Cheating...

[Zeno]

-- REVISED POST -- SHORTER -- FOR THOSE WHO DON'T WANT RED EYES --

 

 

Here's my answers:

 

I believe cheating disrupts personal growth because individuals cannot accurately predict everything that they need to know in the future. It also disrupts advancement of society, because if cheating is acceptable, then only a minority will bother to learn "required" material.

 

It is valuable to know more than just the minimum requirements to do your job.

 

The basic reason people cheat seems to be laziness (it's easier) and greed (wanting something for nothing).

 

As a teacher, I think about cheating more than I did as a student. I ignored it then, now I can't.

 

I think it's too easy for cheating to become a habit.

 

I did cheat on the listening/translating part of quizzes in my secondary school Spanish class.

 

I plan to reduce cheating in my classes by explaining my views to the students, then giving 0% on assignments when they cheat (so they know I'm serious).

 

I won't change my opinion about the cheating policy at my university, because if a university encourages cheating, then getting a degree becomes completely worthless.

 

(I like my long post better. This one has no explanation, and just doesn't have the same feeling to it at all... )

 

--Zeno

[FullAuto]

Isn't there some reward for the longest post?

 

A 'delete' key.

[Zeno]

If you had a class that gave a 50% mark for not turning in an assignment, 0% for cheating, and a real mark between 51% and 100% for turning it in, would you cheat?

 

Assume this is a class that you would "normally" choose to cheat in. Also assume that a 50% is a failing grade.

 

 

Perhaps you would take the 50% grade for doing nothing, and only do the assignments you feel like doing? If you do a couple assignments and pass the exams, you could easily pull a D without having to cheat.

 

Or is the motivation to cheat simply too strong, since if you cheat, and *don't* get caught, you could get an A?

 

--Zeno

[FullAuto]

If it's a class you'd normally choose to cheat in, you'd cheat. Maximum good grade for minimum effort.

[Strong Bob]

If you are using "unique personality" as part of your definition for acceptable cheating, then every person in the world has a different definition. When you have a definition that no one agrees on, then you no longer have any definition at all.

 

You get a little too deep into semantics here. You're thinking of a different use of the term "cheating". I am using the literal term. In that it is merely overstepping rules. Rules, for lack of a better definition, are simply terms to adapt people to a group or society. Rules can get in the way. (This is why "Blue Laws" exist...) And therefore the definition used by others is practically the same, merely used differently.

 

Different definitions on cheating range in logic. If one cheats out of intentional laziness, then their definition matches mine, in that they know they're cheating, and they know the use of it is wrong in that sense. They just use their cheating in a less moral way.

 

When does someone's definition of cheating no longer match with mine? In only one circumstance I can think of. When they class cheating in a linear equation as "bad", "immoral", or "evil". So the rest of the world doesn't have a different definition, only those whom view things in absolutes. A concept I have never found any reason to believe in.

 

It disrupts personal growth because individuals cannot accurately predict everything that they need to know. It's easy to see with children--a child hates to read, no one forces the child to learn, the child cheats through classes, so the child becomes an illiterate adult

 

Forcing someone to learn is the worst thing you can do. You need to teach in stages. Simply waving a book in front of the child's face, and demand he learn to read or else they will be punished isn't any good.

 

"Forced" is the wrong word to use. With that, education becomes a chore, and not a task the child will enjoy in life. A better way to do it, would be "enticing" the child. Allow him to understand the importance of reading, and recreational capabilities. Forcing them, only makes their life a hell, the extra options wouldn't even be worth it. Especially since reading will be one of the first things the child will learn, the child will get a bad 'first impression' on learning if he is forced. This leads to horrible problems later.

 

Reading is necessary for everything. While I argue that there are things in life you just plain do not need to know, I will also argue that there are things you do need to know. Literary skills being the main one, immediately followed by mathematics. But is anything else truly necessary to survive in our society? No. But it sure helps a hell of a lot.

 

It also disrupts advancement of society, because if cheating is acceptable, then only a minority will bother to learn "required" material. Grades become meaningless, and there is no measure of how much anyone actually knows about anything.

