[Type text][Type text][Type text]
1
Harvey
Elizaveta Harvey
Georgie Monahan
Essentials of Argumentation 220
27 November 2013
Proposition of Policy
Background of controversy: According to the recent data from the
report, the Learning Curve, prepared by the Economist Intelligence
Unit (2013), the United States is ranked 17thin the assessment of
the education systems of 50 countries. Despite the variety of
efforts and large amount of money invested into the programs of
improvement of the educational performance, American students
continue demonstrating average scores. Thus, grades became an
indicator of the effectiveness of the educational process for
students, instructors, and administration of the educational
institution. Hyper-individualized society and focus on high-stakes
testing as the only quantitative characteristics of the result
shifted the educational system and displaced the true purpose of
learning process, obtaining the knowledge, with a constant
competition for better scores or GPA. Better grades means better
funding for the school, an equivalent for competence of
instructors, and rewards from parents (Howard Blume). And when
stakes are high, the actions are easier to justify. The study of
self-deception made by Zo Chance et al. in Harvard Business School
in 2011 explains: People often rationalize their behavior in an
effort to maintain a positive view of themselves. Some people say
that cut the corners and get ahead in life have almost the same
meaning within the framework of excessive modern standards. They
claim that everyone cheats, it is cheat or be cheated
(ChallengeSuccess 2011). Others, in order to underline the
detrimental effects of academic cheating, connect this notion to
the thriving cheating culture, which poisons different areas of
modern life. The controversy exists regarding the methods targeting
to reduce the existence of cheating culture. Research leads to the
specific proposition of policy:
Policy proposition: Educational institutions, State, and Federal
governments should significantly strengthen and enforce laws and
create educational programs to reduce the culture of cheating.
Definition: For the purpose of this research, the definition of
educational institution was found in the glossary of statistical
terms for the Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD): Educational institutions are defined as
entities that provide instructional services to individuals or
education-related services to individuals and other educational
institutions. According to CheatingCulture project, cheating is a
violation of established rules or ethical principles for financial,
professional, or academic gain. Cheating includes, but is not
limited to: lying; copying from anothers test; taking or receiving
copies of an exam without the permission of the instructor, using
or displaying notes, cheat sheets, or other information devices
inappropriate to the prescribed test conditions; and allowing
someone other than the officially enrolled student to represent
same. The Merriam-Webster dictionary describes plagiarism/to
plagiarize: to commit literary theft: to steal and pass off (the
ideas or words of another) as one's own; use (another's production)
without crediting the source. Academic dishonesty is defined as
obtaining or attempting to obtain, or aiding another to obtain
credit for work, or any improvement of evaluation of performance,
by any dishonest or deceptive means. The School for Ethical
Education (SEE) defines academic integrity as honest academic work
where (1) the ideas and the writing of others are properly cited;
(2) students submit their own work for tests and assignments
without unauthorized assistance; (3) students do not provide
unauthorized assistance to others; and (4) students report their
research or accomplishments accurately. Another definition was
found in the same source: An Honor Code briefly summarizes the
schools Honor Policy, which defines the expected standards and core
values of student conduct in academic affairsThe purpose of an
Honor Code is to communicate the meaning and importance of academic
integrity to all members of the school community.
Claim 1: The culture of cheating in the U.S. is a problem.
Sub-claim A: Academic cheating is a significant problem in
American educational system.
Ground A1: The evidence of academic cheating in the United
States is found in different educational institutions. This notion
was confirmed by Sarah Galzer in the article, Plagiarism and
Cheating, for CQ Researcher, published on January 4th, 2013: In
surveys done between Fall 2002 and Spring 2011 by Donald L. McCabe,
founding president of the International Center for Academic
Integrity, more than two-thirds of college students admit to
cheating on a test or on written assignments including plagiarizing
from published materials or getting someone else to write their
term paper according to the International Center for Academic
Integrity, a coalition of colleges and K-12 schools based at
Clemson University in South Carolina Teresa Fishman, executive
director of the center, points out that the two-thirds cheating
rate has remained fairly steady over the past 20 years before the
World Wide Web existed. This is a longstanding problem not a
problem just from the Internet age, she contends. Ground A2: As
being revealed in Challenge Success report, [Project at Stanford
University] of 2012: In 2010, the Josephson Institute of Ethics
surveyed 43,000 students from both public and private high schools
and asked them about their cheating behaviors. They found that 59%
of students surveyed admitted to having cheated on a test in the
past year, and more than 80% of students admitted to having copied
another students homework (Josephson Institute of Ethics, 2010).
