Swales' CARS Outline

Tyler Kingsley

Professor Moody

ENC 1102-0105

Apr. 13, 2010

Swales’ CARS Outline

Move 1: Establishing A Territory
Discussing the topic if plagiarism detection services are effective by including previously submitted student essays in its search is very important. If my research concludes that these detection services are ineffective, then teachers might stop using them altogether. Since teachers usually give the same essay assignments each year with a standard rubric, the word and sentence structure that students use are bound to repeat. When these essays are submitted into detection services, they are added to the service’s database and used against essays submitted after it. This leads to essays being marked as plagiarized, when they really aren’t. From previous research, I have found that a large number of student essays are being accused of plagiarism when they are checked against other student essays.

Move 2: Establishing A Niche
With my research, I will raise a question about existing research that I have read. My sources mainly evaluate how plagiarism detection services work and how they use student essays in their database, but they never answer how effective they are by doing this. My research will raise questions about if plagiarism detection services should included student essays, if these essays are limiting the effectiveness of the detection services, and how much of a difference there will be if these essays are excluded from their databases.

Move 3: Occupying The Niche
The purpose of my essay is to evaluate if plagiarism detection services limit their effectiveness by including previously submitted student essays in their databases. I have found that plagiarism detection services are effective except when they use student essays. If they eliminated the essays from their database, then the detection services would be almost completely effective. In my essay, I will give background information on my topic, introduce my argument, discuss previously done research, which includes statistics and case studies, and a personal experience I have with using Turnitin.

Chapter 7-8 Test

My research for Core 4 is more of an argument of definition than an argument of fact. Since my research evaluates the effectiveness of plagiarism detection services, my conclusion can only define the level of effectiveness and not give a definite answer. For example, the Lunsford text gives an example of the definition of an American. It states that an American cannot be labeled as a specific person from a specific place, but more of an idea of freedom (223). My research is similar to this argument because no one can give an exact answer to what is effective and what is not. Each individual person’s expectations, and what he or she wants to receive from a plagiarism detection service, can define the effectiveness of these services. The teachers that use plagiarism detection services view them as very effective. On the other hand, the students who have their essays submitted into these services disagree. They feel that repeated essay topics lead to similar sentence and word structures from student to student and are returned as plagiarized, when they aren’t. According to the Lunsford text, my argument of definition is considered to be an operational definition. It states “Operational definitions identify an object or idea not by what it is so much as by what it does or by the conditions that create it” (225). My research doesn’t evaluate the facts of what a plagiarism detection service is, but evaluates what it does to decrease its effectiveness.


Much like Wysocki and Eilola, my research explains that plagiarism detection services cannot be determined as effective or not as a fact. They discuss how the term “literacy” is becoming ambiguous and is losing its true meaning. The term “effective” is also losing its meaning. Wysocki and Eilola state “ Too much is hidden by ‘literacy,’ we think, too much packed into those letters” (349). Their article is directed towards defining what literacy really is without it being used as an umbrella term. My research will also be directed towards defining what students and teachers find as effective. I will define if plagiarism detection services are effective using previous student submitted essays. Selber wrote an article that also had an argument of definition. He states “ No one metaphor could be complete and sufficient by itself, but collectively they offer a diversity of perspectives…” (24). Selber means that literacy cannot simply have one true meaning, but it needs multiple meanings to fully describe itself. When related to efficiency, Selber implies that research cannot give a set answer to whether plagiarism detection services are effective. My research can only define how effective teachers think detection services are and if it is different from what students think.

Core 3 Reflection

I think that the conversation going on around my topic is fickle and will not end soon. Both sides are making good points but mainly about the time plagiarism detection services save, the accuracy of them, and the moral beliefs they violate. There is no right or wrong answer to this topic, just logical corrections that need to be made to these services.



A concern I see with my research process is the lack of student articles that are available. All of my sources are from a teacher or librarian’s point of view, and not the student’s. My articles discuss how students react to these services, but never included an interview or case study using a student. Another problem with my research is the fact that there is no right or wrong answer. The only solution I can think of is to modify the current detection services to make them fair.