review service).

In the UK, the service is supported and promoted by JISC as 'Plagiarism Detection Service Turnitin UK'. The Service is operated by iParadigms, in conjunction with Northumbria Learning, the European reseller of the Service.[2]

Company history

[edit]

In March 2019, Advance Publications acquired Turnitin, LLC for US$1.75 billion.[3]

In 2021, Turnitin acquired competing software company, Ouriginal, itself the result of a merger between Urkund and PlagScan.[4]

Functionality

[edit]

The Turnitin software checks for potentially unoriginal content by comparing submitted papers to several databases using a proprietary algorithm. It scans its own databases and also has licensing agreements with large academic proprietary databases.

Artificial Intelligence Content Detection

[edit]

In early 2023, Turnitin released a feature that aims to detect content generated by artificial intelligence applications like ChatGPT, however the accuracy of AI content detection remains a topic of debate.[5]

Later that year, some schools have disabled Turnitin's AI detection software due to concerns that, like all other AI detection tools,[6] the software is not entirely accurate.[7][8] Concerns arose after cases were brought with students alleging Turnitin falsely accused them of using AI.[9][10] This has happened when students use the grammar-correcting software Grammarly, which is recommended for student use by many schools.[11][12][13] Turnitin says that they believe about 1% of the papers they flag as AI-written were actually written by humans, and that a much higher rate is generated by AI but not flagged.[6][14]

Student-paper database

[edit]

The essays submitted by students are stored in a database used to check for plagiarism. This prevents one student from using another student's paper, by identifying matching text between papers. In addition to student papers, the database contains a copy of the publicly accessible Internet, with the company using a web crawler to continually add content to Turnitin's archive. It also contains commercial and/or copyrighted pages from books, newspapers, and journals.

Classroom integration

[edit]

If requested by teachers, students can upload their papers directly to the service, for teachers to access them there. Teachers may also submit student papers to Turnitin.com as individual files, by bulk upload, or as a ZIP file. Teachers can further set assignment-analysis options so that students can review the system's "originality reports" before they finalize their submission. A peer-review option is also available.

Some virtual learning environments can be configured to support Turnitin, so that student assignments can be automatically submitted for analysis. Blackboard, Moodle, ANGEL, Instructure, Desire2Learn, Pearson Learning Studio, Sakai, and Studywiz integrate in some way with the software.[15]

Admissions applications

[edit]

In 2019, Turnitin began analyzing admissions application materials through a partner software, Kira Talent.[16]

Reception

[edit]

Privacy

[edit]

The Student Union at Dalhousie University has criticized the use of Turnitin at Canadian universities because the American government may be able to access the submitted papers and personal information in the database under the USA PATRIOT Act.[17] Mount Saint Vincent University became the first Canadian university to ban Turnitin's service partly because of implications of the Act.[18][19]

[edit]

Lawyers for the company claim that student work is covered under the theory of implied license to evaluate, since it would be pointless to write the essays if they were not meant to be graded. That implied license, the lawyers argue, thus grants Turnitin permission to copy, reproduce and preserve the works. The company's lawyers further claim that dissertations and theses also carry with them an implied permission to archive in a publicly accessible collection such as a university library.[20]

University of Minnesota Law School professor Dan Burk countered that the company's use of the papers may not meet the fair-use test for several reasons:

  • The company copies the entire paper, not just a portion
  • Students' work is often original, interpretive and creative rather than just a compilation of established facts
  • Turnitin is a commercial enterprise[21]

When a group of students filed suit against Turnitin on that basis, in Vanderhye et al. v. iParadigms LLC, the district court found the practice fell within fair use; on appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed.[22]

Presumption of guilt

[edit]

Some students argue that requiring them to submit papers to Turnitin creates a presumption of guilt, which may violate scholastic disciplinary codes and applicable local laws and judicial practice. Some teachers and professors support this argument when attempting to discourage schools from using Turnitin.[23][19]

WriteCheck

[edit]

iParadigms, the company that once owned Turnitin, ran another commercial website called WriteCheck. On this website, students paid a fee to have a paper tested against the database used by Turnitin to determine whether or not that paper would be detected as plagiarism when the student submitted that paper to the Turnitin website. It was announced that the WriteCheck product was being withdrawn in 2020 with no new subscriptions being accepted after November 2019.[24] The economist Alex Tabarrok has complained that Turnitin's systems "are warlords who are arming both sides in this plagiarism war".[25] The website is no longer active.

