Sunday 21 December 2014

Everyone should read this- The Province>High School High School RSS Feed DIFFERENCE MAKERS 2014: Bailey Saguin

Vancouver College's Bailey Saguin has turned a childhood battle with cancer into an humanitarian crusade. (PNG photo)

BAILEY SAGUIN

VANCOUVER COLLGE

Bailey Saguin had already endured the ultimate test of mind and body when he showed up for his first football camp back in the fall of 2010.

He had tapped every ounce of his mental strength to win a battle with childhood leukaemia, and after three-and-a-half years of chemotherapy treatments, his body had absorbed more hard knocks than an army of tackling dummies.

Finally, the doctors had told him he was cancer free. They even gave him a t-shirt and a trophy to celebrate the occasion. Now, he was ready to be a Grade 8 student.

Yet for some, victories aren’t finish lines, but rather new starting points along a line that runs forever.

“Football,” says Todd Bernett, his coach with Vancouver College’s appropriately named Fighting Irish, “gave Bailey an avenue to prove that his body was strong, to prove to himself that it had not been conquered.”

Now, five full seasons later, it is Saguin’s collective experience of fighting for life, then fighting just as hard for others, that makes the senior linebacker a true difference maker.

It’s why each summer he spends a week lifting the spirits of young people battling cancer at the Camp Goodtimes retreat, why he has handed out medals at the finish line of B.C. Childrens Hospital ChildRun, and why he has played a hand in helping to raise over $50,000 for childhood cancer research as both an ambassador and speaker.

“The most important thing I do is volunteer at the camp because it’s for kids seven-to-14 who are going through chemo,” says Saguin. “In the real world, they are in a hospital. They are weak and they have trouble keeping up. But you get to empower them with positive influence. The biggest thing I can do is to help them see and feel that they belong, that they are normal kids.”

That is precisely what Saguin sought as he began high school life at Vancouver College in 2010.

“My biggest goal was to get back to being a normal kid,” he begins. “VC football had a no-cut policy in Grade 8, so I took advantage of it, and it was the first group I had been with that didn’t treat me any different. I was family, just like everyone else. It gave me new purpose.”

So much so that Saguin, who packed 210 pounds on a compact 5-foot-5 frame in Grade 8 following years of cancer treatments, “bought a pair of running shoes” and embarked on a fitness program that included the completion of a half-marathon just a few years later.

He eventually moved from the offensive line to a spot at the heart of the Irish defence as a playmaking linebacker, and when he attends commencement ceremonies later this spring, he’ll do so as a well-conditioned 5-foot-9, 170-pound student-athlete and role model. Saguin adds that whatever his future brings, he will never stray from his humanitarian ways in the world of cancer awareness.

Bernett, like everyone in Saguin’s life, is humbled by his courage, convictions and most of all, his empathy.

“It’s hard to say this without sounding dismissive, but in some ways, I avoided using Bailey as a source of inspiration,” Bernett admits. “I wanted him to feel just like every other guy, and not constantly have to be held up as a living story of the human spirit. But there was one direct instance (prior to the team’s Sept. 14 rivalry game with Burnaby’s St. Thomas More), when he was selected as our weekly captain, that I did directly choose his story as an example of overcoming adversity.”

What happened in that game?

Vancouver College trailed 26-14 at half, but won 50-32.

On the day he strapped on a football helmet for the first time, a critique of Bailey Saguin might have said that he was weak, lacked any technique and had absolutely no physique.

But the best part? He never lacked heart.

Friday 19 December 2014

How to Build a Successful School Technology Program by Jason Saltmarsh

Technology is a catalyst for change. If you want to disrupt a classroom full of children or young adults, try handing out an iPad or a Chromebook to each of them. You'll see lots of activity and excitement, but without solid planning and expectations, much of that energy will be counter-productive. Distractions lurk behind every keystroke, and you can be sure that our 21st Century learners know how to find them.

It's no wonder that teachers have mixed feelings about educational technology. Many school districts invest in new computers, label and configure them according to policy, place them in the hands of the students, and expect great things to happen. Not likely. When new and complex disciplinary issues arise, test scores gradually decline, and teachers begin asking students to turn off their devices, the finger-pointing begins.

