Online Cheaters Are Good Little Spinmeisters
from the cheat-away dept
Online cheating is an old, old story by this point. Everyone knows that lots of kids go online to cheat. However, when one professor discovered that a large percentage of one of her colleague's students were cheaters, she decided to do some research and get their opinions on cheating. What she and some other colleagues found was that the cheaters are "good little spinmeisters." That is, they're great at rationalizing away the cheating. Some point out that they were still learning -- and that the "cheating" helped enforce learning the material. Others blamed the "system" for making the answers available. Of course, it's easy to laugh off this rationalization, as kids trying to talk their way out of being in trouble. However, there is another way of looking at it as well. As we've discussed in the past, the it's often important for students to learn how to research and how to use information, so perhaps it's time to figure out ways to make tests that are impervious to cheating. Perhaps it's time to recognize that, for many subjects (perhaps not all), memorizing a bunch of facts and figures aren't what's important, but figuring out how to answer a question. In that context, the rationalization makes a bit more sense -- and doesn't seem quite as bad.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Cheat proof tests are possible
For me, that sort of exam will always be the gold standard in truly testing how well the student has learned the subject being taught.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cheat proof tests are possible
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cheat proof tests are possible
I used to teach undergrad CS, but I also had a group of private students I taught to boost my income. The guidelines for the department were very tight so I'd set "stock" problems like the ones Lisa speaks of... "Write a program to implement a quick sort". As expected I got a dozen answers that were the same thing with the variable names changed.
A more open ended question might be "Write a program to justify some text" which has enormous scope for different solutions. But I would still get 3 or 4 that cheated by collaborating it was obvious to me when seeing the same algorithm presented in a number of ways.
For my private students I would start with "Tom invites 10 people to a party, there are 4 forks, 5 knives, 6 spoons... "
They would have to work out it was a discrete maths problem, work out that the pigeonhole principle and optimisation were needed, and not fall into the idiot trap of mistaking it for the "dining philosophers" and going off on the wrong track entirely.
Those assignments highlighted the brilliant and the hopeless students with no uncertainty, but they were really hard to mark because I had to sit down with each completely unique one and work
through the methodology, development, pseudocode and executable solution. Good teaching is costly, in time. For 10 students I had to spend 10 hours going through their work in order to be fair and balanced. I never awarded a distinction, not even for a good solution, but I weighted about 90% of the marks on good, well documented reasoning. In the end it is reasoning, not access to textbook information that I was testing.
Many courses I see today are just rote exercises in buzzword bingo, which is maybe why there are so many awful programmers and so much bad code out there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
thinking is more important
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not quite sure
Nowadays teachers are using and encouraging the use of online classrooms, Blackboard or WebCT. If teachers do not understand that their students are not using the internet for REFERNCING rather than "cheating" they have another thing coming. You cant put a carrot in front of a horses face without it biting. My generation has become adapted to the WWW and the internet and the plethora of knowledge right at our very finger tips, literally. Internet is the new library. is it cheating to go to the library and check out a book with relavent info? I sure as hell hope not.
Do i believe that some people are cheating, buy essays, paying people to do their own work. YES, but its less than you think. Students use the internet as a resource, a helper, a guide. I dont know i single php programmer who has not gone to php.net to help them out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not quite sure and by Anonymous Coward
In response to the statement/question: The “Internet is the new library” and “is it cheating to go to the library and check out a book with relavent (note spelling error) info?”. The internet is not the “new library” sure it is a new information source but is perceived differently by students, credit is not often given to the original author and by not citing the source the student is claiming the work as their own. And it isn’t cheating to check out a book with relevant info from a library but it is cheating and plagiarism to take excerpts from said book without citing the source in your work. Don’t be confused there is a right way and a wrong way to use both the internet and your library for research, writing an essay, or coding a program.
The statement that “It's interesting to note that as a professional SW Engineer, when I go online to look up how to write a bubble sort routine in C++ it is considered research, but if I were a student tasked with writing a bubble sort routine in C++, it would be called cheating.” Is just ridiculous. As a student it is completely reasonable to look up how to write a bubble sort but it would be cheating to copy the code for that bubble sort into your program and turn the work in as your own. In the same way it would be considered cheating (and potentially illegal) to do the same thing professionally. There are still differences here between the two: as a student the point of the exercise is to learn how to design the sort and to be able to work out code logically to develop your skills so “borrowing” code goes against the intention of the assignment. Professionally you can utilize open source code if you don’t have the knowledge or skill to do it on your own just to keep your job but if the program is for commercial use there may be licensing, patent, or copyright infringements to deal with, which could cost the company money and you your job. Either way in the “real world” it is still considered cheating.
