Why is cheating bad?

[randomsix]

Cheating a test isn't bad.

Tests that are cheatable are bad.

Creating a multi-choice nuisance that checks how good you are at memorizing pieces of data short-term is a pointless endeavour.

The idea of measuring competence in these limited ways has a bad effect on society. I know a lot of gifted people, who are just bad at test. For various reasons. And then there are people who are not as smart, not as creative, not as nice, not as competent - but they excel at memorizing boring shit.

And yet studies have shown that these kinds of standardized tests (such as the GRE) do provide an indication of future success (for the GRE, in graduate school).

And that is my point.

I think your post may be insinuating that your point is the exact opposite of what you want it to.

 

[RubyT]

I think your post may be insinuating that your point is the exact opposite of what you want it to.

Not really. But don't be sad. You probably do well in multiple-choice tests.

 

[Nieroshai]

Cheating does one thing: undermine the point of the test. The purpose of the test is not to be "beaten" like a game, but to serve as a measurement of comprehension of the subject matter. The point is to prove how much you know on the subject. If you cheat, you've gotten a good score without knowing the subject. You won the game, sure. But you missed the point. Now you have a grade, without the skills that grade implies. Penalizing cheating on tests is important to ensure that the point of the test is upheld.

 

[Olrod]

Knowing the answers (cheating) is different to knowing how to find the answers (learning).

What happens when you're in a situation where you have to know/work something out and you can't cheat? You're pretty much stuffed.

[captcha: rack your brains]

That's the point captcha, they can't.

 

[DaWaffledude]

Because a test isn't testing your "cunning". It's testing your knowledge on the subject matter.

 

[wickedmonkey]

Because this:

http://imgur.com/oWpyj

 

[randomsix]

I think your post may be insinuating that your point is the exact opposite of what you want it to.

Not really. But don't be sad. You probably do well in multiple-choice tests.

Well let's break this down.

You said that multiple choice tests are pointless and don't show how well people would actually perform in job XYZ.

I said that there are several studies which show that performance on the GRE correlates with success in graduate school.

You said that what I just said supports the idea that performance on tests like the GRE does not correlate with success in environments like graduate school.

So you either took my words to be the exact opposite of what they mean or you misspoke.

 

[RubyT]

Well let's break this down.

Yeah, let's.

You said that multiple choice tests (...) don't show how well people would actually perform in job XYZ.

Where?

 

[j0frenzy]

From an individualist standpoint, we try to do what is best for ourselves. So for example, If cheating on the LSAT would get you into law school, why should you flip burgers rather than go to law school just because your competition either has more intellect or drive.

As someone in law school, I can tell you cheating on the LSAT is a really bad idea in general. It isn't a test of knowledge, it is about logical reasoning and deductions. The only way to cheat on it would be to steal the answers in advance. Also, law schools and the Bar stresses morality, so getting caught cheating on the LSAT, a law school exam, or in any other part of your legal career can pretty much destroy your career. Don't do it.

 

[randomsix]

Well let's break this down.

Yeah, let's.

You said that multiple choice tests (...) don't show how well people would actually perform in job XYZ.

Where?

Here:

The idea of measuring competence in these limited ways has a bad effect on society. I know a lot of gifted people, who are just bad at test. For various reasons. And then there are people who are not as smart, not as creative, not as nice, not as competent - but they excel at memorizing boring shit.

This paragraph contains the implicit claim that doing well on these tests is absolutely no indication of ability. In addition, you insinuate that people who do well on these tests only do well because they can memorize trivia.

 

[RubyT]

Okay. Last try, because this is getting ridiculous and I don't know if I'm being trolled.

Here:

The idea of measuring competence in these limited ways has a bad effect on society. I know a lot of gifted people, who are just bad at test. For various reasons. And then there are people who are not as smart, not as creative, not as nice, not as competent - but they excel at memorizing boring shit.

This paragraph contains the implicit claim that doing well on these tests is absolutely no indication of ability. In addition, you insinuate that people who do well on these tests only do well because they can memorize trivia.

I will rephrase my message:

My opinion is that most current standardized tests do not sufficiently assess people's abilities. They promote the ability to memorize facts over intelligence and creativity, apart from lots of other stuff.

Your demur was that studies indicate a correlation of doing good in tests with doing good in career.