A Model of K12 Technology Program Success

A successful school technology program not only supports, but is integral to, the delivery of curriculum. In every instance where technology is being used, it should be the best pedagogical approach as determined by the teacher. Rather than bend our curriculum to allow for the integration of technology, we should instead be using technology selectively to meet targeted learning goals.

2014-12-15-4pillars.png

PLANNING

You can surmise a lot about a school's technology program based on how often the curriculum director and technology director have lunch together. Curriculum needs should drive technology planning. A responsible technology plan will address the specific needs of teachers and students, and allow for complete delivery of the K12 curriculum.

Any long-range technology plan should include the input and participation of all stakeholders in the school community. Special attention should be paid to policy and procedures regarding acceptable and responsible use of technology. An open and honest discussion of the educational value, as well as any perceived risk, in using technology should take place early in the planning stages.

COMMUNICATION

There are two methods for changing teaching practices. The first is to change philosophy and hope that a change in practice follows. The second is to change practice and hope that a change in philosophy follows. One is proactive, the other reactive. Introducing computers and hoping curriculum and teaching philosophy will change is clearly a reactive approach with no guarantees. It doesn't afford teachers the respect they deserve as professional educators, and it certainly doesn't do our children any favors. Instead, a thoughtful dialogue about teaching and instruction needs to occur so that schools can plan for instructional supports, professional development, and clearly define new expectations for staff and students.

SUPPORT

A successful school technology program includes both technical and instructional support. Technical support staff should be reliable and staffed sufficiently enough to handle issues as they occur in multiple locations. Instructional support methods should include peer mentors, professional learning networks, student technology teams, ongoing professional development (both in and out of district), and licensed technology integrators.

EVALUATION

Evaluation and adaptation should be an ongoing piece of any strategic plan. Is the technology plan aligned with the curriculum framework? Are there challenges or areas where more resources are needed? Can we cut costs and improve efficiency by identifying technology services or approaches that are no longer relevant?

Teacher and administrator evaluations are also crucial to the success of any technology program. Do the administrators know what to look for? Are the teachers meeting their technology goals? Is there a need for targeted professional development? Outstanding teachers should be identified and encouraged to share their successful integration strategies with others.

It's About Teaching

Technology is a catalyst. Certainly, it has the potential to make good instruction better, but it can quickly make bad instruction even worse. As any good technology director, curriculum director, or superintendent can tell you, instruction begins and ends with the teacher. A successful school technology program isn't about technology, it's about teaching.

Straight From Students: Smart Tips for Searching Online

175715671-1
Karoline Hestsveen, a high school student in Norway, collaborated with 26 other students and teacher Ann Michaelsen to write the interactive digital book Connected Learners: A Step-By-Step Guide to Creating a Global Classroom, a collection of anecdotes, tips, and ideas to help educators design their classrooms into student-driven, globally connected learning spaces. Karoline wrote the following chapter about using smart search tactics.

The Internet is full of useful information. You can find everything from food recipes, new jobs, news, and information on various topics. Most students use the internet to find information, because there is so much information about almost anything you can imagine to be found on the web. Imagine searching for information about Facebook on Google, you will get 20,270,000,000 results.

Since anyone can put up anything there, you are likely to find false information. It is important to be able to tell the difference between false and correct information. The result for Facebook will give you many different results and how do you know what to trust and what to use? Most people settle for the first three results. There are many questions you can ask yourself, and many things to look for when you are considering the relevance of web sites.

      The first thing you can do is to look at the URL. The URL is the address of the page, the link.

      • Is this a personal site? Personal sites are often more likely to present one person’s subjective opinion. The information may not be neutral, and may just be presenting the page owner’s opinions, rather than good information.
      • To decide this, you can look for personal names in the URL, or words like “users,” “members” or “people.”
      • It is also a good idea to look at the domain. Domains are the ending of the address, the .com or .org.
        • Government sites use .gov
        • Educational sites use .edu
        • Nonprofit organizations use .org

        cover_mock__87309.1369095130.1280.1280

The next thing to do is to evaluate the author. What do you know?

