It's not cheating, but it does circumvent the assessment value of the test imo. The quote in the article about shallow heuristics can totally be appropriated:

It's not cheating, but it does circumvent the assessment value of the test imo. The quote in the article about shallow heuristics can totally be appropriated: > [Good test takers] are prone to adopting shallow heuristics that succeed for the majority of [tests], instead of learning the underlying [facts] that they are intended to [assess]. Semi-related, I wonder where one draws the line on which heuristics are deep vs shallow in test taking. If a question assesses vocabulary knowledge by asking you to pick an appropriate word from several choices, "these are words I've seen before even though I don't know what they mean" && "here's a choice whose Latin roots plausibly give it the right meaning" seems shallow to me. It allows the test taker to select the right answer without actually knowing it. At the same time, it's not shallow in that you're incorporating quite a bit of knowledge of the language as well as the context you've developed over years of reading. --- As soon as the conversation here turned to test taking, the thread immediately reminded me of the scene in The Wire where the students pick the right answer from the blackboard by seeing one of the choices has a lot more stray chalk marks beside it, indicating it was pointed at during the previous period. "The answer is B five. B five's got all the dinks"