13 ms·

As a former University Librarian and Residents Director A) Cheating happens more then it doesn't. In a Philosophy Class which had a dozen seniors all cheated i

As a former University Librarian and Residents Director A) Cheating happens more then it doesn't. In a Philosophy Class which had a dozen seniors all cheated in Spring Semester. Professor flunked them all by giving them an F and told them they were lucky they weren't expelled. President Graduated the students and fired the professor. Then on appeal the President was fired and the Professor rehired with a raise. B) Shocked that YouTube or any stock traded company would allow these videos to stay up. Morally this is wrong since cheating hurts everyone in education. EDIT: C) No one was ever expelled for cheating, ever at my school.

sithadmin 8y ago
As someone that used to write papers for cheaters: it doesn't bother me much, because higher education is already eating itself alive in the US. The impact of a few students paying others to author papers on their behalf is nothing compared to the massive grade inflation one sees at top universities in the US.
- baldfat 8y ago
  A) Cheating hurts everyone. > is nothing compared to the massive grade inflation one sees at top universities in the US B) Because student at top universities (For the most part) have higher GPA in high school and a higher SAT scores already. Unless your morals require a strict bell curve of 10% F, 10% A, 40% C and 40% B?
  - majormajor 8y ago
    Do you want to be able to identify the best of the best? That's the fundamental question here - if that's a useful thing for society, to have credentials that distinguish beyond "did well in high school," then you don't want grade inflation. And if you don't - you could make a solid case that the extreme ends of those skills may not be that useful in general outside of academia - than do Harvard et al need nearly as much money as we throw at them today?
    - eanzenberg 8y ago
      Peer group matters. Being bottom 10% at Harvard is quite different than being bottom 10% at Boston University (no offense).
      - majormajor 8y ago
        The people who seem to not believe this are the people pushing for grade inflation, no? Grade inflation is all about making everyone who isn't top 10% have a prettier resume.
      - walshemj 8y ago
        Ah so the us veriosn of the "gentleman's" degree - a third from Oxbridge in the UK
    - logfromblammo 8y ago
      Identifying the best of the best requires complex statistical methods to remove several different types of bias. I'd rather give students PRoPS, which is to say "percentile ranking of passing students". But that would require some means to normalize different professors teaching from different curricula, with variations in the capabilities of their students across different classes. Automatically failing x% of your students every semester is as cruel and pointless as stack ranking. Clearly, if a student can demonstrate a minimum objective level of understanding, independent of the performance of their peers, they should not fail the course. Equally clearly, if a section is full of geniuses with perfect understanding, they should be graded more highly than a section full of normals that can barely get it after intensive study. If you pile up enough testing data, year after year, it would be theoretically possible to construct a mathematical model to compare with some confidence the student achievement across disparate classes, professors, and institutions, as well as to say definitively who the good and bad professors are, and whether they write difficult or easy exams. If you get a 100% on Dr. Aardvark's CHEM220 final at Example U., that may put you at PRoPS of 80 for "organic chemistry, milestone one", whereas if you get a 60% score on Dr. Zymurgy's CHEM235 final at Hypothetical Institute, that may actually have a PRoPS of 95 for "organic chemistry, milestone one". Dr. Z's exam was simply written to be impossible, and scored very harshly, while Dr. A's exam was built to be more forgiving, and maybe left out some elements that the Example U. chem faculty prefers to save for later courses. This will, of course, never happen. Firstly, you would have to get academics to agree on the essential elements of a given subject at a particular checkpoint in a course of study. Secondly, institutions that rely on selective admissions and political connections for prestige would never participate, if there were even a shred of possibility that the objective evidence would show that they do not actually produce the quality of graduates that they would like to claim. Imagine if Ivy Limestone Woodpanels Law cranked out PRoPS for complete J.D. from 30 to 85, and Bigcity Urban Campus Law ranged from 50 to 99. The former is selective and does a lot of networking, but then passes anyone who still knows enough to not embarrass the school in a connected job, whereas the latter takes everyone, presents a huge challenge, and quickly flunks those who can't master the coursework and get hired through sheer merit. Those numbers would be a huge blow to the former's reputation. Grade inflation is thus a natural by-product of institutions trying to be a "top tier school". It goes right along with publishing in the highest impact journals and wheedling more money out of your alumni. Schools that benefit from institutional prestige want to keep their reputations polished and shiny.
  - sithadmin 8y ago
    Cheating is a constant that must be controlled for. It doesn't stop when you graduate. Further, grade inflation at top-tier US schools has nothing to do with the stats on incoming students. I don't even understand why you think that would be relevant.
- gruez 8y ago
