Running Head GUN CONTROLGUN CONTROL 16Linda Gonzalez.docx

Running Head: GUN CONTROL
GUN CONTROL 16
Linda Gonzalez
CRJ-560 Public Policy
Professor Dr. Mathis
Saint Leo University
December 13, 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgments
---
Abstract
iii
List of Tables
---
List of Figures
---
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

1
Introduction and Background to the Problem
---
Purpose
---
Overview of the Research Design
---
Hypothesis
---
Definition of Terms
---
Independent Variable – Corporate Social Responsibility
---
Dependent Variable – Reputation Targeting
---
Justification
---
Delimitations and Scope

---
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE,
THEORETICAL
FRAMEWORK, RESEARCH QUESTIONS, AND
HYPOTHESES
---
Review of the Literature
---
Synopsis of the Literature Review
---
Theoretical Framework
---
Research Questions
---
Hypotheses
---
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
---
Research Design
---

Population and Sampling Plan
---
Target Population
---
Accessible Population
---
Non-Probability, Purposive Sampling Plan
---
Measurement
---
Data Analysis
---
Procedures: Ethical Considerations and Data Collection
Methods
---
Evaluation of Research Methods
---
Qualitative Methods
---

Quantitative Methods
---
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
---
Data Producing Sample
---
Characteristics of the Measurement Instruments
---
Reliability of the --- Measure
---
Construct Validity of the ---
---
Research Questions
---
RQ 1:

---
RQ 2:
---Hypothesis Testing
---
H 1:
---
H 2:
---
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
---Characteristics of the Measurement
---
Reliability of the ----------------
---
Validity of the --------
---

Interpretations
---
Research Questions
---
Hypotheses
---
Practical Implications
---
Conclusions
---
Limitations
---
Recommendations for Future Study
---
REFERENCES
---
BIBLIOGRAPHY
---
APPENDIXES

---
Appendix A: ----------------------------------------------------
---
Appendix B: ---------------------------------------------------
---
VITA
---
Annotated Outline Format
Title Page
Abstract
Table of Contents
Use the sample table of contents provided as a guideline.
· Explain how this topic is related to the learning outcomes
outlined in this syllabus and/or to the policy related topics
discussed in the textbook of this course
· Explain how the topic is related to criminal justice
Justification

· Explain why this topic is important, and to whom it is
important.
· Explain how this research paper will have a practical effect on
real world problems.
Delimitations and Scope
· Explain what this study can and cannot do.
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE,
THEORETICAL
FRAMEWORK, RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES
Introduction
Research Questions
Hypotheses
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Design

Methods
Qualitative Methods
Sampling
Research Questions
Hypothesis Testing
Interpretations
Characteristics of the Measurement
Research Questions
Hypotheses

Conclusions
Limitations
Recommendations for Future Study
REFERENCES
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDIXES
OUTLINE:
1. ABSTRACT
2. CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE
STUDY
(i) Introduction and Background to the
Problem
(ii)
Purpose/Justification
(iii) Delimitations and
Scope
3. CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE,
THEORETICAL
FRAMEWORK, RESEARCH QUESTIONS, AND
HYPOTHESES
(i) Review of the

Literature
(ii) Synopsis of the Literature
Review
(iii) Theoretical
Framework
(iv) Research
Questions
(v) Hypotheses
4. CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
(i) Research
Design
(ii) Procedures: Ethical Considerations and Data Collection
Methods
(iii) Evaluation of Research
Methods

(iv) Qualitative
Methods
(v) Quantitative Methods
5. CHAPTER
FOUR: RESULTS
(i)
Sampling
(ii) Characteristics of the Measurement
Instruments
(iii) Research
Questions
(iv) Hypothesis
Testing
6. CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
(i)
Interpretations

(ii) Practical
Implications
(iii)
Conclusions
(iv)
Limitations
(v) Recommendations for Future
Study
REFERENCES
7. Abstract
The purpose of this particular study is to thoroughly discuss the
various issues related to gun control in the United States. It
will also give a brief history of gun control where different
statistics gathered in the course of history will be indicated.
This given research and analyses included the use of both
qualitative and quantitative data. We should also be in a
position to understand that this exacting analysis tends to firmly
hold the perception that gun control in the United States will
not only remain a rather challenging issue but that more and
more individuals will want to own their personal firearms as a
way of protecting themselves for the recent rising crime rates.

