2008 Woodie Awards
Is It Really Cheating?
Zora McBride
Issue date: 9/15/06 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 1
During my Explorations class, we were assigned the task of discussing the ethics of cheating in accordance with the Hendrix Academic Integrity policy. Having taken the "Is It cheating?" survey, I have chosen as my chief concern whether it is ethical to "ask someone to proofread a rough draft and circle errors." My immediate response, having previously done this deed myself is, "absolutely!!" However, let us see what the policy has to say about it.
As it happens, this particular practice is covered with great rigor and rigidity. Permit me to provide just a few examples. The following acts are prohibited.
"b. giving or receiving answers and/or materials pertinent to any academic work without permission of the instructor;
c. stealing, manipulating, or interfering with any academic work of
another student;
d. collusion with other students on work that is to be completed by
an individual student; …" (Hendrix academic Policy, pg 24)
As can clearly be seen, in order to follow the proper present procedures, one student must not aid in another's academic affairs. I would emphasize the line "interfering with any academic work of another student," cited above. Accordingly, one student reading and altering another's work by circling any seeming inaccuracies would defy this policy.
However, if I may here reiterate a personal opinion, the aforementioned idea does not merit being branded as cheating.
Consider the following. Provided the student has already completed the majority of his paper, from the gathering of his sources to the end of the rough draft, it is obvious that he is not attempting to avoid his assignment. Rather, he seeks wisdom from one who he believes to have greater knowledge of his paper's topic, and/or the English language, than himself. Rather than punished, oughtn't he to be commended?
Secondly, there is an item on the Is It cheating survey that must be regarded. I am speaking, of course, of item 24: 24. Asking someone to correct a draft of a term paper. This, I will happily grant you, is cheating. However, it seems to present the perfect dichotomy.
While they seem similar, there is a distinctive difference. The former asks only that the student reveal the errors, whilst the latter would have them be both revealed and righted. Clearly, this is an essential discrepancy to make when considering if cheating has been employed.
In conclusion, while the existing records might label it cheating, I believe I have adequately shown that the policy could benefit from at least a slight revamping of its ideas. To prevent students from performing unethical actions on their papers is, certainly, a laudable goal. However, it should be noted that permitting a fellow learner to examine and critique another's work can be useful to both parties. It allows the examiner to fine-tune their analytical skills, and allows the examinee a second opinion on their scholastic endeavor.
It is my sincere hope that, having read this article, those with the ability will consider the suggested revision to the Hendrix Academic Policy.
As it happens, this particular practice is covered with great rigor and rigidity. Permit me to provide just a few examples. The following acts are prohibited.
"b. giving or receiving answers and/or materials pertinent to any academic work without permission of the instructor;
c. stealing, manipulating, or interfering with any academic work of
another student;
d. collusion with other students on work that is to be completed by
an individual student; …" (Hendrix academic Policy, pg 24)
As can clearly be seen, in order to follow the proper present procedures, one student must not aid in another's academic affairs. I would emphasize the line "interfering with any academic work of another student," cited above. Accordingly, one student reading and altering another's work by circling any seeming inaccuracies would defy this policy.
However, if I may here reiterate a personal opinion, the aforementioned idea does not merit being branded as cheating.
Consider the following. Provided the student has already completed the majority of his paper, from the gathering of his sources to the end of the rough draft, it is obvious that he is not attempting to avoid his assignment. Rather, he seeks wisdom from one who he believes to have greater knowledge of his paper's topic, and/or the English language, than himself. Rather than punished, oughtn't he to be commended?
Secondly, there is an item on the Is It cheating survey that must be regarded. I am speaking, of course, of item 24: 24. Asking someone to correct a draft of a term paper. This, I will happily grant you, is cheating. However, it seems to present the perfect dichotomy.
While they seem similar, there is a distinctive difference. The former asks only that the student reveal the errors, whilst the latter would have them be both revealed and righted. Clearly, this is an essential discrepancy to make when considering if cheating has been employed.
In conclusion, while the existing records might label it cheating, I believe I have adequately shown that the policy could benefit from at least a slight revamping of its ideas. To prevent students from performing unethical actions on their papers is, certainly, a laudable goal. However, it should be noted that permitting a fellow learner to examine and critique another's work can be useful to both parties. It allows the examiner to fine-tune their analytical skills, and allows the examinee a second opinion on their scholastic endeavor.
It is my sincere hope that, having read this article, those with the ability will consider the suggested revision to the Hendrix Academic Policy.
Be the first to comment on this story