Reports indicate that in some schools, cheating and instructing pupils how to answer questions on actual papers are common and they occur before the actual examination questions are opened on the appointed day. Incidentally, in reference to my other relative who had to drop out of the school, I later questioned him as to why he failed so miserably when he had been a star performer in the primary school leaving examinations.

He confessed that teachers had ‘mysteriously’ got hold of all the examinations papers and wrote the answers in revision classes and all those who attended obtained grade ‘A’s regardless of how hopeless they had been performing in class and homework.

But the numbers might have been enough to affect an otherwise tied position on the U.S. News & World Report annual ranking of colleges. Claremont McKenna was ranked the ninth-best national liberal arts college in the magazine’s most recent survey, up from 11th the year before.

How am I supposed to preach to student to NOT cheat, to do their best and just be honest… when so many people and so many entities/institutions cheat around us?

Then there are others, instead of becoming discouraged with this news, can write an encouraging article in response to discoveries of cheating.  Dan K. Thomasson writes in Korea Times:

What everyone should realize is that this is a commercial enterprise. U.S. News began its ratings years ago to keep up in the news magazine competition, where it ranked third behind Time and Newsweek. Americans love lists, and the magazine began devoting more and more effort to telling college-bound students and their parents which schools were the best in every aspect. Ultimately, it dropped out of the weekly print business altogether but maintains its name and viability with this enterprise.

I especially like this part of the editorial:

The only really accurate measurement of a college’s standing lies in the success of its graduates ― and that depends, to some degree, on the collective pedigree and dedication of the actual teaching faculty, not just those high-priced big names that come to hunker down and do their own thing in a rarefied atmosphere.

This is what I said:

I think you do make an excellent point that the education system today (in general) needs major overhauling. We teach the same way we’ve been teaching for over a hundred years. I totally agree that the system encourages cheating behavior.

Having said that, writing is writing – and there’s no job and there’s no lifestyle that does not require writing. Just look at yourself. You could not do “this” without your wonderful writing skills. Like parents are responsible for making decisions for their children who do not yet know better, educators (as experts of learning and pedagogy, not of content, like economists for instance) have to sometimes make students do things – like taking a writing class.

Of course, as a writing teacher, I am somewhat biased. When I see that the majority of my students who come into freshman writing class leave as better writers… that’s job well done on my part and also on the part of the students. So, this so-called “shadow scholar” is a just a spit in my face and the faces of all of those students who write, who take writing classes (even if they’re forced to take it), and become improved writers (certainly not perfect but certainly better).

The euphemism is funny – “shadow scholar” and the fact that you have a euphemism (because I think most people will agree with me that it’s not a TRUE linguistic representation of what that work/job entails) suggests something… “less than honest”. But then again for an economist, perhaps honesty is not so important. Of course, when you view through the lens through which you see everything (based on your school of thought) maybe there is no room for ethics. But I do hope that you realize that your lens is one lens – and that there are many out there. In fact you yourself have many lenses, I’m sure.

As someone who is in the trenches and shares your views about the overall need for radical change in our educational system, I am very offended by what seems to be an attack on people like me. Even if you don’t mean it that way… that’s how it comes across. I almost want to say “You don’t know jack.” But I won’t.

First, Promote healthy school culture and authentic learning.

Second,  Teachers matter enormously, and can have a huge influence over whether their students cheat by their pedagogical choices and styles.

Third,  we can help make the learning goals transparent.

Fourth, make integrity expectations explicit.

Fifth, Design less cheat-able assessments and assignments.

In the next few days, I’d like to comment on each of these… but for now, I just had to share the link to the article right away!

One of the comments in response to Martin’s article (as reported by Cory Docorow for boingboing.com) said

parents who demand standardized testing and “measurable” rote learning also instill a culture of cheating in their children at home.  Count on it.

Here’s the most recent one I was happy to come across written by Bobby Cherry at Quaker Valley High School.  He titles the article, “Technology makes it harder to curb cheating in school.”  Here’s a bit from the introduction:

More than 35 percent of teens ages 13 to 17 with mobile phones have used the devices to cheat in school, according to a survey conducted by Common Sense Media — a nonprofit advocating group focused on kids.