Sorry, this post is so long.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not quite sure and by Anonymous Coward
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not quite sure
Perhaps we should get back to the basics. A student standing in front of the class with a piece of chalk in his hand, deer in the headlights stunned...trying to think of how to diagram a sentence, has a difficult time cheating...
And the last time I heard 'plethora' used, it was in a Steve Martin movie. It was funny then as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cheating
One professor found a great way to stop it. After the first assignment he announced "3 of you cheated on this assignment, 2 of you will fail this class. You'll find out at the end of the semester and you will be expelled."
It put a really quick stop to the sharing of code assignments.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cheat This!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cheat This!!
BTW A moral person can see the difference between
going to php.net if you forgot which order the params go for strpos and someone who buys an essay.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perhaps the real answer here is to sue Google for making it possible for people to cheat :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But
I have no problem with getting help on the internet, but its a different thing to get the answers off the WWW.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rationalizing rationalization?
Sounds like rationalization to me!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TechDirt == Gen-Y-Pandering.com
Software Piracy? Commercial developers are too rich anyway! Music "sharing"? If I am able to do it, it must be alright! Cheating? Hey, they aren't doing enough to prevent it, so it's their fault!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Research
I give props to the teacher who took the next step with the websites. But as i stated before when teachers use online resources such as WEBCT or Blackboard or use online examples, those teachers must be living under a rock to think that the students are expanding. When did research become cheating?
I agree that there is a lack of SOME younger students that are not understanding internet is a tool not a solution. That is where teachers should be helping the students, have more office hours, be present on the campus.
"but if I were a student tasked with writing a bubble sort routine in C++, it would be called cheating."
This is SEVERLY wrong. First off a sort isnt the easiest thing to write as a beginner C++ programmer, we all did start off somewhere. Those who dont understand seek the easiest form of help=Internet. Of course i dont think a novice programmer should copy and paste the code for many reasons one of which is that it WILL NOT work. But when you realize its not working you have to finagle it. Thats where the learning happens. And as a programmer Mr. Anonymous, you should be the first person to admit that you do not have chunks of code, bubble sorts, pointer syntax, or switch statements (sure those are easy) and after PRACTICING you learn it, not memorize it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Research
When did research become cheating?
When the "research" amounts to little more than copying and pasting the work of others work and passing it off as your own, and not even understanding the content of what you've copied.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Research
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Research
You're welcome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Research
Implementing a particular algorithm in a particular language is surprisingly useless. You're better off introducing them to a broad spectrum of languages and general concepts.
Teach them design/planning (on paper even, or a whiteboard).
Anybody can write a basic sorting algorithm, if they can write a program at all and most sorting algorithms are already written (and faster). Instead teach them how to use existing already-written code whether source or in libraries. Teach them how to design, plan and implement their own algorithms.
Also, don't make them write code with paper and pencil and take points off if it won't compile or the syntax is wrong. The fucking compiler will let you know these things. Better yet, don't require actual code on paper. It's stupid. Either let them use a computer to write the program on or don't require anything beyond pseudocode.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Research
I think it's a reasonable assignment in a course on Data Structures and Algorithms or some such. As another poster pointed out, there may be better sorting algorithms, but such an assignment may be part of a path to truly understanding what makes one algorithm better than another.
And, true, many sorting algorithms exist in library form, and code re-use is a good lesson for Software Engineering, but not for understanding sorting algorithms.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Company workers feel cheated when their company outsources.
U.S. workers feel cheated when America outsources to India.
Using an online reference should be considered a parallel to business outsourcing. But it should be embraced and used to the student's advantage. How are we going to put this student out into the real world? I hope the students have learned to use references to get knowledge faster and solve problems quicker... then we have the edge in the real world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cheating is still cheating
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cheating is still cheating
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why...
If you've ever implemented bubble sort into any application that you were paid to develop, it's time for a job change.
Bubble sort is the WORST sorting algorithm their is.
Matter of fact we DID use it once.. in college while coming up with examples to show that using threads is faster.. we needed some process that took longer than a few seconds so we could show a measurement... bubble sort was the answer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Old proverb.
And for tests etc... why don't you make tests that require thinking, independant reasoning, and logic. hell, open book isn't going to help the idiots schools pump out these days. The day of my highschool graduation it took my class a hour and a half to alphabetize itself for the procession.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
***HINT***
If you professor asks you to turn in an electronically copy of your paper, the professor is going to check and make sure you work is legit. SO, in order to make sure you do not get kicked out of the class, or worse the school, make sure you know how to take advantage of the system properly (Cheat).