The report continues: Challenge Success researchers surveyed over
1,400 high-school students and found similarly high rates of
cheating: 97% of the students admitted to cheating at least one
time in the past year, and 75% admitted to cheating 4 or more times
in the past year (Challenge Success, 2011).
Ground A3: The recent report(2011) from the survey of 23,000
high school students, which was conducted by the Los Angeles-based
Josephson Institute of Ethics demonstrates more than one in four
girls (28%) and nearly half of the boys (45%) believe that A person
has to lie or cheat at least occasionally in order to succeed.
...more than half (52%) admitted cheating on exams in the past
year, 20 percent said they stole something from a store, 18 percent
admitting stealing something from a parent or other relative, and
14 percent (19% of the boys versus 10% of the girls) stole
something from a friend within the previous 12 months.
Ground A4: Teachers and school officials falsify students
standardized tests results in order to get State and Government
funding. A journalist for New York Times, Michael Winerip, reveals
in the article Ex-Schools Chief in Atlanta Is Indicted in Testing
Scandal, published on March 29th, 2013: The 2011 state [Atlanta]
investigation concluded cheating occurred at 44 schools so
educators could avoid losing their jobs and earn bonuses Beverly L.
Hall earned more than $500,000 in performance bonuses while
superintendent. Dr. Hall, one of 35 Atlanta educators, who was
charged with racketeering, theft, influencing witnesses, conspiracy
and making false statements. Dr. Hall and the 34 teachers,
principals and administrators conspired to either cheat, conceal
cheating or retaliate against whistle-blowers in an effort to
bolster C.R.C.T. scores for the benefit of financial rewards
associated with high test scores, the indictment said, referring to
the states Criterion-Referenced Competency TestTeachers and
principals whose students had high test scores received tenure and
thousands of dollars in performance bonuses. Otherwise, as one
teacher explained, it was low score out the door.
Warrant A1&2&3&4: Data clearly demonstrates the
evidence of academic cheating related to cheating culture in
different educational institutions. (Generalization/Sign)
Sub-claim B: The culture of cheating is harmful to society as
well as it creates obstacles to solving the problem of academic
cheating.
Ground B1: Cheating is harmful to those who cheat and people
around them. Margaret Hogan, Ph.D., the member of the Federation of
State Boards of Physical Therapy in Salt Lake City, Utah, further
supports the statement on the mid-March, Spring Education Meeting
in 2013: The first person who is harmed is the person who cheats.
You develop a character for yourself. If you cheat, youre creating
yourself to be a cheater. You hurt your colleagues. If you help
create physical therapists that are cheaters, you hurt your
patients. The strength of society depends on the strength of each
one of us.
Warrant B1: The example proves that cheating is harmful to
society (Sign/Generalization)
Ground B2: People who have history of academic dishonesty cheat
in many areas of life. The effect was noticed by Josephson
Institute of Ethics and found in the article Plagiarism and
Cheating, which was mentioned above: those who cheat early in life
are more likely to cheat later in life, for example, by lying to
customers, bosses, or significant others, overstate insurance
claims, and falsify tax returns. [The report is based on 6,930
respondents in five age groups (17 and under, 18-24, 25-40, 41-50,
and over 50]. Regardless of current age, people who cheated on
exams in high school two or more times are considerably more likely
to be dishonest later in life. Compared to those who never cheated,
high school cheaters are:
Three times more likely to lie to a customer (20% vs. 6%) or
inflate an insurance claim (6% vs. 2%) and more than twice as
likely to inflate an expense claim (10% vs. 4%).
