MEETING MINUTES

Committee on Educational Technology

10:00-11:00 AM, Thursday, November 3, 2011

MEETING MINUTES

Present: Eric Loehr, Thomas Laughner, Jefferson Hunter, David Gregory, Marnie Anderson, John Davis, Deborah Hass-Wilson, Nicholas Howe, Sara Pruss, Fraser Stables, and Adriana Chalas

The members introduced themselves and welcomed David Gregory, C.I.O. ITS and Adriana Chalas, president of the Honor Board, as a new members to the Committee on Educational Technology as well as welcoming Maureen Mahoney as a guest today.

Minutes from September 29, 2011

Discussion of turnitin.com and plagiarism-detecting software –Maureen Mahoney

Jeff asked Maureen if she had data on whether plagiarism of papers here at Smith was a stable problem or one on the rise. Maureen said the studies that she had seen showed that during 2003-2004 and 2005-2006 the incidents of plagiarism were at a peak and that the numbers had gone down since then. Smith provides seminars and workshops on information literacy at the library and all students sign the honor code at the beginning of each year. The Honor Board which is made up of representatives from 2^nd,3^rd,4^th year as well as Ada Comstock, faculty from each division, and Maureen receives 16-20 cases per year of obvious plagiarism; she said there is no way to know if there have been more actual cases that were not found because they were more sophisticated. She said that the use of turnitin software on all papers would be contrary to the honor code system.

Marnie said that large classes in the Humanities would like to use something like turnitin because it is far too time consuming to try to verify plagiarism with other methods on so many papers. Maureen said that she had not heard this before from the Humanities Department but that faculty are required to use the process that is in place and bring questionable work to the Honor Board. Sara said that sometimes there is a question when a student suddenly turns in a paper that is unlike prior papers, one that shows an unusual improvement in writing style and content.

Tom has contacted other CLAC schools that are using turnitin. He said that Swarthmore has a site license and they notify all students that this is a tool faculty may use on their papers. Maureen re-stated that sanctions by the Honor Board are serious. She also suggested that perhaps there could be a test pilot program using turnitin and that students in classes where it is to be piloted should be told in advance that this is a tool that the faculty may be using. When asked about the costs for turnitin Tom did not know for sure but said he would find out for the next meeting.

Jeff said that there was a good FAQ area on the turnitin website that could answer questions regarding archiving of scanned material and explained the institution-only privacy zone. Nick said that he felt this software could give a false sense of security to faculty and was not a perfect solution.

In summary, Tom will research costs and gather information on how the archiving system works and what the requirements are. This will be discussed again at the December meeting and a proposal will be written that can go to the Honor Board for review. John will check with faculty but did not think a vote from faculty council would be needed in order to proceed. Deborah said that CET faculty should check with their colleagues to see who would be interested in being part of a pilot test.

Don Siegel submitted a grant request for $3800.00 to upgrade his Dartfish software. The last time that Don asked for an upgrade, CET agreed to pay a portion if his department paid the balance with the understanding that in the future his department would need to budget for upgrades. John said that the E.S.S. has had a 10% budget increase to meet some of these requests. Connie will gather the initial grant request for Dartfish as well as the upgrade request and get them to Tom as soon as possible. This conversation may continue via email or be put on December’s agenda.

John shared the results of the 2010-2011 HERI faculty survey with the committee. Tom said that he would get the original report that preceded the survey and send it to the committee. Deborah commented that it appeared there was some faculty resentment to the increased use of expensive technology when there were cutbacks in faculty positions.

Tom said that the Five College project on video conferencing is a good example of sharing technology.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 AM; the next meeting of the CET is scheduled for December 15^th at 10:00 AM in Seelye Hall B4.