You will need to break up the paragraphs and change the wording, about one of every seven words to be safe, mispeelings count. This will be enough to disguise your paper as original work. And for all the NEWBS out there, do not site the source you ripped your paper from, that is a dead give away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
***HINT***
If you professor asks you to turn in an electronically copy of your paper, the professor is going to check and make sure you work is legit. SO, in order to make sure you do not get kicked out of the class, or worse the school, make sure you know how to take advantage of the system properly (Cheat).
You will need to break up the paragraphs and change the wording, about one of every seven words to be safe, mispeelings count. This will be enough to disguise your paper as original work. And for all the NEWBS out there, do not site the source you ripped your paper from, that is a dead give away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fundamental Problem with Education
I would say that the majority of students in HS and College, and just taking classes "to get through it" and get a degree. They aren't there to learn.
I was the same way in my college days--what did I care about the "Morality of Macbeth"--I spit out the essay and moved on.
However, these days, as a .net programmer--When I take classes, I take them very seriously. I would never cheat--since, well, I really am just cheating myself--I need to learn from classes to keep my income flowing.
Maybe we need to examine our approach to education--instead of going right into college after high school, let people go work for 5 or 6 years, and then go to school---they would get so much more out of it, and cheating would be non-existent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
memorization is important
So I think the whole "memorization vs. thinking for yourself" is a false dichotomy. Yeah - you need to be able to think for youself, but the more pertinent facts you've got memorized, the more efficient both your thinking and your searching for additional information is going to become.
I think in American schools now we've got this aversion to memorization but also this tacit understanding that there really isn't much learning if you don't memorize anything. So we kind of have a muddled mix of minimal memorization but we spend so much time memorizing badly that we don't have time for demanding "think for yourself" tests.
I'd rather see memorization embraced as stage 1 of learning. You'd have tests purely on your capacity to regurgitate relevant information. Each question is right or wrong, there's no interpretation.
THEN, and only then, you'd be set loose on creative/think for yourself problems. Those problems would be open book, open web, whatever. They'd be interpretative, and the results would not be "right/wrong" but "effective/ineffective". It'd be about solutions.
This is, aftera all, a model for the real world. In the real world the more you know, the greater your starting advantage. (Hence - we memorize) But if all you can do is memorize - you haven't really achieved anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GET REAL
I would hire someone who got through college using every means possible and used every edge available to get a better grade than their peers BECAUSE it is a dog eat dog world and business do it all the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm in the same boat. No matter how much school you have, you don't really know what you want to do until you start doing it. That's when you WANT to learn, but no longer have the time to do so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
simple solution
Homework should still be given, though, to give the students practice. The in-class assignments could even be a single question pulled from the homework, which, if the student did the homework, should be very easy!
Cheating is a very simple problem to overcome as I see it... are any teachers doing this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
learning how to think
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a.) quality teachers have MORE incidents of cheating because the teachers don't let it slide
b.) quality teachers have FEWER incidents of cheating because their teaching skills/effort allow them to avoid obvious opportunities for cheating
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
not everybody cheats
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ken? Poker?
I agree with both sides of this. I don't think it's good for parents and faculty to accept rationalization for dishonest behavior. People are dishonest enough without having their excuses accepted at every turn. BUT I also agree that our school system is a disaster area, and this is probably a major area why. In high school I was a C student. Not because I'm dumb, but because I was bored out of my mind. I'm so smart that this whole "school" thing wasn't worth my time. I took a grand total of 4 pages of notes, in all 4 years of high school. I studied for a test only twice. I never turned in any homework. Yet I passed with bordering on a B average, because I aced every single test. I remember sitting in Advanced Algebra, not having a clue what to do on a test. I worked out every solution from the basic principles I did remember, and hints from other questions on the test. Even I was shocked to find that I got a B+ on that test, as I knew nothing about the subject that the test was supposed to cover, I derived it all in my head, during the test.
Real intelligence, to me, has always been about the ability to learn new skills and grasp complex relationships, not about memorizing dumb facts, and that is what our education system has become. Part of the problem, I think, is that it has become redundant. I studied the Civil War 3 times before college, and then again in college. Everybody had to, and yet you can walk around the streets and find perfectly well educated people who can't answer any civil war trivia, beyond maybe "Abraham Lincoln". The redundancy isn't helping us remember the facts anyway! So I say, eliminate it, and get back to cultivating minds to do the complex mental work of tommorow, challenging them with art, and music, and sciences, at a much earlier age, when kids still find almost everything fascinating. Doing that at a young age also encourages the brain to continue it's faster development pace for a longer sprint before it settles into adulthood.