Twice as likely to lie to or deceive their boss (20% vs. 10%) or
lie about their address to get a child into a better school (29%
vs. 15%) and one-and-a-half times more likely to lie to spouse or
significant other (35% vs. 22%) or cheat on taxes (18% vs.
13%).
Warrant B2: Report shows that academic cheating leads to further
cheating in life, so that cheating becomes an essential compromise
with ones ethical/moral code. (Causation/ Sign)
Ground B3: Societal nihilism is particularly dangerous for
children. Mass media bombard children with the messages about
success at any cost and that the ends justify the means. Dr. Jim
Taylor provides the explanation in the article Media Teaches Bad
Values to Your Children, posted in his blog on November 8th, 2012:
This culture of avarice not only tolerates, but also encourages
this win at all costs mentality by modeling and messaging
dishonesty, cheating, manipulation, and back stabbing. Examples of
this distorted view of success abound in our culture. Reality TV
relishes lying and deception. Corporate malfeasance, for example,
insider trading and tax fraud, is revealing itself to be the rule
rather than the exception in Big Business. Sports has seen the
proliferation of illegal performance-enhancing drugs among star
athletes who are revered by young athletes. Ground B4: Many young
athletes use illegal performance-enhancing drugs. Dr. Taylor in the
same article, which is mentioned above continues: Research for the
American Academy of Pediatrics indicates that between four and 12
percent of high school male athletes500,000 to one million by some
estimatessaid they had taken steroids. Pressure to make varsity
teams, receive college scholarships, and pursue the dream of
professional or Olympic success compel many young athletes to take
drastic steps to improve performance. These athletes are heavily
influenced by professional athletes who act as their role models.
They see that the benefits of steroid use are significant and the
consequences of being caught are minimal. Ground B5: Society is
poisoned with cheating culture, and young people are the most
influenced ones. Dr. Taylor explains: There is a social contagion
effect in which young people are more likely to cheat when those
around them cheat. When children hear or see others cheat, they
assume its acceptable to cheat or feel that they must cheat to keep
up with their peers. Before the recent advancements in technology,
though, the circle of contagions to which young people were exposed
was quite small, for example, a group of friends or a sports team.
The Internet now exposes children a much wider and more diverse
range of contagions, from peers to professional athletes to
politicians to businesspeople. The messages from many of those
contagions tell children that everyone cheats, it is okay to cheat,
and they must cheat if they are going to keep up with those who are
already cheating.
Warrant B3&4&5: The research provides examples that
media and technology promote spreading of the harmful cheating
culture, which targets the most susceptible classes of the society.
(Causation/ Generalization)
Sub-claim C: We are failing to solve the problem of academic
dishonesty because of the high-stakes settings of the educational
system, poor law enforcement, and many people are unwilling to
realize the harmful consequences of academic cheating.
Ground C1: Academic cheating is an ethical problem of society.
Chris Rashidian, a staff writer for Orange Coast College newspaper
Coast Report Online in the article Cheat and win, published on Nov.
2nd, 2011, support this position: Academic dishonesty is not as
addressed as it should be, said Rendell Drew, a social science
instructor at Orange Coast College. Instructors do not address it
as they should because there is a major problem with a lack of
ethics from both instructors and students.
Warrant C1: The reasons for cheating are rooted in human
psychology. In order to solve the problem, the actions should
address the roots of the academic dishonesty. (Causation)
Ground C2: The existing evaluation of knowledge system forces
students to cheat. It was clarified by Josephson, of the Josephson
Institute of Ethics: When I asked one superintendent why schools
had so little interest in taking up my institutes
character-education programs to fight student cheating, I got this
answer: Cheating is not the problem; its the tests: You have to
expect kids to cheat if we test them this way.
