“As many of you know, one of my hobbies is catching cheaters”

There’s a few posts making their way around the web relating to students cheating.  The first is a fantastic account by a guy who writes papers professional for students.  I mailed it to a few academic friends when I first read it.  I only needed one word to explain it: fantastic.

I’ve written toward a master’s degree in cognitive psychology, a Ph.D. in sociology, and a handful of postgraduate credits in international diplomacy. I’ve worked on bachelor’s degrees in hospitality, business administration, and accounting. I’ve written for courses in history, cinema, labor relations, pharmacology, theology, sports management, maritime security, airline services, sustainability, municipal budgeting, marketing, philosophy, ethics, Eastern religion, postmodern architecture, anthropology, literature, and public administration. I’ve attended three dozen online universities. I’ve completed 12 graduate theses of 50 pages or more. All for someone else.

The behaviour of the students is so clear, so uniform, so obviously wrong that it forms the background for his more important question:

For those of you who have ever mentored a student through the writing of a dissertation, served on a thesis-review committee, or guided a graduate student through a formal research process, I have a question: Do you ever wonder how a student who struggles to formulate complete sentences in conversation manages to produce marginally competent research? How does that student get by you?

Where the hell is the prof?  Dealing with papers vs. students, that’s where.  Or worse, studying the results of TA’s grading papers.  And if the papers’ grades seem to fit what’s expected, there’s no point asking other questions, no point talking to the students.  Profs don’t often know their students:

You know what’s never happened? I’ve never had a client complain that he’d been expelled from school, that the originality of his work had been questioned, that some disciplinary action had been taken. As far as I know, not one of my customers has ever been caught.

All you need is a normal distribution.  It doesn’t matter who your students are, it’s just statistics.  It’s all about the grades, all about the curve.  Here’s another gem:

“There was always one lecture that I hoped I would never have to give.”  Are you kidding me?  I’ve never seen a prof enjoy giving a lecture more.  He literally can’t stop rubbing his hands together with delight!  Students cheat because profs rely on stale, uninspired work.

I was in a meeting this fall with a bunch of my colleagues and they were discussing similar issues, namely, how do we stop cheaters.  Many ideas where thrown on the table, much of them technologically based and designed to catch people in the act.  In other words, they were about people trying to play the game better than the best student-cheaters do.  I gave another idea: “Why not assign work where you can’t cheat?”

I don’t have students cheating in my classes.  It’s not that they respect me so much more than other profs they they just don’t do it.  No, students are students, and if you can game the system, many will.  Instead, I assign work for which there is no existing answer, and I make the process of discovering that answer–the chronological logs of that pursuit–what I mark.  I ask students to work on real things, with real people, and keep living journals of their efforts.  They use wikis, blogs, twitter, github, bugzilla, etc.  You can fake a final result, but it’s much harder to fake the final result and incremental steps.

Instead of cheating what I end-up with are students dropping the course.  When there is no way to cheat, those who rely on such techniques are forced to come to terms with an important question: are you willing to do real work, which happens in real-time, or are you not?  You can’t cram for this.  You can’t borrow your friends’ and substitute it for your own.

For me it comes down to this: at the end of your course, are you going to have an exam grade and a grade distribution, or are you going to have a real-world project and a set of experiences that are unreproducible?  Only that which can be repeated can be copied.  If your students are copying, ask yourself why you are relying on things that can be copied instead of doing something original.

This entry was posted in Home School, Mozilla Education, Teaching Open Source. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

4 Comments

  1. Ben Hearsum
    Posted November 22, 2010 at 6:05 pm | Permalink

    This is a really interesting take and certainly shows one of the reasons why you’re such an outstanding professor. However, I’m not sure how some of this can apply to certain areas — particularly very early semesters. How do you give 1st and 2nd semester students tasks that have no existing answer? Or is it more about about changing what is being graded in general?

  2. Posted November 22, 2010 at 10:12 pm | Permalink

    Astounding. All the answers to the questions existed ahead of time in a test bank the students could access, and _they’re_ the ones at fault?

    In every field outside of academia, the term for that is “due dilligence”.

  3. Posted November 23, 2010 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

    Applause for this post, and for being the kind of teacher you are. Several courses I’ve professors had have my full respect for creating assignments where you knew you were learning because the answers weren’t something googleable. The best assignments are ones that iterated on previous work because it got harder for someone to just submit a final piece without having shown the work it took them to get to the finish. Creating assignments like this is harder to do, demands more of a teacher’s time but it’s so valuable to nurture in students the skills that they can actually use in the real world. (Let’s not look at how cheating is useful in the real world for the purposes of this comment)

    When I took your open source classes, I observed the dropout rate and felt encouraged by this as it signified being in a class where students couldn’t just skate by as they did in other subjects. In fact, during the course of my degree I was quite surprised to see how far someone could get from regularly cheating. It took until the 3rd or 4th year to really expose someone who had been relying on the work of others.

    If not every class, every degree must have at least one test to really sort out who should be getting the degree based on their actual work on real problems where a professor evaluates their unique perspective, work put in over time, and solutions. Otherwise the degree means nothing and we might as well sell them for the cost of the degree and save everyone the time required to do the years of schooling.

  4. Posted November 25, 2010 at 11:25 am | Permalink

    Arg.

    So for 21+ years he has never had this lecture. So either his students up to this point have never cheated, or his methods of testing have just changed, or more likely he has never caught them… Also, I bet his content hasn’t changed for 21 years either. He caught them by accident.

    “The days of being able to find new ways to cheat the system are over” not likely. This guy needs to take a course in modern technology, and look at how fast it is advancing. This is only the beginning.

    “They aced the exam because they had the answers ahead of time” isn’t that the idea? If you are going to make such a linear test like this, shouldn’t they have the answers to study from? What’s the point of writing a static test if you don’t know what is going to be on it. All you are doing is testing their memory anyway. The students “cheated” by studying a list of content they should of been learning. Sounds good to me…

    I am very passionate about test marks being pretty useless, and this guy just helped prove my point.

    Keep it up Dave.