3 ms·

Yeah, it entirely depends on the timeline of the poisoning. If the bad results were uploaded just prior to the exam, and the results were cloned, people likely

Yeah, it entirely depends on the timeline of the poisoning. If the bad results were uploaded just prior to the exam, and the results were cloned, people likely cheated. I think this trap is fine. Hopefully he had his bad results pulled afterwards too, so the site only contained flawed data during the exam period. If the bad results were uploaded several days prior to the exam we run the risk of people studied, and couldn't fathom why their answers didn't match the "official results", but learned the wrong result was the correct answer. It may have stuck in their heads simply because it was an unexpected answer. Perhaps these people didn't even go back to the site during the exam at all, but the weird results from the studying phase were what they could recall. In this second case, the trap isn't good at all. It may have caused people to recall the incorrect answers learned from study, not from cheating during the exam. This is a horrible thing to do to your students. It may have caused some people to doubt themselves during study, and pushed them to cheat during the exam because they clearly didn't understand something. This is unfortunate. Prof and student share some blame here. How to classify this case is difficult. Without the poisoned study material, these students may have actually known the material, felt confident, and aced the exam. We'll never know.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
Thank you, this is what I was trying to describe. I don't intend to argue this necessarily happened (I'd expect it probably did not), just point out the possibility. It doesn't seem to me the professor really did enough to determine the actions of these students and there is potentially good reason for them to believe the 13 or so students who claim to have not cheated. Certainly the "one student who is right ‘on the bubble’" could be given more benefit of the doubt. I guess it's moot given the actual policy against looking up tests without the professor's permission. I can see how it's a shortcut to find the correct answers without necessarily understanding the material. But I still see a reasonable perspective that the professor's decision potentially caught people who were genuinely intending to learn.
pixl97 3y ago
>Hopefully he had his bad results pulled afterwards too, Also remember anything you put on the internet is forever... Pretty much this guy may be doing the 'bullshit generation problem' we are starting to accuse AI of doing.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago

Thank you, this is what I was trying to describe. I don't intend to argue this necessarily happened (I'd expect it probably did not), just point out the possibility. It doesn't seem to me the professor really did enough to determine the actions of these students and there is potentially good reason for them to believe the 13 or so students who claim to have not cheated. Certainly the "one student who is right ‘on the bubble’" could be given more benefit of the doubt. I guess it's moot given the actual policy against looking up tests without the professor's permission. I can see how it's a shortcut to find the correct answers without necessarily understanding the material. But I still see a reasonable perspective that the professor's decision potentially caught people who were genuinely intending to learn.

pixl97 3y ago

>Hopefully he had his bad results pulled afterwards too, Also remember anything you put on the internet is forever... Pretty much this guy may be doing the 'bullshit generation problem' we are starting to accuse AI of doing.