Ground C3: Focus on grades as an indicator of the effectiveness
of the educational system hurts the educational process. Rich
Motoko, a journalist for the New York Times, observed this notion
in the article Latest Cheating Scandal Reignites Debate Over Tests
Role, published on April 3rd, 2013: Evidence of systemic cheating
has emerged in as many as a dozen places across the country, and
protests in Chicago, New York City, Seattle, across Texas and
elsewhere represent a growing backlash among educators and parents
against high-stakes testingThe widespread cheating and test score
manipulation problem, said Robert Schaeffer, the public education
director of FairTest, the National Center for Fair and Open
Testing, is one more example of the ways politicians fixation on
high-stakes testing is damaging education quality and equity.
Ground C4: The educational system is set to question the moral
beliefs of the instructor. Sarah Glazer demonstrates this idea in
the article, Cheating and Plagiarism, which was used above: fear of
poor student evaluations, which can mean reduced pay, often
discourages professors from pursuing cheating or plagiarism. Many
teachers dont want the hassle of pursuing a case of plagiarizing
through numerous administrative levels, Gardner [a psychologist
Howard Gardner and a professor at the Harvard School of Education]
says. Nor do they want to be threatened by parents or students with
lawsuits or even physical harm. So at many places, there is in
effect a kind of don't ask, don't tell policy.
Ground C5: The excessive demands of the educational system
regarding students grades force teachers to cheat. According to the
article Pushing Teachers to the Edge? from the Los Angeles Times,
written by Howard Blume on November 7th, 2011: The current system
sets it up so students and teachers must succeed on a
multiple-choice test, but it does not provide the resources to do
so effectively, said one administrator [California] who did not
want to be identified because she was concerned about possible
career repercussions. Some educators say the pressure to raise
students test scores creates an atmosphere where its no longer
unthinkable to cheatBoth the system and the cheaters are wrong.
Warrant C2&3&4&5: The examples demonstrate that
grades-oriented educational system promotes cheating culture.
(Sign/Generalization/Causation)
Ground C6: The educational system set the high standards for
teachers removing creativity and professional freedom. Lynn Stout,
a journalist for the Los Angeles Times, explains in the article Pay
for Performance Pitfalls, published on April 12th, 2013:
Policymakers and reformers assume the solution is getting the
incentives right. They believe incentives might help and cant
possibly hurt. But as the Atlanta scandal shows, and as social
science has proved, incentives can hurt. Pay for performance can
create workplaces that suppress ethics and conscience. Instead of
more productive employees, you get more opportunistic, unethical
and criminal employees. Incentive plans are like dynamite useful
but also dangerous. These plans should be handled only by experts,
with great care and in small amounts. We should let employers and
supervisors on the front lines of the workplace not politicians,
bureaucrats or would-be reformers decide how best to motivate
employees. They might decide they need more trust, and fewer
incentives.
Warrant C6: This example proves that teachers are the ones who
can promote healthy studying environment, not policymakers and
reformers (Sign).
Ground C7: Students cheat because their grades became more
important than the process of learning. An explanation is provided
by Sarah Gazer in the article Plagiarism and Cheating, which was
mentioned above: Cheating increases when educators teach to the
test instead of emphasizing learning. But experts question whether
shifting to learning for learnings sake is realistic when public
school funding now depends on standardized-test results and
families think their childrens future depends on high grades
Ground C8: The Federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA)
standardizes the criteria of the effectiveness of the educational
system. The further explanation is provided in the article Experts
Divide on Responses to Cheating, written by a journalist Christina
Samuels for Education Week in 2011: Standardized tests remain at
the heart of determining whether schools and districts make
adequate yearly progress in raising student achievement under the
federal No Child Left Behind Act. The tests are also being used to
develop value added measures that will gauge an individual
educators effect on a student learning.
Warrant C7&8: High-stakes educational system and focus on
grades diminish instructors responsibility for providing
practically useful knowledge. (Causation/ Generalization)
Ground C9: The definition of academic cheating is not clear for
many students. This is confirmed by Sarah Glazer in the article,
which was mentioned above: That could be because students today are
less likely to consider plagiarism cheating, especially if the
plagiarized information comes from the Internet, McCabe [Donald L.
