Collective punishment is more suited toward groups with some kind of cohesion. College classes are comprised (essentially) of a bunch of strangers occupying the same room for a couple of hours a week over a few months--it simply won't matter if a cheater is ostracized from them. Not to mention the tight schedules college classes run on (IN THEORY) that would be bugger-fucked all over the place by forcing everybody to retake a test.
Academic Dishonesty (Cheating)
- Thread starter infinity^infinity
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I hope that I will be teaching physics so there probably won't be many papers involved. I am mainly concerned about tests because homework is very hard to enforce, and the way I see it, you can do your own work on the homework which will lead to a better understanding of the material. Or, you can cheat on the homework and get nothing from it and be unprepared for the test hurting yourself in the long run.Mylinkay Asdara said:
I like what my Russian Language professor handled the cheaters. Now to set this little tale there were only 15 of us in the class and I was one of the only two students to have an A at the midterm, needless to say I found myself very popular on group discussion/study nights...anyway, my prof knew that students were cheating off of me and the other student so she gave the two of us a test with completely different questions (short answer/essay type). After grading the tests she announced that she was proud of the two of us for both acing the test but regrettably most of the rest of the class seemed not to even understand what the questions were (she was also astonished that those that cheated off of me all had two sisters, a brother, a railroader father and a nurse mother same as me). She then gave the students a chance to redeem themselves with a -10% test retake and a warning that anymore cheating on tests and she would have to notify administration. Needless to say there was no more cheating in her class.
Okay, fine. I am sorry that I knocked english. I know it is possible to cheat in an english class. Color me miffed by the fact that my last english professor knocked points off my grade for using "they" as a neutral-singular pronoun. Despite the fact that the dictionary clearly lists it as such.Mallefunction said:
The problem with Choice B, besides it being unfair to the other students, is that it is a tactic when the group functions as a single unit. You punish everyone, so the non-offenders will have an issue with the offender, which should hopefully motivate the offender to act with respect to the group. A class of students is, generally, not a unit, so punishing everyone is just plain unfair.
buh ninja'd:
buh ninja'd:
daunchy said:
Universities already have their own rules in place for cheating. You just report the cheating, and let someone else deal with it. The ones with which I am familiar deliberately take that choice out of the prof's hands. They actually are not allowed to make their own judgement call on it.
So just focus on teaching, and try to be aware of the means by which someone might cheat.
So just focus on teaching, and try to be aware of the means by which someone might cheat.
I just thought I would point out that sometimes people make mistakes and I have known couple people who almost got kicked out of school for cheating on things that they did not in fact cheat on at all. For example my friend handed in a program and was basically told he cheated and copied another guy in the class because they both had the same syntax but the reason they syntax was the same was because they both had the same teacher in high school so they simply learned to do things the same way do you think it's fair that they should go through either option?infinity^infinity said:
Having really harsh results no matter what means if you as a administrator make a mistake you are completely screwing somebody who may not deserve it. I think its important to not cheat but I also think teachers jump at the first sign without a second thought and the stakes are high so it's unfair that you can so easily be accused and have no say in defending yourself.
yup, plus pitting your students against each other in a pissed off manner? Not smart.Stall said:
nice one, you might just cause that guy who studied all night long and is stressed as fuck to beat the shit out of that person who "cheated".
ah someone linked the proper video and had better wording for it, so yeah, gonna say agree with this completely.believer258 said:
I've seen some students, especially when under stress, do some very "extremist" things, so putting even more stress over a test like this is the worst thing you can do.
if you don't want people to cheat, then do 3 versions of the test with the answers flipped around so they can't look over and cheat, simple as that.
Frankly OP, if I had to come into class again to take another test just because some d-bag in the back row cheated, I would be right pissed off. In my experience, the college classroom is not a social entity; most classmates don't even know each other. The extra incentive from "angering the rest of the class" would be minimal. Just punish the student who cheated.
This is basically an argument from ignorance suggesting that because we can't know if someone else was cheating, we do know someone was, and since we can't know who we must punish all to be sure and get them. But consider this -- even if everyone in the back 3 rows of the hall was cheating, that's only around a 3rd or maybe a 5th of the class. How many more innocent students are hurt by this than guilty ones?infinity^infinity said:
First option is fine, but I don't know if you can get away with it.
Second option, to echo the rest of this thread, NO. Collective punishment isn't fair in this case.
Even if the cheating is collaborative, if you don't have evidence of anyone else's guilt, they shouldn't be punished. Innocent until proven guilty and all that jazz.
Second option, to echo the rest of this thread, NO. Collective punishment isn't fair in this case.
Even if the cheating is collaborative, if you don't have evidence of anyone else's guilt, they shouldn't be punished. Innocent until proven guilty and all that jazz.
I personally favor expulsion from college for cheating, and a year long waiting period before any college for accept your application, at which point all previous work will be invalidated and you can begin again. >.> But I tend to look on cheating as lazy, dishonorable and cowardly. These are three things that I feel should be crushed with utter ruthlessness.
I'd withdraw from your class the first time that happened and then spread the word to everyone I know that you do that. As for why, it's because I don't have to take that shit. I don't cheat, on anything. I study and do my work, and I don't enjoy doing it twice. Especially if it's because some fuck nuts decided to cheat and gets caught. I pay my tuition to be taught, not take shit from a professor who's overzealous with the cheating policy. It's not my concern nor should it be that someone else is cheating. My grade is my responsibility, if someone wants to skate through a class cheating I don't give a rat's ass. It's not a competition, I'd be a fool to think it matters at all what the grade is of the guy sitting next to me.infinity^infinity said:
So yeah I say choice A, the kid made their choice so let them stew in the mess they made. With option B I'd promptly tell you to fuck off and you'd never see me in your class again. Plus I'd make sure to ruin your reputation amongst the students, though you wouldn't need just me to do that. I guarantee all the other kids in the class who weren't cheating will be doing that as well through simple word of mouth.
This factor seems to be repeated often. As I said before, in the scientific community, if a single data point in a scientific report is altered, the validity of the entire scientific report is nullified. As I see it, the test scores are a report, to me, by my students; it shows me how well the class understands the information that I am teaching them. If one person "fudges" the data by altering their score by cheating, then the report(test scores) as a whole are discredited. The only way to get an accurate representation then, is to do the entire experiment over again.summerof2010 said:
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:
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.