    • See if the name of the author is recognized by either you, or is he/she associated by a known organization?
    • Is there any contact information about the author? If there is, you can contact the author to get more information, or ask about his/her position and opinions. It is important to decide whether you have found just an opinion or gossip, or if it is a relevant, factual text.
    • You also need to consider the date of the publishing. If it was written ten years ago, the facts are very likely to have changed. It is very important to use up to date facts.
    • Are there any sources? It is a very good idea to check out the sources the author has used. Maybe they are even better than what the author has created. Alternatively,maybe the sources prove to be not reliable at all.
    • It can also be very useful to look up what others say.
    • Google the author and see if you can find any information on him/her.
    • Go to Alexa.com and paste in the link in the search box. You will find traffic details, related links, and ownership info about the domain name.
    • Google the site and see what comes up. It is often a good idea to see what sort of pages that links to the page you are looking up.These simple steps can help you to evaluate whether the information you have found is false or not. It is always important to remember that everyone can post anything on internet, and it is important to check your sources twice. We used these sources: Johns Hopkins, and UC Berkeley.

Thursday 18 December 2014

4 Things Employers Look For When They Google You

girl typing on computerEvernote

Want to know what 80% of employers do before they invite you for an interview?

They Google you.

If this surprises you, then this article is exactly what you need to read. In today’s workforce, employers value transparency when recruiting and hiring candidates, so you need to make sure your online presence is clean and honest.

When employers search for you on Google, they don’t do it to intentionally find negative things about you. They simply want to get to know their applicants so they can better select candidates for an interview. This is why you need to take into consideration the top four things employers look for when they Google candidates:

1. A professional headshot

Whenever possible, employers want to know what their applicants look like. Make sure you have a professional photo of you on your online networks and website so employers can see you. This doesn’t have to be a photo taken by a professional, but it should be a photo of you in professional attire with good lighting.

2. Your online portfolio

The next things employers want to find out is how much of your work and accomplishments can be found online. An online portfolio is a great way to showcase what you’ve displayed on your resume and build credibility for yourself as a job seeker. This way, employers will have a better idea of what you accomplished and what you could do for their company once hired.

3. The size of your digital footprint

Employers also want to know how you present yourself and interact with others online. Research shows 96% of recruiters use LinkedIn to search for candidates. This should be an indicator that you should have a complete LinkedIn profile in addition to the other social networks you use. If you don’t have yourself connected to these online profiles, then you could be missed by employers when they search for job seekers in your field.

4. Your character and behavior

Not only do employers want to know your qualifications for the position, but they also want to know how you’d fit in with their culture. Employers Google candidates to assess their personalities and behavior online. They’ll often check to see whether or not you bad-mouth previous employers or coworkers online and the type of content you share.

The bottom line — employers want to assess your credibility

The purpose behind searching candidates on Google is to find out whether you are the professional you say you are in your resume and cover letter. By looking at the factors mentioned above, employers can find out whether or not you are a good candidate for their company. Plus, the more you care about your online presence and reputation, the more likely you are to land an interview when an employer Googles your name.

One bad tweet can be costly to a student athlete

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/sports/high-school/2014/09/11/social-media-student-athletes-twitter/15473399/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin=

Fairport boys basketball coach Scott Fitch talks about the impact of social media on the future of teens. Video by Jeff DiVeronica

 21268 1923 50LINKEDIN 1COMMENTMORE

Three years ago, Scott Fitch couldn't believe what he was hearing. A college coach recruiting two of his Fairport High School boys basketball players called to say how much he liked what he saw after watching them play an AAU game, and that he thought both were good enough to see court time on his team as freshmen.

"But we're going to stop recruiting one of them," the college coach said.

Stunned, Fitch asked why.

Related: Schools use Twitter for immediate updates

"We found his Twitter account, looked through it and some of what we saw isn't representative of what our university is about," the recruiter explained.

With seemingly every teenager active these days on social media, that type of conversation happens now more often than you might think. It led Fitch to find out more so that the 43-year-old could teach his players and fellow coaches at Fairport what's appropriate and inappropriate for high school students to post on Facebook, Instagram and, most prominently now, Twitter. Since then, he has done more than 40 presentations at area schools with students, coaches, faculty and parents..