  >The impact of a few students paying others to author papers on their behalf is nothing compared to the massive grade inflation one sees at top universities in the US. grade inflation is real, but at least it effects everyone equally. cheating allows dishonest students to get ahead by paying $$$. moreover, you can adjust for grade inflation, but you can't adjust for cheating.
  - sithadmin 8y ago
    Grade inflation at top US schools happens through $$$ as well. Having a parent that is a major donor matters. I've seen it firsthand.
- ocdtrekkie 8y ago
  It's always intriguing to see how people justify grossly unethical behavior to themselves. I don't think the issue is your disservice to higher education in general or grade systems as a whole, but to your customers, who never receive the education they were meant to, and that they paid for.
  - sithadmin 8y ago
    Many of my customers could barely compose a cogent e-mail. In most cases I was left wondering how they could possibly be admitted at whatever school they were at. Sure, my assessment of my customers was limited to a few back-and-forth e-mail exchanges, but I was usually left with the impression that they were enrolled at a school they didn't 'deserve' to be at. Further, you're just completely discounting the agency of my customers here. They knew what they were doing, and how it devalued their education experience.
    - ocdtrekkie 8y ago
      I presume they ended up enrolled in that school because there was always a way that money got them out of learning the hard lesson of failure. Case in point that they could pay someone to write papers for them. Failure is arguably an important part of the process of learning.
      - creep 8y ago
        Failure is the most important part in the process of learning. That statement says nothing about cheating. One could fail at cheating too, and either learn a better way of cheating or learn not to cheat. Both are fine. If you're good at cheating you might be a decent hacker because you might better see the flaws in any seemingly rigid and fixed system. People who break things often find a way to better recreate those things. There's a thing that happens with loopholes. There's the guy that finds the loophole and tests it out for himself. Then there's the small group that follow him in if it suits their needs, and then word spreads and a good proportion of people also follow. If the loophole threatens the existing system in any way, then the upholders of that system will attempt to barricade the loophole. A few upholders might change the system itself, but that is rare. The one guy who first used the loophole will always be on the lookout for new loopholes, and there's nothing you can do about it. You can say it's wrong, you can say it's not fair, but it's a fact of life. And by using that loophole that one guy can create change all around him. He can change it himself, or he can open the door for other people to see the change that needs to happen. Maybe it's good to patch the loophole, maybe it's good to change the system in which the loophole was found-- either way, it comes down a great deal to our explorer friend. He learns from failure too, but his goals are different and that's fine.
- ulrikrasmussen 8y ago
  Your argument seems similar to somebody saying that it is okay to litter because the environment is screwed anyway. You may be correct in your criticism of the educational system, but how does that justify you making the situation worse?
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    On some level things have to get worse before there's willpower to make progress toward a solution.
  - sithadmin 8y ago
    I worked with less than 100 clients over the course of two years. My impact was statistically insignificant.
    - openasocket 8y ago
      Statistics don't enter into it. Whether something is morally wrong or right is intrinsic to the act itself, not based on what other people are doing. If everyone in the world starts stealing from stores, that doesn't mean it is OK for you to start stealing as well.
      - sithadmin 8y ago
        Okay, so you're into the deontological line of thinking. I'm not. The fact that you think your approach to morality is the default just suggests that you haven't actually had a meaningful engagement with current literature on moral reasoning.
        openasocket 8y ago
        My argument is "if everyone in the world is doing something immoral, it is still immoral for you to do it," which works equally well in consequentialism. The fact that your actions are statistically insignificant compared to the whole only means that the immorality/morality of your individual actions are small compared to the whole of humanity. That's a false comparison, I'm not aware of any ethical system that determines morality by comparing your impact against the totality of humanity. Maybe comparing your impact against the impact of the average person, but not the total. Under such a system only the Hitlers and Ghandis of the world would even register.
- wpietri 8y ago
  Oh, really? By that logic, since you're eventually going to die, probably horribly, then you'll be ok with me coming by and taking out one of your kidneys. Or, as in The Big Lebowski, lopping off a toe. Those are as nothing to a death from a brain tumor, after all.
  - sithadmin 8y ago
    No, it's really quite different. You take my kidney? That's going to have a direct impact on my quality of life. It'll hurt for a while. I won't be able to drink as much and I'll have to be careful about my diet. I write a paper for someone else to turn in as their own? In a situation where I know more or less nothing about the client? The outcomes are both unknowable and in most cases impossible to tie to my act directly.
    - ribosometronome 8y ago
      Why would someone pay you to write an assignment for them if the outcome of you writing the paper is so unknowable?
    - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
      > The outcomes are both unknowable and in most cases impossible to tie to my act directly You breached academic code and, if money was exchanged, potentially the law. Given you wrote the paper and received the money, the act is quite simple to tie to you.
      - sithadmin 8y ago
        I'm sorry, what academic code? What which binds students at schools that I didn't attend and have no contractual relationship with? Lol, okay. >potentially the law Yeah, show me the law that tells me it's illegal to write something for someone else. Thanks.
        JumpCrisscross 8y ago
        > show me the law that tells me it's illegal to write something for someone else Writing papers for someone else is not illegal. (The student presenting the paper as their own violates your copyright, and potentially other laws.) But if you market and sell your papers for the purpose of cheating, particularly with respect to students pursuing degrees they intend to use for licensing/certification (e.g. law or civil engineering), you're aiding and abetting fraud.
- GW150914 8y ago
  You were a professionally immoral person, so it not bothering you much is probably a shitty metric. Surely the people who gravitate to this work are the least reliable people to assess the impact, sort of like pimps and dealers.
  - sithadmin 8y ago
    I never claimed to be a 'reliable person' to assess the impact. Just sharing my thoughts and experiences.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- lr4444lr 8y ago
  You're a lesser purveyor of counterfeit goods, but you're still a counterfeiter.
  - sithadmin 8y ago
    Counterfeit implies a copy of something that has a defined market value. Academic papers don't. What I did is closer to a tailor creating a suit for someone from scratch, rather than someone operating a sweatshop to produce fake suits from some known brand.
    - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
      > Academic papers don't Did you get paid for them? If yes, they had a market value. That's the most basic definition of a market--a buyer and seller negotiating and agreeing upon a price for a good or a service. "Market" doesn't mean commodity. Hopefully you weren't writing anyone's economics papers...
      - sithadmin 8y ago
        I'm sorry, but that's a dumb response. There's value in producing a work that passes muster as an acceptable paper to turn in for an assignment. But there isn't a pre-existing reference good that has a defined market value to counterfeit.
        JumpCrisscross 8y ago
        > there isn't a pre-existing reference good that has a defined market value to counterfeit By your rationalization, it's impossible to counterfeit a painting.
        sithadmin 8y ago
        Can you explain to me how you would come to that conclusion?
- reaperducer 8y ago
  > it doesn't bother me much, because higher education is already eating itself alive in the US. The ship is sinking already, so it's OK if I set fire to it.
  - sithadmin 8y ago
    Depends on the ship and its contents. The 'ship' that is the US higher education system doesn't seem to hold much value, imo. Set it ablaze.
  - creep 8y ago
    Cheaters aren't setting fire to the sinking ship. They're escaping via unofficial routes-- ie. they are foregoing the life rafts.
- e40 8y ago
  You are a terrible person.
  - sithadmin 8y ago
    There were far worse ways that I could have kept myself afloat, income-wise. I'm pretty okay with this one, thanks.
    - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
      > There were far worse ways that I could have kept myself afloat, income-wise "Your honor, you should not judge me for stealing. For I could have also murdered."
- your-nanny 8y ago
  Doing their assignments (well) contributes to grade inflation
matz1 8y ago
>cheating hurts everyone. Not the paper writers and some of the students who can benefit from it.
- wpietri 8y ago
  I think it hurts them too. Have you even done a shitty job? It's soul-destroying. In high school I answered an ad in the paper and ended up doing "charity fundraising" by telephone. It turned out that the charity only got ~15% of the money raised. The people working there were all sleazeballs. I'm sure had I stayed there I would have ended up a sleazeball as well.
  - matz1 8y ago
    Its not a shitty job for some of the right people. I can easily think few possible advantage of this job: - flexible time - potential to earn lot of money - sheer enjoyment of writing - improve one writing skills
    - dofly 8y ago
      I think it all depends on incentives. If one goes to school with a sole purpose of learning something(employment, career track being non-issues), I'd imagine, they wouldn't care about the cheaters as they wouldn't be competing with the cheaters for jobs, promotions etc. This reminded me of a Russian pop star from the early 2000s who became a philosophy major at a major Russian university. Presumably, she didn't mind the cheaters as I doubt she was aiming at tenure track or something to that effect at the school. Although, I can't be sure :)
      - wpietri 8y ago
        I went to school just to learn and I despised the cheaters. They were debasing something I valued, taking up time and attention that could have been given to somebody who gave a shit.
    - eponeponepon 8y ago
wpietri 8y ago
I recognize that my first instinct, solving cheating via firing squad, is probably too extreme. But perhaps we could at least try it out and see how it works?
misterbowfinger 8y ago
> Morally this is wrong since cheating hurts everyone in education. Going to slap a big "NOPE" to this bit. It's the school's responsibility to educate and assess students, and therefore it's their job to reduce cheating. IMHO, if it's really easy to cheat on a test (mostly rote memorization), then students SHOULD cheat. It's a bad test and and insanely huge waste of everyone's time and money.
