3 ms·

I understand that point of view. However, the non-cheating, conscientious students are often very angry with professors and administrators that take this approa

I understand that point of view. However, the non-cheating, conscientious students are often very angry with professors and administrators that take this approach. Your best customers feel like their earned credentials are devalued. They are competing with the cheaters for their first job after graduation. Maybe their investment will pay off in the long run, but they are pissed off right now. Suppressing cheating is work on behalf of the good faith students. Miserable work it is.

WalterBright 4y ago
That's a reasonable concern. On the other hand, by not checking for cheating, one changes the culture in the classroom. For example, in universities that aggressively go after cheaters, an adversarial relationship develops between the students and the faculty. The students collaborate on cheating, and get social credibility for cheating. Students will brag about successfully cheating to their peers. On the other hand, at Caltech, we had an Honor System. Exams were not proctored, and students could take the exams whenever and wherever they wanted. The students were on their honor not to cheat. And an interesting thing happened. The students developed a collaborative relationship with the professors. Cheaters were despised and ostracized. If you were cheating, you'd better keep it to yourself - the other students would turn you in, and at that point you might as well leave the university.
- robotresearcher 4y ago
  The honor system is wonderful when it works. If it was the universal answer, it would be universally applied. "The student-faculty ratio at California Institute of Technology is 3:1, and the school has 66.7% of its classes with fewer than 20 students." https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/california-institute-of-technology-1131 https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/california-institute-of...

WalterBright 4y ago

That's a reasonable concern. On the other hand, by not checking for cheating, one changes the culture in the classroom. For example, in universities that aggressively go after cheaters, an adversarial relationship develops between the students and the faculty. The students collaborate on cheating, and get social credibility for cheating. Students will brag about successfully cheating to their peers. On the other hand, at Caltech, we had an Honor System. Exams were not proctored, and students could take the exams whenever and wherever they wanted. The students were on their honor not to cheat. And an interesting thing happened. The students developed a collaborative relationship with the professors. Cheaters were despised and ostracized. If you were cheating, you'd better keep it to yourself - the other students would turn you in, and at that point you might as well leave the university.

robotresearcher 4y ago
The honor system is wonderful when it works. If it was the universal answer, it would be universally applied. "The student-faculty ratio at California Institute of Technology is 3:1, and the school has 66.7% of its classes with fewer than 20 students." https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/california-institute-of-technology-1131 https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/california-institute-of...