Search Views


Browse Archives

Views

The Faculty Role in Stopping Cheating

September 27, 2007

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Like parents reluctant to discuss sex with their pre-teen daughters, faculty members have always seized with relief on any way to escape the need to address the sensitive issue of cheating in college. But concerns over the incidence of academic dishonesty have been growing in recent years and it is surely past time to bring this subject out into the light of day.

For many professors, of course, the environment in which they work has changed -- and not, in this respect, for the better. There was a time when cheating involved glancing at a neighbor’s test answers or laboriously copying passages out of books in the library by hand. But with the advent of cell phones, text messaging, and the Internet, cheating in college has become more widespread and harder to detect. Students can now purchase online papers on topics from astronomy to zoology, locate research on even the most arcane topic almost instantaneously and submit text in English to be automatically translated into any of a hundred foreign languages.

This, then, is the background against which first-year students have been arriving at colleges and universities across the country over the last month. And on those same campuses, faculty members and administrators have been wrestling with the challenge of introducing them to their new and unfamiliar academic environments. Prominent among the topics they have been addressing, albeit unwillingly, is “academic integrity” -- the kinder, gentler obverse of … well … cheating.

Some of this year’s freshmen will have taken online tutorials, others will have received pocket-size how-to booklets on avoiding plagiarism in their papers, and still others will have attended orientation meetings where faculty members alerted them to their institutions’ honor codes, or policy statements, or the online tools used to detect plagiarism.

Some of my colleagues, to be sure, adopt the ostrich defense, refusing to “waste valuable class time” talking about academic honesty. Cheating is cheating, they contend; students should recognize it for what it is and “just say no.” But this approach fails to take into account the world of college study as contemporary students see it. A recent national study, after all, showed that two of every three college students fail to recognize that downloading copyrighted music and video constitutes stealing -- a judgment call far less complex than those they will encounter when they tackle lengthy term papers drawing on multiple scholarly sources.

Instead, we should openly admit to our students that even experienced professors frequently confront moments of indecision in their own work that lead them to consult their colleagues or their consciences. Like most truly worthwhile activities, studying and writing with integrity demands sophisticated ethical reflection not the blind application of a set of rules to clearly defined circumstances.

We should also frankly acknowledge that instructors at the college level differ markedly in their expectations of students, all too often without making those expectations clear in their course syllabi. Some encourage group work on projects; others prohibit it. Even those who encourage group work may or may not take time to define what individual contributions are acceptable. Some expect students to cite all their sources in a paper, including even the textbook assigned for the course, while others see this as unnecessary. We appropriately respect the rights of individual instructors to set such parameters in ways that best support their goals, but students deserve to understand exactly where the lines will be drawn in each class, just as they need to know the due dates for papers and the rules regarding the use of calculators in tests and quizzes. In clarifying their guidelines, professors simply help students to develop an important life-skill: the ability to analyze and respond to the many and varying demands that will be placed on them in their future careers and in their personal lives as adults.

Above all, we cannot ignore the fact that today’s students are the targets of highly sophisticated marketing that explicitly undermines the messages that conscientious faculty members are trying to inculcate. The Internet offers an unlimited array of information free for the taking and all but encourages students to take shortcuts. The sober-seeming Web site of an organization that claims to “provide a top notch writing service for all … clients across the world” also asserts that “[all] our work is guaranteed not to be plagiarized and we give a money back guarantee for that.” This hardly helps a student unclear on the concept to see that the very act of ordering up a “model essay” from this outfit itself violates the canons of academic honesty, virtually whatever one’s definition of that contested term.

So what strategies can a diligent faculty member adopt to combat student misconduct? First, offer students a forthright, unembarrassed explanation of what constitutes the work you expect in a course or an assignment and of what help they may and may not seek from others in completing it. Second, take reasonable care to design assignments and examinations in such a way that cheating on them will be difficult and could only result from a conscious effort on the part of a student to deceive. In a literature course, do not invite students to select their own texts to compare and contrast; pick works that the paper-mills are unlikely to have anticipated. When assigning a term paper, require at least one draft and insist that the final text demonstrate that its author has responded to your suggestions for improvement. And make it clear that you will be expecting all students to check their handheld devices at the door on each and every exam day. Third, always offer a sympathetic ear to students with honest questions. Denying that this is a key element of the responsibility we owe our students, by contrast, is poor pedagogy and will only buy additional trouble -- for us or for our unfortunate colleagues -- as our students move towards graduation four years hence.