Fitch also has presented "Pause Before You Post," at a Section V Sportsmanship Summit and to administrators on the state level.

"Never let a 140 character tweet cost you a $140,000 scholarship," Brandon Chambers, an assistant men's basketball coach at Marymount (Virginia) University, tweeted on Aug. 25.

On some recruiting forms, colleges ask for a student's social media screen names or addresses.

More schools are using Twitter to give their athletes recognition, in-game updates or final scores. But any individual student can stir up trouble with a single comment, picture or online conversation, and that extends well beyond just an elite athlete trying to get a scholarship. Teens complaining about playing time, bickering with a teammate or trash-talking an opponent have forced coaches to be more vigilant about their players' online activity. It's not as frequent as preparing a plan for the next practice or game, but it's something coaches simply can't ignore.

"It's here to stay and we either get up with the times and figure out how to get through it or we'll be sorry," said veteran Rush-Henrietta football coach Joe Montesano, who'll occasionally tweet inspirational sayings or messages for his players to see. "I think it's part of the education process as a teacher and coach. We try to model for them, try to teach them how to do it the right way."

The wrong way can happen as soon as a student-athlete hits "Send."

"It's instant and it's public and some kids don't realize that," said Gates Chili athletic director Ken Hammel, who is Monroe County's representative on Section V Sportsmanship Committee. "You can start a pretty big disruption with one comment that is tweeted or retweeted and taken the wrong way. It could offend an entire district."

Twitter-cool

Local schools are now starting to include a student's online activity as part of their code of conduct. In Hilton, for example, it's covered under the citizenship category for "inappropriate use of technology/media."

Why did Twitter supplant Facebook among teens as the place to be online?

"When Facebook became more popular with adults and when their parents and grandparents got on (Facebook) it shifted for kids," said Michael Gaio, eMedia editor for Athletic Business. "Facebook no longer was cool."

It became the "hangout" your parents knew about and could monitor, so kids found a new, more private (at least from their parents) space. Now Twitter is becoming old hat, so teens are trending toward Instagram, which is posting pictures (no text) that can receive "Likes" or comments. That can be dangerous, too.

"The big things for kids is to see how many 'Likes' they can get so the more outrageous your picture is, the more 'Likes' you might get so that's a potential pitfall," said Pittsford's Scott Barker, one of the more active athletic directors statewide on Twitter, providing game updates and pictures of games and his athletes.

Many parents have Twitter accounts just to spy on their kids' online activity. Penfield girls soccer coach Libbie Tobin doesn't worry about that much, but said she "can sense when something is going on," among her players that might become a problem, so she'll remind them and say, "Hey, I don't want to hear about anything on Twitter."

Good team captains police their own squads, a couple of students said.

"If I see someone on our team saying something (on Twitter), I'll say, 'Hey, it's not worth it. Maybe you should take that that down (and delete it).' Then it's their choice," said Hilton girls soccer midfielder Alex DiVasta, a senior captain.

R-H junior quarterback Jared Gerbino said Montesano reminds his players often to be careful what they post. There has been trash talk at R-H in the past that he's noticed. "Nothing major, just like 'We're going to kick your butt,' " he said. Gerbino tries to steer clear of it.

Last fall, a wide receiver at one Monroe County school tweeted at a defensive back for another saying he was going to have a big night against him. When a girls soccer player for one school rubbed it in with a tweet about the Honeoye Falls-Lima girls losing the state title match, 1-0, an HF-L player reminded that girl that the Cougars had beaten her team in the sectional final.

Aquinas boys basketball coach Mike Grosodonia takes his players' phones before each game so they can't tweet while it's going on. "I've heard of kids going in at halftime and getting on Twitter if they're crushing a team or something," he said. No parent has taken issue with that, he said.

"They're kids. Sometimes they make mistakes, just like we did," Grosodonia said.

But now it's online and that almost always means it's instantly public, which can create more problems.

Turn-off to college

After that phone call, what Fitch found later that night after scrolling through his players' Twitter feeds wasn't anything criminal or drug-related.

"Classic kid stuff, just not thinking," Fitch said. "He used some vulgar language. There was some partying stuff."

That was enough. In the most competitive age for scholarship money, kids can't afford to take the chance.