Litigation

[edit]

In one well-publicized dispute over mandatory Turnitin submissions, Jesse Rosenfeld, a student at McGill University declined, in 2004, to submit his academic work to Turnitin. The University Senate eventually ruled that Rosenfeld's assignments were to be graded without using the service.[26] The following year, another McGill student, Denise Brunsdon, refused to submit her assignment to Turnitin.com and won a similar ruling from the Senate Committee on Student Grievances.[27]

In 2006, the Senate at Mount Saint Vincent University in Nova Scotia prohibited the submission of students' academic work to Turnitin.com and any software that requires students' work to become part of an external database where other parties might have access to it.[19] This decision was granted after the students' union alerted the university community of their legal and privacy concerns associated with the use of Turnitin.com and other anti-plagiarism devices that profit from students' academic work. This was the first campus-wide ban of its kind in Canada,[28] following decisions by Princeton, Harvard, Yale and Stanford not to use Turnitin.[29]

At Toronto Metropolitan University in Toronto, students may decide whether to submit their work to Turnitin.com or make alternate arrangements with an instructor.[30] Similar policies are in place at Brock University in Saint Catharines.[31]

On March 27, 2007, with the help of an intellectual property attorney, two students from McLean High School in Virginia (with assistance from the Committee For Students' Rights) and two students attending Desert Vista High School in Phoenix, Arizona, filed suit in United States Circuit Court (Eastern District, Alexandria Division) alleging copyright infringement by iParadigms, Turnitin's parent company.[32] Nearly a year later, Judge Claude M. Hilton granted summary judgment on the students' complaint in favor of iParadigms/Turnitin,[33] because they had accepted the click-wrap agreement on the Turnitin website. The students appealed the ruling,[34] and in 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Judge Hilton's judgment in favor of iParadigms/Turnitin.[35]

Flaws

[edit]

Ad hoc encodings, fonts and text representation

[edit]

Several flaws and bugs in the Turnitin plagiarism detection software have been documented in scientific literature.[36] In particular, Turnitin has been proven to be vulnerable to

  1. ad hoc text encodings,
  2. rearranged glyphs in a computer font,
  3. text replaced with Bézier curves representing its shape.

Automated paraphrasing

[edit]

Another study[37] showed that Turnitin failed to detect text produced by popular free Internet-based paraphrasing tools. Besides, more sophisticated machine learning techniques, such as automated paraphrasing, can produce natural and expressive text, which is virtually impossible for Turnitin to detect. Also, article spinning was not recognized by Turnitin. Asked about the situation, the then vice president of marketing at Turnitin Chris Harrick said that the company was "working on a solution", but it was "not a big concern" because in his opinion "the quality of these tools is pretty poor".[38]

Turnitin's response

[edit]

Several years later, Turnitin published an article titled "Can students trick Turnitin? Some students believe that they can 'beat' Turnitin by employing various tactics".[39] The company denied any technical issues and said that "the authors of these 'tricks' are mostly essay mills." The article then listed a few possible "tricks" and how Turnitin intended to take care of them, without mentioning scientific literature, technical treatises or examples of source code.

Further criticism

[edit]

The Italian scholar Michele Cortelazzo [it], professor of linguistics who also studies copyright attribution and similarity between texts,[40] noted that, ironically, it is impossible to tell if Turnitin's source code has been plagiarized from other sources, because it is not open source.[41] For the same reason, it is unknown what scientific methodologies, if any, Turnitin uses to assess papers.[41]

In 2009, a group of researchers from Texas Tech University reported that many of the instances of "non-originality" that Turnitin finds are not plagiarism but the use of jargon, course terms or phrases that appeared for legitimate reasons. For example, the researchers found high percentages of flagged material in the topic terms of papers (e.g. "global warming") or "topic phrases", which they defined as the paper topic with a few words added (e.g. "the prevalence of childhood obesity continues to rise").[42]