 

A brief lapse in your semantics here... If cheating were acceptable, is it even cheating? Rules are set in place as a guide and law. When you accept an action against a rule, it must either be due to a loophole (Which isn't cheating.) or allowed to henceforth turn the said rule into a mere guideline and nothing else.

 

I can also argue on how grades are pretty much meaningless regardless of anything. (My GPA was lower than 3.0 when I graduated. Yet I very frequently prove to be the smarter, more clever, than some of my friends with GPAs of 3.5 to 4.0. And I can swear most of them scarcely cheat on anything.) Due to this fact, I view grades and point averages as a waste of my time. The only factor they create is a slim one with your college application. (They look at SATs more than anything.)

 

Cheating is an extremely miniscule part of the grading problems nowadays. Mostly it's poor testing/teaching, where things are kept too simple.

 

I see this all the time in computer work--some fool gets an MCSE and convinces a company to hire them, and they don't even know how to use a mouse. Companies hire writers who can't write, teachers who can't teach, nurses who don't know medicines, mechanics who don't know tools, etc. So, it becomes the company's job to test applicants and make sure they know how to do the job. But when you get to that point...what is the value of a degree? It means nothing, because your friends with the same degree all have different levels of knowledge--and grades don't accurately predict anything at all.

 

I agree with this completely! Which is why I have never shirked any work in my law studies. (Despite having graduated, I still study it. Even though I haven't been admitted into any colleges.) Which is why I still do a LOT of writing. People who cheat to get into their profession without knowing their profession shouldn't be there. It's why I say it's okay to cheat, when it doesn't harm where you're going.

 

Society needs measurements of performance in order to put people in jobs they can actually do. Society needs education in order to create people qualified to perform certain jobs. Once education allows cheating, then the entire system breaks down. Yes, you will still have some qualified people--but you won't be able to tell them apart from the unqualified people without expensive and time-consuming testing.

 

Once again, grading and degrees are not now, nor have they been for a long time, a decent gauge of skill. This can be partially attributed to cheating, yes. But I've already mentioned the other pieces of the puzzle. It's already expensive and time-consuming to tell the qualified people apart, and it's through a simple paper called a "resume". And even so, this is only the part of the resume called "Experience".

 

The one and only way to gauge someone's skill is experience. Grading is too flawed a system.

[Ivory]

strong bob-too long!!!!!

 

youd cheat...in response to zenos question. youd get the best mark for littlest input. people dont usuaally cheat, hoping theyll get causght out!

[Slaughter]

This is the rest of Strong Bob's post above. It was too long for the forum software to handle, so I had to split it.

 

It isn't always about "need". It's about "value"

 

And you will find no argument from me on this. But at the same time... What right do Public Schools have in telling me what knowledge is more valuable than the rest?

 

My career of choice is Law Enforcement. So my chosen fields of study would be psychology, law, and physical training. (Them being the most important.) Other "values" include social behaviour, deductive reasoning, and forensics. (There's definitely more, but I don't think I need to go through a list here. ) Now, knowing some things about vehicle engines would probably help me out if my car breaks down, but how much would a half year class about it do to help me in that field? Especially if the information goes dormant in my head just a scant few months after the class is over?

 

"The more I know today, the better a person I am than yesterday." My godfather told me this QUOTE, and I see no reason to disbelieve it. Sure, it's nice to get some information regarding some software engineering, but it wouldn't help me in my career, or pretty much anything I'd do in life. (I love computers for internet and gaming. But that's about it, so no hobbies from that would come either.) So I need to make sure what I learn in my short lifetime comes to good use. I cheated on my Engineering class, not because of laziness, not because it was "easy", (Although, basically, it was certainly easier than doing their work.) but because it was just in the way of my learning experience to what I make important to me.

 

Some people cheat because they want to express individuality. I believe that is a rationalization

 

I cheat because I feel public schools have little right to deem what I need to know. (Especially when my personal experiences have proven school curriculum wrong all too often...) So I disregard it. And learn at the pace most optimal for me. It's rationalizing, yes. But so isn't the saying: "We shouldn't have war because people get hurt."

 

As Strong Bob said, public education is a "one size fits all" system that very rarely fits even half the students. I agree it needs reform in every country I've ever seen it. But no one seems to have a good solution to the needed reforms--a solution that costs the same as the current system, and one that fits close to 100% of students.

