Is trying to catch cheaters a worthwhile use of college resources?

Yes. If too many cheaters get by without getting caught, then a degree from that institution is no better than a mail-order diploma.

It is a very worthwhile use of resources. A school is only as good as its integrity and honor. This must be reflected by its students and staff.

Colleges should spend sparingly on enforcement. Colleges should teach students how to recognize the difference between learning and parroting what they find on the web or other sources.

As a middle school teacher, I think it is very important for colleges to make sure they are enforcing the moral code. I find what your researcher said very true. Students see others cheating so often that they think it is fine. I try to impart to students the importance of doing their own work. Cheating in my class may mean a zero on the assignment but cheating in college may mean being kicked out of school. If the rules are not enforced they think that there is no consequences for cheating so why not do it.

Looking at our society objectively it seems that “cheating” could have its merits on a personal level (although likely not on a societal level). Being a good cheater (i.e. one that doesn’t get caught or better yet who’s actions are socially acceptable): the lawyer who can win a court case that should have been lost, the hospital that charges 3 times more for because it is well regarded, the politician who can get lots of funding from companies while still appealing to his constituency, the bank that charges fees for every little thing.

Should we then be teaching our kids to cheat, but to cheat smartly. Like it or not, a lot of what is taught in high school or college is irrelevant for most students’ future endeavors. If a student cheats smartly (only when they can get away with it, and only the subjects that are worthless to them), they could potentially achieve more than if they didn’t cheat. The cheater could do more with less time, and get better grades. That could lead to a better college, which could lead to a better job, etc., etc.. Is this really how our society is set up?

Certainly cheaters should be aggressively pursued. Everyone seems to justify cheating when they do it to get something they feel they deserve. We seem to forget that cheating puts people in positions they may not be qualified for. Think of how much trust you have in other’s ability to do their jobs. Do you want to rely on a cheater?

I don’t want my oral surgery performed by someone who get their certificate through cheating.

I don’t want to drive across a bridge designed by an engineer who got their license through cheating.

I don’t want children watched over by a daycare provider who got their license through cheating.

I don’t want to eat food at a restaurant that passed it’s inspection by cheating.

Russ’s post got me thinking. Is Education really nothing more than teaching kids to copy what was done by others? I don’t think so. I’d argue there’s a significant difference between building on the work of others and taking credit for work you didn’t do yourself.

As for allegedly pointless memorization: Yeah, it’s good to know where to look when you don’t know something. But how far does that really extend? Do we just give every kid an iPad and tell them to use the internet to find out how to do things? Should I memorize information about foreign countries, or have to look it up when I’m talking to my fellow Senators about why we should build a relationship with Brazil (because surely, with all the time I’ve saved by cheating, I can devote my time fully to my political career (which is 83% cheating and 29% lying and 14% paying for (gay) sex))?

Wait, I’m not sure my numbers add up… bah, close enough.

Encourage sharing and cooperation…discourage cheating… re-educate the student (if they with to continue at that institution) as to appropriate methods of study and producing good work.

Yes, it is important to discipline cheaters, but how? If they are cheating they already know how to game the system. They can challenge a low grade and the Prof. has to prove the cheating incident. Unfortunately, direct observation is just ” he says..she says” info. The professor/teacher rarely wins in these cases because the institutions do not back up their faculty. They have to be nice to their “clients” ie. tuition paying students. Then add in the parent component who will threaten consequences because a bad grade may harm a students future career and earnings. We can only hope as others here have said that they sink their own boats.

Yes. However, I wonder about the collective will of all those involved in education – teachers, students, parents, administrators – to work together to curb the culture of cheating that seems to have taken hold.

I agree with Susan that good instructional design by teachers can reduce cheating and that certain kinds of testing can reduce certain kinds of cheating. However, that only goes so far. There is not a one-size-fits-all method of testing that works for all kinds of learning objectives. Good pedagogical practice involves using the right assessment tool at the right time. As an instructor, I use a variety of assessment tools to evaluate student effort and achievement.

But a teacher can only do so much. Some evaluation methods require more time-intensive methods of scoring. Grading an essay or student portfolio takes a lot more time than a machine-scored multiple-choice exam. Also, a good teacher knows that student assessment also presents learning opportunities. If students can get individual feedback on specific portions of their essay or insight on the pattern of types of multiple-choice questions missed on a test rather than a single score or grade, there is the potential for that student to learn from the assessment experience. Scoring rubrics can help but they still aren’t able to point out positives and negatives in the same way that written comments from the teacher on the students’ work can do. These can present very real time challenges for the teacher burdoned with multiple sections of large class sizes. Do the administrators and tax payers want to pay the cost of lower class sizes and/or reduced credit loads for faculty who conscientiously use these these best practices in student evaluation?

And what about distance learning, i.e. interactive television (ITV) and on-line education? Student assessment in these settings is even more challenging. Ideally, in interactive television settings, you’d have a proctor at every “remote site” for objective testing (when objective testing is the appropriate assessment tool). For on-line classes, having a proctored testing center is a possibility. But these sorts of solutions mean extra personnel, often during evening and weekend hours. In this day and age of budget cuts in education, these are some of the things that are the first to go. And for the on-line student from way out of area or even country, there’s no practical way to require them to come to a testing center. After all, the whole point of “distance education” is to accomodate the student who is place-bound, or schedule-bound and can’t get to a brick-and-morter classroom. Other methods of student assessment in distance education also have other unique obstacles. Some, in my experience, can be overcome but which require an inordinate amount of teacher monitoring and involvement – much more than the “prep” time for which we’re paid.

Lastly, administrative and parental support for applying meaningful consequences when a student is “busted” for cheating is sorely lacking. Honor codes and punishment policies are all good and well until it happens to be their little “johnny” or “susie” or the “star athlete” or student senate president. Then the teacher is often left hanging out to dry. Is it worthwhile to spend resources on preventing academic cheating. Yes, for all the reasons others have mentioned concerning academic integrity, moral character, and promotion true learning. But I’m just not sure many people realize just how many resources would be needed to truly make a dent in the problem that exists today.

I have always envied my wife’s experience at St. Olaf over mine at the U of M. Cheating is such a huge concern at the U that it becomes a major distraction during test-taking.

I wonder though, if a student is paying for their education, why do they value it so little that they would devise a way to avoid learning it? I think that one could argue that in some cases, the knowledge being tested doesn’t seem relevant to the student, and therefore not important enough to learn or synthesize.