Gun control is a term used to refer to laws or policies that
regulate the use, manufacture, supply, sale, transfer,
modification of firearms. Different countries have these
policies applied differently, for instance, countries such as the
United Kingdom are very strict on gun possession unlike the
United States. This means that these gun control policies vary
from state to state and country to country (Harcourt, 2006).
The issue of gun control in the United States is seen as a rather
menacing one because no permanent solution has yet been
found. The culture of gun ownership can be traced back to the
initial days of European settlement where those on the frontier
owned their individual firearms meant for hunting as well as
protecting. One should note that for as long as there have been
firearms in the US, there have also been gun laws such as those
prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons which were
passed in Louisiana and Kentucky way in 1813. This prompted
numerous other states to follow suit. It was only last December
where 20 children and 6 staff members of a school in
Connecticut were shot dead. In the course of the history of gun
control in America, there have been many other cases such as
this which have been reported on a regular basis by the media.
One is left to wonder whether or not the President’s executive
power is limited and even if he were to impose stricter gun
ownership laws, whether they would minimize the incidents of
mass shootings.
Justification
The main issues to be examined is how many people are in
possession of firearms and how do they acquire them. Are there
laws that restrict the acquisition of these firearms and if they
are there, are they being followed? The target population in
this particular study will be individuals who have been chosen
randomly from different areas of society such as victims of gun
crimes within the community, gang members, policy makers and

the law enforcement agencies. Different questionnaires as well
as interview guides were constructed for these particular groups
in order to gather accurate information regarding gun ownership
and gun control. The findings from the study were that a
majority of American citizens do actually own a personal
firearm and there are some who do not have licenses for them.
The findings also indicated that teenagers and younger are the
ones that on most occasions are caught in crimes involving guns
especially those involved in gangs. The data collected covers
the acquisition of raw data via activities such as surveillances,
forensics and interviews of discretion. Based on the findings of
this research study a number of recommendations for future
study have also been made in regards to how crimes related to
guns can be prevented.
Delimitations and Scope of Study
Due to the basic fact that this particular study was carried out in
the state of Virginia, the delimitations of this study included
local and state law enforcement. This was done to get the
necessary responses for the questions that were being
researched. Additionally, the most recent shootings such as the
Navy Yard, Fort Lee, U.S.S. Mahan, and Virginia Tech have
happened within close driving distances of the researcher
location. Another delimitation is that while conducting this
study, the financial costs proved to be quite affordable and thus
enabled to make this research comprehensive. It should
however be noted that this study cannot solve the problem of
gun control in the United States but in retrospect, it may assist
law enforcement agencies to better respond and give some
comfort to the general public.
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
· The Department of Homeland Security has a progress report
on the President’s Executive Actions to Reduce Gun Violence.

21 of the 23 executive actions President Obama laid out in
January to help reduce gun violence, including guides to help
develop high-quality emergency operations plans for K-12
schools, institutions of higher education and houses of worship.
The plans have steps ranging from ending the freeze on gun
violence research, to addressing barriers that keep states from
submitting records to the background check system, to making
sure federal law enforcement agencies trace guns recovered in
investigations. Doctors and health professionals protect their
patients and their safety and confidences. The President took
actions to clarify that no federal law prohibits health care
providers from reporting threats of violence or talking to their
patients about gun safety.
· Critical Issues in Policing Series drafted a document that
studied active shooting incidents from the past 15 years, lessons
learned, and changes that have been made or need to be made in
responding, preventing and reacting. In 1999, two students shot
and killed fellow students, a teacher, injuring 12 others and then
killing themselves at a high school in Colorado. The shooting
prompted new thinking by police departments about how they
should respond. More than a decade later, this process of
developing new police policies, practices, and training for
“active shooter” events is continuing. Various Denver area
agencies responded but did not enter the school to stop the
shooters for more than 30 minutes. Columbine brought a
realization by law enforcement leaders that a much faster
response was needed for active-shooter incidents.
· After the 2009 shooting at Fort Hood where 13 people were
killed and 43 others were injured, the Defense Secretary Robert
Gates established the Department of Defense Independent
Review of the incident. All branches of military service, along
with civilians and contractor subject matter experts provided
members for the board. In January of 2010 the report was
released titled “Protecting the force: Lessons learned from Fort

