By Professor
Doom
Faculty: “Of the thirty students in
the course, only 4 actually submitted their own work. The rest...didn’t even
realize I can tell where they got their code from.”
Administrator: “If you do not pass at
least 15 students in this course, we’ll have to shut the program down, and we
won’t need your position anymore.”
--Computer science faculty explaining
to me why he was polishing his resume…not that he could afford to leave that
very semester.
Last time around I touched on the
possibility that accredited institutions distinguish themselves by removing
cheaters from college courses. Administrators encourage cheating, at least
indirectly by letting cheaters evaluate professors (and in turn using those
evaluations to influence a professor’s job), but keeping cheaters isn’t merely
enhancing retention—the only thing an administrator cares about—it’s hurting
all the other students who are legitimately trying to get an education.
Encouraging cheating in higher education is as insane as a merchant going out
of his way to have shoplifters in his store…it’s just bad business.
“The
Dean’s office and my chair ‘expressed their appreciation’ for me chasing such
cases (in December), but six months later, when I received my annual
evaluation, my yearly salary increase was the lowest ever, and significantly
lower than inflation, as my ‘teaching evaluations took a hit this year.’”
--NYU
Professor explaining how catching cheaters lowered his evaluations, hurting
himself in the process. Poor guy thought that once he acquired tenure, he’d
able to catch cheaters without penalty. Over the course of the rest of his
career, catching cheaters just for one semester might cost him $50,000 or more.
That he waited until after tenure to try such a boneheaded move shows that he
had gotten the memo from administration earlier: do not catch cheaters.
Seriously, “This institution expels
cheaters” needs to be fundamental to accreditation. Expulsion, from a class,
for a semester, or from the institution, used to be a real risk of being caught
cheating, but now there are no risks. Administrative encouragement of cheating
is a huge factor in the atmosphere on campus today, where the
majority—the majority!—of students admit to cheating at some point in their
career, and where most every attempt to catch cheaters in a course does so in
abundance. Not banishing cheaters means they stay in the class, able to exert
power over the faculty with the student evaluation. The cheater’s “honest” evaluation of the
teacher would be suspect in any thinking person’s eyes, albeit not those of an
administrator, who bases so much of a faculty member’s career on evaluations.
Administrators don’t want cheaters caught
or penalized, much less expelled, because it cuts into retention rates, but
this typically narrow and shortsighted view needs to be discouraged, above and
beyond the stomach-churning fact that administrators penalize faculty for
catching cheaters, for trying to have integrity in the institution. An
institution that graduates cheaters doesn’t just do the cheater a favor, it
detracts from the value of the degrees granted to the honest students. Over
time, the institution becomes something of a joke, although in that time the
administrator has moved up and on as a result of his great success at
“leadership” of an institution with many dishonest graduates.
This is what has happened to a large
extent with online degrees, where any non-administrator can see the potential
for cheating, a potential that has been realized to a great extent. Online
degrees, even from accredited online institutions that have been around for a
decade or more, are still basically worthless pieces of paper, useful only to
those that already have a position along with accommodating managers (or
administrators) who know not to look too closely at the source of the degree
(often because they have such degrees themselves). This near worthlessness is
what all college degrees, not just online degrees, are turning into, and
shutting down the cheating window would go a long way to preserving some
prestigious value to a degree.
In 2007, half of the second-year class
at the Indiana University School of
Dentistry allegedly used information that other students obtained through
hacking to pass an exam,
--Yes, half the class. It’s that ridiculous. If half the people going for medical degrees, a profession with some reputation for integrity, are cheating, how many psych majors do you think are cheating?
--Yes, half the class. It’s that ridiculous. If half the people going for medical degrees, a profession with some reputation for integrity, are cheating, how many psych majors do you think are cheating?
A
student caught cheating should be removed from the course, and probably
expelled. It’s that simple. There are few places in this country that are more
than an hour’s drive from multiple institutions of higher learning, being
expelled from one institution is not a life-destroying event, the cheater can
just go elsewhere. For those few students that do only have one choice and
can’t afford to be expelled, they still have the option of, well, not cheating
in the first place.
