One of the features built into Blackboard is a program called SafeAssign. With it, faculty can run reports on essays to determine whether students are plagiarizing or incorrectly integrating outside sources into their writing. If you’re not familiar with SafeAssign, check out these tutorials:
This one shows how to integrate a SafeAssignment into Blackboard:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fty7ePV64lE
This one shows how to grade and interpret SafeAssignments:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21Pvpg0A45Q
Recently, though, plagiarism detection software has provoked a backlash. A panel at the Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC) issued this condemning statement: “plagiarism detection services can compromise academic integrity by potentially undermining students’ agency as writers, treating all students as always already plagiarists, creating a hostile learning environment, shifting the responsibility of identifying and interpreting source misuse from teachers to technology, and compelling students to agree to licensing agreements that threaten their privacy and rights to their own intellectual property.”
To view their full position statement, click here:
http://culturecat.net/files/CCCC-IPpositionstatementDraft.pdf
While some aspects of their statement might seem a little reactionary, I think they do raise an important point: Do we use SafeAssign as an instructional tool, or do we use it as a punitive measure? Like any other educational technology, SafeAssign should supplement, not dominate, our interaction with students. Put to its best use, SafeAssign can initiate conversations about plagiarism and the conventions of appropriate citation.
One point that the CCCC panel makes that’s worthy of contemplation is this: “The use of technology is no substitute for good teaching. … Teaching with integrity means that discussions about academic honesty should be a central part of the learning process, a role that technology can never fulfill.”
In short, using SafeAssign as an automated “gotcha” mechanism does not put it to its best use. I would argue that this program can be a valuable tool to help instructors identify students who need additional support.
Furthermore, students can run a SafeAssign report on their own writing before submitting it to see for themselves whether they are appropriately citing sources—another way this program can be used to supplement students’ growth as writers.
I might recommend a referral to the Writing Center if you come across a SafeAssign report that indicates that the student has a limited understanding of the conventions and expectations of incorporating sources:
http://www.cune.edu/a-to-z/offices/academic-resource-center/faculty-referral-form/
Or you can transfer plagiarism and citation learning modules created by the Writing Center into your Blackboard course. They come with minilessons on plagiarism and citation and contain assessments to determine whether students comprehend the information. For more information, email Patrick.hargon@cune.edu.
What are your thoughts? Do you find SafeAssignments to be a useful way to help students to get a better grasp on appropriate citation of outside sources? Or do you agree with the CCCC’s perspective that they can potentially create a hostile learning environment?