Hood”. The Independent Review conducted integrated lines of
inquiry. These topics related to identification of internal
personnel threats, force protection, emergency response and
mass casualty, application of policies and procedures, and the
support to Department of Defense healthcare providers.
2.3
Looking at what has been discussed above, the literature review
has highlighted the increased attention that people have drawn
to the issue of owning and using guns.
2.4
The issue of terrorism and counterterrorism can be better
explained via the Political Theory of Fascism and the
Philosophical Theory of Religion. First and foremost fascism
may be vaguely defined as a consolidation of an ultra-
nationalist ideology which is unwaveringly racist; as the Latin
word suggests, fasces generally means to make use of power in
order to scare or even impress people. Fascists who are rather
frustrated and have failed to gain control in their native
countries tend to have historically turned to terrorism. This
simply means that in most cases they are likely to turn into
domestic terrorists mainly because fascists do not hold a belief
system that citizen rights tend to be bestowed purely because
someone is the inhabitant of a give country. They also do not
hold the belief that all human beings tend to possess equal
rights (O’Kane, 2005). On the other hand, the Philosophical
Theory of Religion with regards to terrorism take into account
the fact that at least a quarter of all the terrorist groups and also
about half of the most dangerous terrorist groups on earth are
chiefly motivated by diverse religious concerns. This means that
they tend to believe that God not only approves of their
questionable actions but that God Himself tends to demand their

action. With reference to the Al Qaeda terrorist organization, it
is somewhat obvious to conclude that these two theories are
very much in practice within it.
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
3.1
Introduction
This chapter deals with research methodology and concentrates
on the research design, target population, procedures and
evaluation of research methods.
3.2
Research Design
This research study employed a cross sectional study where the
mixed-mode approaches was utilized. This means that it
employed qualitative methods thus ensuring that the research
questions are concisely answered. The sample was picked via
sample survey research design involving the selection of a
representative number of units from the target population so as
to make generalizations to the population from which the
sample was drawn (Nassar, 2004). This technique proved useful
in that it enabled the research to gather the necessary data via
the attitudes, values, behavior and views of the respondents.
3.3
Methods
Keeping in mind that some of the respondents would be of
Arabic Muslim origin, ethical considerations were required so
as not to appear offensive or racial. Some of the data collection
methods that were applied in the course of this research study
include the administering of questionnaires and conducting
interviews.
3.4

3.4.1
Qualitative Methods
In the course of collecting data for this research, the use of
interview guides which tend to give more accurate information
which the questionnaires might not have captured or rather were
not incorporated.
3.4.2
No quantitative methods were used for this particular research
study.
4.1
Sampling
As it had been earlier indicated the sample for this particular
research study was done using the simple random sampling
methods because it tends to provide each of the total sampling
units of the target population an equal and yet known nonzero
probability of being selected (Horgan,
2013).
4.2
The instruments that were used in this research study as it has
been mentioned were interviews and questionnaires. The self
administered questionnaires had questions that would ensure
provision of unbiased information regarding terrorism as well as
counterterrorism efforts by the federal
government.
Hypothesis Testing

Following the information that was gathered in the course of
carrying out the research the hypotheses were tested through the
data collection instruments or the measurement instruments and
were found to be
conclusive.
5.1
Interpretations
From the research study we can see that not only has terrorism
existed for a long time but it is also becoming more and more
complicated particularly for the federal agencies trying to
address the situation. The two theories mentioned in the
theoretical framework tend to also play a huge role in
determining whether or not one will take part in a terrorist
attack or join a terrorist group. They also determine why one is
participating in a terrorist organization in terms of their
religious beliefs, values and attitudes towards politics.
5.2
As we can see from the study which we have conducted, a
myriad practical implications or rather suggestions may be
derived from it. This is to say that by utilizing this piece of
research the necessary law enforcement agencies may be able to
predict and/or refer to the historical acts of terrorism which
took place within and without the United States government. It
is therefore safe to say that this research may be used as a tool
which enables one to stay attuned with the past as well as the
future trends of global terrorism.
The main issue that leads to any government to have policies to
regulate manufacture and acquisition of firearms is insecurity.
Proponents of these policies argue that there are widespread
dangers that come with ownership of firearms. Some of these
dangers include, suicide, gun injuries, robbery and other issues
related to gun injuries. Opponents on the other hand, argue that,