- s17n 8y ago
  That's like saying "stealing isn't morally wrong - inventory control is retailers' responsibility and therefore it's their job to reduce loss".
  - jrhurst 8y ago
    I have a feeling that people who make misterbowlfingers argument would say that your analogy is also valid.
    - s17n 8y ago
      The point is that since similar statements could be constructed about anything ("murder isn't wrong, it's the job of police to prevent me from killing people"), it's a dumb argument, regardless of how you feel about cheating or stealing.
      - sithadmin 8y ago
        No, your approach to reasoning is bad. You're trying to apply a construct from formal logic and apply it to situations that defy description in formal logic. You can't reduce aesthetic and emotional responses into syllogism.
        s17n 8y ago
        Often, the nuances of the real world defy simple syllogistic reasoning. This isn't one of those times.
JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> Professor flunked them all by giving them an F and told them they were lucky they weren't expelled My university flunked cheaters with an X instead of an F, a mark that carried onto their official transcript. By the time kids are in college, I think it's fair to be so final with judgements in respect of integrity.
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  Maybe not with Freshmen, but Seniors sure.
  - gizmo385 8y ago
    Why not with Freshmen? They're usually around 18 years old and they've been in school for 12 years at that point. I think they outta know by now that cheating is wrong.
hexane360 8y ago
>Then on appeal the President was fired and the Professor rehired with a raise. That's hilarious. It's crazy that there was so much fallout from a case of cheating.
Buge 8y ago
>Shocked that YouTube or any stock traded company would allow these videos to stay up. Morally this is wrong since cheating hurts everyone in education. Is it Youtube's job to enforce morals? Is it Youtube's job to prevent anything that might hurt education? If it was determined that memes hurt education (by distracting students from studying) should Youtube ban memes?
- ohashi 8y ago
  It can be it's job. The upside of keeping them - you get more business from companies operating in grey/black. The downside, loss of a tiny bit of revenue, possible public backlash/outcry, and the loss of morality. It's hard for people to die on the hill of a service for cheating. If you really want to, go for it, but it'll be lonely.
  - Buge 8y ago
    Could that same thing be said for channels doing gun modifications? Many people got very mad when Youtube took down some of them.
- sakuronto 8y ago
  It wasn't YouTube's job to be the morality police, but much like Cloudflare, YouTube, entirely of its own volition, decided to take on the job, and now it's too late for them to backpedal.
  - Buge 8y ago
    So because some censorship happens there should now be an increase in censorship?
- anonnel 8y ago
  > Is it Youtube’s job to enforce morals? ... Wrong frame. YouTube’s ethical responsibility is dictated by their ethos and that of society. It’s Youtube’s ethical responsibility to not have videos which promote academic cheating products.
Theodores 8y ago
I learned this the hard way. When I was at university I happened to be 'fluent' in 68000 assembly language, so I was able to do that assignment within minutes of the task being set, no cheating needed. I actually understood what I was doing and wrote an assignment that was not cribbed from the work of others. I thought this was going to be marked well, passing was expected. However, when the results came out a 'see me' was on the board. The lecturer was angry at me because I wouldn't say who I 'copied my work from'. But then I remembered showing my code to a colleague in the minutes before handing in the assignment. Mine worked perfectly the first time but when I ran it again it failed. I realised I had cleared a 'byte' instead of a 'word' and changed my work accordingly before handing it in. Nobody else had this change, just my work. That one byte of real difference showed I knew 68K assembly when nobody else did. So it turned out that my original 'done in ten minutes' code had been fished out the bin and typed in by someone else, they had then spread this around and everyone on the course except for a few mature students that were out of the loop had copied my stuff. Now this was just one incident, as well as that there were other problems with groupthink which is not the same as cheating. I was behind on one project and submitted a simple diagram. Everyone else submitted reams of stuff, all returned with red pen on most of the pages. My assignment had just the one tick for perfect mark. Had I huddled with my colleagues in depressing group think panic sessions and done my own version of the 70 page assignment they were doing then I would not have got that perfect mark. In my opinion plagiarism is just scraping the surface, beneath that there is a bigger problem of original thought and problem solving. Most people go along with what everyone else is doing.
Shivetya 8y ago
youtube's leaves a lot to be desired once you venture outside of entertainment. besides this education issue the amount of government sponsored propaganda on the site is astounding. teleSUR maintains a channel with all sorts of suspect stories including showing the paradise the Venezuela supposedly is, https://youtu.be/BT5L4YU_Fl4 https://youtu.be/BT5L4YU_Fl4 Now before people dismiss such out of hand there are far too many who believe what is presented here because like many they are guilty of believing stories that reinforce their beliefs.