East Rochester graduate Ron Whitcomb Jr., now in his eighth year as an assistant football coach at Old Dominion University, said he'll research a recruit's social media presence before he even makes any contact with the player, which per NCAA rules can't happen before the start of his junior.

"You've got to dig through all the avenues you can," said Whitcomb, 30, who is ODU's recruiting coordinator.

He'll check for a Facebook profile, Twitter and now Instagram — all tools he may later use to keep in touch with the player. Recently, ODU stopped recruiting a quarterback because it didn't like what it found on his Facebook profile. There was vulgar language, some pictures with the player posing with his tongue out. "He looked like Miley Cyrus," Whitcomb said. "That can't be the face of your team (as a QB)."

Another "turn-off," Whitcomb said, was finding a player posted too often for ODU's taste. "Sixteen posts a day? He was on social media too much," he said. "Is he spending enough time on important stuff?"

Anything that's racially insensitive or sexist is also a red flag, he said. Old Dominion, he said, is probably one of about 10 college football teams that doesn't allow its players to post on Twitter.

Whitcomb doesn't want to come off as "holier than thou," he said, but he wants teens to know these are factors recruiters watch when evaluating a player's character. In late July, Penn State stopped recruiting a player because of social media. "Actually glad I got to see the 'real' person before offered him," tweeted offensive line coach Herb Hand, a native of Westmoreland, near Utica.

Hand later elaborated to an online publication, 247sports.com, saying: "If a guy makes the decision to post or (retweet) stuff that degrades women, references drug use or cyber-bullying crap, then I can make the decision to drop them, especially if I have discussed it with them prior, and especially in today's climate of athletics."