these polies established under the gun control do not reduce the
murders, suicide, robberies and other gun related injuries.
Relation to learning outcomes
This topic is related to criminal justice because most crimes
committed are done using guns and most killings occur again by
use of guns. If only it was possible to effectively control the
manufacture and acquisition of guns then the rate of insecurity
will be lower. Gun violence can also be reduced if gun control
policies are effective in a state where such violence are
common.
Relation to criminal Justice
Criminal justice deals with upholding social control and
mitigating crimes. Having gun control policies is one of the
ways that can be used to reduce crime and uphold social
control. These policies will also state the form of punishment an
offender is to get, if they break the gun control laws which are
another function criminal justice (LaFollette, 2001).
5.3
Conclusions
The following can be drawn from the study:
· Most terrorist organizations tend to concentrate their acts on
the allies of the United States government and as a result they
end up as being collateral damage in a fight which they never
orchestrated or rather knew anything about.
· There is a relationship between fascism and terrorism and this
has long been used as a tool to instill fear into the general
populace.
5.4
Limitations
Some of the limitations of this research study were that some of

the respondents were not willing to provide any information
regarding the subject matter. This was perhaps in fear of the
implications, if any that would follow them were they to reveal
any damning revelations.
5.5
Recommendations for Future
Study
Further research can be carried out on: -
(a) Factors that contribute to terrorism
(b) The theories of Criminology with regards to terrorism
(c) The social implications of terrorism to the global community
References
A, T. M. (2008). Gun control. Current Science, 93(11), 4-5.
Blair, P., Martaindale, H., & Nichols, T. (2014, January 7).
Active shooter events from 2000 to
2012. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from
http://leb.fbi.gov/2014/january/active-shooter-
events-from-2000-to-2012
Cook, P. J. (2006). Aiming for evidence-based gun policy.
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 25 (3).
Dijk, J. J. (2008). In the shadow of Christ? On the use of the
word "victim" for those affected by crime. Criminal Justice
Ethics vol.27 (2008) nr.1 p.13-24
Duggan, M. (n.d.). More guns, More crime. Journal of
Political Economy, 109(5), 1086-1114.

Dykstra, R. R. (2010). Guns, Murder, and Plausibility.
Historical Methods, 43(4), 193-196.
Hall, T. (2006). Is there a right to bear arms? Public Affairs
Quarterly, 20, 293-312. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40441446.
Harcourt, B. E. (2006). Language of the gun: Youth, crime,
and public policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Henigan, D. A. (2009). Lethal logic: Exploding the myths that
paralyze American gun policy. Washington, D.C: Potomac
Books
Horgan, J. (2013). The Psychology of Terrorism, 2nd Ed. New
York: Routledge.
LaFollette, H. (2001). Controlling guns. Criminal Justice
Ethics, 20(1), 34-39.
Nassar, J. (2004). Globalization and Terrorism. Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield.
O’Kane, R. (2005). Terrorism, Vol I-II. Northhampton, MA:
Edward Elgar.
Ruggiero, V. (2005). “Political Violence: A Criminological
Analysis.” 35 -41 in M. Natarajan (ed.). Introduction to
International Criminal Justice.
Stableford, D., & Pfeiffer, E. (2014, April 2). Fort Hood
shooting leaves 4 dead, including
gunman; 16 injured. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from
http://news.yahoo.com/fort-hood-
shooting-222528983.html
Wellford, C. F., Pepper, J., Petrie, C., & National Research
Council (U.S., & National Research Council). Firearms and
violence: A critical review. Washington, DC: National
Academies Press.

Student Perceptions of Anti Plagiarism Programs
Eloy L. Nuñez, PhD
April 23, 2011
Abstract
This article examines student perceptions of the institutional

use of anti plagiarism software by
universities. A thematic analysis of 27 student essays is
conducted in an effort to gain insight into
student perceptions of the Turnitin.com approach to prevent
plagiarism. The article concludes that the
respondents accept the use of such software as a necessary
aspect of scholastic research, but they also
point out some misgivings about the process.
Introduction
While preparing for this article, I dutifully conducted an initial
search on ProQuest and
highlighted the articles that I thought would pertain to my topic.
I briefly reviewed the abstracts and I
kept the ones that I thought provided relevant information and
discarded those that did not. I then read
each of them in detail and highlighted certain areas of the text
that I thought provided useful
information. I then copied and pasted several passages onto a
separate Word document so that I could
refer to them later if I thought I would need to.
What I just described is probably repeated thousands of times a
day by students conducting
secondary research for courses in both traditional and online

