Here's how I see it: - You've absolutely no duty to warn students up front. If this is done, it's because it's a good idea on your terms. - You have a duty to

Here's how I see it: - You've absolutely no duty to warn students up front. If this is done, it's because it's a good idea on your terms. - You have a duty to actively fight and punish cheaters. This is because that kind of cheating "steals" value and/or time from students that don't cheat. The honest students expect the rules to be enforced as part of the "contract" they paid for. To not enforce it strictly is theft by the cheaters and contributory negligence by the school. - It might be good for honest students, the "wobblers", and the educators to warn, in vague unspecific terms. Young students might be expected to make mistakes and need to learn meta-things like "cheaters don't prosper" too. Like: "This course is hard. If you cheat, we WILL catch you. this is what will happen..." - It might be good for students and the educators to have graduated penalties. Something like, first offence: fail the exam. 2nd offence XF. 3rd offence expulsion. This should be clearly documented. Lack of contrition may result in escalation. Again, meta-lessons for the more, erm, stubborn. - "fool me once, shame on me". "fool me twice..." - All of the above being stated, I do NOT believe in "zero tolerance" policies. Fairness cannot be had without judgement. - After stern warnings, make sure the students get the toughest test first and get the chance to drop the class if they can't "hack it" without cheating. And tell them this when they get caught.