Turnitin.com and Postman's question

This Tech Talk column originally appeared in The Exponent (University of Alabama in Huntsville), Vol. 33, No. 14 (December 6, 2001). Digitized issue: UAH LOUIS archive. Reproduced here courtesy of that archive.

A recurring theme in this column has been Neil Postman’s contrarian question, i.e., “What will new technology undo?” In the last issue of The Exponent Sharon G. Powell wrote an article about the possibility of the University purchasing a license for Turnitin.com’s plagiarism prevention system with the intent of allowing instructors to use the service to screen submitted papers for instances of academic dishonesty. Turnitin.com is clear in making claims about the benefits of the service, but we should also consider the unintended effects that this new application of technology could bring.

Thinking about plagiarism, I feel the same irrational paranoia as when a cop is behind me on the road, so I’ll come to a complete stop for full disclosure. Sharon is my neighbor. In using the word ‘paranoia’ I don’t mean to be dismissive; the University’s stance on plagiarism is stern and unambiguous. I remember reading the warning that came with my syllabus in American Lit that listed failure and possible expulsion for those who would transgress the academic honesty policy. The stakes are high, both from the perspective of the University, which must insist upon academic integrity, and of students, whose futures could be harmed irreparably if forced to wear the Scarlet P (Note: the idea of a red letter worn as punishment for sin comes from Nathaniel Hawthorne’s 1850 novel The Scarlet Letter. No, I’m not paranoid!)

It’s important to remember that the Turnitin.com website markets the plagiarism prevention service, so the product description brags that they use “the most advanced and comprehensive (search engine technology] currently available” and even makes the absurd claim that the service can compare submissions “against the entire Internet”. The testimonials cup floweth over with warm, fuzzy, touchy-feely endorsements such as the one from Robert Halliday that says the service reduced plagiarism and “sparked a lively campus-wide discussion” on the subject. Because the site presents marketing material, Turnitin.com omits important information. From statistics, we know that any test has two closely related quantities: sensitivity (likelihood of a “true positive”) and specificity (likelihood of a “true negative”). An increase in sensitivity involves a necessary decrease in specificity and vice versa. The site doesn’t provide the sensitivity and specificity for its plagiarism test (which, to be fair, would be difficult) and doesn’t provide any insight into the kinds of cases that might cause the software to fail.

Dr. Epperson in his Numerical Methods course admonished us to be very careful about interpreting the results of the algorithms we were learning because of our tendency to suspend disbelief when using computers. The biggest potential problem I see with this service is that it could hijack that suspension of disbelief to completely destroy the presumption of innocence. Many of the testimonials on the site justify my fear because they talk about having proof of plagiarism. (It’s dismaying on many levels that these instructors don’t understand the difference between proof and evidence.) In complex software, bugs are inevitable, and that makes it impossible to rule out the chance that the software behind the plagiarism prevention service could render false accusations and effective convictions.

Being college students, we all understand and appreciate the value of a college education. Moreover, we can fathom the damage that would result from a destroyed academic career. If the University decides to adopt the Turnitin.com software, I hope the University will have the foresight and sense of fairness to give students the right to see the Originality Report before submitting their work in order to avoid the problems that will certainly arise. Even without such protection, we can vote with our Drop/Add forms: if you aren’t confident that an instructor will use the software fairly, then drop the class. Don’t allow yourself to slip through the cracks.