or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Exam cheaters...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Exam cheaters... - Page 7

post #91 of 163
im not sure what i did or said for such a comment.

I will think about it, and reply later.

My base premise is: lying, cheating and stealing is wrong.

It is perhaps through writing, I didn't explain myself 100% so well on my replies. Things get lost in writing replies. I agree with you.
post #92 of 163
I suspect students cheat largely because they perceive it as no big deal and/or because by downplaying honor codes, many institutions implicitly suggest that though cheating may 'technically' be a violation, it's really not all that big a deal if done discreetly, in small doses -- akin to lending your dining room pass to your off-campus friend if you're going home the weekend.

When an institution has a strict honor code and makes a point of reiterating it, cheating is lessened not merely because students fear punishment, but also because if the institution makes it clear that they take it seriously, students are more likely to internalize the ethos that defines it as a serious breach of intellectual and personal ethics.

Why institutions don't make more of a big deal about it, I don't know. Don't want to appear too demanding, punitive and 'oppressive', I guess -- alienates potential customers.
post #93 of 163
This reminds me of a Bush incident. When Bush was at Yale, the only class he got an A in was an anthropology class taught by none other than Margaret Mead. Apparently Mead hated grading so she gave everyone who participated in the class an A.
post #94 of 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quirk
I suspect students cheat largely because they perceive it as no big deal and/or because by downplaying honor codes, many institutions implicitly suggest that though cheating may 'technically' be a violation, it's really not all that big a deal if done discreetly, in small doses -- akin to lending your dining room pass to your off-campus friend if you're going home the weekend.

When an institution has a strict honor code and makes a point of reiterating it, cheating is lessened not merely because students fear punishment, but also because if the institution makes it clear that they take it seriously, students are more likely to internalize the ethos that defines it as a serious breach of intellectual and personal ethics.

Why institutions don't make more of a big deal about it, I don't know. Don't want to appear too demanding, punitive and 'oppressive', I guess -- alienates potential customers.

+1. Well put.
post #95 of 163
At my University, most of the cheaters I notice are lame-ass white boys.
post #96 of 163
Cast ye the first stone. If you're going to turn someone in for cheating on a stupid test, then you had better be mother theresa. Who cares? Academia is mostly bullshit anyways, and people have to do it so they can move on to bigger, better things. What, are you going to start reporting people for skipping class too?

Get a life.
post #97 of 163
Read the rest of the thread, perhaps. I'm not sure if I've ever disagreed with you before. Interesting. Regards, Huntsman
post #98 of 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quirk
I suspect students cheat largely because they perceive it as no big deal and/or because by downplaying honor codes, many institutions implicitly suggest that though cheating may 'technically' be a violation, it's really not all that big a deal if done discreetly, in small doses -- akin to lending your dining room pass to your off-campus friend if you're going home the weekend. When an institution has a strict honor code and makes a point of reiterating it, cheating is lessened not merely because students fear punishment, but also because if the institution makes it clear that they take it seriously, students are more likely to internalize the ethos that defines it as a serious breach of intellectual and personal ethics. Why institutions don't make more of a big deal about it, I don't know. Don't want to appear too demanding, punitive and 'oppressive', I guess -- alienates potential customers.
Good points. My Alma Mater had/has an excellent single sanction Honor system. Back in the '50's they eliminated entirely athletic scholarships after a cheating scandal. The conclusion was that "athletic scholarships were incompatible with the Honor System." I believe that private institutions have a chance of maintaining effective, single sanction honor systems. Public institutions must find it impossible. The so-called "right to an education" conflicts with an honor system. Why is single sanction so important? Anything short of a sudden, swift "death penalty" gives the potential offender the opportunity to apply a calculus of risk vs reward. For example, if someone parties all semester and comes up clueless on finals and is facing flunking out anyway, why not cheat? If you get away with it, you're golden. If you get caught, well, an automatic F or 0, or even a lame "semester off" is the limit of risk. Being totally expunged from the institution immediately and forever is another matter. Maybe, knowing that that's the risk at the end of the term will give one a better incentive to keep up during the term. Thus, the ethos of strict honor will tend to raise the standards of the institution and everyone in it. Regarding turning in others, why should college be different from real life. Under certain circumstances, lying, cheating, and certainly stealing are crimes in "real life." And, again, under certain circumstances having knowledge, before or after the fact, of such crimes and not reporting it is, in itself, a crime, often carrying similar penalties. The reason the laws are written this way is similar to the reason Honor Codes are written this way. No laws can be effectively enforced without the support and buy-in of those being governed. When laws and honor systems fail, it is often because of the fact that a bright line has developed between the enforcement apparatus and the population. Accessory laws, like the "will not tolerate those who do" clause of effective honor codes, serve to blur that line, and charge and empower citizens of the system with the responsibility (as painful as that might be) of participating in and maintaining their own civilization rather than just handing off the hard part while reaping the benefits.
post #99 of 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Violinist
Cast ye the first stone. If you're going to turn someone in for cheating on a stupid test, then you had better be mother theresa. Who cares? Academia is mostly bullshit anyways, and people have to do it so they can move on to bigger, better things. What, are you going to start reporting people for skipping class too?