JDIVERON@DemocratandChronicle.com

Friday 12 December 2014

From Texting to Plagiarism, How to Stop High-Tech Cheating

With the proliferation of mobile devices and instant access to the internet, cheating has become easier than ever. What can educators do to stop it?
This article originally appeared in T.H.E. Journal's August 2013 digital edition.
High-tech cheating on a phone
The 21st century classroom is a wonder of online tools and content that students can access from an ever-evolving range of personal mobile devices with capabilities only dreamed of less than a decade ago. (Just imagine: The first iPhone was released in 2007!) But the anywhere/anytime access these devices provide to vast web resources, sprawling social networks, and real-time communication has spawned a new kind of cheating in K-12 environments--an easier, tech-enabled version of bad behavior that is as old as the classroom, but with the potential to compromise virtually every aspect of modern student assessment.
What we're calling high-tech cheating has been characterized variously as a trend, an epidemic, and a plague. But it might be something even worse: a paradigm shift. More students than ever are using information technology in ways that break the rules of academic integrity, and a shocking number of them don't seem to think they're doing anything wrong--well, not that wrong. They're taught, after all to use these tools and resources to work together on class projects. They swarm over shared Google Docs, interact on assignment-related Facebook pages, and coordinate team efforts via text message. For digital natives, some have argued, sharing information is so natural and so often encouraged that lines that were once so bright and clear are blurring.
Things get even blurrier when you factor in the examples presented by educators in headline-grabbing revelations of their own disrespect of the rules. In the past couple of years, teacher-related cheating scandals have erupted in Atlanta; El Paso, TX; Washington, DC; and Columbus, OH. According to the US Government Accountability Office, 32 states have reported "canceling, invalidating, or nullifying test scores from individual students, schools, or districts because of suspected or confirmed cheating by school officials [emphasis ours]" for the 2010-11 and 2011-12 school years.
What Is High-Tech Cheating?
The web is a rich resource of shameless cheating strategies. YouTube is rife with examples. "How to cheat on all of your tests," reads the listing for one video. Click on it and you get step-by-step instructions on how to copy a beverage label and replace all the nutritional information with, say, your physics notes. "Make sure you get enough glue on the bottle," the video advises. "Once you have this done, you'll have your notes, but nobody will know except you!" Web developer Josh May makes this particular process even easier on his Pirate Weasel website, where he provides a printer-ready water bottle label onto which notes can be cut and pasted.
But the high-tech cheating ball was already rolling way back in the digital Stone Age of 2004, when this activity was briefly called "cybercheating." At that time,Santa Clara University (CA) researchers Stacey Conradson and Pedro Hernández-Ramos declared that "…the preponderance of statistical and anecdotal evidence underscores several disturbing trends, indicating that cheating at the secondary level is not only occurring more frequently, but that students are using much more sophisticated methods for their transgressions."
Five years later, a 2009 report from Common Sense Media included the results of a national poll conducted by the Benenson Strategy Group, which found that more than 35 percent of teens admitted to cheating with cell phones and the internet. The cheating involved texting answers to one another during tests, using notes and information stored on smartphones, and downloading papers from the internet to turn in as their own work.
So if high-tech cheating is nothing new, why haven't we solved the problem? According to Doug Winneg, CEO and founder of Software Secure. "On one level, the issue is simple. If left unchecked, students cheat; properly proctored, they don't. What complicates the situation is the evolution of extremely powerful, mobile technology and its ability to connect students to the web and to each other."
Winneg's company has been using technology to keep students from cheating since 1999, when it developed a patented software system that locked down student laptops and automatically turned them into secure test-taking terminals. In 2006 the company began focusing on the burgeoning world of online education and added remote proctoring systems to its product lineup.
The company's Remote Proctor Suite is a high-tech solution to a high-tech problem. The system authenticates a student's identity biometrically and then records video and audio of the exam environment. (It's called a record-and-review online testing model.) Winneg's company found a market for this solution because of the acute needs of online programs to prove their credibility. But he argues that a vigilant proctoring strategy can also go a long way toward solving high-tech cheating problems in traditional environments.
"The students know we're watching, because we tell them we're watching," he says. "Watching, listening, and recording. We clearly articulate what we're doing when we proctor an exam so that the students won't feel tempted. The deterrent power is incredible."
The long-term solution to the high-tech cheating problem, Winneg says, must include thoughtful and consistent monitoring of exams (whether online or in the classroom) coupled with a well-understood, published exam policy that spells out for students what is and isn't allowed.
Putting Down the Phone
If the primary instrument of high-tech cheating is the smartphone, why not simply ban the devices during exams? A growing number of schools around the country are taking that approach. Along with banning cell phones from test environments, the state of California has gone so far as to deploy a team from the state education department and the national Educational Testing Service to check social media sites "every 15 minutes" to see if students have snapped pictures of tests and posted them online. (Last year, 36 questions from standardized exams in the state showed up on social media sites, the Los Angeles Times reported.)
A Southern California high school junior who asked not to be identified says that her experience suggests that a ban alone won't do much to curtail cell-phone-enabled cheating if the teachers aren't paying attention. "I have a lot of teachers who say, 'Put your cell phones in your backpacks,' but then just sit at their desks when we take the tests," she says. "And they never look up. It's just really easy to cheat in those classes. You just keep your cell phone in your lap under your desk and look down. I don't see people doing it all the time, but it definitely happens."
Cell phones are not permitted in public high schools in New York City, and yet cell-phone-enabled cheating grabbed the spotlight last year when a group of students at NYC's Stuyvesant High School were caught texting photos of test pages and sharing information about state Regents Exams--while they were taking them.
Stuyvesant is one of the country's most prestigious public schools. According to Thomas Zadrozny, who as a junior reported on the incident for the school newspaper The Spectator, "It's a very high pressure environment, and a group of students turned to cheating as a way to get through it. We dubbed it 'the cheating ring.' The way it worked was, one student coordinated efforts by a bunch of them to exchange answers on exams, both in school and on state exams, at the end of the 2012 school year."
Zadrozny's story ("Stuyvesant Cheating Ring Exposed"), which he cowrote with Kaveri Sengupta and Jordan Wallach, with reporting by Arielle Gerber, appeared in The Spectator on Sept. 9, 2012. The story notes that the students weren't caught, precisely: One student, who was apparently included in the cheating ring reluctantly, came forward and told administrators that students were sharing answers via cell phones.
"It was common for teachers not to monitor exams very well," Zadrozny adds. "I'm not blaming them, but they do need to wake up to the reality that this is going on, and they need to be more vigilant during a test."
This advice could be especially important for New York City schools in the future, given that nearly every candidate currently running for to succeed Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who instituted a ban on student cell phones, is promising to drop the ban. Lifting it, they say, would allow parents to make sure that their children are safe.
Zadrozny, who heads to the University of Washington to start college this fall, insists that the much-publicized incident doesn't reflect the character of his school. "You shouldn't get the idea that everyone in the school does it," he says. "This was the largest example, but this is a huge school, and most of the students are on the right path. And this isn't just a Stuyvesant thing. This is happening at every high school in the country. Our students just got caught."
Search Is Not Research 
Not all students plagiarize, but enough of them do to justify some of the hyperbolic language characterizing this form of high-tech cheating. Each year,Turnitin, a company that has become something of a household name among plagiarism-detection services, conducts what's called a matched content analysis. In 2012, the company searched 38 million student papers for matches to online content. About 10 million of those papers were written by secondary school students; the rest were written by college and university students. Among the papers searched, the company turned up 156 million matches to previously published online content. Unsurprisingly, the number one online source for those matches was Wikipedia. Among the secondary school papers, the second most popular source of those matches was Yahoo Answers.
"Think about that!" says Jason Chu, senior education manager at Turnitin. "You have students who are writing papers, and their version of doing research, which is really informed by their social habits, is to go to a social sharing site. What's the credibility behind Yahoo Answers? It doesn't make any sense, but it sheds light on the challenge students are facing when it comes to research online."
For many students born in the digital age, Chu says, research means search. "The irony, of course, is that there's so much information available to students online that they don't know how to parse," Chu says. "They don't know how to interpret it, how to evaluate it, how to make sense of it."
And they don't really understand who owns it. "Copyright and intellectual property rights are often a fuzzy concept for students," Chu says. "I've had instructors tell me that students who've been caught turning in papers they purchased online are actually confused about why they were in trouble. They'd say, 'Sure, I bought this, but it's mine. What's the problem here?' "
Companies like Turnitin are providing what increasingly might be considered standard tools in K-12, but there are some misconceptions about how these tools work, Chu says. "We don't actually identify plagiarism," he explains. "There really is no true plagiarism-detection service out there, one that will unequivocally and with full confidence identify plagiarism. You can't teach a machine to parse intent. What all plagiarism detection services do is identify and compare matched content. It's really up to the instructor to look at the those matches and decide whether it's a case of poor citation, a student who simply forgot to put in the quotation marks, or did they copy the content in a way that's not appropriate."
Making that job more challenging, adds Chu, is the fact that "this generation of digital natives writes every day. Previous generations would write for assignments. Nowadays, students are writing all the time. They're text-messaging. They're sharing on social media sites like Facebook. But they're writing, and it's easy for them to conflate content information that they share, that they use and access every day, and apply that perspective to how they produce school papers."
  