 

I actually did, at one point. It was part of an argument I used to fight the necessity of ridiculous classes. Many teachers listened, I even had a meeting with the primary Principal of the school about it. The one and only flaw they saw in my idea was money. And that could've been easily solved if the damn city didn't spend 70 million on a new school, only to let it fall into misuse...

 

I don't have much time to reiterate here. I didn't type it into my computer. But if you ever feel like discussing this with me via messenger or PM...

 

I disagree with Strong Bob on this. He feels it is the teacher's responsibility to give the material, and the student's responsibility to actually learn it. However, I believe it is also the teacher's responsibility to remove certain obstacles to learning, find new ways to give the material to make it easier for some students to learn (some students learn better through different approaches), and to provide "connection points" so that students can see how the material relates to other classes, to real life, and to narrow "expert" fields they may want to pursue.

 

I either wrote wrong, or you read wrong. Yes, it's the students job to learn and the teacher's job to teach. But I never said that the teacher shouldn't try to "remove obstacles" from learning. I'm saying that they should, but they just plain don't.

 

In fact, this contradicts your suggestion that a child must be "forced" to learn if it becomes rebelious. (As stated earlier about reading.) Which is significantly different than simply "removing obstacles." Students learn differently though different approaches. Public schools fail in that approach so I've been forced to learn from myself and external sources instead. Which is why I cheated.

 

If a teacher admits that the course is worthless for some students, and allows those students to cheat without penalty, then you've created a very poor environment for learning. Who wants to take a class where students have different rules to follow? Who wants to take a course from a teacher who thinks it's worthless?

 

A teacher should at least inform students that maybe other studies may take higher priority. It's their duty to be honest, otherwise you start something akin to propaganda. When this starts, people either become rebelious, or programmed into linear thinking.

 

Who wants to take a class where students have different rules to follow? Everyone. If things remain the same for everyone, or remain the same everywhere, people either go nuts or get so used to it, that rules begin to lose meaning. Thus the cheating starts.

 

Who wants to take a course from a teacher who thinks it's worthless? Nobody, of course. But that's a different situation completely from a teacher honest enough to admit that some students may never need his course, while others will strive off it.

 

If Strong Bob could get an A in engineering without studying, paying attention, or doing any work at all in the class, would he bother cheating? The listening/translating part from cassettes in my Spanish class was worth about 5% of the final course grade. If I had a 95% in the class, would I bother cheating? The truth is, I wasn't good at Spanish, I didn't want to study it, and I knew I could pass with a C if I cheated on the listening/translating part of the tests.

 

This is basically a hypothetical situation saying "Why fix it, if it isn't broke." I see absolutely no reason why you would even say this... It's redundant. Might as well say: "If I could learn by implanting a chip in my head, why would I bother reading? I'd already know all the literary material" No offense, but this is kinda silly...

 

In the first class, I will explain my views on cheating, and give real-life examples for how my courses are important.

 

I have a better idea. Leave out the part on your beliefs on cheating, but leave in the 'real-life examples'. That's a really good move. But simply stating your views on cheating is unoriginal, and is mirrored by a great number of teachers besides yourself. (Therefore, most students will tune out the very moment you say "Here's my views on cheating...") They need to know why they shouldn't cheat, and make the choice themselves. Otherwise, they're not learning, just obeying orders.

 

I do not believe cheating should be 'allowed' by any means. But due to an extremely poor education system, it becomes necessary for some people to cheat in order to shape their lives properly, and be allowed to live the life they desire to live.

[Ivory]

slaughter you should of just deleted it"

[sir-roosio]

Strong bob, get some air man, take a screen break! blimey ur skin must have gone transparent from lack of natural light!

[Zeno]

Hi there, Strong Bob!

 

Despite the other comments (*cough*Ivory*cough*roosio*cough*) I did read your post(s), and appreciate that you took the time to answer everything. I know sometimes it's painful to read a lot of text, but if you're used to it and interested in the subject, I actually prefer to read long, well-written posts. Besides, it's much easier to misunderstand short answers than long, thoughtful responses...

