Mixing
Has the student responsibility for not cheating?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
If a student is cheating, he can be caught or not caught.
If he is caught, it's not obvious what to do.
There are options with different strategies:
- The students are themselves responsible for not cheating.
- The teacher is responsible for preventing cheating.
- The organisation is responsible for not cheating.
Options 2. and 3. are obviously acceptable and in use.
Option 1. is the one that is interesting. If that is used, it often leads to cheating in very high percentages, significantly more than in cases 2. and 3. is cheated.
The most interesting point is that in case 1., cheating is irrelevant for the teacher and the organisation. The teacher should explain the strategy, and the reasoning to do it in the course notes. And that is all for him.
The reasoning is that it is to the detriment of the student, and nobody else if the student cheats.
Is this strategy somewhere in use?
Should it be?
(I do not limit the question to the level of education, but there are levels - like before high school, where one can not obviously assign the responsibility to the children. But it is still possible to work. In the case of PhD students, it is possible.)
teaching cheating education responsibilities
edited 2 hours ago
Vladhagen
4,28611738
asked 3 hours ago
Volker Siegel
15419
 |Â
show 6 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
If a student is cheating, he can be caught or not caught.
If he is caught, it's not obvious what to do.
There are options with different strategies:
- The students are themselves responsible for not cheating.
- The teacher is responsible for preventing cheating.
- The organisation is responsible for not cheating.
Options 2. and 3. are obviously acceptable and in use.
Option 1. is the one that is interesting. If that is used, it often leads to cheating in very high percentages, significantly more than in cases 2. and 3. is cheated.
The most interesting point is that in case 1., cheating is irrelevant for the teacher and the organisation. The teacher should explain the strategy, and the reasoning to do it in the course notes. And that is all for him.
The reasoning is that it is to the detriment of the student, and nobody else if the student cheats.
Is this strategy somewhere in use?
Should it be?
(I do not limit the question to the level of education, but there are levels - like before high school, where one can not obviously assign the responsibility to the children. But it is still possible to work. In the case of PhD students, it is possible.)
teaching cheating education responsibilities
edited 2 hours ago
Vladhagen
4,28611738
asked 3 hours ago
Volker Siegel
15419
6
What?? How on earth could it be anyone's responsibility but the student's to not cheat?
– Azor Ahai
3 hours ago
5
I have taught at a college (US meaning - post-secondary undergraduate education at a small institution without graduate programs) where the student body collectively is responsible for cheating. The students are collectively responsible for finding cheating, and the students elect a group of students to decide on punishments if cheating has occurred. Faculty leave the room during exams.
– Alexander Woo
2 hours ago
1
@AlexanderWoo. That is awesome.
– Buffy
2 hours ago
1
"it is to the detriment of the student, and nobody else if the student cheats". So incompetent doctors hurt only themselves?
– Tobias Kildetoft
2 hours ago
1
1,2,3 are not mutually exclusive. The student is obviously responsible to not cheat. The teacher and institution also have an obligation to create reasonable policies that discourage and deter cheating, as needed, but so as not to interfere with educational goals. Just like in society in general, every individual has a responsibility to obey the law, but the state also has a responsibility to provide police.
– Nate Eldredge
52 mins ago
 |Â
show 6 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
If a student is cheating, he can be caught or not caught.
If he is caught, it's not obvious what to do.
There are options with different strategies:
- The students are themselves responsible for not cheating.
- The teacher is responsible for preventing cheating.
- The organisation is responsible for not cheating.
Options 2. and 3. are obviously acceptable and in use.
Option 1. is the one that is interesting. If that is used, it often leads to cheating in very high percentages, significantly more than in cases 2. and 3. is cheated.
The most interesting point is that in case 1., cheating is irrelevant for the teacher and the organisation. The teacher should explain the strategy, and the reasoning to do it in the course notes. And that is all for him.
The reasoning is that it is to the detriment of the student, and nobody else if the student cheats.
Is this strategy somewhere in use?
Should it be?
(I do not limit the question to the level of education, but there are levels - like before high school, where one can not obviously assign the responsibility to the children. But it is still possible to work. In the case of PhD students, it is possible.)
teaching cheating education responsibilities
edited 2 hours ago
Vladhagen
4,28611738
asked 3 hours ago
Volker Siegel
15419
If a student is cheating, he can be caught or not caught.
If he is caught, it's not obvious what to do.
