Maybe at an undergraduate level it isn't necessarilly a competition, it is for anyone who plans on getting into grad school. As for student reputation goes; if my reputation is solely decided upon the basis that I have morals and I don't tolerate cheating in any form, then I could care less about what the students think of me. I think what makes a good teacher is their ability to teach the students so they understand and help in their intellectual growth, and any student who decides that a teacher is "bad" because of the teacher's cavalierity on cheating then it is the student who is of poor quality.KeyMaster45 said:
Academic Dishonesty (Cheating)
- Thread starter infinity^infinity
- Start date
Recommended Videos
There's a difference between school and science.
In school, the students or their parents pay to get edumacated.
If the student want to stay a dumbshit, it should be their own prerogative.
In science, you make contributions to science, and making stuff up is like leaving a floater in the pool.
Hurting self vs. Hurting others.
In school, the students or their parents pay to get edumacated.
If the student want to stay a dumbshit, it should be their own prerogative.
In science, you make contributions to science, and making stuff up is like leaving a floater in the pool.
Hurting self vs. Hurting others.
There are a few problems with this.
First, the punishment varies between students - some will have no problem going in front of the class and doing this (some will view this as an invitation to cheat until caught the first time), others might not be able to stomach the thought of doing that. In my experience working with undergrads, those who feel like they had to cheat, the ones you want to let off with a warning, are much more likely to fall into the second group.
Second, no reputable university would ever allow such a thing. They universally have systems in place dictating exactly what happens when a student is caught cheating. Individual professors don't have leeway in deciding how to deal with these things.
Third, the "make the students police each other" approach never works. The only thing it does well is turn the entirity of the student group against you.
Fourth, I think you make too big a deal out of the repercussions of cheating. You have to bear in mind that the overwhelming majorty, by a landslide, will never be researchers. In fact, depending on your field, it's relatively likely that they'll never do anything even related to their field of study. Those who are going to be researchers might be covering up a particular deficiency. I've known people who were absolute terrors in their field, but just couldn't do arithmetic quickly or couldn't remember formulas without some sort of reference. These are not problems you face in the real world of research. I met one girl who was a very strong philosopher, but had a particular, very rare condition that made her unable to interpret symbolic logic. And then you have the serious people who are forced to take classes that have nothing to do with their field - classes that they might struggle in or might be taking too much time from their actual focus with useless busy-work. Regarding your father's criticism, it's also possible that his expectations are just distinct from modern teaching in the field. This happens very often in technical fields.
And even if they do become researchers, this is why peer review exists, why laboratory reviews exist, et cetera. There are already controls in place to prevent this sort of thing without trying to predict who will end up falsifying data before the fact.
Finally, if they want to become researchers, they have to go to grad school. This is a much better filter than looking for cheating in undergrad careers. It is unbelievably hard to cheat your way through any remotely reputable grad program. You're talking about very personal interactions and production of original research. If you learn enough to "fake" your way through grad school, congratulations, you accidentally became an actual grad student.
First, the punishment varies between students - some will have no problem going in front of the class and doing this (some will view this as an invitation to cheat until caught the first time), others might not be able to stomach the thought of doing that. In my experience working with undergrads, those who feel like they had to cheat, the ones you want to let off with a warning, are much more likely to fall into the second group.
Second, no reputable university would ever allow such a thing. They universally have systems in place dictating exactly what happens when a student is caught cheating. Individual professors don't have leeway in deciding how to deal with these things.
Third, the "make the students police each other" approach never works. The only thing it does well is turn the entirity of the student group against you.
Fourth, I think you make too big a deal out of the repercussions of cheating. You have to bear in mind that the overwhelming majorty, by a landslide, will never be researchers. In fact, depending on your field, it's relatively likely that they'll never do anything even related to their field of study. Those who are going to be researchers might be covering up a particular deficiency. I've known people who were absolute terrors in their field, but just couldn't do arithmetic quickly or couldn't remember formulas without some sort of reference. These are not problems you face in the real world of research. I met one girl who was a very strong philosopher, but had a particular, very rare condition that made her unable to interpret symbolic logic. And then you have the serious people who are forced to take classes that have nothing to do with their field - classes that they might struggle in or might be taking too much time from their actual focus with useless busy-work. Regarding your father's criticism, it's also possible that his expectations are just distinct from modern teaching in the field. This happens very often in technical fields.