McCabe, a professor of management and global business at Rutgers
University] suggests, based on his interviews and post-survey
comments from high school and college students. Only one in four
undergraduates considers cut-and-paste plagiarism to be serious
cheating.
Warrant C9: The clear policy regarding academic dishonesty
should be expected as a factor for reducing the existing cheating
culture. (Causation/ Sign)
To support this proposition, I offer the following plan:
I. Mandate:
Department of Education create a national policy regarding
academic cheating;
Educational programs regarding academic integrity must be
enabled in each educational institution and focus on preventive
actions;
Students sign an Honor Code, an agreement about ethical
behavior, at the beginning of each course;
Each assignment to have a signed acknowledgement note: I did
this assignment myself for the purpose of learning (starting from
middle school)
Instructors emphasize mastery and learning the material in-depth
rather than grades by giving students a choice to demonstrate their
knowledge in multiple ways (a mix of essays, projects,
presentations, diagrams, along with traditional tests and quizzes
(Challenge Success);
An anonymous survey of students regarding the competence of the
instructor at the end of the course;
Revising the grade policies by the instructors (Challenge
Success) (accept late work, eliminate zeros and class rankings, and
allowing occasional ungraded assignments.);
In cases of sufficiently serious[footnoteRef:1] incidents of
academic dishonesty, or repeat offense, the student violated the
Student Code of Conduct and Disciplinary pays a fine[footnoteRef:2]
to the Academic Integrity Committee (AIC) of the Educational
Institution AND must take an ethical behavior course the following
semester in his or her educational institution, or on-line, when
the course is absent in the course program; [1: The instructor
determines the level of sufficiency.] [2: The educational
institution determines the size of the fine.]
Launch educational programs for parents to help creating healthy
educational environment at home, develop organizational, and
time-management skills;
II. Agencies:
The mandates of the plan will be carried out by the State
Department of Education and require local agencies, such National
School Boards Association (NSBA), National Parent-Teacher
Association (NPTA), and National Coalition for Parent Involvement
in Education (NCPIE) to implement the plan. Academic Integrity
Committee (AIC) must be created in each Educational
Institution.
III. Funding:
Pay-as-You-Go tax policy should be used, and funding on the
local level is expected from the cheating students fines.
IV. Enforcement: Requires cooperation among several local
agencies. Educational programs should encourage students, parents,
and educators to launch school-wide discussions. Schools must
comply with several data collection requirements and submit an
annual report.
V. Legislative intent:
To implement the programs and raise public awareness of the
issue the culture of cheating. The further questions will be
clarified by todays Town Hall discussion.
Claim 2: We can solve the problem.
Sub-claim A: Education programs will help to solve the problem
of academic cheating.
Ground A1: The actions should be addressed to the roots of the
problem and lower the incentives to cheat. Sarah Glazer in the
article Plagiarism and Cheating, which was mentioned above writes:
cheating decreases when teachers stress learning the material
instead of teaching to the test, Pope has co-founded a program,
Challenge Success, which has trained about 100 schools to shift to
learning for learnings sake. Eric Anderman, a professor of
educational psychology at Ohio State University, says less cheating
occurs when teachers emphasize that the learning is whats really
important. In a study he conducted, cheating went down when
students moved from a score-oriented middle school math class into
a high school class where the teacher emphasized learning math for
its own sake. The study was based on Andermans observations of
teachers with different teaching styles. For example, if a student
gets a disappointing 75 percent score on an algebra test, Anderman
prefers that the teacher gives the student more time to study and
then re-test him the following week. At that point the teacher
could just give the student the higher grade if [he gets] a 93 the
next week or average the two scores, Anderman says. But it sends
the message: Youre not done with this work until you demonstrate
that you have learned it.
