3 ms·
> but have a harder time arguing they signed a pledge without reading it. This is easy to argue, people do it all the time (hello, TOS). So there is nothing in
by eviks 1y ago
> but have a harder time arguing they signed a pledge without reading it.
This is easy to argue, people do it all the time (hello, TOS). So there is nothing incontrovertible about it.
It also contradicts the goal for pledges expressed by those setting this policy, they want to "strengthen the dedication to academic integrity" etc
- nkrisc 1y agoIf you’re arguing that then the answer is: too bad. These sorts of pledges are not 30 pages of legalese that you’re asked to agree to in the middle of a purchase. It’s usually a single page of plain language. If someone signs it without reading it they lose all rights to argue they weren’t aware. Choosing to remain unaware is not a defense.
- eviks 1y agoSyllabus isn't legalese either, and not reading its first page that cheating is bad is exactly the same choice with the same "rights" attached. There is no magical difference here
- bc569a80a344f9c 1y agoYou don’t countersign a syllabus.
- eviks 1y agoThen add a signing requirement???
- abcd_f 1y agoYou are arguing for the sake of arguing.
- andrewflnr 1y agoOr you could just add it to the honor code, once, instead of multiple times each semester on what is typically a purely informational document. Focus. The only goal here is creating a paper trail, and signing the honor code once does that and exactly that.
- nradov 1y agoSure, having a clear honor code is helpful. But individual instructors and courses have different policies on which tools are allowed and how students can collaborate.
- nkrisc 1y agoIf you sign something that says “I won’t do X”, and then you do X and argue you didn’t actually read what you signed, no one is going to take you seriously.
- ab5tract 1y agoHow does it contradict, exactly? To me it seems completely congruent with your quotation.
- matthewdgreen 1y agoTwo things can be true at once. You can take your pledge seriously, which is the happy path. And in the event that you choose the unhappy path, it can also be used as evidence that you understood the requirements. The overwhelming majority of my students choose the happy path.
- fwipsy 1y agoDo you think that the pledge reduced the incidence of cheating, as students may have treated it as a warning that this class would enforce rules on cheating?
- andrewflnr 1y agoThat would be surprising to me. I wouldn't take seriously anything the university says, as opposed to does. Prospective cheaters probably take their cues about likely enforcement levels from fellow students who have seen [lack of] actual consequences.
- matthewdgreen 1y agoI took it seriously as a student. I remember during a no-book take home exam having forgotten some stupid little fact, and thinking “damn it would be such a little thing to look it up in the textbook” and feeling so much shame about even considering it, specifically because I had to handwrite an honor pledge on my work. (I didn’t cheat, by the way.)