 

------

 

First, regarding the definition of cheating. I think we agree here. Cheating is the overstepping of rules. However, we must remember that these are rules we (usually) agree to follow. It is true that rules are placed on people unfairly sometimes, when people are given no choice in the matter and simply forced to follow or die. However, in many cases rules are something we promise to follow. If I've chosen a school that uses grades and core course requirements, then I've agreed to the rules (and the penalties for not following them).

 

But that is idealist. Public institutions are often run by a central government agency, which dictates the rules to all members. The "solution" is to choose a private institution, but that often requires money and influence. I won't sit here and tell you every government always creates fair rules for everyone in the public education system. I don't believe that, and no one else should, either.

 

That said, we must also remember that, as members of whatever society we're in, rules are there to control people. If no one follows them, chaos results. If cheating becomes a common solution to unfair education rules, then the entire education system collapses. You might argue that the entire education system is already a failure (and I wouldn't necessarily argue) but that doesn't make cheating a good solution, in my opinion.

 

------

 

I used the term "forced" to describe educating children in something they don't want to learn. You said we should "entice" them to want to learn it. Of course, enticement is a better method--and if you ever become a parent or instructor, I want you to remember and practice that method. Unfortunately, unless you are a master teacher with infinite patience and wisdom, "forced" is sometimes the quickest and best method for teaching. And learning, for that matter. I've had to force myself to learn loads of stuff I never wanted to learn, and force myself to do many things I didn't want to do. In an ideal world, we would all love whatever knowledge we need and whatever jobs we do--but life isn't ideal, and "forced" is sometimes necessary.

 

That's not to say beating a child to force them to learn. I'm talking about stupid things, like telling a child they must finish reading a book or doing their homework before they're allowed to play outside. No, it's not the best method according to child psychiatrists--but sometimes, practical application of "force" is a lot more effective than theories and blow.

 

------

 

I agree that grades are a poor measure of ability. However, they are a measure. CVs are a marketing salespitch, and interviews are a live-broadcast commercial. High grades show that someone is willing to force themselves through material well enough to vomit it out on exams before forgetting it. High grades show that someone knows how to cheat without getting caught. High grades show that someone cares about the courses they did well in, or at least have some talent in them, or that they did something to make high marks in them (as opposed to the classes they did poorly in).

 

If you don't like grades as a measure, then you are faced with a dilemma. Hire someone for a month or two, see how they perform, and fire them if they don't measure up? Give them a test during the interview (which again requires a grade for performance-measurement)? How do you measure the quality difference between two employees if you don't have any scoring method? Do you simply believe the "Past Experience" part of the resume, and check with prior employers (who usually won't talk due to legalities and personal interests)? The fact is, grades are a convenient and easy metric for estimating how an employee will perform. A university drop out may perform better than the 4.0 graduate--in fact, I've seen that very example. But statistically, most 4.0 graduates of a good school are better at their jobs than 2.0 graduates of an equivalent school.

 

------

 

I definitely agree that poor testing and teaching are a *huge* problem at schools. But since I'm focusing on cheating in this forum topic, I won't get into that.

 

------

 

At the university where I teach, cheating is a problem among students in their primary course of study--their in-major classes. I'm glad you see how this is a problem, since cheating in these classes definitely affects their performance skill in the future.

 

 

"The more I know today, the better a person I am than yesterday."

 

I like that quote from your godfather--he sounds wise! I agree, and you said you don't disagree... However, you seem to think that knowledge you gain must help in your career, hobbies, or anything you want to do in life. Do you honestly know what topics and subjects will be most important to you throughout your entire life? You gave a list of some things you know you'll need. Fine. But it's the things we don't know we need that makes things difficult later.

 

You may be right, that the basic principles of engineering will never, ever be useful to you in your entire life. But you may be wrong, too. Do you honestly believe you can list off every subject and knowledge field that will ever be useful to you in the future? You said that a half-year course in basic vehicle maintenance might be useful some day, but isn't worth actually investing 6 months into it.

 

I don't know. I think that if we're forced to take some course because some education administrators decided it would be useful for everyone, then the time is already wasted--might as well gain something from it. And besides, if you've never tried it, you don't know if you're talented at it, or if you're interested in it... Personally, I like knowing how to change the oil in my car, replace the spark plugs, jump-start other people's cars (a great way to meet women, by the way), change tires, and identify why the damn engine overheated. Understanding vehicle engines a little bit made things easier when I learned how to juryrig repairs on a boat a few years later. Will I ever be a mechanic? Not bloody likely, since I have no real interest beyond common curiosity.

