Plagiarism rewritten

I will start with an easy question: has the internet changed the demeanour of plagiarism? The answer is ‘yes, of course’. The scope of the seduction online and the ease by which it can be committed have skyrocketed. Motive and method seem to be written in the internet’s charter. And isn’t eLearning playing into its hand? Aren't we like the car owners of some countries who could get fined for not locking our car, luring guileless car thieves?

So let me pose a second, more difficult question: has the internet changed the essence of plagiarism?

If you are one of the many educators who have a clear stance on the issue, taking plagiarism to be theft, a crime, and antonym of learning, your answer will be no. But here’s a challenge: hasn’t the time come for plagiarism to be overhauled?

Let’s consider first the consequences of the increase of sources from which one can copy. We are not talking simple addition here, it’s exponential. Doesn’t the mere number of available texts make plagiarism unavoidable? There are after all only so many ways one can express an idea or fact. Some time back I visited a well-built site for primary school students, full of colours, images, texts and a page explaining plagiarism. I forgot which animal was used as an example, but let’s say it was a leopard. The ‘plagiarized’ text went along the lines: “the leopard is the smallest of the four big cats”[1]. ‘Wait a moment’, I remember thinking, ‘can a simple statement of a general fact be called plagiarism?’

The aims and objectives of teaching and their relation to learning styles is more material for discussion. Traditionally, education has favoured - to say the least - the verbal style. Knowing something was basically knowing how to write about that something. Little luck for those students who knew but could not fluently express themselves by words. With its seamless integration of multimedia, a learning platform can remedy this one sidedness and evaluate knowledge acquisition in creative ways.

Another strong argument against an all too strict ruling by plagiarism could be made by the social construction of knowledge.

Alas, one could object, will creative writing not be the unwarranted victim of plagiarism’s overhaul? I doubt it. More people are writing and being read on the internet then ever before. Although their essays are not being corrected by a teacher, their number of readers is probably as effective a style marker.

---

[1] Wikipedia, who else?.

Copy proof

It’s June and the dark shadow of exams is hovering over the life of many muggle children and youngsters. Parents are suffering too. More than in the past do they copy their children’s insecurities and nerves. Worse still, the adult distortion mirror of hindsight and hopefulness often amplifies their experience.

New electronic learning tools have made little difference in these testing times. Used extensively for assignments and evaluations during the course of the learning process, they do not satisfy the basic requirements for a final examination. They are still not identity- and copy-proof.

Indeed, you can require distance students to turn on their webcam for the duration of the examination. But what if the device blacks out during the allotted time? Is the attempt invalidated? This question looms high over any technical setback during the test and holds legal repercussions.

The point of assuring the individuality and originality of the answers is, if possible, even more tricky. A webcam cannot detect a second laptop placed tactically outside its visual field, much less pages of a book or an all too helpful uncle. I have read about examiners who are scanning the students’ eye movements to make sure that no undue wanderings outside the screen occur. Imagine the stress involved in this level of control. No wonder many institutions have abandoned the pursuit of organizing exams online and returned to actual sessions.

Let me move on to the broad and more acute problem of plagiarism, present in all forms of education today and exponentially so in elearning. Of course, one can install plagiarism detection software that will cut each assignment nicely in two percentages, original and copy. It is probably an indispensable tool in higher education. But how to explain what plagiarism is to young people who always had this wealth of information at their fingertips? Is the concept of plagiarism itself not due for a revision?

Moodle's cookies

Today I will linger over a topic that’s hot, cookies. I am not too familiar with digital cookies, I admit. I am even not too fond of their sweet aliases. But here I am, new European legislation forcing me to give cookies some attention. Incidentally, this is a situation in which I commonly found myself since eLearning occupies my time: new subjects sprouting on my path, requiring some understanding, inviting me to learn. Isn’t that the calling of all teachers: unending learning?

Since Saturday, 26th of May, European websites are obliged to inform their visitors of the cookies that will silently be placed on their electronic devices during the visit. Good. This will keep eavesdroppers at bay. No uninformed and unauthorized tracking of my wanderings through the internet, no unallowed skimming of my identity, no profiling where the only profile I care for is the one written by myself.

Now, let’s return to our Moodle learning platform and continue with the job of teaching. But hear this. Although eWallah doesn’t track nor skim, and does not harbour second grade commercial intentions, we do use cookies and are subject to the law. Some of the cookies we place are even first-party session cookies. They’re necessary for our users to stay logged in when moving through the pages.

 

And there is more. Any learning platform administrator who respects himself and enjoys an original creation will have at least some plugins installed that do not belong to the core software of Moodle. Enter the third-party cookies. By showing our users the geographical location of one another, we open a line for Google maps to push their cookies to our users’ computers.  By allowing the use of repositories like Flickr, we take the lid of their cookie jar. Digital cookies are omnipresent, and they travel fast. The new legislation makes it apparently easier to know them and refuse them. It does not make them crumble.