sithadmin 8y ago

As someone that used to write papers for cheaters: it doesn't bother me much, because higher education is already eating itself alive in the US. The impact of a few students paying others to author papers on their behalf is nothing compared to the massive grade inflation one sees at top universities in the US.

baldfat 8y ago
A) Cheating hurts everyone. > is nothing compared to the massive grade inflation one sees at top universities in the US B) Because student at top universities (For the most part) have higher GPA in high school and a higher SAT scores already. Unless your morals require a strict bell curve of 10% F, 10% A, 40% C and 40% B?
- majormajor 8y ago
  Do you want to be able to identify the best of the best? That's the fundamental question here - if that's a useful thing for society, to have credentials that distinguish beyond "did well in high school," then you don't want grade inflation. And if you don't - you could make a solid case that the extreme ends of those skills may not be that useful in general outside of academia - than do Harvard et al need nearly as much money as we throw at them today?
  - eanzenberg 8y ago
    Peer group matters. Being bottom 10% at Harvard is quite different than being bottom 10% at Boston University (no offense).
    - majormajor 8y ago
      The people who seem to not believe this are the people pushing for grade inflation, no? Grade inflation is all about making everyone who isn't top 10% have a prettier resume.
    - walshemj 8y ago
      Ah so the us veriosn of the "gentleman's" degree - a third from Oxbridge in the UK
  - logfromblammo 8y ago
    Identifying the best of the best requires complex statistical methods to remove several different types of bias. I'd rather give students PRoPS, which is to say "percentile ranking of passing students". But that would require some means to normalize different professors teaching from different curricula, with variations in the capabilities of their students across different classes. Automatically failing x% of your students every semester is as cruel and pointless as stack ranking. Clearly, if a student can demonstrate a minimum objective level of understanding, independent of the performance of their peers, they should not fail the course. Equally clearly, if a section is full of geniuses with perfect understanding, they should be graded more highly than a section full of normals that can barely get it after intensive study. If you pile up enough testing data, year after year, it would be theoretically possible to construct a mathematical model to compare with some confidence the student achievement across disparate classes, professors, and institutions, as well as to say definitively who the good and bad professors are, and whether they write difficult or easy exams. If you get a 100% on Dr. Aardvark's CHEM220 final at Example U., that may put you at PRoPS of 80 for "organic chemistry, milestone one", whereas if you get a 60% score on Dr. Zymurgy's CHEM235 final at Hypothetical Institute, that may actually have a PRoPS of 95 for "organic chemistry, milestone one". Dr. Z's exam was simply written to be impossible, and scored very harshly, while Dr. A's exam was built to be more forgiving, and maybe left out some elements that the Example U. chem faculty prefers to save for later courses. This will, of course, never happen. Firstly, you would have to get academics to agree on the essential elements of a given subject at a particular checkpoint in a course of study. Secondly, institutions that rely on selective admissions and political connections for prestige would never participate, if there were even a shred of possibility that the objective evidence would show that they do not actually produce the quality of graduates that they would like to claim. Imagine if Ivy Limestone Woodpanels Law cranked out PRoPS for complete J.D. from 30 to 85, and Bigcity Urban Campus Law ranged from 50 to 99. The former is selective and does a lot of networking, but then passes anyone who still knows enough to not embarrass the school in a connected job, whereas the latter takes everyone, presents a huge challenge, and quickly flunks those who can't master the coursework and get hired through sheer merit. Those numbers would be a huge blow to the former's reputation. Grade inflation is thus a natural by-product of institutions trying to be a "top tier school". It goes right along with publishing in the highest impact journals and wheedling more money out of your alumni. Schools that benefit from institutional prestige want to keep their reputations polished and shiny.
- sithadmin 8y ago
  Cheating is a constant that must be controlled for. It doesn't stop when you graduate. Further, grade inflation at top-tier US schools has nothing to do with the stats on incoming students. I don't even understand why you think that would be relevant.
gruez 8y ago
>The impact of a few students paying others to author papers on their behalf is nothing compared to the massive grade inflation one sees at top universities in the US. grade inflation is real, but at least it effects everyone equally. cheating allows dishonest students to get ahead by paying $$$. moreover, you can adjust for grade inflation, but you can't adjust for cheating.
- sithadmin 8y ago
  Grade inflation at top US schools happens through $$$ as well. Having a parent that is a major donor matters. I've seen it firsthand.
ocdtrekkie 8y ago
It's always intriguing to see how people justify grossly unethical behavior to themselves. I don't think the issue is your disservice to higher education in general or grade systems as a whole, but to your customers, who never receive the education they were meant to, and that they paid for.
- sithadmin 8y ago
  Many of my customers could barely compose a cogent e-mail. In most cases I was left wondering how they could possibly be admitted at whatever school they were at. Sure, my assessment of my customers was limited to a few back-and-forth e-mail exchanges, but I was usually left with the impression that they were enrolled at a school they didn't 'deserve' to be at. Further, you're just completely discounting the agency of my customers here. They knew what they were doing, and how it devalued their education experience.
  - ocdtrekkie 8y ago
    I presume they ended up enrolled in that school because there was always a way that money got them out of learning the hard lesson of failure. Case in point that they could pay someone to write papers for them. Failure is arguably an important part of the process of learning.
    - creep 8y ago