scholastic institutions. Obviously, I do not
consider myself a plagiarist and the approach that I just
described is a perfectly legitimate method for
organizing notes on a literature review for a research project.
As I did this, I could not help but think
how easy it is for students to take these same copy-and-pasted
passages and use them as part of their
research papers. The temptation to cross the line into
plagiarism has to be great… especially for those
who are not very good writers, or those who have good writing
skills but are up against a hard deadline.
In my years as an instructor, both online and in the traditional
classroom setting, I have run into
many cases of student plagiarism. I have noted a variety of
possible reasons for students copying other
peoples’ works and claiming them as their own. The reasons
range from benign ignorance to purposeful
and egregious appropriations plagiarism wherein the offender
knowingly and habitually takes someone
else’s work and claims it as their own (Lewis, 2008).
What exactly constitutes plagiarism? Saint Leo University
defines academic dishonesty as

“representing another's work as one's own, active complicity in
such falsification, or violating test
conditions. Plagiarism is stealing and passing off the ideas and
words of another as one's own or using
the work of another without crediting the source” (SLU, 2010).
Computer Based Technologies as Enablers and Countermeasures
of Plagiarism
Plagiarism has long been a major concern for scholastic
institutions. With the proliferation of
online courses and instantaneous access to publications, the
opportunity and temptation to plagiarize
other peoples’ works has greatly increased. But it is not just
the easy access to information provided by
modern day online search engines that contributes to plagiarism.
I have to believe that the number one
technical enabler of plagiarism is the copy-and-paste feature
that I had mentioned in the introduction of
this article. As one of my students noted in his essay, “In a
world of cutting and pasting paragraphs and
sentences, it seems that it would be quite easy to plagiarize
reports, websites and books.”
I cannot say for sure, but I suspect there are several reasons that
plagiarism occurs. Lewis
(2008) identifies three primary antecedents of plagiarism:

rationalizing dishonesty, problematic
techniques, and definitional ambiguity. It has been my
experience that most of the cases that I have
observed can be attributed to problematic techniques and
definitional ambiguity. In these cases,
students failed to properly quote or cite a source. This is
usually attributed to sloppiness or laziness, but
there was no obvious intent to plagiarize.
However, every once in a while there comes a case of obvious
intentional plagiarism where the
student takes steps to conceal their deeds. One common
technique used by students is to copy large
segments of text and then change a few words here and there to
make it look like they were
paraphrasing the cited source. And yes, even the citations can
be plagiarized, and often are. I like to
point out to students and new professors that just because a
source is properly cited does not absolve
the student from plagiarism. Some students think that the mere
act of placing an author’s name and
date in parentheses after a plagiarized passage, absolves them of
guilt. It does not.

Anti Plagiarism Software Programs
Just like the Internet provides a fertile ground for plagiarists, it
also provides the tools for
instructors to cross-check the students’ work to ensure that it is
not plagiarized. I am familiar with two
anti-plagiarism software programs. Saint Leo University uses
Turnitin.com and requires students to
submit all major assignments via its web site prior to grading.
Other universities that I am familiar with
use a similar program called SafeAssign. Both rely on
expansive data bases and lightning quick word
matching logarithms. Interestingly, on several occasions I have
submitted the same document to both
programs and have obtained different results.
Another notable difference between Saint Leo University policy
and the other university is that
Saint Leo relies on the findings of a Graduate Academic
Standards Committee to determine whether a
student is guilty of plagiarism. In the other university, the
individual professor makes the final
determination. There are advantages to both systems, but I
prefer the Saint Leo policy for several
reasons. While I am not shy about sanctioning students (I have
done it over 45 times for the other

university), I like the fact that a committee makes the final
determination, because that way, there is
greater uniformity in the level of administered discipline. Also,
the committee acts as a central
depository for all documented cases of plagiarism at the
institution. In the other system, a professor will
likely be unaware of a student’s previous plagiarism in another
professor’s class. In my opinion, the
Saint Leo policy is superior for those reasons.
Student Perceptions About the Turnitin Process
It is clear that Saint Leo University takes the issue of academic
dishonesty very seriously. I
would say more so than other institutions that I am familiar
with. In 2010, my boss Dr. Robert Diemer,
Professor & Director Graduate Criminal Justice at Saint Leo
University directed me to incorporate a
student familiarization assignment for the plagiarism web site
tool Turnitin.com as part of the redesign
of the CRJ-565 Leadership in Criminal Justice course. The
intent of this new assignment was to
familiarize new graduate students of the Turnitin process, and
hopefully to serve as a deterrent for