Get a life.

"Bigger and better things"...hmmm. In the context of your reference, Acacemia is a process of credentialing. Be it a military officer from one of our military academies, a business executive from one of our business schools, what kind of person do you want using those credentials to go on to "bigger and better things?"

In his book "Living the Martial Way," by Forrest Morgan, Morgan spends quite a bit of time discussing the issue of honor as it applies to bushido, or the warrior ethos. He makes the point:

"Warriors aren't honorable because they fear a wrathful god. Warriors are honorable because its a practical requirement of their profession. They are honorable because it's the most powerful way to live. Honor is essential among professional warriors. When hundreds or thousands of lives are at stake, superiors must know their subordinates are absolutely reliable. They must be able to trust those under their command to report information accurately, no matter how bad the news is....The non-warrior elements of society must also rely on the honor of warriors, for warriors can be the most dangerous people in the world...Warriors without honor quickly become tyrants, as some third world countries demonstrate...Only honor separates warriors from thugs."

By discussing honor in the martial arts, Morgan, has by exetnsion, made a derivative argument for having a strict honor code as part of the credentialing process in our military academies.

Now, I would add that "only honor separates business men from charlatans and grifters." I think that's valid. Why, then, shouldn't an honor system be part of the credentialing process for business schools? Or should they just be allowed to cheat their way through and move on to "bigger and better things," like Enron, or being your broker?

I really think that the extent to which any degree (or "credential") has any value to the cheater is directly dependent on those who went through the process without cheating. Because if _everyone_ cheated, the degree would have no value whatsoever.
post #100 of 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Violinist
Cast ye the first stone. If you're going to turn someone in for cheating on a stupid test, then you had better be mother theresa. Who cares? Academia is mostly bullshit anyways, and people have to do it so they can move on to bigger, better things. What, are you going to start reporting people for skipping class too?

Get a life.
Ladies and gentlemen, the next generation.
post #101 of 163
Perhaps it's a little naive of me, but it does surprise me that of all people, a classical musician would have such a dismissive -- no, contemptuous -- attitude with regard to issues of integrity. Classical musicianship, more than perhaps any other single pursuit I can think of (including the clergy, or even the military) requires an extraordinary degree of personal integrity: a fierce commitment to personal excellence; a rigorous and demanding personal work ethic; respect for rules, form and structure; and as exemplified in the symphonic tradition, the ability to work in unfailing synthesis with a completely integrated team. Even the activities of military soldiers (who perhaps come closest to the classical musician's degree of fully synthesized discipline, integrity, and teamwork) inevitably demands the ability to improvise and work somewhat independently when on the field of battle -- soldiers are somewhat more like jazz musicians in that regard, I suppose. But the performance of classical symphonic musicians, particularly when it's all on the line -- the crucible of live performance -- requires following the code (the score, the maestro, the prescribed structure) without fail, else the integrity of the work be lost. Even the audition process for classical musicians maintains a high standard of integrity: those auditioning for major symphony orchestras are hidden from the auditioning panel behind a screen, in order that the auditioners' judgement not be compromised by factors other than the musician's level of skill. Anyway, the contempt for integrity as expressed by some here is somewhat sobering. Lord knows, not one of us is perfect, and not one of us is able to consistently meet his/her own personal standards of integrity, much less those that are imposed upon us. But when we are unable to acknowledge those inevitable times when we fall short of it, and when we lose respect for the very idea of integrity and mock rather than respect those who endorse it, we've gotten pretty screwed up. Now granted, not all honor codes necessarily demand that students report those peers who violate the code -- admittedly, that is a higher, more demanding ethical standard than simply being responsible for your own conduct. But declining to impose this higher standard on ourselves is one thing; mocking rather than respecting those who do is quite another.
post #102 of 163
i'm asian, i DO NOT CHEAT, and would appreciate it if my people weren't lumped into a category of cheaters -- i mean we could keep doing so and say white people can't dance or jump, black people smoke a lot of weed, and indians smell bad; but i know making sweeping comments like that are untrue and what i may have been exposed to is only a tiny representative sample of the entire population of people i'm talking about.
post #103 of 163
Thread Starter 
I really have nothing more to add to this other than what's already been said better than me by a several others so far. I'm not a Mother Theresa, and yes, I make mistakes and have moral flaws. I jaywalk. I've biked through stop signs. I drink, spit, and tell others to fuck off. Cheating, be it on an exam, taxes, your spouse, your employer requires some element of planning - there's more time to think things over and say to yourself "this isn't right, I shouldn't be doing this."