      Failure is the most important part in the process of learning. That statement says nothing about cheating. One could fail at cheating too, and either learn a better way of cheating or learn not to cheat. Both are fine. If you're good at cheating you might be a decent hacker because you might better see the flaws in any seemingly rigid and fixed system. People who break things often find a way to better recreate those things. There's a thing that happens with loopholes. There's the guy that finds the loophole and tests it out for himself. Then there's the small group that follow him in if it suits their needs, and then word spreads and a good proportion of people also follow. If the loophole threatens the existing system in any way, then the upholders of that system will attempt to barricade the loophole. A few upholders might change the system itself, but that is rare. The one guy who first used the loophole will always be on the lookout for new loopholes, and there's nothing you can do about it. You can say it's wrong, you can say it's not fair, but it's a fact of life. And by using that loophole that one guy can create change all around him. He can change it himself, or he can open the door for other people to see the change that needs to happen. Maybe it's good to patch the loophole, maybe it's good to change the system in which the loophole was found-- either way, it comes down a great deal to our explorer friend. He learns from failure too, but his goals are different and that's fine.
ulrikrasmussen 8y ago
Your argument seems similar to somebody saying that it is okay to litter because the environment is screwed anyway. You may be correct in your criticism of the educational system, but how does that justify you making the situation worse?
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  On some level things have to get worse before there's willpower to make progress toward a solution.
- sithadmin 8y ago
  I worked with less than 100 clients over the course of two years. My impact was statistically insignificant.
  - openasocket 8y ago
    Statistics don't enter into it. Whether something is morally wrong or right is intrinsic to the act itself, not based on what other people are doing. If everyone in the world starts stealing from stores, that doesn't mean it is OK for you to start stealing as well.
    - sithadmin 8y ago
      Okay, so you're into the deontological line of thinking. I'm not. The fact that you think your approach to morality is the default just suggests that you haven't actually had a meaningful engagement with current literature on moral reasoning.
      - openasocket 8y ago
        My argument is "if everyone in the world is doing something immoral, it is still immoral for you to do it," which works equally well in consequentialism. The fact that your actions are statistically insignificant compared to the whole only means that the immorality/morality of your individual actions are small compared to the whole of humanity. That's a false comparison, I'm not aware of any ethical system that determines morality by comparing your impact against the totality of humanity. Maybe comparing your impact against the impact of the average person, but not the total. Under such a system only the Hitlers and Ghandis of the world would even register.
wpietri 8y ago
Oh, really? By that logic, since you're eventually going to die, probably horribly, then you'll be ok with me coming by and taking out one of your kidneys. Or, as in The Big Lebowski, lopping off a toe. Those are as nothing to a death from a brain tumor, after all.
- sithadmin 8y ago
  No, it's really quite different. You take my kidney? That's going to have a direct impact on my quality of life. It'll hurt for a while. I won't be able to drink as much and I'll have to be careful about my diet. I write a paper for someone else to turn in as their own? In a situation where I know more or less nothing about the client? The outcomes are both unknowable and in most cases impossible to tie to my act directly.
  - ribosometronome 8y ago
    Why would someone pay you to write an assignment for them if the outcome of you writing the paper is so unknowable?
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > The outcomes are both unknowable and in most cases impossible to tie to my act directly You breached academic code and, if money was exchanged, potentially the law. Given you wrote the paper and received the money, the act is quite simple to tie to you.
    - sithadmin 8y ago
      I'm sorry, what academic code? What which binds students at schools that I didn't attend and have no contractual relationship with? Lol, okay. >potentially the law Yeah, show me the law that tells me it's illegal to write something for someone else. Thanks.
      - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
        > show me the law that tells me it's illegal to write something for someone else Writing papers for someone else is not illegal. (The student presenting the paper as their own violates your copyright, and potentially other laws.) But if you market and sell your papers for the purpose of cheating, particularly with respect to students pursuing degrees they intend to use for licensing/certification (e.g. law or civil engineering), you're aiding and abetting fraud.
GW150914 8y ago
You were a professionally immoral person, so it not bothering you much is probably a shitty metric. Surely the people who gravitate to this work are the least reliable people to assess the impact, sort of like pimps and dealers.
- sithadmin 8y ago
  I never claimed to be a 'reliable person' to assess the impact. Just sharing my thoughts and experiences.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
lr4444lr 8y ago
You're a lesser purveyor of counterfeit goods, but you're still a counterfeiter.
- sithadmin 8y ago
  Counterfeit implies a copy of something that has a defined market value. Academic papers don't. What I did is closer to a tailor creating a suit for someone from scratch, rather than someone operating a sweatshop to produce fake suits from some known brand.
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > Academic papers don't Did you get paid for them? If yes, they had a market value. That's the most basic definition of a market--a buyer and seller negotiating and agreeing upon a price for a good or a service. "Market" doesn't mean commodity. Hopefully you weren't writing anyone's economics papers...
    - sithadmin 8y ago
      I'm sorry, but that's a dumb response. There's value in producing a work that passes muster as an acceptable paper to turn in for an assignment. But there isn't a pre-existing reference good that has a defined market value to counterfeit.
      - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
        > there isn't a pre-existing reference good that has a defined market value to counterfeit By your rationalization, it's impossible to counterfeit a painting.
        sithadmin 8y ago
        Can you explain to me how you would come to that conclusion?
reaperducer 8y ago
> it doesn't bother me much, because higher education is already eating itself alive in the US. The ship is sinking already, so it's OK if I set fire to it.
- sithadmin 8y ago
  Depends on the ship and its contents. The 'ship' that is the US higher education system doesn't seem to hold much value, imo. Set it ablaze.
- creep 8y ago
  Cheaters aren't setting fire to the sinking ship. They're escaping via unofficial routes-- ie. they are foregoing the life rafts.
e40 8y ago
You are a terrible person.
- sithadmin 8y ago
  There were far worse ways that I could have kept myself afloat, income-wise. I'm pretty okay with this one, thanks.
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > There were far worse ways that I could have kept myself afloat, income-wise "Your honor, you should not judge me for stealing. For I could have also murdered."
your-nanny 8y ago
Doing their assignments (well) contributes to grade inflation