There are options with different strategies:
- The students are themselves responsible for not cheating.
- The teacher is responsible for preventing cheating.
- The organisation is responsible for not cheating.
Options 2. and 3. are obviously acceptable and in use.
Option 1. is the one that is interesting. If that is used, it often leads to cheating in very high percentages, significantly more than in cases 2. and 3. is cheated.
The most interesting point is that in case 1., cheating is irrelevant for the teacher and the organisation. The teacher should explain the strategy, and the reasoning to do it in the course notes. And that is all for him.
The reasoning is that it is to the detriment of the student, and nobody else if the student cheats.
Is this strategy somewhere in use?
Should it be?
(I do not limit the question to the level of education, but there are levels - like before high school, where one can not obviously assign the responsibility to the children. But it is still possible to work. In the case of PhD students, it is possible.)
teaching cheating education responsibilities
teaching cheating education responsibilities
edited 2 hours ago
Vladhagen
4,28611738
asked 3 hours ago
Volker Siegel
15419
edited 2 hours ago
Vladhagen
4,28611738
asked 3 hours ago
Volker Siegel
15419
edited 2 hours ago
Vladhagen
4,28611738
edited 2 hours ago
Vladhagen
4,28611738
edited 2 hours ago
Vladhagen
4,28611738
4,28611738
asked 3 hours ago
Volker Siegel
15419
asked 3 hours ago
Volker Siegel
15419
asked 3 hours ago
Volker Siegel
15419
15419
6
What?? How on earth could it be anyone's responsibility but the student's to not cheat?
– Azor Ahai
3 hours ago
5
I have taught at a college (US meaning - post-secondary undergraduate education at a small institution without graduate programs) where the student body collectively is responsible for cheating. The students are collectively responsible for finding cheating, and the students elect a group of students to decide on punishments if cheating has occurred. Faculty leave the room during exams.
– Alexander Woo
2 hours ago
1
@AlexanderWoo. That is awesome.
– Buffy
2 hours ago
1
"it is to the detriment of the student, and nobody else if the student cheats". So incompetent doctors hurt only themselves?
– Tobias Kildetoft
2 hours ago
1
1,2,3 are not mutually exclusive. The student is obviously responsible to not cheat. The teacher and institution also have an obligation to create reasonable policies that discourage and deter cheating, as needed, but so as not to interfere with educational goals. Just like in society in general, every individual has a responsibility to obey the law, but the state also has a responsibility to provide police.
– Nate Eldredge
52 mins ago
 |Â
show 6 more comments
6
What?? How on earth could it be anyone's responsibility but the student's to not cheat?
– Azor Ahai
3 hours ago
5
I have taught at a college (US meaning - post-secondary undergraduate education at a small institution without graduate programs) where the student body collectively is responsible for cheating. The students are collectively responsible for finding cheating, and the students elect a group of students to decide on punishments if cheating has occurred. Faculty leave the room during exams.
– Alexander Woo
2 hours ago
1
@AlexanderWoo. That is awesome.
– Buffy
2 hours ago
1
"it is to the detriment of the student, and nobody else if the student cheats". So incompetent doctors hurt only themselves?
– Tobias Kildetoft
2 hours ago
1
1,2,3 are not mutually exclusive. The student is obviously responsible to not cheat. The teacher and institution also have an obligation to create reasonable policies that discourage and deter cheating, as needed, but so as not to interfere with educational goals. Just like in society in general, every individual has a responsibility to obey the law, but the state also has a responsibility to provide police.
– Nate Eldredge
52 mins ago
6
6
What?? How on earth could it be anyone's responsibility but the student's to not cheat?
– Azor Ahai
3 hours ago
What?? How on earth could it be anyone's responsibility but the student's to not cheat?
– Azor Ahai
3 hours ago
5
5
I have taught at a college (US meaning - post-secondary undergraduate education at a small institution without graduate programs) where the student body collectively is responsible for cheating. The students are collectively responsible for finding cheating, and the students elect a group of students to decide on punishments if cheating has occurred. Faculty leave the room during exams.
– Alexander Woo
2 hours ago
I have taught at a college (US meaning - post-secondary undergraduate education at a small institution without graduate programs) where the student body collectively is responsible for cheating. The students are collectively responsible for finding cheating, and the students elect a group of students to decide on punishments if cheating has occurred. Faculty leave the room during exams.
– Alexander Woo
2 hours ago
1
1
@AlexanderWoo. That is awesome.