Student: “This is for Skippy!” *pow*
--a student with psychological
problems got excited at a charity event and punched me full in the face. I saw
no reason for disciplinary action, and after well over six years of full time
enrollment the student did manage to get his worthless 2 year degree.
While this might give too much power to
faculty to get rid of students they just don’t like, in all honesty I’ve never
seen a professor accuse a student of cheating out of malice. This just isn’t a
concern, although perhaps it’s possible a professor could be wrong. There are
already procedures in place for students that feel they’ve been wrongly accused
of cheating. These procedures are not much used now since faculty are penalized
for finding cheaters, but this relic from a bygone era can easily return, to
protect that rare possibility of harming an innocent. This is a risk higher
education should be willing to take, for the sake of the millions of people
that are definitely being harmed by the “open cheating” atmosphere of today, if
not for the sake of the reputation of higher education, which is in real danger
of being destroyed by administrative policies.
Tutors for the basketball team at the
University of Minnesota admitted they had written hundreds of papers for
players.
--I really should talk about the corruption of college sports…but it’s just too easy a target. Do you really think the professors of these basketball players really believed the papers were legit?
--I really should talk about the corruption of college sports…but it’s just too easy a target. Do you really think the professors of these basketball players really believed the papers were legit?
Now,
I’ll grant you, at first, these policies could flush half the students out of
higher education (and cause real problems for athletic programs, but the
athletes there should just have special programs, or just be enrolled for
Education degrees). That dental school above was no aberration, it’s quite
common, when faculty check, to find half of the students in a course are
cheating in some fashion. Faculty are strongly discouraged from checking.
If an institution can quickly and easily
lose accreditation by allowing cheaters to graduate, administrators might
rethink their position on cheating. This idea might sound draconian, but higher
education, in its current form, is in great danger of vanishing. The tolerance
and encouragement of cheating, far more than the student loan scam, can lead to
the annihilation of the higher education system that’s been core to Western
Civilization for centuries.
Allow me to reinforce this point.
The “drastic action” of having some
integrity is required because the world is changing. Free universities and the
content of high quality courses are available to anyone with an internet
connection. It’s only a matter of time until the knowledge of most all degree
programs, identical in every way to what is offered at a “traditional
institution,” is available online for free.
Free.
I grant that this knowledge has been in
books, and thus relatively free, for many decades now, but now we have a
corrupted accreditation system providing cover for a corrupted higher education
system…it’s impossible to tell if a degree-holder actually has this knowledge.
Which of the following sounds like a more
likely candidate for a degree-requiring position: someone that paid $50,000 for
a degree at an institution where he could easily have cheated his way through
the entire program, or someone who shows up with a flash drive, containing examples
of all the work he did and skills he learned pursuing the same degree at a free
university? Both candidates could be lying and know nothing, but the second at
least wasn’t stupid enough to waste $50,000 for a slip of paper that means
nothing. Employers are already smart enough to think that through for online
degrees, and students will figure it out eventually.
If “traditional” institutions don’t do
something, soon, to establish that they’re offering something more than a piece
of paper, that they’re willing to honestly certify some legitimacy to what
they’re doing, they’ll be history. It’s simply a matter of time before
employers realize that traditional schools no more legitimately train students
than online schools, accredited or not.
The suit claims a Zicklin
administrator made professors allegedly pad grades for about 15 students in
order to keep $45,000 to $75,000 tuition checks coming into the school.
--I’ve said it before and I’ll say it
again: retention
is everything to administrators. There is no other concern.
It’s a sign of how far institutions have
fallen, how minimal the integrity, that I feel the need to present pages of
arguments for “get rid of cheaters.” A generation or two ago, it was understood
that penalties for cheating were severe and now, students literally complain
when they’re caught cheating, since they know administrators will rush to help
them.
So that’s the next fix: “This institution
does not tolerate cheating” needs to be core to accreditation, and even if it
isn’t there, it needs to be core to any institution of higher education.
Otherwise, higher education in its current form is doomed. Granted, I’m a bit
biased in thinking the system of higher education of the 14th
century to about 1990 is worth having again…but it still seems far superior to
the primarily corrupt and fraudulent system of today.
No comments:
Post a Comment