In a room built solely for the purpose of administering exams, 228 students sit hunched over computers. A security camera monitored by a test proctor scans the room. As one student moves his jaw, the camera frantically zooms in and a program takes a screenshot of his latest computer activity. The camera reveals that the student is not wearing a wireless earpiece capable of transmitting test answers, but a proctor nonetheless rushes into the room with a trash can and orders the suspect to spit out his gum.
Welcome to the future, or as The New York Times refers to it, "the frontier in the battle to defeat student cheating," ("To Stop Cheats, Colleges Learn Their Trickery", June 5). The above scene, straight out of an Orwellian dystopia, is a real possibility for University of Central Florida students taking exams at the school's new state-of-the-art testing facility, which has been meticulously designed to defend against would-be cheaters.
The UCF's testing center, to its credit, has achieved a rare level of success in the anti-cheating movement. According to Taylor Ellis, an Associate Dean at UCF's business school, there were only 14 cases of suspected cheating out of 64,000 exams administered during this spring semester. But the draconian nature of the center highlights a disturbing trend in anti-cheating efforts by universities: Methods such as the testing center and popular online services that scan essays for plagiarism seek to deter cheating by catching and punishing offenders rather than preventing cheating before it happens.
Efforts by universities to reduce cheating should instead be aimed at reducing the incentives to cheat rather than the instances themselves. In my experience, many otherwise honest students cheat because they are overwhelmed by an assignment or feel that an assignment constitutes "busy work." As long as students continue to believe this, they will look for new and innovative ways around increasingly harsh anti-cheating efforts.
Removing incentives to cheat requires a rethinking of homework and testing policies. We must get back to the true purpose of homework and exams, which is to practice new material and encourage original, analytical thinking about a subject. One of the best teachers I've had firmly believed that exams were an important part of the learning process and he structured his tests as comprehensive practice in applying new material. When students can understand how assignments and exams fit into the objectives of a course and feel that they have been adequately prepared to complete them, they are far less likely to take shortcuts.
Of course, there will always be some individuals who would rather cheat than work hard, or who prioritize getting a good grade over all other concerns. But focusing resources on catching and punishing offenders, rather than educating students about the importance of integrity, is a flawed approach. If the goal of college is to prepare students for the real world, where temptations to behave dishonestly are everywhere, then UCF's approach is doing its students a grave disservice. Most UCF students will be doing the right thing by not cheating, but they may only be doing so because surveillance cameras are watching. Rather than working to improve character, catch-and-punish methods scare students into behaving honestly, sending the message that it is only necessary to be honest when you might get caught.
In comparison, Dartmouth sets an admirable example with regard to academic honesty. The first principle of the Academic Honor Policy states: "In recognizing the responsibility of students for their own education, [the Faculty of Dartmouth College] assumes intellectual honesty and integrity in the performance of academic assignments, both in the classroom and outside." This assumption of integrity helps build student character. More importantly, it serves to prepare students for the future.
Unless there is clear cause to suspect misbehavior, anti-cheating efforts by universities should target the incentives to cheat before the student sits down to take a test. This method, which Dartmouth successfully employs, coupled with a reevaluation of the purpose of homework and exams, will seek to significantly reduce cheating the right way. An anti-cheating policy in this mold is the true "frontier" of the movement.