– Buffy
2 hours ago
@AlexanderWoo. That is awesome.
– Buffy
2 hours ago
1
1
"it is to the detriment of the student, and nobody else if the student cheats". So incompetent doctors hurt only themselves?
– Tobias Kildetoft
2 hours ago
"it is to the detriment of the student, and nobody else if the student cheats". So incompetent doctors hurt only themselves?
– Tobias Kildetoft
2 hours ago
1
1
1,2,3 are not mutually exclusive. The student is obviously responsible to not cheat. The teacher and institution also have an obligation to create reasonable policies that discourage and deter cheating, as needed, but so as not to interfere with educational goals. Just like in society in general, every individual has a responsibility to obey the law, but the state also has a responsibility to provide police.
– Nate Eldredge
52 mins ago
1,2,3 are not mutually exclusive. The student is obviously responsible to not cheat. The teacher and institution also have an obligation to create reasonable policies that discourage and deter cheating, as needed, but so as not to interfere with educational goals. Just like in society in general, every individual has a responsibility to obey the law, but the state also has a responsibility to provide police.
– Nate Eldredge
52 mins ago
 |Â
show 6 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
If you mean to ask, are there places where the teacher and the institution can ignore the possibility/responsibility for preventing cheating, relying entirely on the honor/integrity/ethics of the students, the answer is a qualified yes.
There are places with formal honor codes that the student signs. The penalties for breaking it can be severe, hence the qualification. But it is mostly honored at those places and students are treated as honorable people, not as criminals in waiting.
However, even in such places, a professor would probably not want to dangle bait in front of students, reusing old exams without change, nor would the institution not want to have a system in place for handling student misconduct.
But even beyond that, some people teach in such a way that it is very difficult to do anything that would be considered cheating. You can, for example, deemphasize formal high pressure examinations. You can also encourage, even require, student collaboration. There are ways to determine student performance for which these practices don't interfere.
The job of education is to promote student learning, not grading.
answered 2 hours ago
Buffy
21.4k667122
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
I disagree with much of your premise.
- It is the students responsibility not to cheat
- It is the responsibility of the professor to detect cheating when possible
- It is the responsibility of the institution to levy consequences for cheating
All of this is done to uphold the quality of the degree sought and the reputation of the institution.
Finally, cheating is not irrelevant even when undetected, because it erodes the reputation of both the degree and the institution. In the limit, you have unqualified students entering the workforce touting a ‘degree’ in nothing other than success in cheating. Meanwhile students that did not cheat suffer the consequences of a degree from a school with declining reputation.
Edit: OP’s premise may be sound in a ‘game theory’ context, wherein the purpose of the game is to earn maximal points, but such an exercise dismisses the broader implications.
answered 46 mins ago
HEITZ
8,22131732
I missed the point of the reputation, thanks! But the core of the question is basically whether the strategy works. And it works, by definition, if the final grades at the end are at least as good as traditional grades. I do not think that you disagree with anything. You just answer the question "Should the strategy be used?" with "No", and go on to explain your argument. (Actually, you say that your opinion is that you think the premise that the three strategies are separate is wrong. Now I get it. ) Good answer!
– Volker Siegel
21 mins ago
I’d only agree with your premise in the context of game theory. Yes, the quantifiable outcomes may be the same but the qualitative - the consequences as a whole and for the system - certainly question a cheating strategy.
– HEITZ
19 mins ago
It is not a cheating strategy! When it works, that implies that they cheated not more than before! And if it works, they have actually proven their responsibility, which is a major positive point on the qualitative side.
– Volker Siegel
12 mins ago
I guess I’m missing your point. My major criticism is that cheating, even when successful, is detrimental not just to the cheater, but to his/her peers and the institution.
– HEITZ
7 mins ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
If you mean to ask, are there places where the teacher and the institution can ignore the possibility/responsibility for preventing cheating, relying entirely on the honor/integrity/ethics of the students, the answer is a qualified yes.
There are places with formal honor codes that the student signs. The penalties for breaking it can be severe, hence the qualification. But it is mostly honored at those places and students are treated as honorable people, not as criminals in waiting.
However, even in such places, a professor would probably not want to dangle bait in front of students, reusing old exams without change, nor would the institution not want to have a system in place for handling student misconduct.
But even beyond that, some people teach in such a way that it is very difficult to do anything that would be considered cheating. You can, for example, deemphasize formal high pressure examinations. You can also encourage, even require, student collaboration. There are ways to determine student performance for which these practices don't interfere.
