Cheaters Should Never Win: Eliminating the Benefits of Cheating

被引：11

作者：

Fendler R.J. ^{[1
]}

Godbey J.M. ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] J. Mack Robinson College of Business, Georgia State University, 35 Broad Street, Suite 1206, Atlanta, 30303, GA

[2] J. Mack Robinson College of Business, Georgia State University, 35 Broad Street, Suite 1210, Atlanta, 30303, GA

来源：

Journal of Academic Ethics | 2016年 / 14卷 / 1期

关键词：

Academic integrity; Cheating; Estimating probability of cheating; Punishment; Reward;

D O I：

10.1007/s10805-015-9240-8

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Numerous academic studies and reports indicate that as many as half of all students cheat on exams. Cheating on exams undermines the central purpose of a university, corrupts the meaning of grades as a measure of subject matter mastery, and significantly harms honest students. Although instructors are aware that many students cheat and they clearly oppose the behavior, they do little to punish cheaters. Accusing, prosecuting and convicting cheaters are time intensive, stressful and potentially costly activities for which faculty members receive few rewards. In this paper, we derive an equation to estimate the benefit that can be gained by a student who copies on a multiple choice exam. We then propose an exam design that not only eliminates the benefit, but also proportionately punishes cheaters, with little to no cost to instructors. Moreover, the exam system we propose can allow an instructor to determine, with a high degree of certainty, the odds that any student seated anywhere in the classroom cheated on any part of the exam. © 2015, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.

引用

页码：71 / 85

页数：14

共 31 条

[1]

Bertrand M., Mullainathan S., Do people mean what they say? implications for subjective survey data, American Economic Review, 91, pp. 67-72, (2001)

[2]

Bliss T.J., Statistical methods to detect cheating on tests: a review of the literature, Retrieved from, (2012)

[3]

Carrell S.E., Malmstrom F.V., West J.E., Peer effects in academic cheating, Journal of Human Resources, 43, 1, pp. 173-207, (2008)

[4]

Coren A., Turning a blind eye: faculty who ignore student cheating, Journal of Academic Ethics, 9, 4, pp. 291-305, (2011)

[5]

Coren A., The theory of planned behaviour: will faculty confront students Who cheat?, Journal of Academic Ethics, 10, 3, pp. 171-184, (2012)

[6]

Cummings K., Romano J., Effect of an honor code on perceptions of university instructor affinity-seeking behavior, Journal of College Student Development, 43, pp. 862-875, (2002)

[7]

Diekhoff G.M., LaBeff E.E., Clark R.E., Williams L.E., Francis B., Haines V.J., College cheating: 10 years later, Research in Higher Education, 37, 4, pp. 487-502, (1996)

[8]

Groark M., Oblinger D., Choa M., Term paper mills, anti-plagiarism tools and academic integrity, Educuase Review, 36, 5, pp. 40-48, (2001)

[9]

Haines V.J., Diekhoff G.M., LaBeff E.E., Clark R.E., College cheating: immaturity, lack of commitment, and the neutralizing attitude, Research in Higher Education, 25, 4, pp. 342-354, (1986)

[10]

Hutton P.A., Understanding student cheating and what educators can do about it, College Teaching, 54, 1, pp. 171-176, (2006)

← 1 2 3 4 →