My major is economics. A lot of these students will either end up working in financial services, government, and the civil service. In Canada, the Liberal government sponsorship scandal of the past few years pissed off nearly everybody in the country - and for what? $150 million? That's a drop in the ocean. That's one of many public sector scandals. Think of the stuff that goes on at not only the federal level, but also the provincial/state, and local levels. Think about your corporate scandals. As a taxpayer and investor, things like this annoy me greatly - cheating costs me, and costs you. How can some of you sit there and complain about ethics in the private and public sectors, and then let something like cheating on an exam slip by? If the cheaters eventually get caught and weeded out of the system, why are so many still advancing and getting ahead? The percentage that do get caught in the end is merely the tip of the iceberg. Where do you draw the line on at the point where the whistle gets blown? I might be sliding down the slippery slope, but if you let one "insignificant" incident of cheating in university get by, the consequences of cheating will be much larger, and costlier later on. Blow the whistle on the cheaters, liars, crooks and charlatans. Once a cheater, always a cheater. You get away with it once, and you're on a power trip - you think you can always keep getting away with it.
post #104 of 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quirk
Perhaps it's a little naive of me, but it does surprise me that of all people, a classical musician would have such a dismissive -- no, contemptuous -- attitude with regard to issues of integrity.

Classical musicianship, more than perhaps any other single pursuit I can think of (including the clergy, or even the military) requires an extraordinary degree of personal integrity: a fierce commitment to personal excellence; a rigorous and demanding personal work ethic; respect for rules, form and structure; and as exemplified in the symphonic tradition, the ability to work in unfailing synthesis with a completely integrated team.

Even the activities of military soldiers (who perhaps come closest to the classical musician's degree of fully synthesized discipline, integrity, and teamwork) inevitably demands the ability to improvise and work somewhat independently when on the field of battle -- soldiers are somewhat more like jazz musicians in that regard, I suppose.

But the performance of classical symphonic musicians, particularly when it's all on the line -- the crucible of live performance -- requires following the code (the score, the maestro, the prescribed structure) without fail, else the integrity of the work be lost.

Even the audition process for classical musicians maintains a high standard of integrity: those auditioning for major symphony orchestras are hidden from the auditioning panel behind a screen, in order that the auditioners' judgement not be compromised by factors other than the musician's level of skill.

Anyway, the contempt for integrity as expressed by some here is somewhat sobering. Lord knows, not one of us is perfect, and not one of us is able to consistently meet his/her own personal standards of integrity, much less those that are imposed upon us. But when we are unable to acknowledge those inevitable times when we fall short of it, and when we lose respect for the very idea of integrity and mock rather than respect those who endorse it, we've gotten pretty screwed up.

Now granted, not all honor codes necessarily demand that students report those peers who violate the code -- admittedly, that is a higher, more demanding ethical standard than simply being responsible for your own conduct. But declining to impose this higher standard on ourselves is one thing; mocking rather than respecting those who do is quite another.


