In 2021, I started my new role as the Digital Education Partner for the School of Psychology.  My main remit has been to collaborate closely with the school's Director of Learning and Teaching (DLT) to provide support and advice to staff and students on the effectiveness of using learning technology in their day-to-day teaching and learning.

During one of the school’s Digital Strategy Group meetings, I discovered that instead of using the widely adopted online marking system, Turnitin (Tii), which is centrally supported by the University, the school has a bespoke marking system that utilise Blackboard Assignment for collecting submissions, distributing assignments to markers, collecting grades, and, if needed, redistributing them to students with feedback and scores.

This system employs Blackboard Assignment for the submission of student coursework. The coursework is then downloaded and distributed to markers using a custom in-house system, comprising EssayMover (a bespoke tool developed for the marking process) and crib sheets, specifically designed for efficient allocation to markers. After marking is completed, the coursework, along with the feedback, is returned to the education team for final processing. Ultimately, students receive their graded assignments and marker comments from the education team.

This workflow presents several limitations that could escalate into more significant challenges. A key concern is its reliance on a limited number of staff members, creating a single point of failure and diverting these individuals from their primary roles, as they are often required to provide technical support during system failures. Additionally, the bespoke system is prone to technical issues, such as problems with long file names and file access conflicts among staff, leading to considerable delays.

Furthermore, the workflow necessitates an extra layer of verification to ensure consistency between marksheets and the actual marks on assignments, adding to the administrative workload.

Considering these challenges, I have put forward a proposal for the integration of Turnitin. This platform, widely embraced by many schools within the University, offers an advanced suite of features designed to streamline the submission and marking process. While the School of Psychology had previously evaluated Turnitin and decided against its implementation, I judged that recent developments over the past few years made a re-evaluation worthwhile.

Turnitin's integration presents targeted solutions to some of the immediate challenges. It offers dedicated university-level support, reducing the risk of overburdening individual staff members and preventing a single point of failure, thereby freeing up staff to focus on their core educational responsibilities. The platform's seamless integration with Learning Central counters the disjointed submission and feedback processes, streamlining the workflow for academic staff and students. Additionally, Turnitin addresses the current limitation of shared drive usage; for example, external examiners who can no longer access essays on the shared drive will now benefit from Turnitin's robust storage and access methods. The diverse feedback mechanisms available within Turnitin, such as feedback studio and rubric scoring, also directly tackle the issue of one-dimensional feedback, facilitating a richer evaluative conversation between educators and students.

In addition to directly addressing specific challenges, Turnitin offers several other significant advantages. The platform provides comprehensive, well-maintained documentation that empowers staff with the resources they need for easy and informed use. Turnitin's workflow is also optimized for marking. This means faster and more efficient grading processes. As a result, grades are returned more quickly. Additionally, Turnitin is well-supported within our University. It has a wide range of resources and training opportunities. Other schools within the University, who have long utilised Turnitin have a wealth of knowledge and best practices to share. This collective experience helps all users.

In light of this, I initiated a limited test of the Turnitin software and with the approval of the Board of Studies, to evaluate if the potential benefits outweighed the costs.  I worked closely with the academic team on one module to tailor the system to their needs, enhancing the experience for both staff and students. To measure the enhancement, I collected feedback from both staff and students. Staff responses indicated a generally positive reception towards the new process, despite a few hiccups and technical glitches. This feedback not only confirmed the benefits of the system's adoption but also highlighted areas for further refinement, ensuring a more seamless experience in future implementations.

However, transitioning to a new system like Turnitin is not without its challenges. We identified several technical issues and limitations, particularly when compared to the existing workflow.

Turnitin's Limitations

• Availability Windows: Unlike Blackboard, which allows staff to set different availability windows for students, Turnitin lacks this flexibility, creating an increased workload for the education team who must then set up separate portals.
• Anonymous Marking Complexities: Turnitin's anonymity settings differ from Blackboard's, posing workflow challenges. For instance, distinguishing between late and Extenuating Circumstances (EC) students becomes problematic. Once anonymity is enabled in Turnitin, it cannot be reversed in batch, and individual reveals are permanent.
• Restricted File Types: Turnitin limits the types of files that can be submitted, posing a challenge for video and audio-based assignments.
• Single File Submission: While Blackboard supports multiple file submissions, Turnitin restricts submissions to one file at a time, with new submissions overwriting the previous ones.
• Group Assignments: Turnitin does not support group assignments, unlike Blackboard assignment.
• Various technical issues and challenges: I've encountered and addressed various limitations and technical challenges. These ranged from system instability, like server outages during critical submission periods, to integration issues with Blackboard Ultra, where non-standard grading schemes did not translate correctly and updates to marks were not consistently reflected. Each issue presented its own challenges but also a great opportunity for me to gain deeper understanding of the system to prevent similar issues from happening again in the future.

In response to these challenges, I provided additional guidance and devised workarounds. Issues were reported to our IT department and Turnitin for further investigation and resolution. These experiences have not only honed my problem-solving skills but also underscored the importance of flexibility and resilience in evolving digital learning environments. I have documented all identified issues and their solutions for future reference, ensuring a structured resource is available for guiding future implementations.

While Turnitin does have its limitations, there are usually workarounds or new procedures that can be established to address these limitations. However, I sometimes reflect that the most significant challenges often arise from the fear of change, for example:

• The fear of increased workload for staff.