Ground A2: Thomas S. Dee and Brian A. Jacob in the research
Rational Ignorance in Education a Field Experiment in Student
Plagiarism, published in 2012: In an experimental study of over
1200 students at a highly selective post-secondary institution,
there was a significant reduction in the likelihood of plagiarism
among those students who completed an online tutorial on
understanding and avoiding plagiarism.
Warrant A1&2: Educational programs should be expected to
help reducing the level of academic cheating (Causation/ Parallel
case)
Ground A3: Educational programs can help to lower students
anxiety and stress due to schoolwork overload. Denise Pope, a
psychologist and a member of Challenge Success program, delineates
in the article: Beyond Doing School: From Stressed Out to Engaged
in Learning, published in 2010: Reduction of cheating was noticed
whenmany of our schools moved from the traditional seven- or
eight-period day to a rotating block or modified block schedule
that offers fewer courses each day for longer periods of time.
Schools also added tutorials, late starts, and more free periods
for students to slow the pace of the day and promote more time for
student-teacher interaction and a chance to get a jumpstart on
homework. Many also changed their calendars to hold final exams
before vacations, eliminate mid-semester exams, and eliminate
summer assignments in order to allow students some real time off.
And almost all use test and project calendars to prevent students
from having to take several exams and quizzes on the same day or
from having too many major projects due at once. new course
scheduling guides that have, in the words of one administrator,
significantly changed the workload for many of our students. The
course guide lists every course at the school, including all honors
and advanced placement courses, and offers an approximation of how
much homework to expect each night in each class. When the students
sign up for their courses for the year, they need to add up the
total hours of nightly homework, include nine hours for sleep, and
then include all of the hours for extracurricular activities such
as sports or music lessons. Student, parents, and counselors must
sign approval for each schedule.
Warrant A3: Raising student engagement in the educational
process leads to reduction of academic dishonesty (Causation/
Generalization).
Ground a4: Instructors and school administration should increase
emphasis on learning, not grades, as a purpose of education helping
to create climate of trust and integrity. The effect was explained
by Arden Miller et al. in the research Reasons Not To Cheat,
Academic-Integrity Responsibility, And Frequency Of Cheating for
the Journal Of Experimental Education, published in 2011: There are
three categories of reasons not to cheat: (a) learning goals, (b)
character or personal moral codes, and (c) punishment or
consequences. Both theoretical approaches to motivation, task
involvement and mastery orientations, would predict that learning
goals would be a likely reason not to cheat. When an individual is
task involved, the goal of the activity is to understand or learn
the task because the focus of attention is on the learning task.
Thus, rational behavior is to engage in high effort at the
activity, because high effort is the most rational path to attain
the goal when one is task involved Mastery-oriented students are
likely to engage in high effort and respond to poor performance
with increased efforts and reevaluation of strategies.
Warrant A4: The recent research proves that students who are
oriented on mastery and learning rather than grades are less likely
expected to cheat. Emphasis on learning can help to reduce the
level of academic cheating (Generalization/ Causation).
Ground A5: Student should be engaged in learning process, while
instructors can explain how the learning material or the skills can
be useful for the students in the future. Jerusha O. Conner, and
Denise C. Pope in the article Students Cheat Because of Low
Dedication: Not Just Robo-Students: Why Full Engagement Matters and
How Schools Can Promote It, published in Journal of Youth and
Adolescence on Apr 5th, 2013: Fully engaged students are more
likely to have reported never having cheated, while the reluctantly
and busily engaged students are more likely to report having
cheated at least one time. Where fully engaged students on average
report feeling sad or depressed one or two times a month,
reluctantly and busily engaged students on average report
internalizing symptoms a few times a month. And while fully engaged
students report two physical symptoms due to stress in the past
month, busily and reluctantly engaged students are more likely to
report closer to three such symptoms. Many of the adolescents in
our sample suffer from high levels of academic anxietyThe sample
included 6,294 adolescent participants, attending 15 different
high-performing schools, 11 of which were private; however, public
school students constituted 63% of the sample. In this group of
students from high-achieving schools, 65% reported a grade point
average (GPA) of 3.5 or higher. In fact, 67% report that they often
or always are stressed by schoolwork. Most of the students (91%)
report having cheated on their schoolwork at least once since
coming to their current school. Fully engaged students achieve
significantly higher GPAs, take significantly more advanced
courses, cheat significantly less, and experience significantly
less academic worry and significantly fewer internalizing,
externalizing, and physical symptoms of stress than students in the
two other engagement profiles.