My lament is that this is true. There are people who are just not good at doing tests, for various reasons. And they are often out-maneuvered by people who are inferior at the task at hand, but have a better test record.

Another opinion of mine is that society doesn't benefit from this.

This is a subjective statement. Anecdotal experiences and so forth.

 

[Legion]

I like to think it depends what you cheat on. 8D

I'm notorious with my friends for, let's say, "Tipping the balance" when we play card games or board games. (Which basicaly means yes, I'll cheat if I see an opportunity to do so).

See, my stance on this is that if you're going to cheat at a game, why bother playing at all?

Assuming the game is being played for the mutual enjoyment of the people involved, then exactly. It may be fun for the cheater, but it ruins the fun for the other players, and that's very selfish.

 

[theultimateend]

As they say, you don't get punished for cheating, you get punished for being caught.

Whoever said that has never cheated on something before >_>.

Generally speaking if you don't know the material on the test, someone has failed, either you or the professor. Either way if you pass it without actually knowing it you are in for a very sore future.

Though most jobs that require certification (that I've experienced) didn't really need that certification. I think certifications are more to dissuade dangerously stupid people from getting jobs where their stupid can harm others.

But my pool of examples is small enough that I'm probably wrong on the point of certification.

 

[red dragon 52]

Because of the inherent dishonesty of the act. If you cheat on a test (or on your SO for that matter) you lied about something, either your knowledge of the subject matter on the test, or your commitment to that person. You did not 'play by the rules.'

Tests are supposed to be an even playing field to weed out those who know what they are doing vs those that do not. Cheating means you do not know what you are doing, but you had an unfair advantage to make it seem as you do.

 

[conflictofinterests]

(by cheating I mean not playing by the rules: IE having answers to a test)

Now I will preface this by saying I do not agree that cheating is right, I just want to play devils advocate

So, can anyone tell me why cheating is bad? One of the most common things I hear is that it is not fair to other people. But you know what else isn't fair, that other people were born with more brains, or more muscle. This gives them an innate advantage, and would a cheater not simply be using their gift, cunning, to give themselves an advantage?

From an individualist standpoint, we try to do what is best for ourselves. So for example, If cheating on the LSAT would get you into law school, why should you flip burgers rather than go to law school just because your competition either has more intellect or drive.

Of course, cheating will probably catch up to you at some point, and getting caught is a major deterrent, but how is cheating unfair when life itself is not fair?

Cheating catches up to you in ways other than just getting caught cheating. Let's put you in a hypothetical scenario in which you cheat on the LSAT and there is no possible way for this act to be discovered by anyone, and you will never be directly punished for it. If you had to cheat on the LSAT in order to get into law school, it may be that you are not prepared for law school. I'm not saying that these tests are accurate predictors of future performance, but what the hell else are high-investment organizations going to do with the flood of applicants that come knocking on their door? Many of them will be vastly under qualified, and if this test divides the "maybe"s from the "definitely not"s, then the organizations are a lot better off, and the "maybe"s have a lot better chance of not being lost among a sea of "definitely not"s.

Cheating undermines what little legitimacy testing has, and it isn't to your benefit to sneak into an institution you won't be able to make it through. It isn't to your benefit to cheat on a math test to pass a class and then be moved on to the next more complicated class. What understanding you could have gleaned is then pushed that much farther out of reach.

Go ahead and cheat if you think it'll never come up again, if you think it's never going to bite you in the ass. No skin off my nose. Have fun drowning in unintelligible coursework, though.

 

[conflictofinterests]

Tests are supposed to be an even playing field to weed out those who know what they are doing vs those that do not.

I would just like to point out that tests are rarely, if ever, an even playing field. Ideally, yes. However, framing can inadvertently favor one group over another, such that those who do understand the concepts being tested on may still score poorly. You are more likely to get false negatives than false positives due to poor framing, however.

 

[S_SienZ]

Only reason you feel cheating is your "gift" is because you're one of the few doing it.

Get the people who actually have the brains together to brainstorm ways to cheat and they will blow your mind.

 

[hideomgskojima]

I cheated once... I now have a son with no mother because the other girlfriend found out, shot my mistress then shot herself. Well, I was in both wills and that worked out quite nicely.

 

[DigitalAtlas]

It's treated badly when you get caught because a real rogue wouldn't ever get caught.