future plagiarism. The thinking was, if the students become
familiar with the Turnitin process early on in
their studies, they will be less likely to submit a plagiarized
assignment.
I took Dr. Diemer’s suggestion and came up with an a two-part
assignment in which the students
are directed to explore several online search engines and find
articles related to ethics. The students are
instructed to copy and paste portions of the articles onto a
template that is provided to them. They are
then instructed to submit the purposefully plagiarized
assignment onto the Turnitin.com web site. To
make certain that the students understand that copying and
pasting text from other sources is not
acceptable, the instructions for the assignment state the
following proviso:
“This is the only time in your scholastic careers that you will be
allowed to copy and paste
someone else’s work for an assignment. We are doing this so
that you can become familiar with the anti
plagiarism service provided by Turnitin.com.”
In the second part of the assignment, the students are instructed
to write a brief essay on the

entire process. They are asked to respond to the following
questions:
the Turnitin process.
potential pitfalls
associated with its use.
The assignment is given in Module 3 of the course to
correspond with the Ethics block. There is
no grade issued, but the successful completion of the
assignment is a requirement for passing the
course.
Methods
Since its inception, the Mandatory Turnitin assignment has been
completed by 118 students as a
requirement of the CRJ-565 course. For this article, I
conducted a thematic analysis of student
responses for only the classes in the Spring 2 (2011) term. A
total of 27 student papers from three
different sections were reviewed. This is strictly a convenience
sample and should not be construed as

scholastically viable study. Nevertheless, I found it to be a
fairly revealing view of student perceptions
about the Turnitin process and plagiarism in general.
Results
Of the 27 student essays reviewed, not one had a negative
comment about the use of Turnitin.
Asked to comment on Saint Leo University’s practice of
mandating submissions of assignment via the
Turnitin web site, students were either supportive, or at a
minimum, grudgingly accepting of the
process. I will share some of the comments that I observed.
One student stated, “Turnitin.com helps provide academia with
the ability to police students as
they turn in assignments based upon research conducted on the
internet.” Another acknowledges the
necessity of the web site, “Turnitin.com is a necessary website
to assist instructors with plagiarism.”
Other comments were, “I do understand academic honesty and
Turnitin is vital to discouraging
plagiarism” and “If I were a teacher, I would use Turnitin.”
Other positive comments about the use of Turnitin are noted
below:

“The process is fairly easy and self explanatory. I think it is a
great tool for students.”
“The Turnitin process is simply amazing. I had not realized its
ability or imagined that so many
universities utilize it. I think this exercise should be conducted
for all Saint Leo Students before they
utilize it for the first time.”
“If I were a teacher, I would use Turnitin. If nothing else, it
should discourage students from
cheating. Although it has flaws, it should point out the obvious.
In addition, I think it is great for
students. I always feel better about a paper if I can check it
with Turnitin or Writecheck before
submitting it to the instructor.”
The next two questions that the students were asked in the
assignment have to do with the
accuracy and reliability of Turnitin mechanism for finding
matching text. Although the students mostly
reported similarity scores of 90% and above, a few of them
noted that Turnitin did not match all the
copied and pasted text, and some found a possible glitch in the
system. One student noted the failure
of Turnitin to match text that was copied verbatim, “it only

found 71% of the plagiarized text, when in
fact the whole document was plagiarized.”
One student noted the following, “After submitting my test
paper, it returned with 63%
similarity index. Interestingly, it found almost 100% of my
first two submissions and none of my third.”
Two other students noted this apparent glitch in the Turnitin
logarithms, “I did notice in this trial that
some of the text did not go red as it should for whatever reason,
and that my overall paper got a 92
percent matching, which is still definitely a problem. I did
expect a 100 percent rating, but that did not
happen for some reason.”
The other student describes the same glitch, “It did highlight
every word of my first two choices
but failed to recognize the majority of the final post.” All three
students reported lower similarity scores
on their second and third tries. Submitting more than one
attempt was not part of the assignment, yet
some students did it anyway, either on purpose or by accident.
It seems that in doing so, they may have
discovered a possible flaw with the system.

