<p>^ Maybe. But so long as people believe that myth, other people cheating hurts us. This myth is something we can try to make as true as possible.</p>
<p>If you look at the way grades are done at Cambridge (all done on 3 hour final exam, exams are not set or graded by the same people who teach, exams are done anonymously via student numbers), you can see some ways to make the myth truer.</p>
<p>
And then there’s reality…</p>
<p>I and my family must exist in different reality. Sorry to hear that. Good luck changing other people’s attitude and beliefs, I will never be bothered with that, life is too short to be bitter about others instead of enjoing every moment.</p>
<p>^^^
I’m find it curious that you’d equate recognition of reality with bitterness. I see it as simply the requisite first step in the exercise of problem-solving.</p>
<p>
reply:
</p>
<p>Actually, it was 100% true for our 2 kids (one currently gainfully employed, another in a top graduate program in humanities with full funding).</p>
<p>(I kind of begin to wish it was a myth for the sake of the 3rd one ;))</p>
<p>"I and my family must exist in different reality. Sorry to hear that. Good luck changing other people’s attitude and beliefs, I will never be bothered with that, life is too short to be bitter about others instead of enjoing every moment. "</p>
<p>So we should accept any grossly unfair system and just try to do our best?</p>
<p>
I don’t think it’s so much a matter of “myth,” as it is not a matter of “black or white”/ “all or nothing”/ “always or never.” On the whole, the world operates and we all live in that “gray matter” between oft-cited extremes.</p>
<p>Sure, there are odds to be played, and the idea is to increase one’s odds. But it’s also true that the most revered of successes tend to be those achieved “despite all odds to the contrary.” </p>
<p>I think it’s important to remember that if the grade is the goal, teaching to the test is fine. But at the end of the day, most people seem to agree that the grade wasn’t the goal. I expect your third (and mine) will be just fine. ;)</p>
<p>keepittoyourself, papers may be graded almost exclusively by TAs at some schools, but they certainly were not at schools I attended or at my S’s school. If your perspective is formed by a large state university, that explains much.</p>
<p>I do agree with the idea of anonymous grading, though. At the U of C, the master’s exam is the only thing graded anonymously. It was hilarious to see the top grades going to students who were routinely downgraded by the professors–women, for example, and MAT students–instead of the favored boys. The faculty in my department at that time was almost exclusively male and mind-bogglingly sexist.</p>
<p>
Yes, but what happened to those who deserved the kudos. Do you remember who should have gotten the medal when Ben Johnson or Marion Jones appeared to be the winners? I don’t. Most professors grade somewhat on a curve in that they might not want to give out too many A’s. If those A’s are all stolen by cheaters, the best students in the class may end up with B’s through no fault of their own.</p>
<p>
“Back in the day” my generation sure didn’t, and, as a result, we have the 26th Amendment.</p>
<p>
So learning is a competitive sport? I’d say that alone is a huge problem.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is it just me, or is this just a string of barely coherent cliches?</p>
<p>And yes, learning is a competitive sport: there are only so many slots in top grad programmes, or all grad programmes, or medical school, or law school, or the jobs people want. How you do in a learning environment is a major way of deciding who gets those slots.</p>
<p>And about adversity: a lot of people like Barack Obama because despite coming from a poor background (though this is exaggerated- his parents both had PhDs) he did well in college and went to HLS etc. Wouldn’t it truly suck if he only did that because he paid people to write his papers for him, or alternately if he never got the chance because people with fake papers got the top grades?</p>
<p>I suppose exceptional people like him will always be fine. But what about the people ranked at about the 80th percentile… people who will never lead a country but who might get a good job as an accountant or a doctor or a banker? Though the system might never be perfectly fair, we have to try our best to make sure that these people don’t get screwed over.</p>
<p>Not to mention the people who get taught by stupid teachers, or treated by stupid nurses who faked their way into their jobs by paying for papers.</p>
<p>^^^
I abhor cheating, but I strongly believe that treating learning as a competitive sport invites cheating, and that as competition increases, so does cheating. </p>
<p>I don’t think we can realistically eliminate all competition or all cheating, but I think we can do a great deal to reduce the competitive factor and in doing so, reduce cheating.</p>
<p>Among the multitude of problems inherent to learning as a competitive sport is the need to continue the competition and prize system into the workplace. Those whose primary motivation from kindergarten to degree is a gold medal aren’t likely to suddenly change their ways upon graduation. So what’s the next “prize,” who will award it, and what will it take to win it?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I wouldn’t say that “learning” is a competitive sport, but schools, colleges, teaching, and grading are definitely structured to reward the best “competitors” not necessarily the best “learners”.</p>
<p>
Well, I whole-heartedly agree. I also believe we’re all worse off for it, and if I go to my grave still advocating structural change, so be it. ;)</p>
<p>I would far prefer it if learning were not a competitive sport, but the reality is that in many instances (med school acceptances, first jobs where they ask for your GPA) it is. </p>
<p>I loved architecture grad school - it was all pass/fail. (I will confess though that it had the result that I put more time into studio and less time into structures - perhaps not an all together good thing!)</p>
<p>If this were true, he would be raking in the cash. Literally he says he works almost non-stop. $2000 for a 2 day assignment and he’s earning $66000 a year while doing this constantly? Something doesn’t add up.</p>
<p>
Is her professor frustrated with the quality?
That would solve the problem.</p>
<p>"So we should accept any grossly unfair system and just try to do our best? "</p>
<p>-Accept it or not, it is your choice, depending if you want to be effective in your efforts or not. Doing your best in regard to working very hard and being open to all opportunities will be very effective no matter what others are doing, “correct grossly unfair” situation will be very futile effort, but you are very free in your choice of what you pursue. As far as my family is concerned, I have been very honest to myself and my kids. In specific situation with one of them, I told: “No matter how hard you try, you never ever be at the very top. First will be the kids with connections, then URM, then others. All you can do is to do your best to be on top of this third group and forget about all unfairness, it will correct itself at the end”. I have been right over and over and once more. Saved our family lots of frustration also. But again, my family exist in different reality than most people here, we only control what we can and do it by following all the rules. Results have been outstanding so far, beyond any expectations.</p>
<p>
Duke prof Dan Ariely’s Sept 15 blog, [“Plagiarism</a> and essay mills,”](<a href=“http://danariely.com/2010/09/15/new-school-year-plagiarism-and-essay-mills/]"Plagiarism”>http://danariely.com/2010/09/15/new-school-year-plagiarism-and-essay-mills/) critiques papers he & a fellow prof bought from essay mills. Guess they didn’t get one written by “Ed Dante,” or maybe Ariely just didn’t publicly critique it in his blog? ;)</p>
<p>For a bit of humor, watch the video posted to his [July</a> 25 entry, “Who cheats more?”](<a href=“http://danariely.com/2010/07/25/who-cheats-more/]July”>http://danariely.com/2010/07/25/who-cheats-more/)</p>