Showing posts with label cheating. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cheating. Show all posts

Saturday, 15 June 2013

My daughter is with us for the holidays, having survived her first barrage of law school exams in California. The exams were longer and more difficult than anything I ever had as a graduate student in Chinese studies. But her professors allowed students to have notes with them. This got my attention because her boyfriend at a neighboring law school was forbidden to have notes in two of his exams.

At these two institutions dedicated to equality under the law, what my daughter did during exams at one could have been considered cheating if she attended the other. What are we to make of the uneven nature of such rules, just as unpredictable as those found in our public K-12 schools? Open-book exams are okay some places, not in others. Cooperating with friends on homework is encouraged by some teachers, denounced elsewhere as a sign of declining American moral fiber.

Alfie Kohn, a provocative writer and speaker on educational subjects, has a book coming out next year: "Feel-Bad Education: And Other Contrarian Essays on Children and Schooling." It addresses this issue in a way that may cause apoplexy in some of those raised on the old rules but makes sense to me.

For instance, insisting that students do homework on their own does not necessarily encourage independent learning. In high school, most students show up to see their friends. If homework becomes a social occasion, even by telephone or Internet, there is some chance it might get done. Otherwise, except for motivated, college-bound students, it often will not be completed. That is particularly true in schools that limit severely how much homework counts on report cards.

I don't often agree with Kohn. But he has a gift for seeing past school practices that owe more to habit than results. There are many studies, he notes, that show cooperative learning - doing an assignment with others - raises achievement as well as enhancing relationships and motivation.

"The problem, however, is that aside from the occasional sanctioned group project," Kohn writes, "the default condition in most American classrooms - particularly where homework and testing are concerned - is reflected in that familiar injunction heard from elementary school teachers: 'I want to see what you can do, not what your neighbor can do.' (Or, if the implications were spelled out more precisely, 'I want to see what you can do all by yourself, deprived of the resources and social support that characterize most well-functioning real-world environments, rather than seeing how much more you and your neighbors could accomplish together.') . . . Alas, most collaboration is simply classified as cheating. End of discussion."

Kohn blames much of cheating on the competitive nature of American schools. The majority of high schools in the Washington area are prime examples. Most of the parents are college graduates. They want their children to follow the same path. They seek out competitive high schools to make that happen.

Around here, smart educators and school boards have seen how the urge to beat your classmates can sour the learning process. Most no longer rank graduates by their grade point averages, except in broad categories like the top 10 percent, the next 10 percent, and so on. At least half of Washington area schools no longer pick just one student with the best grades to be valedictorian. The honor often goes to dozens of hardworking students who have gotten grade-point averages above 4.0 because they took Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate courses.

More difficult-to-copy essay questions on exams and more attention to what is going on in the exam room may also restrain cheating. But why not start with eliminating rules and practices that frustrate learning? We might make our schools better and make it less likely that students think they have to cheat to get where they want to go.

For education news and analysis, go to the Education page at washingtonpost.com/education. You can sign up for a weekly e-mail of our best headlines and blogs, The Post's "Education Report." Our blogs include Class Struggle by Jay Mathews, The Answer Sheet by Valerie Strauss, D.C. Schools Insider by Bill Turque, College Inc. by Daniel de Vise and Campus Overload by Jenna Johnson. For college news, go to washingtonpost.com/higher-ed. And on Twitter, follow us @PostSchools. Editor's note: Jay's column appears today because its usual home in Metro, the Education page, will be on holiday break for the next two Mondays.


View the original article here

Tuesday, 11 June 2013

The Sept. 1 edition of Education Week had a provocative commentary, "All my favorite students cheat," by high school teacher Christopher L. Doyle. He and I agree that cheating is rife, but we don't agree on what causes that. He thinks students are protecting themselves against widespread insecurity in a declining America. I think the larger problem is that teachers so love and trust their students that the teachers become easy marks.

America used to be tough on cheaters. Before World War II, miscreants could be suspended, expelled or caned. Schools went soft in the 1960s, and although we have little data, cheating probably increased. In a 1995 survey by "Who's Who Among American High School Students," 76 percent of high-schoolers with at least B averages said they had cheated at least once. In suburban, upper-middle-class, high-achieving schools, such as the place Doyle still teaches or many Washington area schools, cheating is still common.

Some students want their schools to do something about it. In the mid-1990s, I served on a citizen-teacher-student governance committee at Scarsdale High School in Westchester County, N.Y. When our chairman asked whether anyone had any personal complaints about the school, our two student members raised a topic we had never addressed: cheating. Non-cheating students, they said, felt abused by lax enforcement. They blamed teachers for not proctoring their own exams. Some teachers, they said, left the room for the hour to sip coffee in the teachers lounge.

These were not state tests or the SAT, which require proctoring, but the regular course exams that would determine students' report card grades. The Scarsdale assistant principal told me many teachers assumed their students would never cheat because they were such great kids.

Such deep belief in the inner goodness of American teens is not easily challenged. Erich Martel, a history teacher at Wilson High School in the District, was recently involuntarily transferred to another school in part because he used anti-cheating devices such as printing tests with fonts too small to be read from the next desk. His principal complained he was "creating an expectation that students will cheat" and ought to have more faith in the character of his pupils.

Schools here and throughout the country have struggled for years with the issue but made little progress. Attitudes differ on what constitutes cheating. In one survey of students at New Trier High School in Winnetka, Ill., 97 percent said looking at another student's exam was wrong. Only 46 percent, however, had the same view about asking someone in an earlier class what was on the test. Teachers I know encourage team projects, so their students ask why they can't share their homework results. Multiple-choice tests are easier to cheat on, but they take less time to grade than essay exams. Essays are more difficult to copy.

Some surveys suggest pressure to get admitted to a favorite college can cause cheating, but so can adolescent sloth. One teacher at a New York school I visited said how proud she was that her students never took those illegal shortcuts. Hearing that, a student journalist quickly found two good students who had cheated on each of the teacher's last three exams. The reporter asked them why. "It was just easier," one said.

Despite the cheating, learning continues. Students have to know something to do well on heavily proctored exams, such as the SAT or Advanced Placement tests. Perhaps if we took cheating more seriously on exams that affect high school grades, our students would not cheat and would have more respect for us.


View the original article here