The job of education is to promote student learning, not grading.
answered 2 hours ago
Buffy
21.4k667122
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
If you mean to ask, are there places where the teacher and the institution can ignore the possibility/responsibility for preventing cheating, relying entirely on the honor/integrity/ethics of the students, the answer is a qualified yes.
There are places with formal honor codes that the student signs. The penalties for breaking it can be severe, hence the qualification. But it is mostly honored at those places and students are treated as honorable people, not as criminals in waiting.
However, even in such places, a professor would probably not want to dangle bait in front of students, reusing old exams without change, nor would the institution not want to have a system in place for handling student misconduct.
But even beyond that, some people teach in such a way that it is very difficult to do anything that would be considered cheating. You can, for example, deemphasize formal high pressure examinations. You can also encourage, even require, student collaboration. There are ways to determine student performance for which these practices don't interfere.
The job of education is to promote student learning, not grading.
answered 2 hours ago
Buffy
21.4k667122
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
If you mean to ask, are there places where the teacher and the institution can ignore the possibility/responsibility for preventing cheating, relying entirely on the honor/integrity/ethics of the students, the answer is a qualified yes.
There are places with formal honor codes that the student signs. The penalties for breaking it can be severe, hence the qualification. But it is mostly honored at those places and students are treated as honorable people, not as criminals in waiting.
However, even in such places, a professor would probably not want to dangle bait in front of students, reusing old exams without change, nor would the institution not want to have a system in place for handling student misconduct.
But even beyond that, some people teach in such a way that it is very difficult to do anything that would be considered cheating. You can, for example, deemphasize formal high pressure examinations. You can also encourage, even require, student collaboration. There are ways to determine student performance for which these practices don't interfere.
The job of education is to promote student learning, not grading.
answered 2 hours ago
Buffy
21.4k667122
If you mean to ask, are there places where the teacher and the institution can ignore the possibility/responsibility for preventing cheating, relying entirely on the honor/integrity/ethics of the students, the answer is a qualified yes.
There are places with formal honor codes that the student signs. The penalties for breaking it can be severe, hence the qualification. But it is mostly honored at those places and students are treated as honorable people, not as criminals in waiting.
However, even in such places, a professor would probably not want to dangle bait in front of students, reusing old exams without change, nor would the institution not want to have a system in place for handling student misconduct.
But even beyond that, some people teach in such a way that it is very difficult to do anything that would be considered cheating. You can, for example, deemphasize formal high pressure examinations. You can also encourage, even require, student collaboration. There are ways to determine student performance for which these practices don't interfere.
The job of education is to promote student learning, not grading.
answered 2 hours ago
Buffy
21.4k667122
edited 2 hours ago
answered 2 hours ago
Buffy
21.4k667122
answered 2 hours ago
Buffy
21.4k667122
answered 2 hours ago
Buffy
21.4k667122
21.4k667122
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
I disagree with much of your premise.
- It is the students responsibility not to cheat
- It is the responsibility of the professor to detect cheating when possible
- It is the responsibility of the institution to levy consequences for cheating
All of this is done to uphold the quality of the degree sought and the reputation of the institution.
Finally, cheating is not irrelevant even when undetected, because it erodes the reputation of both the degree and the institution. In the limit, you have unqualified students entering the workforce touting a ‘degree’ in nothing other than success in cheating. Meanwhile students that did not cheat suffer the consequences of a degree from a school with declining reputation.
Edit: OP’s premise may be sound in a ‘game theory’ context, wherein the purpose of the game is to earn maximal points, but such an exercise dismisses the broader implications.
answered 46 mins ago
HEITZ
8,22131732
I missed the point of the reputation, thanks! But the core of the question is basically whether the strategy works. And it works, by definition, if the final grades at the end are at least as good as traditional grades. I do not think that you disagree with anything. You just answer the question "Should the strategy be used?" with "No", and go on to explain your argument. (Actually, you say that your opinion is that you think the premise that the three strategies are separate is wrong. Now I get it. ) Good answer!
– Volker Siegel
21 mins ago
I’d only agree with your premise in the context of game theory. Yes, the quantifiable outcomes may be the same but the qualitative - the consequences as a whole and for the system - certainly question a cheating strategy.
– HEITZ
19 mins ago
It is not a cheating strategy! When it works, that implies that they cheated not more than before! And if it works, they have actually proven their responsibility, which is a major positive point on the qualitative side.