 

------

 

I agree that there are solutions for public education reform that cost money. The trick is finding the money, or finding a solution that is cheap and agreeable to everyone. Education also has biases based on culture and society (as far as what students should or should not learn). Despite the expense of your solutions, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts---although, right now I'd rather focus on cheating.

 

------

 

You said everyone would like taking classes where students have different rules to follow. I think you may have misunderstood me. "Ivory gets an A because he copied a 3 page report from the Internet, and he doesn't need this course in the future." "Bob gets a D because he wrote 6 pages on his own, but he really needs to know the material better for his future." "Zeno gets an Incomplete, because he wrote 10 pages, but half were copied, and he's not allowed to copy because he won't like cheating when he grows up. If he rewrites the copied portion, he'll get a B."

 

No, I think most everyone would be pretty upset at a class with different rules for different students, based on whether the student "needs" the class in his or her predicted future (and yes, that's even with the idealist assumption that the student predicts their own future).

 

------

 

You may be right that the students won't listen when I tell them my views on cheating. I'll have to think very carefully about my "anti-cheating" speech. I don't want the students to tune out. Maybe I can think of a project where cheating will result in the project's failure (rather than a simple failing grade), thereby illustrating my point. Hmmmm...interesting. I like that idea!

 

------

 

And finally, you said you don't believe cheating should be allowed. Yet you believe cheating is necessary for students due to a poor public education system. If it isn't allowed, then you must have some punishment (or perhaps a reward for not cheating). You must also have some method for catching students. Simply saying "don't cheat unless it suits your purpose" really isn't very effective.

 

------

 

A note: I'm on a business trip for a week, and will leave in a day and a half. I'll respond to anything before I take off, but after that, the thread will have to live on it's own for awhile. If everyone loses interest in a day or three, I think we can let it rest in peace.

 

I'm hoping for more thoughts and opinions, so any new voices are welcome! I hope the old voices stick around too--even if I am the only one who reads Strong Bob's posts.

 

--Zeno

[Matri]

So, how would you group me based on the following scenario?

 

I have a 2000-word essay report to turn in in 3 days' time, on political theories and government. I'm roughly one quarter of the way through and am seriously considering cheating to just finish it and be over, and hopefully scrape together enough to not fail. Unfortunately its pretty darn near impossible to find any on this topic(s).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P.S. It's really hard to write an objective and unbiased report on political theories when you hate how the principles of the theories have been twisted and corrupted. And all those books on Elitism can sugercoat their concepts all they want, it doesn't change the fact that there are absolutely no positive examples.

 

P.S.S. Oh yeah, and wanting ~10 different references is not easy when those books costs half a months pay each, and the library has already lent all its copies out.

 

*mutters* [/rant]

[Bomb Bloke]

You can most likely use web referances. Political debates are about te same as philosphical ones to me - a web of theories which, even if they do produce any real results, are most likely ignored.

 

*sighs*

 

Politics bugs me. I don't believe we can't jail them all.

[Matri]

You can most likely use web referances.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I wish. If web references count for more than 1/3rd of your references, you lose marks.

 

Political debates are about te same as philosphical ones to me - a web of theories which, even if they do produce any real results, are most likely ignored.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, except the people in philosophical ones actually have brains.

 

Politics bugs me. I don't believe we can't jail them all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We can't. If we could, everything would be dandy, but we can't.

[Zeno]

Hi Matri,

 

Okay, here's the plan. 2000 words is not a long report--keep reminding yourself of that. You want to know how long 2000 words is? Well, look at my last post, from March 14 2005, 07:56 PM. I just plugged it into Word; it's just slightly more than 3 pages, with a word count of 1576.

 

Write 3 full pages of text and you'll have your 2000 words, easy. Even after cutting out any excess "fluff," then making it look and sound good. Of course, if you're not used to writing 2000 word essays, it may still seem "long". Give yourself enough time to write it--plan your 3 days until the due date, and give yourself time to do the actual writing, plus the editing. (I can't advise you how long you need--only you know the amount of time).