Turnitin was also criticized for paying panelists at conferences on education and writing.[42]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "A Guide for Resisting Edtech: the Case against Turnitin". hybridpedagogy.org. June 15, 2017. Retrieved January 4, 2021.
  2. ^ "Turnitin UK 2021-2022" (PDF). University of Bristol.
  3. ^ Korn, Melissa (March 6, 2019). "Advance Publications to Buy Plagiarism-Scanning Company Turnitin for Nearly $1.75 Billion". Wall Street Journal.
  4. ^ "CEO's statement on Ouriginal's acquisition by Turnitin, November 30, 2021". November 30, 2021.
  5. ^ Fowler, Geoffrey A. (April 3, 2023). "We tested a new ChatGPT-detector for teachers. It flagged an innocent student". The Washington Post.
  6. ^ a b "Can Using a Grammar Checker Set Off AI-Detection Software?". EdSurge. April 4, 2024. Retrieved April 25, 2024.
  7. ^ Quach, Katyanna. "Some universities reject Turnitin's AI-writing detector". www.theregister.com. Retrieved November 23, 2023.
  8. ^ "University removes AI detection feature from Turnitin". The Hawk Newspaper. October 4, 2023. Retrieved November 23, 2023.
  9. ^ Klee, Miles (June 6, 2023). "She Was Falsely Accused of Cheating With AI -- And She Won't Be the Last". Rolling Stone. Retrieved November 23, 2023.
  10. ^ Young, Jeffrey R. (April 4, 2024). "What happened after this college student's paper was falsely flagged for AI use after using Grammarly". Fast Company.
  11. ^ Menezes, Damita (March 4, 2024). "Student fights academic probation for using Grammarly". The Hill. Retrieved April 25, 2024.
  12. ^ Steere, Elizabeth. "The Trouble With AI Writing Detection". Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved April 25, 2024.
  13. ^ Leoffler, Kim (February 20, 2024). "Georgia college student used Grammarly, now she is on academic probation". FOX 5 Atlanta. Retrieved April 25, 2024.
  14. ^ Coffey, Lauren. "Professors Cautious of Tools to Detect AI-Generated Writing". Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved April 25, 2024.
  15. ^ "Welcome to help.turnitin.com, the new home for guides". turnitin.com. Turnitin, LLC. 2022. Archived from the original on December 29, 2022. Retrieved January 3, 2023.
  16. ^ [1] "Turnitin Partnership Adds Plagiarism Checking to College Admissions"]. Campus Technology, Rhea Kelly. June 26, 2019
  17. ^ "Turnitin". The Dalhousie Gazette. Dalhousie University. November 4, 2011. Retrieved November 18, 2020.
  18. ^ "Schools' reliance on turnitin.com questioned". Excalibur. York University. December 1, 2010. Archived from the original on December 11, 2010. Retrieved November 18, 2020.
  19. ^ a b c "Minutes of Meeting" (PDF). msvu.ca. Mount Saint Vincent University. March 6, 2006. Retrieved November 18, 2020.
  20. ^ Foster, Andrea L.; May 17, 2002; Plagiarism-Detection Tool Creates Legal Quandary; The Chronicle of Higher Education; retrieved September 29, 2006
  21. ^ A.V. et al. v. iParadigms, LLC, 562 F.3d 630 (4th Cir. 2009)
  22. ^ Carbone, Nick (2001). "Turnitin.com, a Pedagogic Placebo for Plagiarism". Bedford/St. Martin's. Archived from the original on January 2, 2006. Retrieved November 18, 2020.
  23. ^ Schreiner, Valerie (November 20, 2019). "Supporting Originality From the Start: An Update on WriteCheck". Turnitin. Retrieved December 9, 2019.
  24. ^ Murphy, Elizabeth (September 9, 2011). "Plagiarism software WriteCheck troubles some educators". USA Today. Retrieved October 15, 2011.
  25. ^ "McGill student wins fight over anti-cheating website". CBC News. January 16, 2004. Archived from the original on March 6, 2005. Retrieved April 15, 2007.
  26. ^ Churchill, Liam (December 2, 2005). "Students: 2, Turnitin: 0". McGill Daily. Archived from the original on May 17, 2007. Retrieved April 15, 2007.
  27. ^ Amarnath, Ravi (March 15, 2006). "Mount St. Vincent bans Turnitin.com". The Gazette. Archived from the original on July 30, 2012. Retrieved November 28, 2011.
  28. ^ "University opts not to 'Turnitin'". The Daily Princetonian. April 4, 2006. Retrieved November 18, 2020.
  29. ^ "Turnitin.com Information for Students". Ryerson University. December 5, 2006. Archived from the original on September 30, 2012. Retrieved March 20, 2009.
  30. ^ "Brock Academic Integrity Policy". Brock University. October 3, 2013. Retrieved March 8, 2016.
  31. ^ Vanderhye, R. (April 16, 2007). "A.V., et. al. v. iParadigms, LLC: Amended Complaint for Copyright Infringement" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on March 20, 2009. Retrieved March 20, 2009.
  32. ^ Hilton, Claude (2008). "Memorandum Opinion" (PDF). United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 5, 2010. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  33. ^ Barakat, Matthew (April 28, 2008). "Students appeal ruling favoring plagiarism detection service". Boston.com. Archived from the original on December 6, 2008. Retrieved April 29, 2008.
  34. ^ A.V. ex rel.Vanderhye v. iParadigms LLC, 562 F.3d 630 (4th Cir. 2009).
  35. ^ Heather, James (2010), "Turnitoff: identifying and fixing a hole in current plagiarism detection software" (PDF), Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35 (6), London: Taylor & Francis: 647–660, doi:10.1080/02602938.2010.486471, eISSN 1469-297X, ISSN 0260-2938, OCLC 45107128, S2CID 18091789, retrieved November 14, 2020
  36. ^ Rogerson, Ann; McCarthy, Grace (2017), "Using Internet based paraphrasing tools: Original work, patchwriting or facilitated plagiarism?", International Journal for Educational Integrity, 13 (1), London: BioMed Central, 2, doi:10.1007/s40979-016-0013-y, ISSN 1833-2595, OCLC 812152707
  37. ^ Straumsheim, Carl (April 28, 2017). "Someone else's words". Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved November 16, 2020.
  38. ^ Campbell, Audrey (September 25, 2019). "Can students trick Turnitin? Some students believe that they can "beat" Turnitin by employing various tactics". turnitin.com. Retrieved November 17, 2020.
  39. ^ "Michele Cortelazzo" (in Italian). Retrieved November 18, 2020.
  40. ^ a b "Luci e ombre (tante) dei software antiplagio" [Lights and (many) shadows of anti plagiarism software] (in Italian). September 17, 2015. Retrieved November 18, 2020.
  41. ^ a b Scott Jaschik (March 13, 2009). "False Positives on Plagiarism". Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved December 4, 2020.
[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Turnitin&oldid=1236120068"