More than 50 percent of those surveyed said they have cheated using the Internet.

I’m happy to see that this is a topic of discussion in high school journalism. Good job, Bobby Cherry!

Interestingly, Debbie Bell, coordinator of academic honesty, says:

I would like to think that there isn’t more cheating going on… I would like to think that faculty, graduate students and students themselves are taking the policy more seriously.

I’ve been wondering about this myself.  When more students are reported, what does it indicate?  Does it mean that there’s more cheating or does it mean that faculty are more vigilant?

Sadly, the reported number of “224″ cannot tell us much about the reality of academic honesty (or dishonesty) at University of Georgia.  The total number of full-time undergraduate students exceeds 24,000 students.  This comes out to about .9 percent – not even 1 percent.  When national surveys say that over 75 percent of students admit to cheating in college – and even with the fact that not all 75 percent of such students are cheating all the time, of course – the number reported is abysmal.

This is true at my institution as well.  Cheating happens.  Sure. But we are certainly not doing a great job of monitoring and reporting cheating.  In fact, Donald McCabe and his team’s studies have shown that a significant portion of faculty admit to witnessing and overlooking cheating. These faculty sometimes have good reasons for doing so, one of which may be lack of support from the institution.

Still, I think we all need to remind ourselves that we must defend the integrity of learning if not for ourselves and our belief in the power and value of learning… then at least for our students who work hard to do their own best, honest work.

Professors combat cheating in online classes

This article lists some ways that online classes are trying to prevent cheating:

1. control the time when students take exams – narrow window so that everyone’s taking it at the same time

2. use a remote proctor (using web cameras)

3. use a exam proctoring service for fee (like ETS)

4. make exams tougher and make it open note (having closed book exam for online class, of course, doesn’t make any sense)

5. make the final exam an in-person, proctored exam

I have a few questions, though.  First is, what does the title mean?  I am not sure I clearly understand the meaning of “cheating poses threats to MHS students”. How so?  Is cheating rampant at Mattoon High School?  It’s an interesting choice for this article.

Second is a question regarding the statement made by the Assistant Principal.  He makes an excellent point that ”[Cheating will persist for] as long as it takes students to realize it is not about the grade, it is about them learning the material.”  This is very true.  As I have said many times on this blog and elsewhere, the primary and fundamental reason students cheat is because they have failed to see the value in learning. Period.

So, I want to ask Mr. Krepel and all educators and educational administrators and parents: What are we doing to create educational experiences that will allow our students to enjoy learning and see value in the learning process instead of the GPA, the SAT score, the fluffing up of resumes, and rankings?  

The system that the cheating behavior is trying to dupe is sometimes the core of the problem.

When students cheat in high school or college in a kind of systematic way, one of the major things we need to wonder is why don’t students care about learning?  Those students who truly do care about learning do not cheat.  Actually, I should say…. those students who are able to allow themselves to enjoy learning rather than giving into the pressures of GPAs, college applications, financial aid, scholarships, rankings and so on… those students do not cheat.  Sometimes a student WANTS to enjoy learning but do not feel that they have room for such leisure – gotta keep those grades up and resumes packed.

Certainly the condition of the system does not excuse or somehow justify cheating. That’s not the point. The point is, as a separate issue, if and when there is massive cheating, we – those who create, maintain, or participate in the system – should be more… introspective.

If continuing brain research does in fact show biochemical differences between the brains of those who help others and the brains of those who do not, could this lead to a “morality pill” — a drug that makes us more likely to help? Given the many other studies linking biochemical conditions to mood and behavior, and the proliferation of drugs to modify them that have followed, the idea is not far-fetched. If so, would people choose to take it? Could criminals be given the option, as an alternative to prison, of a drug-releasing implant that would make them less likely to harm others? Might governments begin screening people to discover those most likely to commit crimes? Those who are at much greater risk of committing a crime might be offered the morality pill; if they refused, they might be required to wear a tracking device that would show where they had been at any given time, so that they would know that if they did commit a crime, they would be detected.