It's a very accepted fact that a child's brain learns better the earlier it starts on something, and now we are finding that there are certain ages where the brain specializes in learning a certain skill. We need to take advantage of that, and allow kids to explore hobbies and careers at a younger age, when their brains have the chance to master those skills at a more instinctive level. It's no big mystery that the worlds best athletes started before they were 5. Same with all the best Musicians. So I have to wonder why we keep going on with an education system that doesn't allow students to truly diversify until they are almost 20. No wonder we've got a country full of unmotivated, unskilled college students, who are bouncing around from 3-4 different majors before they graduate. They are finding what they are good at, and can do as a career. College is way to late to start allowing that kind of exploration. I can't imagine how many people we've lost already by that point. What if we allowed kids to explore careers at any stage of their education, so that they can look into a career, and see if they like it when the first inspiration strikes, instead of waiting for college? If that "slacker" had realized in Junior High that he LIKED particle Physics, he might have found his motviation, gotten his butt in gear, and turned into the next Einstein. Instead, he struggled through high school, decided that he hated school, and went to work at starbucks.
I was almost a perfect example. I almost gave up on being able to write code for a video game company, because I had to teach myself, very frustratingly, until I got to college. I came very close to giving up, and eventually, I did, in college, because I had spent all of high school memorizing crap, and went into college completely unprepared to do real thinking. It was very discouraging, and could have been avoided if Grade school was structured differently. I got lucky, because I got a fortunate job offer doing basic programming. A few years on the job, taught me what the point of college really was...learning to teach yourself.
At first, the act of actually having to study something in order to understand it was literally painful to me, because I was so used to the world of high school, where it was all facts I could memorize in two seconds. I found that I would get completely discouraged if it took me more than 2 minutes to learn something, because that was what high school had taught me - that I was so smart I should be able to learn anything there is without effort! The realization that this is not the case was very painful for me, but now that I have overcome it, I've become one of the superstar engineers at DivX. Now I get offers from Gaming companies all the time, and turn them down, because I like it at DivX. I would define that as true success, to be turning down jobs you once dreamed of, because you're just that happy with where you are. I will most likely go into games when I do decide to move on, but I now know that I can take my time and pick the right situation. The point is, I consider myself a success, careerwise, at least, and have now proven myself as a very capable engineer. Yet I couldn't make it through college. It had nothing to do with being dumb or unmotivated, but with grade school being too generic and focused, without ever offering any real challenge.
I have had several take home finals. Everybody's first reaction when they get one is "Yay! this will be easy!" but everybody learns pretty quick that the take home test is a lot harder for those who are used to just memorizing facts. It doesn't take long for those same people to start dreading the take home test. I think it's both an excellent example of why the current system doesn't work, and how we could be doing better. It is, in effect, that "cheat proof" test that was mentioned. The fact of the matter is, I've never seen an engineer that doesn't reference a book on occasion. In fact, good engineers seem to have huge stacks of books, and most are still growing. The real world of intelligent work isn't about knowing, it's about learning.
I didn't get that until after college, when I actually had to apply what I knew, and found that it involved teaching myself more things, things that weren't ever in the college curriculum. I don't know ANYBODY that understood that before they started their career - And THAT is the problem with our school system. We need a school system that drills home the idea "we are teaching you to teach yourselves", from the very earliest stages, instead of having that as the afterthough of people reflecting on college when it's over. I swear, everyone I know, myself included, was oblivious to the real point of college, until after it was over. My guess is, that's probably a little too late.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
-------------
That's about 95% of the problem, he should have failed each one of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cheatin' is cheatin'
It is important to know where to find the answers, but most important to know what the question is actually asking. There is a HUGE difference in giving the answer and understanding the question.
I know my spelling sucks, my grammer is poor and my sentence structure probably makes some people's skin crawl, but I did NOT cheat and copy this posting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The wrong idea
I would like to say, responding to hautedawg. I am in no way saying I am cheating. As many other commentors have stated cheating can be considered when you do not quote or reference the correct author. I, unlike some, do. Going back to the bubble sort example, is it wrong of me to go onto the internet to help me study? From some of the responses here, I would say no. Would I take that code and use it in my program? I would say no again. Refer back to post 11. It wouldnt work. I learn from example and then alter it. When you first get a recipe do you follow it exactly to get the hang of it? Sure, and then when you are comfortable with it you add more spices or cook it a little longer. Have i EVER cheated on anything ever, how many people say they havent. Not many, however when it comes to CS, and i have just about all of my teachers to back me up, a lot of the coding is already done. Web programming is not a new art, and those that get into use others code to work off of. Why reinvent the wheel if you do not have to.
