4 ms·
I don't know about that. There's still the rest of society to consider. Which is to say, there's still his personal professional integrity. I guess it depend
by Dove 15y ago
I don't know about that. There's still the rest of society to consider. Which is to say, there's still his personal professional integrity.
I guess it depends on the circumstance. If the school knowingly encourages cheating for profit, I would think integrity demands playing whistleblower. In fact, I'd apply that to any organization knowningly doing something shady -- bring it to light or accept guilt as an accomplice.
If the school believes in academic integrity, but the compensation for teachers results in perverse incentives, it is important to do the right thing anyway--defend the academic integrity of the school, work on fixing the system, and in the mean time put social pressure on other teachers to do the right thing until the system is fixed.
I agree that it's not the professor's responsibility to pursue the matter beyond his influence at the school. If there's an office of academic honesty, but it's lax, the best he can do is lobby to improve it. But inasmuch as professors have absolute control over the grades they distribute, I do think they have a responsibility to be fair with them.
I can see leaving an institution over a lack of academic honesty. I can see working to reform or improve one. I can see failing a student for cheating, but washing your hands of it when the school does nothing further. What I cannot see is saying to society at large, "On my reputation as an expert, this student can do calculus," when you aren't sure it's true, for the sake of a less stressful workplace and a higher salary.
- hackinthebochs 15y agoI'm finding it hard to find fault with your argument. I think where our differences lie is that I don't believe its a moral imperative for someone to risk their livelihood to whistle-blow against something that is fundamentally someone else's responsibility. If the janitor at an investment bank overhears fraud being discussed, I don't believe the janitor has a moral responsibility to expose that fraud if it risks his own livelihood. Similarly for a teacher who puts in a commendable effort to weed out cheaters only to be essentially punished for it by the administration. It's his job to make note of cheaters, but the responsibility for doling out consequences is a cooperative effort between the professor and the administration. If the administration isn't doing their job, and exposing this risks his own career and livelihood (for a professor publicly going against his administrations this might actually be the case), I don't think he has this responsibility.
- Dove 15y agoI can understand that, though I certainly disagree. I can respect a principle of proportionality -- I don't think it makes sense to risk a life life to stop a petty theft. But I absolutely cannot agree with the line of thinking that says because something is one person's moral responsibility, it isn't another's. To my way of thinking, any evil you know about is your responsibility to fight. Or at least not cooperate with. Personal cost doesn't enter into it. I think sometimes life doesn't offer you a middle ground between heroism and cowardice.