And even if they do become researchers, this is why peer review exists, why laboratory reviews exist, et cetera. There are already controls in place to prevent this sort of thing without trying to predict who will end up falsifying data before the fact.
Finally, if they want to become researchers, they have to go to grad school. This is a much better filter than looking for cheating in undergrad careers. It is unbelievably hard to cheat your way through any remotely reputable grad program. You're talking about very personal interactions and production of original research. If you learn enough to "fake" your way through grad school, congratulations, you accidentally became an actual grad student.
If you're the scientist in this analogy, the data is only fudged if YOU change it. A student who has to cheat obviously doesn't know the material. And besides, it's not like you couldn't draw conclusions from a population size of one fewer person. If you've ever taken a statistics class, you know that sometimes you have to make do with what you've got.infinity^infinity said:
In a more accurate analogy, each student would be a scientist, each test would be a research report, and you'd be the peer review process. Punishing the entire class for one person fudging their data would be roughly equivalent to refusing to publish the papers of every scientist from an entire institution because one of them turns out to have falsified some data points.
Just as an amusing side note, here's the policy from one of my current professors, straight from the course syllabus:
Right, that's more of a setup for an Art major joke. Tut tut.Evelynia said:
Back on topic though:
I encountered something like this in my Organic Chemistry class a year back. After the first midterm, the graded tests were handed back with the announcement that the professor caught multiple people cheating. If the perpetrators were to come to his office and hand their tests in by the end of the week (no questions asked), then they would receive a 0 for the test but still be able to take the class. If they chose not to, however, they would receive an F for the class and be reported to academic administration. From what I remember, about an eighth of the class was missing the following week (which I looked forward to since the lecture hall was essentially at capacity when the semester started) and the announcement never had to be repeated since.
On the subject of collective punishment, I'd have to agree with daunchy.
Purely from a scientific student, option B is saying you failed at taking the test and you should apologize for the students having to retake it.
Now punishing vertically makes a lot more sense. Declare all prior results and or degrees that student might have gotten null and void.
Now punishing vertically makes a lot more sense. Declare all prior results and or degrees that student might have gotten null and void.
No. Professors should not announce to the class a student has cheated, that's a major no-no and possibly illegal. In addition making kids hate each other will get you fired. The correct way to deal with cheating students is that if they cheat for something major, you give them an F and do everything in your power to get them expelled. Don't be mean about it and don't treat it like a punishment, just lay it out as the flat truth, cheat and you will be forced to try and expel their ass, like a natural reflex. If they cheat on something minor then give them a zero and if they continue to do then do as above. Tell them that cheating will not be tolerated and tell them to not even try it. Students will still do it but you will able to come down like hammer in the right way if you find out.
Or... how about employers actually try interviewing and testing potential employees. That would eliminate the possibility of a cheater getting rewarded for taking the easy way out and would shut your dad up about the idiots who are hired to work with him.
I've heard several times in the Navy that "if you ain't cheating, you ain't trying." Now, this is not official policy, obviously, but most senior Navy personnel I've known at least aren't stupid enough to write off all cheating as utterly reprehensible and deserving of immediate, harsh disciplinary action. And of course, there are some things you just don't cheat on because the potential cost is too high.
There are smart cheaters and dumb cheaters. Smart ones realize that cheating is a temporary solution and endeavor to improve in the area they are forced to cheat in so they don't run the risk of repeat offenses. Dumb ones just copy answers without thought and in the end almost always get caught eventually.
There are smart cheaters and dumb cheaters. Smart ones realize that cheating is a temporary solution and endeavor to improve in the area they are forced to cheat in so they don't run the risk of repeat offenses. Dumb ones just copy answers without thought and in the end almost always get caught eventually.
In the analogy I was not placing myself as the scientist, that was the class as a whole. Yes, you can choose the size of the group you are studying but that decision can only be made prior to the beginning of the experiment, and cannot be changed after the experiment has been completed. Also, if I want to know how well my class is understanding the material, by cutting the group down of which I take my average the potential error increases; and in a setting where I can easily obtain information from every member of the group, by reducing the size of the group that I actually take information from I am being irresponsible and not covering my bases.
Also, the individual achievements of scientists can, in a way, be effected by the institution they are from. An institution's reputation is made up of the reputations of every member of that institution. By simple math if even one researcher loses their credibility the gross credibility of the institute is decreased.
