10 SETIEMBRE

10 SETIEMBRE

10 SEPTEMBER

by GESTION DEL CONOCIMIENTO INSNSB · View the channel on PSI

Humanities, Social Sciences & Thought Economics & Finance KJMManagement and management techniquesKJMKKnowledge management
🎙 GESTION DEL CONOCIMIENTO INSNSB 👥 778 📅 September 21, 2026 ⏱ 51 min 👁 0 📄 tutorial 🧭 2026-09-21
Available in: English (current) Français

Keywords

Turnitinsimilarity scoreAI writing detectionacademic misconductinstitutional policy

Summary

The video is a training session conducted by an administrator at an academic institute, demonstrating the use of Turnitin (originality check) for detecting similarity and AI-generated content in student manuscripts. The presenter walks through the administrator, instructor, and student views, showing how to upload documents, review similarity percentages, and interpret AI detection scores. Several examples are presented: a document with 15% similarity and 41% AI score, and another with 51% similarity without AI flags. The key message is that these percentages are merely indicators and must be analyzed qualitatively by considering context, proper citation, and paraphrasing. The presenter emphasizes the need to communicate with authors, not automatically reject high scores, and to exclude trivial matches (like indexes or small word chains). The video also reviews institutional policies from the institute’s journals, which mandate declaration of AI use and do not set fixed percentage thresholds. Finally, advice is given on maintaining paraphrasing skills and using AI ethically, referencing the institute’s guidelines.

160 words

Critical Evaluation

Value of the Information & Strength of the Argument

The video provides valuable practical insights for educators and researchers on how to use Turnitin effectively, often overlooked in academic settings. It stresses the importance of human judgment over automated scores, aligning with best practices in academic integrity. The argumentation is clear and experience-based, with concrete examples illustrating false positives and the need for contextual assessment. The presenter acknowledges Turnitin’s commercial nature and its evolving features, but does not offer external validation or compare with other tools, which slightly limits the robustness of the claims.

Scientific Rigor, Source Quality, Title Accuracy

The video references institutional policies from journals such as ‘Investigación e Innovación Clínica Quirúrgica’ and the ‘revista pediátrica del INSN’, but does not provide citations or URLs. The demonstrated usage of Turnitin is based on hands-on practice, yet no independent verification of the tool’s accuracy is given. The title ‘10 SETIEMBRE’ is irrelevant to the content, failing to inform viewers about the educational purpose. However, the presentation is internally consistent and aligns with common guidelines from academic publishing bodies, though it would benefit from citing formal sources.

187 words

Title / Content Match

The title '10 SETIEMBRE' is a simple date without reference to the content, which is a training session on Turnitin usage and interpretation. It does not hint at the educational substance, making it misleading for potential viewers.

Quality & Reliability

7/10

The video is a practical tutorial from an institutional perspective, demonstrating Turnitin's features and discussing interpretation of similarity and AI detection scores. It acknowledges limitations and emphasizes qualitative review, aligning with established academic integrity practices. However, it is not a formal scientific study and relies on institutional experience rather than peer-reviewed evidence.

Key Moments

Markers derived by PSI from the transcript: the creator did not define chapters.

Cited Sources

  • Turnitin Originality Check — The main tool demonstrated for similarity and AI detection in documents.
  • Políticas editoriales de la revista Investigación e Innovación Clínica Quirúrgica — Institutional journal policies on similarity analysis and AI use, mentioned by the presenter.
  • Revista pediátrica del INSN — Policies on AI use and declaration requirements for authors, referenced in the video.

Contribution & Novelties

This video offers a hands-on, practical perspective on using Turnitin in a real academic setting, emphasizing qualitative interpretation over blind reliance on scores. It provides a nuanced view that AI detection is not definitive and must be verified through dialogue with authors. This is valuable for educators developing institutional guidelines.

Pour aller plus loin :

  • Turnitin on Wikipedia — Background on the tool’s features and limitations.
  • Plagiarism detection — General overview of methods and challenges.
  • COPE guidelines on AI use in academic publishing — Ethical considerations for AI in scholarly work, though the exact URL may not be specific; better to link: COPE position on AI — Note: I’m not entirely sure of this exact URL, so I’ll omit it and just mention COPE without URL to avoid risk.

129 words

Radar Profile

The radar profile shows moderate to high scores across information quantity, quality, and reliability, with a slightly lower technical depth. The video excels in providing practical examples and institutional context, but lacks academic rigor in citing formal sources, resulting in a balanced but not exceptional profile.

Reliability 7/10