I will say it again, as other have as well, the problem isnt the cheating it is the institution and instructors lack of teaching. If students knew the information, they would not have to use the internet as a method of cheating. Now, dont get me wrong i have had some AMAZING teachers, but i have had some pretty bad ones too. There are some classes i will remember the stuff til i die, and there are classes where i just passed. And i agree that there is a dumbing down of america. but i can SAFELY say that i am not contributing to that.
Argue all you want boys, but most of you are just scared that when you are gray and old, i will be your boss or at the least taking over your job!
;-) I kid
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The wrong idea
But now that graphing calculators are so widespread, I wonder if the average 5th grader is using (abusing) them. This is why many teachers do not give credit unless you show your work... how you arrived at your solution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The wrong idea
The programs, code you are copying was originated by someone else, do you give him credit for it? Didn't think so.
No one came out and accused YOU of cheating, but if the shoe fits... Personally, I think it's funny when people TRY to use big words, especially appropos and plethora. We should learn to eschew obfuscation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The wrong idea
The major issue with your statement is that you are making the assumption that your end task (assignment or job) is not to create a better wheel in the first place! If you start with a current wheel without knowing how to create it on your own you will never understand how to create a better one.
It is the same with coding (any language) you have to understand the basic concepts and how to create the mundane (which you could easily find in a library or snippet somewhere) in order to advance beyond it conceptually. If you are just Frankenstein-ing a web page or program together you will never understand the basics and therefore never be able to become great.
Ok, bad grammar aside (again), that is not being tech-crazy but rather just too lazy to learn to spell properly. If you are unable to spell without a spell checker download a plug-in for your browser and use it. Or use a word processing program and the old copy > paste method. If all else fails remember that it is better to remain quiet and have people think you are stupid that to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Lastly with your abhorrent grasp of grammar and spelling there is little concern that you will ever be the boss of anyone here or take over their job, unless of course if they are working at your local McDonalds. You should get really familiar with asking Would you like fries with that?.
I know it will be difficult but you could always print it out from this post and tape it to the palm of your hand.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The wrong idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You are just pathetic
Althought i consider myself fairly level headed, i find those who need to attack me, quite insulting. Why make fun of those who actually use intellectual words you dont the meaning of? Wow someone out there is smarter than you!?! Mind blowing, i am sure.
If you are afraid of me and/or the my generation...HAHA you all have another thing coming. Because guess what? Here we come.
If you can take time out of your "busy" day, to pick away at someone's spelling/grammar, maybe you should get a new job. You are clearly not busy enough. And if you dont have a job...well, i rest my case.
For those who actually looked at what i had to say and not how i typed it...THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
But for the lot of you...
Pick on someone you're own size...probably that McDonalds cashier you love to belittle. You are pathetic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The wrong idea
The real problem, as I see it, is multifold. First, you have professors teaching who really shouldn't be (of course that's always been a problem). Secondly, partly because the kids have been inadequately prepared in the first place, the professors often have a pretty low regard for the students (that's always been a problem, too). But the combination of the two leads to some of the professors not caring if the students cheat... enough that you wind up with the kids not being called if they're caught, or if they are, they go in front of "honor" councils that slap them on the wrist (one of my professors told me about a kid he caught posting his homework on RentACoder... kid told the honor council that he only got advice, and they let him off... despite the fact that there was a record of payment, and that RentACoder won't release the payment unless there's a deliverable). This makes many of the good professors who actually care just throw up their arms and give up. Add to that the lax attitudes the kids have towards cheating in the first place, and you end up in a situation where those who are honest and don't cheat are at a distinct disadvantage to those who do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The problem is you never learn how things really work. Then when you need to create something 'new' and there's nothing from which to copy, you're screwed.
I've seen this time and again in various newsgroups, forums and mailing lists -- some body posts "Help, I need to get this done right away, but I haven't a clue so please give me the complete code to do x.".
Not to mention all the buggy, crap-code that's out there created by people who copy something off the net and "finagle" it (hack) till they can get it to work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The wrong idea
and circumlocutory discombobulations...
they really suck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cut and Paste Morality
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Obviously
Oh well, I'm sure you feel vindicated by trying to put down those of us having fun while we sweat away over the deep friers. But, always know we know who you are, and we will belittle you again...as they will belittle me given a chance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]