 

For the research, you can skimp a little on it. Finding 10 references is easy; you only need to get a little information from each source. Do a web search, find 3 websites (so you're under the 1/3 requirement). Do *another* web search, find 6 *books*. Guess what? Did you know you can find entire books, or parts of books, online? If you get all of the reference information for the book, but you read an electronic copy, it isn't cheating. You can download entire books, legally, at certain websites--check out Project Gutenberg, for example.

 

Actually, if your lecturer is extremely strict about ensuring you don't do online research, you may be cheating the lecturer's rules by using electronic material. Okay, if you can't use e-books, then you *do* need to hit a physical library. Here's another trick: most libraries don't allow anyone to check out reference books, periodicals, newspapers, or microfilm. Get your remaining 7 references from encyclopaedias, magazines, and old newspapers--even if you must use a microfiche. You're researching political theory; you can find the material in any of the thousands of journals.

 

How long will it take to find the material? Not long. Go online, do a websearch for your topic, plus newspaper or journal names. That should tell you where to find the article. Then just go and get the physical (or microfilm) version from your library.

 

------

 

Your topic sounds tough. It would be so much easier to write a biased report, arguing your view of whatever political theories you like. But you must write unbiased information about political theories in general.

 

I would do a compare-and-contrast report. Talk about one political theory (whichever one you have the most information about). Then, talk about another political theory, and how it differs. Then, talk about a third theory. That should finish 2000 words.

 

If, again, this isn't allowed by your lecturer, and you must talk in general about all political theories...well, you must follow whatever the assignment requires. Talk about the history of political parties, how they develop their ideologies, and why most government systems end up with a 2-party system. Talk about why and how the political parties swap positions on different issues (you can see the trend over a few decades). Maybe, if you need more words to fill up 2000, talk about how individuals rarely agree with every point in whatever political ideology they adopt.

 

------

 

If I were you, Matri, I wouldn't cheat. There's no need. Even if you hate a topic, you should be able to write something about it. If you want to get a good grade, then do the report. Do the research online. Go find physical copies of 5-6 articles at your library. Get 1-2 encyclopaedia entries as references. Then write your 3 page report.

 

If you want to make a statement to your lecturer, and prove to everyone that the topic is crap and you hate the class and don't care about the grade...then you *still* don't need to cheat. Write a report that discusses how inane and stupid you think all political theories are. Make sure you cite references (good, solid references) that back up your view.

 

If I were the lecturer, and a student wrote a good 2000 word essay that demonstrated exactly why the required topic is a poor topic (with good references from anti-political theorists)...I would give the student an A. Your lecturer may be different (you could get a 0% for all I know). Still, if you want to show off to your friends like you don't give a damn, at least do it with style.

 

------

 

If you cheat, then you're simply following the easiest path--laziness and greed, wanting an "A" without doing anything. You've got three f-ing days. Do something! Do the report or make a statement doing an anti-report. Just do something!

 

------

 

But, if you don't take my advice, and decide to cheat, you have a lot of work ahead of you. The Internet makes it incredibly easy to plagiarize. But don't forget, it also makes it incredibly easy for a lecturer to discover plagiarism. Lecturers know students, and they know the material. They know how students write, they know how professionals write, and they know how the Internet works. 20 years ago, you could copy a book that isn't in your school library, and be fairly certain not to get caught. Now, everything exists online somewhere--the lecturer need only type a slightly modified piece of your writing, do a search, and find exactly what you copied.

 

If you copy, you must change, at a minimum, one out of every two important words. You must add grammatical mistakes that are appropriate to students at your grade level, and ones that you have accidently made before--but which are not found by Word or other grammar checking software. You must check the entire report and make sure it sounds like something you would write, similar to writing you've done before. And finally, you must do websearches on random bits of your writing, and make sure you can't find where you copied it from.

 

Finally, you must find 10 references--real references--which actually contain relevent information to your copied report. You must add quotes or paraphrase all 10 references (your lecturer will check for that). You must, of course, make sure your quotes and additions flow with the copied version you plagiarized from.

 

And after all of that work, which takes *hours*...you might find you've wasted the time you could have otherwise simply used writing the report.