Timothy R. Austin is vice president for academic affairs and dean of the college at the College of the Holy Cross.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on The Faculty Role in Stopping Cheating

  • Posted by Dave Stone on September 27, 2007 at 7:15am EDT
  • Austin claims that plagiarism has gotten "harder to detect." This phrase by itself raises serious doubts with me about his credibility, even about his experience dealing with plagiarism. Twenty years ago, how could one ever find the lone encyclopedia article a student had plagiarized from? Today, google makes it simple. It has never taken me more than a minute with a search engine to find the source of plagiarized papers (and I've turned in two dozen to my university's honor system).

    Cheaters are by definition lazy. That makes them easy to catch.

  • Well-noted
  • Posted by B.D. , Clinical faculty at Tier II college on September 27, 2007 at 7:25am EDT
  • I always spent 20 minutes on my alma mater's honor code ..

    http://honor.unc.edu/honor/index.html

    .. then spend the rest of the semester, defending against legalistic challenges that would impress Barry Scheck.

    Example: "well, like, if even the whole faculty can't agree on Truman and his New Deal economic thing -- what's the 'correct' answer?"

    The correct answer: testing. Lots of testing. And dismissal for those students -- and faculty and administrators -- when testing standards are not met.

    Enough of psuedo-scientific psycho-babble that is epidemic in today's academia. It is society that pays for the cost of low expectations, with tax revenues wasted on ineffective higher-ed.

    Increasing numbers of employers no longer have confidence in college GPAs and transcripts. They administer GRE-like exams themselves -- and more often than not, are disappointed with the results.

  • faculty methods to prevent cheating
  • Posted by Bim Angst , Instructor of Writing at Penn State Scchuylkill on September 27, 2007 at 8:45am EDT
  • The practice of bringing students to awareness of standards has to be ongoing and built right in to all course work. And when students violate standards, they must be called on it--especially if it's unintentional (which is most of what I see as plagiarism in the required writing classes I teach). The discussion of academic and intellectual integrity must be open, explicit, evidence-based (look at the work), and it has to occur so often that students begin to anticipate application of the standards and eventually also anticipate, and make on their own, the necessary considerations.
    This is most easily accomplished when the faculty member is involved at every stage of student work. Plagiarism and other forms of cheating will happen most often when an assignment is given and the instructor never looks at the progress of student thinking, inquiry, research, and performance until the final product is turned in for grading. If you're doing that, you're encouraging plagiarism.

  • criminal same as unethical?
  • Posted by Colin Smith , assitant professor on September 27, 2007 at 9:20am EDT
  • I dispute "downloading copyrighted music and video constitutes stealing — a judgment call far less complex than those they will encounter when they tackle lengthy term papers drawing on multiple scholarly sources."

    Theft of intellectual property is a crime, but it may or may not be unethical. Attributing someone else’s work as one’s own is always unethical. What is legally intellectual property depends on the jurisdiction, and is controversial. How to regard sheet music and literature publishers maintaining copyrights decades after the death of the author? More complex than copying without citation.

  • cheating
  • Posted by Steve on September 27, 2007 at 10:35am EDT
  • It is my experience that most cheating is a result of the way the professors conduct their classes. They have unfair rules, encouraging collaboration and then calling it cheating, etc. In the entire academic comments, one never sees any acceptance that the professor may have encouraged the very acts that he wants to punish.
    In a message to all provosts if a professor has a constant cheating problem it’s not the students.

  • The Dean With Thirty-five Fingers On Each Hand
  • Posted by Frizbane Manley on September 27, 2007 at 11:15am EDT
  • Lofty comments ... and practically useless. Take, just for example, the three recommendations in Austin’s last paragraph. Were I to employ those three principles in creation of every one of my tests and assignments it would reduce cheating in my classes by a very, very tiny fraction.

    One of the significant contributors to academic dishonesty is the distortion to the cultures for learning that define most institutions by faculty abandonment of usually well defined procedures for responding to cheating. In most of the colleges and universities with which I have been associated – and that’s a lot – there is an honor code, an honor court, and formal procedures for responding to incidents of cheating ... and then there is a very elaborate informal structure designed to circumvent the clearly defined honor code procedures.

    From the office of the president and hir so-called cabinet to the VPAA (one of the cabinet members) to the deans to department chairs there is much pressure exerted on individual faculty to handle dishonesty (1) gently, (2) quietly, and (3) without taking it to the honor court. Indeed, given the enormous amount of cheating at American colleges and universities, it is quite remarkable – and scandalous at that – that honor courts meet as infrequently as they do.

