ucas copycatch

Surely it is more than 10%. You would have to literally copy someone else's statement for it to detect it. Common phrasing and words do not constitute plagiarism.

Reply 4

It would have to be more than 10% given the sheer volume of applicants talking about the same ******** there will be duplication - infinite monkeys, typewriters and that.

Reply 5

gm88

OP

I think it's 10% here's the link:
http://www.ucas.com/students/startapplication/apply09/personalstatement/similaritydetection

Reply 6

Rock n Roll

"The Copycatch process ignores 450 commonly used words that many applicants almost inevitably use in their statements such as 'and', 'so' and 'with', and also ignores a selection of commonly used words and phrases including 'Duke of Edinburgh' and 'football'."

Idiot. And its not like thats it if the automatic system flags the statement, just means a real person will check through then obviously see its not copied!!!!

Reply 7

Rock n Roll

Idiot. And its not like thats it if the automatic system flags the statement, just means a real person will check through then obviously see its not copied!!!!

Which, interestingly, is not how the system is actually used by most universities.

Reply 8

Well as long as you do not blatantly plagiarise, then it should not be a concern. To copy 10% of your personal statement is almost five entire lines taken verbatim from another source.

Reply 9

rlw31

12

gm88

I think it's 10% here's the link:
http://www.ucas.com/students/startapplication/apply09/personalstatement/similaritydetection

That website says that any ps that has at least a 10% similarity will be reviewed, it doesn't mean that they will be flagged up as being definate examples of plagarism.

Reply 10

iheartvet

Well as long as you do not blatantly plagiarise, then it should not be a concern. To copy 10% of your personal statement is almost five entire lines taken verbatim from another source.

When hundreds of thousands of people are using the system the odds of that would appear to increase markedly.

Reply 11

In order to plagiarise, you have to copy word-for-word. A few phrases and words do not constitute plagiarism. I think that people steal whole sections of personal statements and this is what the software is designed to combat. If you lift whole sections of text, you deserve to get caught out.

Reply 12

iheartvet

In order to plagiarise, you have to copy word-for-word. A few phrases and words do not constitute plagiarism.

Technically true. But, when you have hundreds of thousands of applicants all trying to say very similar things in very similar ways do you suppose that they will all be unique and different?

I think that people steal whole sections of personal statements and this is what the software is designed to combat.

You're giving a lot of credit to a bit of software. How often have you used it? How many people have you seen 'caught' by it?

Reply 13

I am not purporting to have 'caught' people myself. But having worked as a teacher at University, I know that people even at a level higher than those in sixth form, steal ideas and words from others without quoting or citing. Therefore, I can only fathom that others do so on their statements. You can deduce this from the very existence of the software. If people did not plagiarise, then there would not be any need for the software to be developed and employed.
As to respond to your first point, do you not think that the developers of the programme would have taken this into consideration? Give them some credit...

Reply 14

iheartvet

As to respond to your first point, do you not think that the developers of the programme would have taken this into consideration? Give them some credit...

Whether they've taken it into consideration or not, software like that used on turnitin has low specificity, especially with scientific documents. What is worse is how people rely on the software, act on it's results and fail to understand it's limitations.

Reply 15

Have you used the programme? How do you know that they 'fail to understand its limitations'?

Reply 16

iheartvet

Have you used the programme? How do you know that they 'fail to understand its limitations'?

Of course I've used the program, dozens of times. People get pulled up for plagiarism all the time, far too often because they've included something like a formula or specific technical phrase, nobody bothers to check what's actually been 'plagiarised' and so students get punished for 'copying' their own work (one student had a piece of work submitted independently by their tutor and by the school office, they didn't wonder why it was 100% plagiarised they just failed her and noted her lack of probity).

Reply 17

In what capacity do you use this programme? Was this in the sciences or something?
I cannot comment on those subjects.
One could argue that it is not the programme's limitations, but of those who do not employ it correctly.

Reply 18

ThePenguinMafia

1

if it's anything like turnitin then it's easy to get around, sadly

of course your average applicant would probably fail to get around, and those that are 1337 (j/k) could quite easily write a better PS than the BS ones given as examples.

They're probably just looking for verbatim plagiarism. It's stupid though, as that "burning holes in curtains" or w/e intro I read about in the times is imo quite lame. Insincere, and probably wasn't even true from the person who originally wrote it. It doesn't say anything about the students genuine desire to do medicine, or even inform the selector about why the person is suitable. It's really cheesy, too, so I doubt it'd grab anything more than a groan

Reply 19