cheating on ap test

<p>zzzboy, I guess thats one thing our schools have in common!</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>I already said that I was definitely far from entertaining a Javert mentality, didn't I?</p>

<p>Note, I'm only saying how light rescindence from an Ivy is compared to the magnitude of his crime. I'm not saying that he should <em>definitely</em> be rescinded -- but I'm definitely opposing the idea that he <em>definitely</em> should not be rescinded, which is what kingofqueens was saying. </p>

<p>Do you think it wrong of me to have such a stance?</p>

<p>I also said that this incident was unlikely (because of the amount of ethics one is required to discard in order to even consider cheating in a strictly-proctored standardised tes) to be a one-time incident, but rather a culmination of a string of incidents that the OP was never caught for. The OP has refused to deny this suggestion [which was made earlier in the thread, and not by me, certainly].</p>

<p>To allow someone to get away with cheating sends the wrong message where cheating may be encouraged further on, at greater and greater magnitudes, that might be next caught only when the stakes are very high [e.g. my example of Enron]. Note how nearly all of the people involved in the scandal were people who had gone to prestigious schools and all their life had never been caught for their cheating personality.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>I'm not referring to CC'ers in general dear sir.</p>

<p>I'm referring to those posters who think cheating is a very light thing.</p>

<p>
[quote]

Lets say your father did go to highschool and DID cheat, would you consider him as low as you think tyball is?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Lower, if he had not learnt his lesson. Not that I'd be surprised.</p>

<p>you guys should really just stop with the feeble comebacks and give galoisien a bit of credit. think about what you are doing -- you are arguing that cheating is not abhorrent. how can you win?</p>

<p>What about lying to the US or Singaporean government about your citizenship status so you don't have to participate in National Service?</p>

<p>boomer what kind of school do you go to? students at your school have some bad ethics and morals.</p>

<p>
[quote]
What about lying to the US or Singaporean government about your citizenship status so you don't have to participate in National Service?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh so you dug that up too?</p>

<p>I'm not lying to the US government -- they know I'm have a Singaporean citizenship. I only contemplated never telling the SG government of my new US citizenship, should I decide to naturalise. However, the people in the SG government are despots and authoritarians. Would you never consider lying to a tyrannical government as well?</p>

<p>FOR THE LAST TIME (IF YOU WANT TO BRING IT HERE) I DO NOT WISH TO ABSCOND FROM THE NATIONAL CONSCRIPTION PROGRAMME FOR THE PURPOSES OF AVOIDING HARD LABOUR.</p>

<p>I in fact, embrace hard labour, and think it would do me a lot of good (and maintain or improve my fitness, at least). I'm willing to do anything to serve the equivalent, even join into the US military and serve in Iraq even. (I'm hoping George Bush -- or the next president -- calls a nationwide draft, so I can get myself out of this political mess.) I don't even have the funds to fly back, and I don't know if UVA would even grant me 2-3 years' worth of gap.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You privileged kids with your wealth and private schools are absolutely ridiculous, oh please.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I've seen far more cheating in the public schools I've been in as opposed to my private school (with a fairly strict honor code).</p>

<p>And the op by no means deserves jail time. What the guys at enron did was illegal. What the op did was an academic integrety mistake, but not illegal.</p>

<p>And I am to serve in my birth nation's labour-wasting exercise for what? To maintain a ONE PARTY STATE'S political control? The government doesn't even put the military (which consumes 21% of the national budget) to any real economic uses. It even avoids deployments that would be of actual <em>constructive</em> benefit, like peacekeeping in East Timor, or applying pressure on the military junta of Myanmar. Remember in Jan 2007 when ASEAN legislators were planning to pass a resolution that would take partial (if only symbolic) steps towards resolving the issue of the repression of the Burmese military government? When it came to the actual ASEAN session, it was never discussed, in part because of backroom deals that were no doubt aided by the political conservatism of the government of my birth country.</p>

<p>It's far more constructive for me to serve in Iraq or Afghanistan, where at least my duties will actually make a worthwhile and constructive contribution towards a worthy cause.</p>

<p>I see you're still online benjaminx -- well, Mr. Admitted-to-Brown dear sir, are you going to say anything? Are you duly satisfied? Do you want to come at me with another impudent remark?</p>

<p>I have to ask, are you even Singaporean? Before you made this remark, did you even know <em>anything</em> about the state of civil rights in my birth country, the coercive tactics the People's Action Party uses to maintain political control, or <em>anything</em> about the true nature of my nation's conscription programme? Or are you just a monoculturalist who digs with the express intention of trying to put the dirt on someone?</p>

<p>
[quote]
What the op did was an academic integrity mistake, but not illegal.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Indeed, and legally he won't risk imprisonment. But should the consequences for cheating on so major an exam be that light, when you are doing injustice to hundreds of thousands of other test-takers?</p>

<p>i dont get your argument...he's doing an injustice, and he is receiving the consequences...his scores are being canceled, therefore having no impact on the rest of the country.</p>

<p>did you just totally forget the whole score canceling part?</p>

<p>When considering the problem of proportional punishment, the punishment should always be exactly the same as the damage caused. Like, if you decide to evade $500,000 in taxes and get caught, all the government should do is make you pay the $500,000 back -- it would be unjust to impose jail time! Man, Jeffrey Skilling don't need no jail time -- he just needs to pay back the amount he stole!</p>