The next question had to do with the potential pitfalls of the
Turnitin mechanism. Predictably,
several students were concerned over the reporting of “false
positives” where Turnitin would show a
match of text where there was no intention of copying. Most of
the concerns were not about the
manner in which the software matches text, as much as how the
professors interpret the findings. One
student stated, “Turnitin generated matches in the reference
sections of submitted papers. This is a
downfall if the instructor does not review the portions of the
paper identifying the matched results.”
Another student states his concern that properly referenced
material may be held against him if
it is misinterpreted by the professor, “Turnitin might show it as
a match, but I properly referenced the
match.”
Echoing the concern of many students that professors should not
rely exclusively on the overall
similarity index score, one student puts it this way, “I could
envision a situation where narrowly directed
questions could produce similar responses from students, so I
think that instructors should be careful in

determining the appropriate use of the software, and carefully
examine results to ensure there are no
false positives.”
Another student puts it this way, “In the end the instructor will
know a person’s writing style
and key words used by the student over a period of time and
could identify differences, where a
computer system wouldn’t.” The consensus among the students
seems to indicate that Turnitin is a
good tool, but that ultimately only the professor can determine
whether matching text should be
considered to be plagiarism. After all, there are several
legitimate reasons that text would match word
for word.
The comments of one student seem to summarize the general
consensus outlook on the
importance of the professor interpreting the Turnitin results
correctly, “I certainly can respect the utility
of this anti-plagiarism tool, especially after reviewing the
lecture that articulated the astronomical rate
of plagiarism offenses. That data is extremely compelling. I do
find it somewhat unsettling that higher

education has had to go to these measures which seem to be
akin to a polygraph test. Of course, like a
polygraph, the final determination rests with the reviewer. I
would assume that if a research paper is
found to contain an inordinate amount of previously submitted
text that the reviewer would check to
insure that the material is properly cited.”
Finally, one student notes one obvious limitation of the use of
Turnitin, “there is only so many
ways to say ‘the sky is blue’ without finding someone else
saying it the same way.
Conclusion
Why is this important? Why has Saint Leo University taken
such a proactive approach on the
issue of academic dishonesty? I think the answer to this lies in
the findings of Mills in which she points
out the importance of establishing an institutional culture where
“learning is valued, academic integrity
is explained and emphasized, and where faculty model academic
and professional ethics” (p. iv , 2008).
I have been in the fortunate position where I can compare the
cultures of two different
universities as they relate to academic honesty issues. One of
these universities talks a great deal about

plagiarism, but does very little to prevent it. Conversely, Saint
Leo University goes to great lengths to
prevent it. It is no accident in my opinion, that plagiarism has
become an epidemic in the one university,
as compared to the very small number of plagiarism cases at
Saint Leo. Just to give some perspective on
the matter, in over three years teaching at Saint Leo University,
I have had only four cases of plagiarism.
By contrast, in relatively the same time period, I have had over
45 cases of plagiarism in the other
university. For me, the contrast between the two university
cultures is clear and the outcomes resulting
from their different policies are predictable.
That is why I think it is important to make the students aware of
the plagiarism issue early on in
their scholastic careers. The Mandatory Turnitin assignment
conceived by Dr. Diemer is a perfect
example of a university taking proactive measures to instill a
culture where academic dishonesty is not
tolerated. The core values of Saint Leo University are clearly
stated in the course syllabi that the
students receive at the onset of every class. These core values

are not just idle words. It is evident that
at Saint Leo, an organizational culture has been established and
nurtured that allows these core values
to be practiced on a day to day basis.
References
Lewis, N.. (2008). Plagiarism Antecedents and Situational
Influences. Journalism and Mass
Communication Quarterly, 85(2), 353-370. Retrieved April 23,
2011, from ABI/INFORM Global.
(Document ID: 1567127781).
Mills, C.. Graduate students' perceptions of academic integrity
policies, practices, observations,
engagement, and seriousness of behaviors. Ph.D. dissertation,

Clemson University, United States
-- South Carolina. Retrieved April 23, 2011, from Dissertations
& Theses: A&I.(Publication No.
AAT 3355120).
Saint Leo University (2010). Graduate Academic Catalog 2010
– 2011. The Trustees of Saint Leo
University.

Running Head GUN CONTROLGUN CONTROL 16Linda Gonzalez.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Running Head GUN CONTROLGUN CONTROL 16Linda Gonzalez.docx

Similar to Running Head GUN CONTROLGUN CONTROL 16Linda Gonzalez.docx (20)

More from charisellington63520

More from charisellington63520 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Running Head GUN CONTROLGUN CONTROL 16Linda Gonzalez.docx