Warrant A5: The level of engagement in a learning process and
academic dishonesty are non-correlated (Sign).
Sub-claim B: Strict anti-cheating policies should be clearly
stated by each educational institution and acknowledged by students
and parents.
Ground B1: Students should know that they can be caught.
According to Arden Miller et al. research Reasons Not To Cheat,
Academic-Integrity Responsibility, And Frequency Of Cheating, which
was mentioned above: A category of punishment or consequence as a
reason not to cheat would follow as a significant category of
reason not to cheatPunishment has its effect when we make the
salience of punishment high, but is likely to have little effect
when the perception is that the probability of being caught is low.
The research found that the probability of being caught deterred
students from cheating on self-graded tests while the severity of
the consequence did not deter cheating supports this
conclusion.
Warrant B1: The research proved that students who see the
possibility of being caught cheat likely than those who are aware
of severe consequences, but do not see the possibility of being
caught (Generalization).
Ground B2: Margaret M. Hogan, PhD, and a member of the
Federation of State Boards of Physical Therapy, in the article
Internet and lower standards prompt increase in cheating, published
on January 18, 2013: Professor Margaret Monahan Hogan, Ph.D., the
faculty should be a place of integrity for students. We have to
create a moral surround, an environment that supports and develops
integrity. I suggest we use the 3Ps of Dr. William Kibler of Texas
A&M University promote, police and punish. Test them fairly,
but dont make the bar too high or too low. Make the expectations
clear, and they will trust you. Policing integrity must be done
where the faculty has control, and the punishment must be very
hard. Hogan concluded that, You have to have a way to share the
breadth and depth of violations of integrity in your profession.
You have to have a gold standard. You can claim it and make it
so.
Warrant B2: The punishment should be fair and enforced
consistently. (Genegalization)
Conclusion: The current problem of the cheating culture in the
U.S. requires immediate attention. Reduction of existing cheating
culture should be expected with the implementation of the specific
plans outlined.
Bibliography for Proposition of Policy
Blume, Howard. Pushing Teachers to the Edge? Los Angeles Times.
7 Nov. 2011: A.1. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 24 Nov. 2013. .
Bower, Joe. For the love of learning Web log post. Joe Bower
blog. Joe Bower, 19 Nov. 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2013. .
Challenge Success Project. Report (2012). Web. 25 Nov. 2013.
.
Christakis, Erika, and Nicholas A. Christakis. Harvard Cheating
Scandal: Is Academic Dishonesty on the Rise? TIME.com. 4 Sept.
2012. N.p., Web. 30 Nov. 2013.
.
Clemmitt, Marcia. School Reform. CQ Researcher. 29 Apr. 2011:
385-408. Web. 24 Nov. 2013. .
Conner, Jerusha O., and Denise C. Pope. Students Cheat Because
of Low Dedication: Not Just Robo-Students: Why Full Engagement
Matters and How Schools Can Promote It. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence. 5 Apr. 2013. Web. 3 Dec. 2013. .
Dee, Thomas. S., and Brian. A. Jacob. Rational Ignorance in
Education a Field Experiment in Student Plagiarism (2012). Journal
of Human Resources, 47 (2), 397-434. Print.
Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). The Learning Curve report
(2013). Pearson. Web. 30 Nov. 2013. <
http://thelearningcurve.pearson.com/data-bank/education-input-indicators>.
Glazer, Sarah. Plagiarism and Cheating. CQ Researcher. 4 Jan.
2013: 1-28. Web. 24 Nov. 2013. .