– Volker Siegel
12 mins ago
I guess I’m missing your point. My major criticism is that cheating, even when successful, is detrimental not just to the cheater, but to his/her peers and the institution.
– HEITZ
7 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
I disagree with much of your premise.
- It is the students responsibility not to cheat
- It is the responsibility of the professor to detect cheating when possible
- It is the responsibility of the institution to levy consequences for cheating
All of this is done to uphold the quality of the degree sought and the reputation of the institution.
Finally, cheating is not irrelevant even when undetected, because it erodes the reputation of both the degree and the institution. In the limit, you have unqualified students entering the workforce touting a ‘degree’ in nothing other than success in cheating. Meanwhile students that did not cheat suffer the consequences of a degree from a school with declining reputation.
Edit: OP’s premise may be sound in a ‘game theory’ context, wherein the purpose of the game is to earn maximal points, but such an exercise dismisses the broader implications.
answered 46 mins ago
HEITZ
8,22131732
I missed the point of the reputation, thanks! But the core of the question is basically whether the strategy works. And it works, by definition, if the final grades at the end are at least as good as traditional grades. I do not think that you disagree with anything. You just answer the question "Should the strategy be used?" with "No", and go on to explain your argument. (Actually, you say that your opinion is that you think the premise that the three strategies are separate is wrong. Now I get it. ) Good answer!
– Volker Siegel
21 mins ago
I’d only agree with your premise in the context of game theory. Yes, the quantifiable outcomes may be the same but the qualitative - the consequences as a whole and for the system - certainly question a cheating strategy.
– HEITZ
19 mins ago
It is not a cheating strategy! When it works, that implies that they cheated not more than before! And if it works, they have actually proven their responsibility, which is a major positive point on the qualitative side.
– Volker Siegel
12 mins ago
I guess I’m missing your point. My major criticism is that cheating, even when successful, is detrimental not just to the cheater, but to his/her peers and the institution.
– HEITZ
7 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
I disagree with much of your premise.
- It is the students responsibility not to cheat
- It is the responsibility of the professor to detect cheating when possible
- It is the responsibility of the institution to levy consequences for cheating
All of this is done to uphold the quality of the degree sought and the reputation of the institution.
Finally, cheating is not irrelevant even when undetected, because it erodes the reputation of both the degree and the institution. In the limit, you have unqualified students entering the workforce touting a ‘degree’ in nothing other than success in cheating. Meanwhile students that did not cheat suffer the consequences of a degree from a school with declining reputation.
Edit: OP’s premise may be sound in a ‘game theory’ context, wherein the purpose of the game is to earn maximal points, but such an exercise dismisses the broader implications.
answered 46 mins ago
HEITZ
8,22131732
I disagree with much of your premise.
- It is the students responsibility not to cheat
- It is the responsibility of the professor to detect cheating when possible
- It is the responsibility of the institution to levy consequences for cheating
All of this is done to uphold the quality of the degree sought and the reputation of the institution.
Finally, cheating is not irrelevant even when undetected, because it erodes the reputation of both the degree and the institution. In the limit, you have unqualified students entering the workforce touting a ‘degree’ in nothing other than success in cheating. Meanwhile students that did not cheat suffer the consequences of a degree from a school with declining reputation.
Edit: OP’s premise may be sound in a ‘game theory’ context, wherein the purpose of the game is to earn maximal points, but such an exercise dismisses the broader implications.
answered 46 mins ago
HEITZ
8,22131732
edited 14 mins ago
answered 46 mins ago
HEITZ
8,22131732
answered 46 mins ago
HEITZ
8,22131732
answered 46 mins ago
HEITZ
8,22131732
8,22131732
I missed the point of the reputation, thanks! But the core of the question is basically whether the strategy works. And it works, by definition, if the final grades at the end are at least as good as traditional grades. I do not think that you disagree with anything. You just answer the question "Should the strategy be used?" with "No", and go on to explain your argument. (Actually, you say that your opinion is that you think the premise that the three strategies are separate is wrong. Now I get it. ) Good answer!
– Volker Siegel
21 mins ago
I’d only agree with your premise in the context of game theory. Yes, the quantifiable outcomes may be the same but the qualitative - the consequences as a whole and for the system - certainly question a cheating strategy.