 

------

 

On the other hand, you could hire another student, or an outsider, to write the report. If you do that, make sure it's someone you trust, who will *actually* write it and not simply give you something he or she copied. And make sure the person you ask to do it is not only trustworthy, but is familiar with you and your writing style enough to mimic the way you would write, if you actually bothered to do it.

 

Then, when you turn in the report, sit and sweat it out hoping the lecturer doesn't find out you cheated. Is it worth the stress and worry?

 

------

 

Finally, if your school gives very light or no penalty for cheating, then take everything I've written with a grain of salt. In the university where I graduated, cheating was very, very seriously penalized (instant expulsion and zero chance of ever going to any other decent school in the country). In the university where I work, cheating is ignored if not actively encouraged by some lecturers. As in all things, you must be your own judge of the situation, and your character.

 

--Zeno

 

(this post, 1271 words)

[Matri]

It IS long for me, though. I'm not used to long reports because I can't stomach theoretical subjects. Practical subjects such as Math and programming are infinitely easier for me, because I get to apply what I've studied almost immediately (or soon thereafter), cementing it into my memory. Theoretical studies just make my eyes glaze over. It shouldn't come as a surprise that History was my absolute weakest subject, and Math was my best back in my alma mater.

 

Maybe it's just me. I dislike long-winded explanations so my past essays have always been short, curt and to-the-point. You on the other hand, have no trouble with large essays (and I mean it as an envious compliment ). I seem to travel the extremes. I can cut out the "fluff" from a 2000-word report and shorten it to about 600 words, but if I were to fluff out those 600 I'd inevitable end up with close to 3000 before I knew what was happening.

 

On another note, there are no lectures or tutorials for this course, which in my opinion is not a good thing. Just handed a study guide and assignment sheet and told to "go do it".

 

Anyway, half done now, just need to hunt for the rest of the data... BTW, unbiasness in politics sounds kinda paradoxical...

 

 

P.S. Welcome back

[Zeno]

You on the other hand, have no trouble with large essays (and I mean it as an envious compliment ).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

True, true...

 

Still, you're on the right track. If you can take the fluff out of long reports, then you already know about writing. I tend to write very long reports, then cut half the stuff out because it's repetitive. (I don't do that with forum posts or e-mails, which is why they grow and grow and grow...)

 

In the future, when you're working, you'll be asked to write reports every now and again. No one wants to read fluff. You'll probably, if you're lucky, be working in a field you enjoy--such as a mathematics or programming-based position. Your ability to write short, clear-cut explanations will be a valuable asset.

 

Believe it or not, fluff is also bad in theoretical political reports. So, if you can, and if you have the time, try to write 2000 words of non-fluff. You said you don't like theoretical subjects, so approach it with a practical, analytical mind. Political theory pretends to be logical, using logical arguments--so look at politics and history with your logical mind, then decide whether a certain argument (or a historical decision) is a logical solution. Think how you would decide differently in the same situation.

 

No, it's not applied mathematics. It requires some creative thought, like programming a unique solution or solving a complex mathematical proof. Think of it this way--it can be valuable to learn a bit about how society tries to make order out of chaos. At least you can be a more informed voter, and understanding politics in government helps when learning management, teamwork, and workplace "politics".

 

------

 

Your course sounds really annoying, though. No lectures or tutorials? Just thrown in with a study guide? A theoretical class like this one just begs for classroom discussion, debate sessions, and applied roleplaying of various scenarios. If you're just told to read some stuff, and vomit out results in assignments...

 

Blah. You must have zero motivation to actually learn any of this. The role of a teacher is often motivational, trying to make the subject appealing or applicable to the students' lives. Without that, your stuck with self-learning...which works fine for people who are interested, or those who are working in the field and are required to learn it for job security. But just to throw a book at a student, and tell them to do some assignments because it's required...

 

Blah.

 

------

 

If you want to get through the rest of the course with a little less pain and frustration, you might try finding a good politically-based movie or book. Fiction is good--anything that has political situations written in a compelling way, designed to engage the reader/watcher. It might not be something you like, but it might at least grab your attention and interest long enough to make the class seem more relevant or interesting.

 

Good luck...

 

--Zeno

[Matri]

Well, there's one that's presented in an interesting way.