Goldstein, Dana. Why the World Is Smarter Than Us. The Daily
Beast. 9 Aug. 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2013. .
Hanushek, Eric. Best Education In The World: Finland, South
Korea Top Country Rankings, U.S. Rated Average. Huff Post:
Education. 27 Nov. 2012. Web. 25 Nov. 2013. .
Hogan, Margaret M. Internet and lower standards prompt increase
in cheating. Federation of State Boards of Physical Therapy about
the National Physical Therapy Exam (NPTE): Restoring A Culture of
Honor. 18 Jan. 2013. Web. 3 Dec. 2013. .
Jarc, Rich. Biennial Report Card on American Youth by Josephson
Institute of Ethics Finds Evidence That Young People Are Cheating,
Lying and Stealing Less (2012). Josephson Institute: Center for
Youth Ethics. 20 Nov. 2012. Web. 3 Dec. 2013. .
Kwaak, Jeyup S. SAT Scandal Shines Harsh Light on South Korean
Academics. The Wall Street Journal:World. 9 May. 2013. N.p. Web. 25
Nov. 2013. .
Miller, Arden, Carol Shoptaugh, and Jessica Wooldridge. Reasons
Not To Cheat, Academic-Integrity Responsibility, And Frequency Of
Cheating. Journal Of Experimental Education 79.2 (2011): 169-184.
Academic Search Premier. Web. 30 Nov. 2013. .
Motoko, Rich. Latest Cheating Scandal Reignites Debate Over
Tests Role. New York Time. 3 Apr. 2013. ProQuest. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.
.
Pope, Denise. Beyond Doing School: From Stressed Out to Engaged
in Learning. Education Canada, 50(1), 4-8. 2010. Challenge Success.
Web. 1 Dec. 2013.
<
http://www.cea-ace.ca/sites/default/files/EdCan-2010-v50-n1-Pope.pdf>.
Rashidian, Chris. Cheat and win. Coast Report Online: The
Student Voice of Orange College. 2 Nov. 2011. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.
.
Ravitch, Diane. SAT canceled for South Korea, Due to Cheating.
Web log post. Diane Ravitchs blog. Diane Ravitch, 29 Mar. 2013. 24
Nov. 2013.
.
Ravitch, Diane. Universities to Be Tested to Distraction.
University World News: The Global Window of Higher Education. Issue
No: 210. 26 Feb. 2012. Web. 25 Nov. 2013. .
Ravitch, Diane. We Must Out-Educate and Out-Innovate Other
Nations. Bill Moyers Web Site. 8 Feb. 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2013.
.
Rich, Motoko. Latest Cheating Scandal Reignites Debate Over
Tests Role. New York Times. 3 Apr. 2013. ProQuest. Web. 2 Dec.
2013. .
Samuels, Christina A. Experts Divide on Responses to Cheating.
Education Week. 10 Aug. 2011: 1-2. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 24
Nov 2013. .
Shapiro, Rees T. October18 Reign of Error by Diane Ravitch.
Washington Post. Oct 18. 2013. Web. 30 Nov. 2013. .
Stout, Lynn. Pay for Performance Pitfalls. Los Angeles Times. 12
Apr. 2013: A.17. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 24 Nov. 2013. .
The School for Ethical Education (SEE) project. Web.1 Dec. 2013.
.
Taylor, James. Media Teaches Bad Values to Your Children. Web
log post. The Blog of Dr. Jim Taylor. Dr. Jim Taylor. 8 Nov. 2012.
Web. 3 Dec. 2013. <
http://drjimtaylor.com/2.0/parenting/media-teaches-bad-values-to-children/>.
Wei, Alvin, and Brian Wei. Cheating Ring Suspensions Held. The
Spectator (Stuyvesant High School newspaper) Oct. 18, 2012. Web. 1
Dec. 2013. .
Winerip, Michael. Ex-Schools Chief in Atlanta Is Indicted in
Testing Scandal. New York Times. 29 Mar. 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2013.
.
