punditry.ca — uncovering DSU elections

The message below was directed to me by the DSU’s Communications Coordinator, Meghann Bryans. It is the most up-to-date statement regarding the admittance procedures that will be in place at tomorrow’s AGM. I am posting it for the sake of clarification, since much speculation has been floating around as to what is going to happen tomorrow evening with regard to admittance. It is unknown to me how much this is subject to change in advance of the meeting, but this is where things stand as of 4:00pm today:

At last night’s Judicial Board meeting, a decision was made to allow ALL students attending a class or classes at Dalhousie University to attend and have speaking rights at tomorrow evening’s DSU Annual General Meeting. This applies, but is not limited to, University of King’s College students currently enrolled in Dalhousie classes. All students enrolled in Dalhousie classes, but who do not have valid Dalhousie IDs, must provide proof of registration. Acceptable proof of registration will include a class syllabus and proof that the student is in the class, or a printoff of a class schedule. This decision, however, does not give these students the right to vote at the AGM.

The AGM will be held at the McInnes Room of the Dalhousie Student Union Building. Upon arrival, attendees will receive direction as to where to go. Students with valid Dalhousie IDs will check-in at the main door of the McInnes Room. Due to capacity concerns, Dalhousie students with voting rights will be the first to enter the room, followed by non-voting students. Attendance for students without Dalhousie IDs will be on a first-come, first-serve basis, and will be limited based on the capacity of the room.

A live audio-feed will be streamed in Room 224 for community members and interested parties not registered for classes at Dalhousie.

Media should register with the DSU Communications Coordinator (meghann.bryans@dal.ca) no later than the morning of the event. Media will be escorted to a designated section at the back of the room once the majority of attendees are seated. In order to protect the privacy of voting members, no video cameras will be allowed.

Part… 6? of my look at AGM resolutions turns to the TurnItIn.com motion.

Not all readers know about me and TurnItIn, and our… association.  In December 2005, I wrote an open letter to the University questioning the use of TurnItIn.com.  It might have ended there, because no one replied (actually, I did get a reply after 4 months, when I’d elevated it to a campus-wide issue).  But then MSVU banned TurnItIn, and people started repeating TurnItIn’s claim that full text copies of the paper are not retained.  I looked into it, and found this claim was provably false.  I and others found it was easy to beat (but took down the posts on how to do so, because I don’t support plagiarism).  I found it was impossible to have things removed from their database, despite them telling me they had done so.  I pointed out cosmetic security problems that TurnItIn eventually fixed.  When Dalhousie refused to release even the most basic statistics on the use of the service, I filed a freedom of information request, which they partially answered.  (PROTIP: Dealing with Dal lawyers is a painful experience.)  I debunked Dal’s documentation, and questioned their double standard about flows of information.  Along the way, I pissed off a lot of people I really respect, I was threatened with legal action by Dalhousie staff members, and Dal administrators and TurnItIn.com employees were frequent visitors to my site.  I eventually was deposed for the turnitin lawsuit, which is currently on appeal in the States. 

That is of course only a summary; I worked on the topic off-and-on for 2 years before it got sidelined by other pursuits, and by my departure to a university that does not use TurnItIn.  (U of A flew me out to visit the campus before I accepted their offer of admission; I had lunch with the Vice-provost [Information Technology] and actually asked him about it).  I still get questions and horror stories via email, and every one of them saddens me.  I know of a kid who was forced to repeat grade 12 because TurnItIn said his paper was 15% plagiarized; I saw both the TurnItIn report and the original paper, and the only thing the kid was guilty of was using too many cliches.  But I digress.

I tell you this for two reasons: the first is that I have a clear and obvious bias here, and the second is that if you were to write a list of the top five student/alumni who know the most about Dal and TurnItIn, I would be on that list. I would suggest that a well-researched policy resolution would have touched base with one or all of the top 5. SMAC is mobilizing students, that’s great, but there’s no need to start from scratch…

In general, let me say that this is the first AGM resolution I’ve read that is clearly and unambiguously about academic matters, and I’m so happy I could do the Macarena.

WHEREAS Turnitin.com assumes that all students are guilty of plagiarism until proven innocent and that by proxy Dalhousie University also assumes that all students are guilty of plagiarism until proven innocent;

Granted.

