← Part of the Feedback Flows toolkit
Collusion checker for copying between your own learners
Every marked rubric and automarking submission can enter your organisation's private similarity bank. See a similarity %, flag work at 50% or more, and open a side-by-side compare — never shared with other organisations. Built for UK schools, FE colleges and training providers that want collusion checker with human review, clear exports and evidence trails that fit existing quality processes.
- Organisation-only bank
- Flagged at 50% or more
- Side-by-side highlights
- Teachers see their own marking
Try without signing up
Free collusion checker
Compare two pasted submissions side by side with quotations and bibliographies automatically excluded — then use Similarity Scoring to screen every marked script across your organisation automatically.
Free collusion checker →Peer copying needs an organisation-scoped collusion checker
Writing fingerprints compare a learner with themselves. A collusion checker compares learners with each other inside your organisation after marking — useful when work looks shared across classes, friendship groups or repeated cohort tasks.
Short answers, quotes, reference lists and question text are handled carefully so tiny responses are not scored as 100% similar. Leaders open the Similarity bank for filters, pairs, charts and CSV; teachers see scores on their own results. A match is a prompt to talk to learners, not automatic proof.
Flags at 50% or more are prompts, not verdicts. Open side-by-side highlights, talk to both learners, and log the review outcome. Because the bank is organisation-only, you are not sending scripts to a public web index — easier to explain to parents, governors and data-protection leads.
Cross-class flags are where a collusion checker earns its keep. Leaders should sample pairs monthly even when day-to-day marking looks quiet. Write a one-page local policy for collusion checker: which assessments qualify, who reviews drafts, how long files are retained, and how learners receive feedback. Clear policy keeps staff confident and makes procurement or inspection conversations easier.
Where collusion checker fits
Secondary schools
Spot shared coursework phrases across parallel classes after marking. Review a sample of outputs together the first time you introduce collusion checker, then agree override norms.
Further education
Give quality leads cross-class pairs without a public plagiarism database. Review a sample of outputs together the first time you introduce collusion checker, then agree override norms.
Independent training providers
Support integrity sampling on written evidence within the organisation. Review a sample of outputs together the first time you introduce collusion checker, then agree override norms.
Higher education
Flag peer overlap on module cohorts before formal academic misconduct steps. Review a sample of outputs together the first time you introduce collusion checker, then agree override norms.
Business diploma — two classes, one shared assignment
By hand vs with similarity scoring
| Aspect | Manual | With Feedback Flows |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Rumour and spot reading across classes when deadlines are tight and staffing is thin | Organisation-wide similarity bank after marking with teacher review and an export trail before release |
| Evidence | Hard to show overlapping passages when deadlines are tight and staffing is thin | Side-by-side highlights with jump links with teacher review and an export trail before release |
| Privacy | Temptation to use public web checkers when deadlines are tight and staffing is thin | Never compared outside your organisation with teacher review and an export trail before release |
| Governance | No consistent record of reviews when deadlines are tight and staffing is thin | Logged outcomes and CSV for quality with teacher review and an export trail before release |
Mark, score, compare
Mark as usual
Complete Rubric or Automarking jobs in your organisation. Check names and classes carefully so history lands on the right learner.
See the %
Results tables show Similarity; 50%+ is flagged. Check names and classes carefully so history lands on the right learner.
Open compare
View side-by-side highlights and jump between matched passages. Check names and classes carefully so history lands on the right learner.
Record review
Log no concern, concern raised or dismissed with a note. Check names and classes carefully so history lands on the right learner.
What Similarity Scoring covers
Private bank
Never compared with other organisations. Designed to sit beside your other Feedback Flows tools for collusion checker.
Smart exclusions
Short text, quotes, schemes and common template lines handled carefully. Designed to sit beside your other Feedback Flows tools for collusion checker.
Flagged pairs
Leaders see cross-class pairs that need attention. Designed to sit beside your other Feedback Flows tools for collusion checker.
Teacher scope
Markers see similarity on their own results. Designed to sit beside your other Feedback Flows tools for collusion checker.
CSV export
Export for quality and governance reviews. Designed to sit beside your other Feedback Flows tools for collusion checker.
No AI cost
Similarity checks do not consume AI credits. Designed to sit beside your other Feedback Flows tools for collusion checker.
Side-by-side truth for a fair conversation
Open the compare view and show exactly which passages overlap before you decide next steps. Training Centre walkthroughs mirror the same collusion checker screens so new markers practise review before live work. Leaders can sample completed jobs monthly to confirm overrides stay proportionate and comments stay in the department voice.
- Highlights in both pieces of work
- Click a match to jump to its twin
- Review outcomes on the record
Research and practice
Continue exploring
Questions about collusion checker
Try Similarity Scoring on a live demo
Explore the tool with sample work, or start free with welcome credits on your own account.