Also, the individual achievements of scientists can, in a way, be effected by the institution they are from. An institution's reputation is made up of the reputations of every member of that institution. By simple math if even one researcher loses their credibility the gross credibility of the institute is decreased.
Here here sir, my views on college in general match yours. I'm very sick and tired of pretentious fucking profs.KeyMaster45 said:
My main problem with option B is that classes need as much time as they can get, are you really going to throw away all of the time not only for your students, studying and retaking the test but also yourself, grading may be fairly quick if it is just a scantron but are you going to make an entirely new test just because one of your students cheated?
My economics teacher had an interesting way of dealing with cheating. On the day of the first test after all of the papers were passed out he stood up pointed behind us and and said (and this was in a 100+ person class) "You see those lights back there? Those are cameras. And if we catch you cheating we aren't going to call the administration or anything like that. We will just take you outside and kick your ass." He was just joking of course (most likely) but it was a lighthearted reminder to every person in the class that cheating was serious business and would not be tolerated.
My economics teacher had an interesting way of dealing with cheating. On the day of the first test after all of the papers were passed out he stood up pointed behind us and and said (and this was in a 100+ person class) "You see those lights back there? Those are cameras. And if we catch you cheating we aren't going to call the administration or anything like that. We will just take you outside and kick your ass." He was just joking of course (most likely) but it was a lighthearted reminder to every person in the class that cheating was serious business and would not be tolerated.
Most of the time the university itself deals with honor code/cheating infractions on its own. My university certainly does--a professor notifies the Honor Council, a student body who deals with matters of honor code violations, and the council takes everything from there and the professor doesn't have to worry about it at all.
It's not that you enforce a cheating policy that would give you the bad rep, it's that you enforce a really shitty cheating policy that punishes the group for the crimes of one individual on the assumption that the existence of one means the existence of untold others. Like I said, if someone is cheating that's not my problem, it's theirs. If they get caught it should be between you and them. Not you, them, and everyone else in the class. I'm all for punishing cheaters, cheating makes no sense in my book and it seems to require more effort than actually studying or doing the work.infinity^infinity said:
The flaw in your logic with option B is that it assumes everyone is guilty on the basis of one person. People don't appreciate being unjustly punished, regardless of how good a teacher you actually are. It would be your hamfisted methods for dealing with cheating that would garner you a bad reputation, not that students would be upset it's harder for them to cheat in your class. Students who cheat already don't care, your policy will mean nothing to them since they already have the bravado to think they're above actually learning the material. Your policy would instead inflict undue duress on students, like myself, who don't cheat and quite frankly piss us off. It punishes the wrong group of people, and it's unfortunately the group of people who appreciate that you're up at the board teaching.
You want to send a message that you don't tolerate cheating? Ruin the kids that actually do, the rest of us who don't would appreciate if we could go about our semester in your class unhindered by their stupidity. Kids who actually study already go through enough anxiety the night before a test, and you want to have a cheating policy that could potentially put them through that anxiety twice? Thanks but no thanks dude, I'll gladly take the course next semester with someone else.
As you probably know, choice A is the choice that is the university rule. You are bound by contract to always follow that rule, as are your students. So yes, choice A is the choice that you should go with. Academic Dishonesty is the worst crime in the academic world and should be treated as such by ALL professors. Just this year, my university's dean of Medicine was found guilty of plagiarism, and he was fired from the university and essentially blacklisted across the academic world. You know what he copied? A graduation speech. Not a paper, or an idea, but a graduation speech, because it was plagiarized right from the Harvard graduation speech given the year before.
And as you yourself said, it is draconian to use choice B. If a scientific journal used the same idea, then essentially they would force every author to not only resubmit, but rewrite the entire paper, costing hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of dollars in time lost. The journal would fold immediately.
Oh, and cheaters never get 4.0s, I can guarantee you that. They're typically the ones just trying to squeeze out a passing grade so they can go onto the next year. The guy/gal that's 'cruising' along with a GPA of 4.0, is probably doing a hell of a lot more work than you think (s)he is, and they're probably pretty damned smart.