matz1 8y ago

>cheating hurts everyone. Not the paper writers and some of the students who can benefit from it.

wpietri 8y ago
I think it hurts them too. Have you even done a shitty job? It's soul-destroying. In high school I answered an ad in the paper and ended up doing "charity fundraising" by telephone. It turned out that the charity only got ~15% of the money raised. The people working there were all sleazeballs. I'm sure had I stayed there I would have ended up a sleazeball as well.
- matz1 8y ago
  Its not a shitty job for some of the right people. I can easily think few possible advantage of this job: - flexible time - potential to earn lot of money - sheer enjoyment of writing - improve one writing skills
  - dofly 8y ago
    I think it all depends on incentives. If one goes to school with a sole purpose of learning something(employment, career track being non-issues), I'd imagine, they wouldn't care about the cheaters as they wouldn't be competing with the cheaters for jobs, promotions etc. This reminded me of a Russian pop star from the early 2000s who became a philosophy major at a major Russian university. Presumably, she didn't mind the cheaters as I doubt she was aiming at tenure track or something to that effect at the school. Although, I can't be sure :)
    - wpietri 8y ago
      I went to school just to learn and I despised the cheaters. They were debasing something I valued, taking up time and attention that could have been given to somebody who gave a shit.
  - eponeponepon 8y ago

wpietri 8y ago

I recognize that my first instinct, solving cheating via firing squad, is probably too extreme. But perhaps we could at least try it out and see how it works?

misterbowfinger 8y ago

> Morally this is wrong since cheating hurts everyone in education. Going to slap a big "NOPE" to this bit. It's the school's responsibility to educate and assess students, and therefore it's their job to reduce cheating. IMHO, if it's really easy to cheat on a test (mostly rote memorization), then students SHOULD cheat. It's a bad test and and insanely huge waste of everyone's time and money.