    See RWH’s post, “The Dean With Thirty-five Fingers On Each Hand” at ...

    http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/05/10/cheating

    Not long ago I taught at a business school where I got so sick of the dean’s recommendations (reporting an incident of ch●●ting to the dean was the first step in handling a case) ...

    * why don’t you take 10 points off his test score?

    * why don’t you make her take the test over?

    * why don’t you make him do extra work?

    etc.

    that I changed my syllabus to read “Any incident of cheating in BA 302 will immediately be reported to the Honor Court. I will provide the Court with all evidence relevant to the incident and serve as a witness in the case.”

    Needless to say, the dean and VPAA suffered nervous apoplexy when they discovered a faculty member who advertised his intention to process incidents of cheating in accordance with Honor Code procedures. I recommend it to one and all.

    By the way, one time and without clearing it with me, the dean told a student who cheated and made 100% on one of my tests that she would be required to retake the test but could have the highest of the two scores. Needless to say, I immediately rescinded that promise, but you get the point ... the guy was a genius.

  • Examinations
  • Posted by Bob on September 27, 2007 at 1:30pm EDT
  • The word examination cannotes the idea that someone is watching, analyzing and evaluating, not just grading the paper.

    As an undergrad, I was never party to cheating that probably occurred in my classes. Graduate school was another matter. I often protested the "take home" tests and group "collaboration" projects that we were assigned. I witnessed cheating first hand and reported it to the instructor. As far as I know nothing happened. If that makes me a "goody two shoes" or "not a team player" so be it.

    I do not blame all instructors, but to those instructors who abrogate responsibility for their students,,,you are part of the problem. It is never easy to stand up, but if you wanted something easy, you should consider a field other than teaching.

  • Faculty need to apply the existing rules
  • Posted by Markus Kemmelmeier on September 27, 2007 at 6:10pm EDT
  • I applaud the present author for highlighting the faculty role in stopping cheating. Clarifying expectations, creating tamper-resistant assignments etc. is all good. But as alluded to by various other commentators, one of the most important things that is NOT mentioned is simply enforcement of the existing rules against academic honesty. Every school has them, but the central issue is that faculty often ignore them (even though enforcement of such rules is a pretty good predictor whether academic honesty occurs, see e.g., Whitely, B. E. Jr. (1998). Factors associated with cheating among college students: A review. Research in Higher Education, 39, 235-274).
    I bet that most of the readers are already familiar with why faculty might choose to not check whether material is plagiarized or why they choose to not act on detected cases of academic dishonesty:
    --"too much work; I rather do my research,"
    --"it's the student's own problem if they cheat and don't learn anything",
    --"I am here to benefit not hurt students",
    --"why would I make a struggling student's life even more difficult than it already is?",
    --"this will only hurt my ratings"
    --"today's students just don't understand the concept of plagiarism", down to
    --"when I was in college, I occasionally 'borrowed' papers myself"
    The upshot is that faculty don't do anything when they should. Students of course notice this and since they are "go with what works" they continue cheating. (Whitley's review and meta-analysis mentioned above shows that roughly two thirds of college students admit to cheating--and that's a figure from studies whose greatest problem is the under-reporting of the behavior in question).

    In our department we discussed this issue and recently agreed on a departmental policy that commits everybody to applying the existing rules consistently and fairly, i.e. no exceptions. I really hope this works. What seems to make the greatest impression on students, though, seems to be when I share with them my currenty "cheater detection tally": In all the undergraduate course I have taught over the years, there are only 3 in which I have NOT caught somebody cheating. This is a recent number because since I mentioned this fact in class I have not come across another case of academic dishonesty.

  • They got theirs, already
  • Posted by Buzz on September 28, 2007 at 4:50am EDT
  • " .. the dean and VPAA suffered nervous apoplexy when they discovered a faculty member who advertised his intention to process incidents of cheating .."

    Of course! Their pensions were endangered!

    What those yahoos don't realize: change the grading dynamic by giving a break to one -- EVERYONE asks for the same deal. Nothing gets changed in the end, geniuses!

    But thinking takes too much time for those yahoos. Plus their pensions are at stake. The chances of them caring are about the same as winning the lotto.

    Test. Then test again.

  • Posted by Puplet on October 5, 2007 at 11:55am EDT
  • How about we put our own house in order first and decide what to do with faculty members whose own research is plagiarized?