Collaboration Blurs the Lines 
Digital natives are also so used to working together online that there's often genuine confusion about the difference between cheating and collaborating.
"Teachers need to be mindful of the collision of students' social media activities with their school activities," says Chu. "It's the same tools, the same process, the same screen, the same interaction. But there are different rules. Teachers need to establish clear parameters and show their students that there's a difference between cutting and pasting in a status update on Facebook and original material written for a class blog or discussion forum."
Students in hybrid classrooms are especially vulnerable, Chu believes. Confusion is almost inevitable in classes that conduct business both on and offline--unless teachers make it a point to clarify distinctions. The Southern California high school junior puts it this way: "It is confusing! A lot of my teachers tell us to work together on our homework, but I think they're more trusting about us working together in person, and they don't want us doing it online so much. Or they dowant us to work together online, because that's how we do it in that class. And we just do it that way anyway all the time. But it's not cheating; it's just the way we do our schoolwork."
All this line-blurring can be especially challenging for some teachers, says Neal Taparia, cofounder of online bibliography service EasyBib. "It's difficult for educators who were in school in a pre-internet world to relate to how students are collaborating and researching today," he says. "It's an entirely different world, and I'd almost say that they need to become students again to effectively understand what students are doing and how best to address the problems they face."
"Digital natives are attuned to sharing files and helping each other out," says Dorothy Mikuska, a veteran high school English teacher and founder of ePen&Inc, which makes the PaperToolsPro bibliography tool. "We've taught them well to collaborate in this way. But the transparency of doing their own work is not as significant to them. They're not as motivated to be as careful about citing sources."
"Kids do learn in groups today," says Software Secure's Winneg. "They live in a highly connected world, and it's second nature for them to go online to get answers and to reach out to friends for help. And many teachers are encouraging them to do that in their daily schoolwork. So this confusion between collaboration and cheating is about more than just monitoring student test takers. This is a learning generation, but they're used to having instant access to information online--which is the good news and the bad news."