s17n 8y ago
That's like saying "stealing isn't morally wrong - inventory control is retailers' responsibility and therefore it's their job to reduce loss".
- jrhurst 8y ago
  I have a feeling that people who make misterbowlfingers argument would say that your analogy is also valid.
  - s17n 8y ago
    The point is that since similar statements could be constructed about anything ("murder isn't wrong, it's the job of police to prevent me from killing people"), it's a dumb argument, regardless of how you feel about cheating or stealing.
    - sithadmin 8y ago
      No, your approach to reasoning is bad. You're trying to apply a construct from formal logic and apply it to situations that defy description in formal logic. You can't reduce aesthetic and emotional responses into syllogism.
      - s17n 8y ago
        Often, the nuances of the real world defy simple syllogistic reasoning. This isn't one of those times.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago

> Professor flunked them all by giving them an F and told them they were lucky they weren't expelled My university flunked cheaters with an X instead of an F, a mark that carried onto their official transcript. By the time kids are in college, I think it's fair to be so final with judgements in respect of integrity.

Dylan16807 8y ago
Maybe not with Freshmen, but Seniors sure.
- gizmo385 8y ago
  Why not with Freshmen? They're usually around 18 years old and they've been in school for 12 years at that point. I think they outta know by now that cheating is wrong.

hexane360 8y ago

>Then on appeal the President was fired and the Professor rehired with a raise. That's hilarious. It's crazy that there was so much fallout from a case of cheating.

Buge 8y ago

>Shocked that YouTube or any stock traded company would allow these videos to stay up. Morally this is wrong since cheating hurts everyone in education. Is it Youtube's job to enforce morals? Is it Youtube's job to prevent anything that might hurt education? If it was determined that memes hurt education (by distracting students from studying) should Youtube ban memes?

ohashi 8y ago
It can be it's job. The upside of keeping them - you get more business from companies operating in grey/black. The downside, loss of a tiny bit of revenue, possible public backlash/outcry, and the loss of morality. It's hard for people to die on the hill of a service for cheating. If you really want to, go for it, but it'll be lonely.
- Buge 8y ago
  Could that same thing be said for channels doing gun modifications? Many people got very mad when Youtube took down some of them.
sakuronto 8y ago
It wasn't YouTube's job to be the morality police, but much like Cloudflare, YouTube, entirely of its own volition, decided to take on the job, and now it's too late for them to backpedal.
- Buge 8y ago
  So because some censorship happens there should now be an increase in censorship?
anonnel 8y ago
> Is it Youtube’s job to enforce morals? ... Wrong frame. YouTube’s ethical responsibility is dictated by their ethos and that of society. It’s Youtube’s ethical responsibility to not have videos which promote academic cheating products.

Theodores 8y ago

I learned this the hard way. When I was at university I happened to be 'fluent' in 68000 assembly language, so I was able to do that assignment within minutes of the task being set, no cheating needed. I actually understood what I was doing and wrote an assignment that was not cribbed from the work of others. I thought this was going to be marked well, passing was expected. However, when the results came out a 'see me' was on the board. The lecturer was angry at me because I wouldn't say who I 'copied my work from'. But then I remembered showing my code to a colleague in the minutes before handing in the assignment. Mine worked perfectly the first time but when I ran it again it failed. I realised I had cleared a 'byte' instead of a 'word' and changed my work accordingly before handing it in. Nobody else had this change, just my work. That one byte of real difference showed I knew 68K assembly when nobody else did. So it turned out that my original 'done in ten minutes' code had been fished out the bin and typed in by someone else, they had then spread this around and everyone on the course except for a few mature students that were out of the loop had copied my stuff. Now this was just one incident, as well as that there were other problems with groupthink which is not the same as cheating. I was behind on one project and submitted a simple diagram. Everyone else submitted reams of stuff, all returned with red pen on most of the pages. My assignment had just the one tick for perfect mark. Had I huddled with my colleagues in depressing group think panic sessions and done my own version of the 70 page assignment they were doing then I would not have got that perfect mark. In my opinion plagiarism is just scraping the surface, beneath that there is a bigger problem of original thought and problem solving. Most people go along with what everyone else is doing.

Shivetya 8y ago

youtube's leaves a lot to be desired once you venture outside of entertainment. besides this education issue the amount of government sponsored propaganda on the site is astounding. teleSUR maintains a channel with all sorts of suspect stories including showing the paradise the Venezuela supposedly is, https://youtu.be/BT5L4YU_Fl4 https://youtu.be/BT5L4YU_Fl4 Now before people dismiss such out of hand there are far too many who believe what is presented here because like many they are guilty of believing stories that reinforce their beliefs.