WHEREAS Turnitin.com violates, by any reasonable standard, the intellectual property rights of the students who use it by storing, copying and creating for-profit, derivative works-based services from intellectual property taken from often unwilling students.

Here we have a problem.  I think this is true, too.  However, pending appeal, a US court has held that this is fair-use, at least in that country.

Also, the list “storing, copying, and creating” does not have list item agreement.  (if they store [the papers] and copy [the papers], for there to be list item agreement they would need to create [the papers] as well.)

I think Dalhousie bears a measure of this guilt – they are the ones who force students to submit on pain of failing classes.

WHEREAS Turnitin.com is a costly and unproven method of reducing plagiarism;

It’s not *that* costly; about $10k a year.  Yes, there are better things you can do with $10,000, like stacking it in a pile and burning it, but that particular argument won’t get you anywhere.

BIRT that the DSU will take an active stance against the use of Turnitin.com on campus and will petition, lobby and fight Dalhousie University to remove this gross violation of student rights from all classes.

DSU policy on TurnItIn exists; that the author of this resolution was not aware of this policy before bringing the issue to the AGM is unfortunate.  Research first, resolve later.  The existing policy reads like this:

The DSU stands against the mandatory nature of turnitin.com. It calls on the University to adopt an opt-out policy for concerned students. It further calls for better education for students, faculty and staff about turnitin.com and its functions.

A few weeks after writing the motion, SMAC compared their motion to the DSU’s existing policy.  They declare the DSU policy “flawed and toothless”.

Is the DSU policy toothless?  Probably.  I think in particular an opt-out is a less-than-ideal solution, because it doesn’t do enough to protect students.  Opting out requires students be aware of the implications.  (Full disclosure: I helped write the current policy.  Actually, I’m pretty sure punditry.ca pundits dominated the authoring of that policy).  However, I recognize that writing policy in a democratic organization is a compromise; the DSU policy was what we passed through A&E and through Council.  Not everyone had a problem with TurnItIn, to my frustration.

I don’t know how much advocacy the DSU has done on this front in the past few years.  After we passed the policy, a committee (actually, a Dal lawyer) submitted a report declaring that we were stupid kids and lying about everything and that there was nothing wrong with TurnItIn.  (… I’m paraphrasing here).  I suspect things may have cooled down a bit after that.

I don’t know what the “flaws” are, other than that it is toothless.

The SMAC website goes on to say:

[1] Our motion requires that the DSU take an active, not a passive, stand on the use of Turnitin.com in all classes and in all situations.  

[2] We must pass this motion to make the DSU do more than morally object to Turnitin.com. Our Student Union will have to make an effort to inform students about Turnitin.com, and will have to pressure faculty and the administration to stop using it in all circumstances.

[3] We have a chance to make the DSU’s policy more forceful and proactive. Let’s get out on April 1st and pass some student-positive policies!  [numbers added]

Re [1], I disagree that the DSU policy is passive.  I do agree that SMAC goes further, demanding the total removal of TurnItIn and not just demanding an opt-out.  Otherwise, I consider the two policy statements nearly identical in terms of what their force and effect will be.

Re [2], there is nothing in that resolution that will force the DSU to “make an effort to inform students about TurnItIn.com”.  If you want to force them to do that, you should probably say so.  It’s a good idea – put an information sheet in the Frosh packs, for example.  I’ll write it personally.

Re [3], I resent the implication that the current TurnItIn policy is not student-positive.  :)

Anyway, all things considered, I’d vote in favor of this motion.  The only reasons to vote no I can think of are (a) if you think the priorities of the DSU should lay elsewhere, or (b) if you think A&E policy should be decided through regular means via democratically elected representatives instead of being imposed at an AGM.  I’d respect either reason, and am open to hearing more.

I would be remiss if I did not point out that I still oppose the venue and methods.  I happen to agree with this resolution, but stacking an AGM is STILL not the right way to raise issues for debate and discussion.  TurnItIn was a noteworthy issue on campus for a while, thanks to people like Jen Bond, Jess McDiarmid (and other Gazette writers), Sean Smith, and myself.  Our efforts were noticed and have had impact at schools and universities across North America, including some who briefly considered adopting TurnItIn.  I am certain that to this day, saying “MikeSmit.com” in a TurnItIn office results in spitting and cursing (or general laughter, who knows?).  Our way is not the only way, but it sure beats making a spectacle at an AGM.