Hey, let me let you on in on a little secret. Do you have any idea how many classical musicians, who are in the NY Phil, or famous touring soloists, and at top conservatories, had to cheat? It isn't because they lack honor or integrity, and it isn't as that moron whnay suggested, the new, lesser generation. It's people who are doing something at a very high level who simply don't have the time to deal with idiotic theory classes or whatever else. They've made a convenant to become excellent at something, as hard as becoming an olympic athlete on both mind and body, with an industry for which the word cuthroat is utterly inadequate.

A little aside for you Quirk. In these auditions you speak so highly of, women sometimes STILL make a point to wear heals and walk deliberately on the hard wood floors (where now they've put a carpet to the audition area) to show that they're women. If that didn't happen a lot in the 70s, the NY Phil's violin section wouldn't be mostly dominated by women (and consequently, the best talent available). Also, you have only to ask any person in the industry about how corrupt the audition process can be. Sorry to blow your magical little bubble. My colleagues would be touched, though. In many sense you are right that integrity is of the utmost in music, but where school is concerned, where things often get in the way, you'd be surprised how many people cut little corners here or there because they realized that they could make something of themselves.

Athletes do this too. In the context of academia, some people cut corners to do what they really need to do. Of course it is wrong, and I know this. But I ask you, is it just to turn them in? Our concept of justice has so much to do with punishment and accountabiliy, with little consideration to how things affect the community and the over all "balance" of the universe (that sounds so lame). I know a kid or two, that if they were not allowed to graduate from Juilliard because they kept cheating on theory exams, would have had some difficulty in becoming who they are now.

There's also highly successful people in other areas who will occasionally do that because of whatever reason. It is wrong of course, but I would never report them because I don't know what their circumstances are, and why they might really need that. I don't claim to have a perfect ideology, but I just kind of leave it up to the examiners to catch cheaters, I don't police other people because I certainly don't mean to be policed. Lord knows I'm not perfect and until that moment I stop getting drunk, doing drugs, masturbating, having impure thoughts, sex before marriage, speeding, parking where I'm not supposed to and all these other outrages, permanently, then I'm not going to turn in anyone for cheating.

If you think cheating is so morally reprehensible, then you might be surprised that many of those who you admire had to cut corners to do what they really love, and funny enough, the world is a better place for it. Justice doesn't always mean punishment...
post #105 of 163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Violinist
Hey, let me let you on in on a little secret. Do you have any idea how many classical musicians, who are in the NY Phil, or famous touring soloists, and at top conservatories, had to cheat? It isn't because they lack honor or integrity, and it isn't as that moron whnay suggested, the new, lesser generation. It's people who are doing something at a very high level who simply don't have the time to deal with idiotic theory classes or whatever else. They've made a convenant to become excellent at something, as hard as becoming an olympic athlete on both mind and body, with an industry for which the word cuthroat is utterly inadequate.

A little aside for you Quirk. In these auditions you speak so highly of, women sometimes STILL make a point to wear heals and walk deliberately on the hard wood floors (where now they've put a carpet to the audition area) to show that they're women. If that didn't happen a lot in the 70s, the NY Phil's violin section wouldn't be mostly dominated by women (and consequently, the best talent available). Also, you have only to ask any person in the industry about how corrupt the audition process can be. Sorry to blow your magical little bubble. My colleagues would be touched, though. In many sense you are right that integrity is of the utmost in music, but where school is concerned, where things often get in the way, you'd be surprised how many people cut little corners here or there because they realized that they could make something of themselves.

Athletes do this too. In the context of academia, some people cut corners to do what they really need to do. Of course it is wrong, and I know this. But I ask you, is it just to turn them in? Our concept of justice has so much to do with punishment and accountabiliy, with little consideration to how things affect the community and the over all "balance" of the universe (that sounds so lame). I know a kid or two, that if they were not allowed to graduate from Juilliard because they kept cheating on theory exams, would have had some difficulty in becoming who they are now.

There's also highly successful people in other areas who will occasionally do that because of whatever reason. It is wrong of course, but I would never report them because I don't know what their circumstances are, and why they might really need that. I don't claim to have a perfect ideology, but I just kind of leave it up to the examiners to catch cheaters, I don't police other people because I certainly don't mean to be policed.

If you think is cheating is so morally reprehensible, then you might be surprised that many of those who you admire had to cut corners to do what they really love, and funny enough, the world is a better place for it. Justice doesn't always mean punishment...

I have no doubt that this was a heartfelt, sincere post, and thats what makes it even sadder.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Exam cheaters...