"You Are Only Cheating Yourself"

I remember teachers in elementary, middle, and high school invoking the titular refrain, with reference to plagiarism, "wandering eyes" during exams, overt cheating (e.g., preparing crib sheets, getting answers from others who took the exam earlier), or, congregating before class to "collaborate," (e.g., "hey, what did you get for number 16?") on assignments.  I was the kid, for the most part, that other students wanted to cheat "from." I tended to trust my own answers more than those of my peers, and don't remember ever being tempted to "borrow" answers or work. Also, I seemed to have a strong sense of "justice" on that front, and found cheating simply wrong. I did not want a part of it.

Somewhere along the way I stopped being "that" kid--these days, my peers are far more likely to "have it right." I am reminded of that as I collaborate with colleagues, daily, and certainly when I read and comment on other blogs here in our shared Netvibes space.  While I count myself fortunate to rub virtual elbows with a high-powered group, and to learn from and with a fine group of colleagues, I still have no desire to pass someone else's work off as my own, or to have an assessment reflect anything other than my own learning and effort.

Interestingly, looking at current studies and statistics, as summarized, for example in a recent New York Times article by Richard Perez-Pena, fewer students these days--far fewer, in fact--feel the way I did, and do. By the definitions above, as expanded to include technology, the majority of students cheat--and feel ethically justified in doing so (as exemplified here, in Jessica Lahey's Atlantic article).

I think part of what is going on, as students are less clear about what even constitutes cheating, is that the new realities Shirky (2009) delineated in Here Comes Everybody (new definitions of journalism, authorship, and publication, for example) are driving us to re-examine some very basic societal ideas.

As Perez-Pena pointed out, "the Internet has changed attitudes, as a world of instant downloading, searching, cutting and pasting has loosened some ideas of ownership and authorship. An increased emphasis on having students work in teams may also have played a role." (Now, look at me, I just pasted that quote right in to my blog...) Long before the proliferation of the internet, ethicists realized that computers changed things in a big way. Whether they generated wholly new problems as Maner (1980, described in Bynum, 2011) held, or simply put a significant twist on extant issues, as Johnson (1985, also in Bynum, 2011) posited, a new and significantly different reality is defined by these new technologies.

It would be easy to stand on a soapbox, and say, "Kids these days...." Or, to lament the decay of all that is good, right, and just, in the shadow of the (media-driven?, corporate-influenced?, socialist?, fascist?, immoral?, fill-in-your-favorite-scapegoat?) internet, and see the statistics that show more and more high school and college students cheating, and feeling justified in doing so, as a sad and unfortunate reflection of our current zeitgeist, and a broader societal reality--in corporate activity, advertising, politics, government, and other realms--that rewards results (ends) irrespective of honesty, integrity, and ethics (means).

That does not negate a very basic truth, as treated eloquently and succinctly by blogger Michelle Blake, that ultimately, lying and cheating, societal examples notwithstanding, are simply inferior to truth and hard work.

So, I'm back to (stuck with?) my water, water everywhere theme: surfing a wave of innovation and change, navigating a flat, flooded plane of information and ideas, and wanting a good compass.  Here is where the value of some of the basic Ignatian ideals that undergird our Creighton program becomes apparent:  we are called to pragmatically embrace innovation, but to reflect intentionally and incessantly upon both end and means, and to grapple, individually and collectively, with definitions of social justice, the greater good, and the importance, dignity, and worth of the individual.  Maybe a 450-year-old compass still points a true course, after the sea change.

That being said, as an educator, I respond to the statistical proliferation of internet-based cheating among students with a set of questions rather than with judgments, lamentations, answers or prescriptions:

•  Are we giving the right kinds of assignments and tests?
• Are we testing the right things, in the right ways?
• Are we rewarding the right things, in the right ways?
• Can we design assignments that utilize and capitalize on the tremendous resources available to our students, and that make "cheating" impossible or irrelevant?
• Can we, and should we, "fight fire with fire," and use existing and developing technologies like turnitin.com, and biometric IDs for test takers (or time-tested practices like in-person, oral exams) to minimize opportunity to cheat?
• And, to reference the title, WHO is being cheated, and how?

Bynum, T. (2011).  Computer and information ethics.  In E. N. Zalta (Ed.) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2011 ed.)  Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2011/entries/ethics-computer/

Shirky, C. (2009). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. New York: Penguin.