– HEITZ
19 mins ago
It is not a cheating strategy! When it works, that implies that they cheated not more than before! And if it works, they have actually proven their responsibility, which is a major positive point on the qualitative side.
– Volker Siegel
12 mins ago
I guess I’m missing your point. My major criticism is that cheating, even when successful, is detrimental not just to the cheater, but to his/her peers and the institution.
– HEITZ
7 mins ago
add a comment |Â
I missed the point of the reputation, thanks! But the core of the question is basically whether the strategy works. And it works, by definition, if the final grades at the end are at least as good as traditional grades. I do not think that you disagree with anything. You just answer the question "Should the strategy be used?" with "No", and go on to explain your argument. (Actually, you say that your opinion is that you think the premise that the three strategies are separate is wrong. Now I get it. ) Good answer!
– Volker Siegel
21 mins ago
I’d only agree with your premise in the context of game theory. Yes, the quantifiable outcomes may be the same but the qualitative - the consequences as a whole and for the system - certainly question a cheating strategy.
– HEITZ
19 mins ago
It is not a cheating strategy! When it works, that implies that they cheated not more than before! And if it works, they have actually proven their responsibility, which is a major positive point on the qualitative side.
– Volker Siegel
12 mins ago
I guess I’m missing your point. My major criticism is that cheating, even when successful, is detrimental not just to the cheater, but to his/her peers and the institution.
– HEITZ
7 mins ago
I missed the point of the reputation, thanks! But the core of the question is basically whether the strategy works. And it works, by definition, if the final grades at the end are at least as good as traditional grades. I do not think that you disagree with anything. You just answer the question "Should the strategy be used?" with "No", and go on to explain your argument. (Actually, you say that your opinion is that you think the premise that the three strategies are separate is wrong. Now I get it. ) Good answer!
– Volker Siegel
21 mins ago
I missed the point of the reputation, thanks! But the core of the question is basically whether the strategy works. And it works, by definition, if the final grades at the end are at least as good as traditional grades. I do not think that you disagree with anything. You just answer the question "Should the strategy be used?" with "No", and go on to explain your argument. (Actually, you say that your opinion is that you think the premise that the three strategies are separate is wrong. Now I get it. ) Good answer!
– Volker Siegel
21 mins ago
I’d only agree with your premise in the context of game theory. Yes, the quantifiable outcomes may be the same but the qualitative - the consequences as a whole and for the system - certainly question a cheating strategy.
– HEITZ
19 mins ago
I’d only agree with your premise in the context of game theory. Yes, the quantifiable outcomes may be the same but the qualitative - the consequences as a whole and for the system - certainly question a cheating strategy.
– HEITZ
19 mins ago
It is not a cheating strategy! When it works, that implies that they cheated not more than before! And if it works, they have actually proven their responsibility, which is a major positive point on the qualitative side.
– Volker Siegel
12 mins ago
It is not a cheating strategy! When it works, that implies that they cheated not more than before! And if it works, they have actually proven their responsibility, which is a major positive point on the qualitative side.
– Volker Siegel
12 mins ago
I guess I’m missing your point. My major criticism is that cheating, even when successful, is detrimental not just to the cheater, but to his/her peers and the institution.
– HEITZ
7 mins ago
I guess I’m missing your point. My major criticism is that cheating, even when successful, is detrimental not just to the cheater, but to his/her peers and the institution.
– HEITZ
7 mins ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f118106%2fhas-the-student-responsibility-for-not-cheating%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
6
What?? How on earth could it be anyone's responsibility but the student's to not cheat?
– Azor Ahai
3 hours ago
5
I have taught at a college (US meaning - post-secondary undergraduate education at a small institution without graduate programs) where the student body collectively is responsible for cheating. The students are collectively responsible for finding cheating, and the students elect a group of students to decide on punishments if cheating has occurred. Faculty leave the room during exams.
– Alexander Woo
2 hours ago
1
@AlexanderWoo. That is awesome.
– Buffy
2 hours ago
1
"it is to the detriment of the student, and nobody else if the student cheats". So incompetent doctors hurt only themselves?
– Tobias Kildetoft
2 hours ago
1
1,2,3 are not mutually exclusive. The student is obviously responsible to not cheat. The teacher and institution also have an obligation to create reasonable policies that discourage and deter cheating, as needed, but so as not to interfere with educational goals. Just like in society in general, every individual has a responsibility to obey the law, but the state also has a responsibility to provide police.
– Nate Eldredge
52 mins ago