<p>but his actions do NOT affect the rest of the country. you've been saying over and over that he should be "imprisoned" because his cheating is affecting hundreds of thousands of other students, when its not...</p>

<p>so then he should just receive the consequence for his own actions, which is having that score and every other score canceled, and the possibility of being rescinded.</p>

<p>proportional punishment would be just canceling the score of that test...but no, every single test is gonna be canceled and he may very well have no opportunity to attend a respectable university.</p>

<p>so to recap, he cheated on a test HE PAID FOR, affecting ONLY HIMSELF. definitely warrants imprisonment.</p>

<p>
[quote]
but his actions do NOT affect the rest of the country. you've been saying over and over that he should be "imprisoned" because his cheating is affecting hundreds of thousands of other students, when its not...</p>

<p>so then he should just receive the consequence for his own actions, which is having that score and every other score canceled, and the possibility of being rescinded.</p>

<p>proportional punishment would be just canceling the score of that test...but no, every single test is gonna be canceled and he may very well have no opportunity to attend a respectable university.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>They don't affect the rest of the country now because he was caught. And of course, every cheater gets caught every time right? I mean, every person who skimps on their taxes gets caught, every time, and if I stole your car -- man, all the sentencin I need is to give you your car back! </p>

<p>Now, I don't think that rescindence should be a 100% definite consequence for him. But it should definitely be a just consideration!</p>

<p>What in particular I dislike is that the best remedy for the student at the moment is not to 'fess up, but to cover it up. (Just like at Arthur Andersen lololololo!) If the action was so light as people here are saying, is it unthinkable to conceive of, <em>gasp</em> admitting your fault to the school?</p>

<p>That is the problem with zero tolerance -- it makes the situation worse. But the threat of rescindence if the student is not repentant and does not absolutely put himself at the mercy of his school should be a definite possibility.</p>

<p>
[quote]
They don't affect the rest of the country now because he was caught.

[/quote]

You cannot punish someone for something they have not done (yet). Cheating on an AP test is not illegal, thus you cannot even threaten jail time. Also, cheating on an AP test does not guarantee that the person will cheat on something major in the future.</p>

<p>For a rather outlandish comparison: It would be like punishing someone for murder just because they fired a gun at someone (attempted murder, but not murder). As messed up as it is, they did not actually murder the person and thus cannot be punished for that particular crime.</p>

<p>Every post of yours has hypotheticals based in a world and law that does not exist (at least in the US). The real world doesn't work that way.</p>

<p>Ok, lets sum this up into a few easy pieces....at least as I see it.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Cheating is wrong but prominent. It also is rarely punish and somehow hasn't made our nation fall apart yet. Though Bush must have cheated his way through Yale and HBS, and now we have to have him as our president.</p></li>
<li><p>The OP will very likely be rescinded. UPenn most likely still have a thousand kids still on their wait list and UPenn will likely take one of those kids instead of the OP. </p></li>
<li><p>Many people on this thread will feel bad for the OP in what is probably a case of a decent kid making a really stupid stupid choice. Somewhere galoisien will be very very happy that another "filthy, rich" American capitalist pig is being punished.</p></li>
<li><p>galoisien, who often brings up interesting and worth-discussing conversation points, remains unable to hold a civil conversation with anyone. He seems to not realize that no "intellectual" conversations can be had when you reduce your arguments to calling people that you have never met filthy, spoiled, rich kids. I'm not sure what life is like where you live at the moment, but if you continue this habit when you arrive in Virginia, I assure you that at some point you will end up with no friends and possibly a smashed in face after a few kids decide that they are tired of your pointless intolerance for opposing views.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Johnson181: I'm referring to the principle of deterrence, which for the past two posts I tried to nudge you on. ;) Basically the point is because for example they don't catch all the kids who are not only cheating on their own qualifications (or in the OP's case, "helping" someone cheat on their qualifications) but (when taken as a whole) adjust the grading curves unfairly up, the principle of deterrence states that the punishment must at least be more in magnitude than the damage caused by the offender to compensate fo those who don't get caught.</p>

<p>The rest of my posts about future ethics (or lack thereof) and comparisons with Enron, etc. were mainly to show what happens when cheating attitudes don't get corrected.</p>

<p>White Rabbit: I only brought my epithets up because I was incredulous at the idea that my father "definitely" cheated (okay, he definitely cheated on my mother lololololo -- but AFAIK, not on academics), because "everyone cheats", and furthermore, he arrogantly assumed that my father even went to high school. (He got to university by the way of a vocational institute -- that's right, the equivalent of community college that the OP so fears going to -- and after that, he received a scholarship to the National University of Singapore.) Such an absolute assumption, is to me something only a sheltered kid can entertain. Only in the sheltered kid's world do all college students have high school graduates for parents. </p>

<p>Why do you lambast me for making broad assumptions when I was not the original one who suffered such prejudice? It was only eye for an eye -- lex talionis, or the principle retributive justice.</p>

<p>Note there's also a distinction</a> between the rich and the wealthy.</p>

<p>I doubt the kid will be rescinded, plenty of HS do not report it because they don't want colleges to not take their kids in the future due to cheaters being from there.</p>

<p>btw galosien... the OP goes to a public school where over 50% of the students cheat on their AP tests.</p>

<p>Public magnet, then. Same diff.</p>

<p>Plus </p>

<p>Instead of arguing, and since all points seem pretty exhausted, if the OP knows/is willing to share the outcome of his story, that would prove more interesting and useful for all involved...</p>