How to Stop High-Tech Cheating
Cheating isn't a new phenomenon, of course, but never before have teachers had to cope with such powerful tools and enticements. Although technologies such as adaptive testing, which gives different questions to each student, and test-response analysis, which looks for test-answer irregularities, are emerging, the most effective current strategies for coping with the problem depend primarily on awareness, understanding, and a relatively low-tech set of best practices.
Here are five straightforward strategies from the experts:
1) Prohibit cell phones in the room during a test. The modern smartphone is "the lock-pick of cheating," says Doug Winneg, CEO and founder of Software Secure. The devices can store large databases of test answers, send and receive answers among friends in real time, and connect to Wikipedia. If the school policy allows students to bring cell phones to school, consider collecting them at the door on test day.
2) Proctor exams properly. That means walking around among the desks, not sitting at the front of the classroom. "Left unchecked, this generation cheats; properly proctored, they don't," says Winneg. Cell phones open a huge door to the internet, but they fit in the palm of your hand and are easy to hide. It's just not enough to tell students to put them in their backpacks or even to confiscate them at the door--students might have another hidden away.
3) Establish a clear set of rules. It's obvious, even to digital natives, that texting test answers to each other is cheating, but how about reaching out on a social network for help from a classmate on a homework project? The line between collaboration and cheating is truly a blurry one for students using online educational resources, Winneg says, and policies vary from class to class. Teachers who understand the potential for confusion should draw a clear line with written policies and those policies should, if at all possible, be schoolwide.
4) Demonstrate the difference between research and "search"--literally. Let students look over your shoulder while you research and write a short paper, recommends Neal Taparia, cofounder of EasyBib. "When you learn tennis, you're seeing someone swing the racket and you can really see what's going on," he says. "But students never see how their teacher would like them to go about discovering sources, connecting the dots among sources, and developing their own ideas. If you could teach that by example, I think it would be a unique step in the right direction."
5) Focus on developing information literacy skills. "I think most K-12 students think that plagiarism is just handing in someone else's paper," says Dorothy Mikuska, a former high school English teacher and founder of ePen&Inc. "But the idea of citing sources and properly attributing them is not something that they necessarily connect to plagiarism." Another important issue, she says, is citing theright sources. "You have all this user-generated content out there, but students don't differentiate."
6 Digital Literacy Resources
One of the most effective ways to address and reduce the instances of digital cheating is to promote, teach, and model positive digital behavior in three key areas: digital literacy (critical thinking when watching, interacting with, and creating media), ethics (codes of conduct), and safety (understanding digital risks, from malware to dangerous people and information). Here are a few resources to help schools promote the teaching of such skills.
21st Century Information Fluency Project (21CIF) provides professional development and resources for educators to help students locate, evaluate, and use digital information more effectively, efficiently, and ethically.
Cable in the Classroom is the education outreach arm of the cable industry, with a mission that includes promoting digital citizenship. Its website offers a number of resources for educators.
The Center for Media Literacy is an organization dedicated to promoting and supporting media literacy education as a framework for accessing, analyzing, evaluating, creating, and participating with media content.
Media Literacy Clearinghouse is operated by digital literacy expert Frank Baker. The site offers an aggregation and evaluation of media literacy teaching resources.
New Media Literacies, a research initiative based within the University of Southern California's Annenberg School for Communication, looks at the challenges for educators and students living in a "participatory culture." The site includes white papers and teaching guides.
SOS for Information Literacy, a web-based multimedia resource funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Services, includes lesson plans, handouts, presentations, videos, and other resources to enhance the teaching of information literacy.
About the Author
John K. Waters is a freelance journalist and author based in Palo Alto, CA.