 

NationStates

 

And yes, I have managed to screw it up quite nicely, thank you. :lol:

Their forums are just chock-full of politically sensitive issues, and with the exception of the couple of loonies who slip in, the posters are quite well-behaved and rational.

 

 

EDIT: Btw, not a big fan of Tom Clancy novels myself

Edited March 30, 2005 by Matri

[Zeno]

The NationStates thing looks amusing, and I like your country's description...not so nice to visit, and I wouldn't want to live there!

 

------

 

I almost posted some "real life" stuff regarding teaching in general and the results of my efforts to stop cheating specifically.

 

Then I realized you all have better things to do than read more of my unedited babble.

 

------

 

Matri, stop reading, and go work on your paper.

 

 

--Zeno

[FullAuto]

I've got one of those!

 

My NationState

 

I almost posted some "real life" stuff regarding teaching in general and the results of my efforts to stop cheating specifically.

 

I, for one, would like to hear them.

[Zeno]

FullAuto, I don't want to go into a lot of detail.

 

Basically, I have had very good feedback from my students. Many of the students who failed my classes have told me that they appreciate my fairness, because they knew they hadn't done any work to pass. They seemed to respect the fact that I did fail them, because they were simply passed on by other teachers. The students have little respect for teachers that were "nice" and always passed them--though they did *like* the other teachers, which is an entirely different thing. A majority of my failing students talked to me, saying that they will work to pass the class next time (or at least they would if they had me again, which they won't).

 

The students who received poor grades due to cheating have also come forward, many saying that this is the first time a teacher has actually tried to enforce the often-mouthed words, "don't cheat." Overwhelmingly, my students say that the grades, for the first time in their lives, reflect a reality of who did the work, versus who did not. Some of the low scoring students admit it grudgingly, though.

 

The students describe me as one of their favorite teachers (and a large minority as their favorite). This is not because of my grading system or anti-cheating policy. The reasons they say it are immaterial--but the fact remains that, despite having the lowest average course grade and the highest number of students caught cheating on the final exam...it has done nothing to damage my reputation as a lecturer.

 

In other words, I've had a successful year of teaching.

 

Now, I'm not a brilliant teacher, and I've made plenty of mistakes. But it does feel good to know I've made a difference, and motivated some students to learn when they otherwise wouldn't have bothered. It feels very good to know that my efforts to reduce cheating, while largely unsuccessful, were respected by the students.

 

Of course, reducing cheating was only a very small part of my job. I didn't teach "ethics" classes or anything. My choice to enforce anti-cheating policies was a practical decision, designed simply to encourage the students to learn my course material. There are many more important aspects to my courses that encourage learning--however, if students are able to cheat easily, then these "more important aspects" are made irrelevant.

 

Anyway, I have learned a great deal about cheating, and the motivations behind it.

 

------

 

So now that I'm no longer a teacher, does anyone have any job openings for me?

 

--Zeno

[FullAuto]

Ethics classes. Now there's a joke and a half.

[Ivory]

i didtn read the post....but ar4e they volenttry ethics classes?

[FullAuto]

Don't know, but any ethics classes are a bit of a sop to conscience.

[Ivory]

say you agree and you pass, dont and you fail.....well durgh!

like that thing where they gave gay men electric shock therapy and they all agreed it stopedf them being gay just so they wouldnt ahve to go to prison! lol

[Zeno]

Yeah, ethics classes. I don't teach them. But they do, indeed, exist.

 

I think they're supposed to teach you to be honest in the professional world. Because if you're not, and people know you're not, then they won't want to do business with you. It's also important for academics, engineers, and scientists--you know, so you don't fake medical research results or create ship engines that explode.

 

Personally, I think ethics classes are a waste. Showing why and how dishonesty can hurt you should be part of the normal teaching in courses. For example, if you have a programming course, you should learn error-trapping techniques, have intensive error-trapping as part of the requirements for your programs, and learn why fault tolerance is extremely important in certain applications.

 

A generic, all-purpose "ethics" class doesn't get the point across to students. Also, the name, "ethics class," automatically makes students think "sleep through the moral preachings of the self-inflated lecturer, and get an A by vomiting out reports saying everyone should be good."

 

--Zeno