3 ms·

I'm a student at a university that uses Turnitin. I understand the need for the tools and I absolutely don't have a problem with them using automated tools to c

I'm a student at a university that uses Turnitin. I understand the need for the tools and I absolutely don't have a problem with them using automated tools to check my work for plagiarism. What I do have a problem with is the fact that, after uploading an assignment, I am required to click a checkbox that says "I agree to Turnitin's end-user license agreement." I should not have to agree to a license for a piece of software that I'm not even using; it's my professor who's using Turnitin's services. And if it's 11:55 PM and I'm trying to submit my assignment, it feels really scummy to suddenly force me to sign a legal contract that I don't even have time to read.

TheNewsIsHere 4y ago
My university used to use Blackboard, which had SafeAssign (if I recall correctly). It was proprietary to Blackboard and the only option (at that time) was for students to choose if papers were included in the permanent reference database. Because I was given the choice, I selected that because I thought it was both considerate toward me and valuable to my scholarly work. Then my university moved to Canvas and TurnItIn. At first there was no license agreement check box, and all the courses were force-enabled to allow TurnItIn to store student submissions forever. I raised a lot of bell over that and the next term there was that same checkbox that I assume you also see. It always felt very coercive. I hated checking that box. I fought tooth and nail. I had conference calls with the Academic Technologies leadership. They absolutely didn’t understand the objection. They compared it to Office 365 and didn’t understand the point that neither the university nor Microsoft was requiring that I give them a perpetual, virtually limitless license to my content in order to use the service. I pointed to the university policies which explicitly and very clearly categorized non-compensated student output as the property of the student, who was to regain all rights. I pointed out the conflict of interest that iParadigms brings to the table. All I ever got in response was the talking points I found on the TurnItIn marketing material. I’d have been OK if they disagreed after an actual discussion, but they weren’t interested.

TheNewsIsHere 4y ago

My university used to use Blackboard, which had SafeAssign (if I recall correctly). It was proprietary to Blackboard and the only option (at that time) was for students to choose if papers were included in the permanent reference database. Because I was given the choice, I selected that because I thought it was both considerate toward me and valuable to my scholarly work. Then my university moved to Canvas and TurnItIn. At first there was no license agreement check box, and all the courses were force-enabled to allow TurnItIn to store student submissions forever. I raised a lot of bell over that and the next term there was that same checkbox that I assume you also see. It always felt very coercive. I hated checking that box. I fought tooth and nail. I had conference calls with the Academic Technologies leadership. They absolutely didn’t understand the objection. They compared it to Office 365 and didn’t understand the point that neither the university nor Microsoft was requiring that I give them a perpetual, virtually limitless license to my content in order to use the service. I pointed to the university policies which explicitly and very clearly categorized non-compensated student output as the property of the student, who was to regain all rights. I pointed out the conflict of interest that iParadigms brings to the table. All I ever got in response was the talking points I found on the TurnItIn marketing material. I’d have been OK if they disagreed after an actual discussion, but they weren’t interested.