As for your father's story, no one has a clue about what to do on their first day, no matter how trained they are. They're in an entirely different environment, outside of their comfort zone, most likely using entirely different procedures than how they're used to, and they know that they're on a tight line and if they screw up, they could get fired. Not to mention, most of what you learn in university is either false or glazed over, unless you have done large amounts of research on that topic.
And as you yourself said, it is draconian to use choice B. If a scientific journal used the same idea, then essentially they would force every author to not only resubmit, but rewrite the entire paper, costing hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of dollars in time lost. The journal would fold immediately.
Oh, and cheaters never get 4.0s, I can guarantee you that. They're typically the ones just trying to squeeze out a passing grade so they can go onto the next year. The guy/gal that's 'cruising' along with a GPA of 4.0, is probably doing a hell of a lot more work than you think (s)he is, and they're probably pretty damned smart.
As for your father's story, no one has a clue about what to do on their first day, no matter how trained they are. They're in an entirely different environment, outside of their comfort zone, most likely using entirely different procedures than how they're used to, and they know that they're on a tight line and if they screw up, they could get fired. Not to mention, most of what you learn in university is either false or glazed over, unless you have done large amounts of research on that topic.
Well, your choices are both absolutely insane. How about you just make them fail that task, you know, like a sane person would?
I see what you are getting at, and I understand. I suffered from test anxiety for a good deal of time and I myself would no want this to ever happen to me. But, I think there is the possibility that if I make the punishment incredibly severe than no one will do it. People are saying that the contempt provided by the cheater's peers would have no affect on the cheater because there is no social network inbetween them. I don't think this is true; I have been to two colleges in my life; one was a community college were I commuted to class, and an actual university were I stayed in a dorm on campus. And I have to say even in the community college there was a strong connection between my peers and I. It was almost a certainty that you would have another class with at least one person in your class the prior semester. I am hoping that the social network would prevent them from cheating since it is now apparently clear that their actions will cause harm to people other than themselves. Mostly however, I feel that if I teach the best that I can and people are still cheating I feel as if that reflects on me and my ability to teach, almost as if I did not get to that one person; because at the end of the day the real reason I want to be a professor is so I can share the wonder and excitement that my field has given me since I was a kid.KeyMaster45 said:
I cant imagine B being a very viable option once students hwo were confident in their abilities and already had completed the exam with an acceptable grade (to them) having to come back and retake the test again, only differently.
Plus you're in effect delaying the test (if your university runs like mine, you have time limits on classes) to another day, giving the student who cheated more time to study.
...
Personally, i feel students who cheat should be given a failing grade on the assignment they cheated on as a first offense punishment, then after that you fail them from the class. It teachers a lesson and gives them the opportunity to look at what they did and make the moral grown up decision of do I do it again and chance it, or do I just buckle down and study.
Plus you're in effect delaying the test (if your university runs like mine, you have time limits on classes) to another day, giving the student who cheated more time to study.
...
Personally, i feel students who cheat should be given a failing grade on the assignment they cheated on as a first offense punishment, then after that you fail them from the class. It teachers a lesson and gives them the opportunity to look at what they did and make the moral grown up decision of do I do it again and chance it, or do I just buckle down and study.
Well, while degrees are rapidly becoming little more than pieces of paper due to everyone having them, I think this is a big deal.
People tend to cheat in school because good grades open doors for them down the road, and the people doing it frequently feel they HAVE to cheat in order to get ahead. Of course this winds up destroying the entire foundation of our society with things being based on competition.
A guy who cheats on his schoolwork isn't committing a victimless crime, he's stealing a future from those legitimatly competing. What's more with people cheating to raise their grades it inflates the number of people with "perfect" scores and makes it that much more difficult for people who don't have perfect scores. Right now due to cheating I think having that 4.0 GPA is becoming such a requirement to get ahead because so many people manage to get them nowadays that it's becoming expected.
People tend to cheat in school because good grades open doors for them down the road, and the people doing it frequently feel they HAVE to cheat in order to get ahead. Of course this winds up destroying the entire foundation of our society with things being based on competition.
A guy who cheats on his schoolwork isn't committing a victimless crime, he's stealing a future from those legitimatly competing. What's more with people cheating to raise their grades it inflates the number of people with "perfect" scores and makes it that much more difficult for people who don't have perfect scores. Right now due to cheating I think having that 4.0 GPA is becoming such a requirement to get ahead because so many people manage to get them nowadays that it's becoming expected.