Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Library Science Forum
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Library Science Forum


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. Electronic Assessment Repertory Suite Library Science Forum Michael Sobek 28 August, 2007 Project Manager, EARS
  • 2. Scope • EARS (Electronic Assessment Repertory Suite) is an initiative that will provide an end-to-end solution for: 1. Electronic Assignment Submission 2. Text Matching Software 3. Electronic Assessment Marking 4. Gradebook Information Services 2
  • 3. Existing Practice • Electronic Assignment Submission – Available today through L@G, however adoption is limited – Remote Assignment Submission / Print available from OC&AHS • Text Matching Software – No institutional software solution for plagiarism prevention is in place – Some academics are implementing software at a local level – SafeAssignment was trialled for ease-of-use and technical fit • Electronic Assignment Marking – Available in Quiz/Survey form today via L@G assessment items – Electronic document marking not currently available • Gradebook – Available today in L@G, however adoption is limited – Marks Entry Spreadsheet (MESS) used to record course grades – MESS is not updated by L@G, however MESS feeds into PeopleSoft Information Services 3
  • 4. Best Practice 1. Electronic 2. Text Matching 3. Print & 4. Online 5. Course Submission Deliver Marking Gradebook • Improved, • Any-time, Any- • GU And Common • Paperless Marking • All Grades Consistent Cover place Student Sources Recorded In • Library Of Saved Sheets Access One Place • “Draft” Option Comments • Date And Time • Student/Staff • Students Can • “Student Can See • Rubrics Stamped friendly See Own Own Report” • Can Voice-record Grade • Choice for • Word/PDF/Text Option Comments • Grades Students & Staff Format • Comments Transferred To Archived With MESS Paper Information Services 4
  • 5. Proposed Implementation Timeline • Week 9/14 – Academic Trial • S1 2008 – University Wide Rollout Information Services 5
  • 6. How Text Matching Software Works • Papers are submitted electronically by Students or Academics in MS Word, PDF, Text, HTML, RTF or Postscript format • Papers are matched against the following sources: – Internet comprehensive index of documents available for public access on the Internet – ProQuest ABI/Inform database with over 1,100 publication titles and about 2.6 million articles from '90s to present time, updated weekly – Institutional Database all papers submitted by users in their respective institutions – Global Reference Database containing papers that were volunteered by students from Blackboard client institutions to help prevent cross-institutional plagiarism. – Note: TurnItIn makes the check against their equivalent of the “Global Reference Database” an institution-specific option, but does not currently allow students to optionally contribute their papers to the Global database. • An “Originality Report” is generated showing: – Matched text and the source (as a URL) – An overall “Matching Index” (TurnItIn: “Similarity Index”) as a percentage Information Services 6
  • 7. Limitations of Text Matching Software • Text Matching Software: – Cannot distinguish quoted versus non-quoted text – Cannot process a bibliography – Does not contain all sources – Does not know if the source itself was plagiarised • Therefore, Text Matching software cannot determine if plagiarism has occurred – only the Academic can determine this • Text Matching software can determine if text contained in the submitted paper already exists within its database of sources • The “Matching Index” percentage score, and the sources, need to be interpreted and verified to determine if plagiarism has occurred Information Services 7
  • 8. EARS Contacts • Project Manager – Michael Sobek ( • Change Manager – Lynette Revelle ( • Project Officers – Ula Kosal ( – Loren Sommer ( Information Services 8