Cheating Cases More Than Double at USC

Plus, a "steep rise" in cheating in South Africa. Plus, higher education publications cash in to promote Course Hero.

Issue 40

USC Sees a 115% “Spike” in Cheating

According to a report from Annenberg Media, the University of Southern California experienced a “spike” in cheating over the past year. Add it to the list.

The story is about the slow, perhaps unfair, review and disciplinary process at the school instead of the misconduct directly. And the process is a problem. Not just at USC but everywhere. As cheating incidents grow and the process becomes more litigious and complex, existing school systems struggle. It’s a hidden cost of cheating for schools, instructors and students alike.

USC, the report says:

is inundated with high numbers of reports of cheating and other academic integrity violations.

A USC spokeswoman, on behalf of Student Affairs, told Annenberg Media that the remote testing environment beginning in March 2020 resulted in dramatically higher numbers of reported academic integrity cases, which were more difficult and time-consuming to evaluate due to the un-proctored nature of Zoom and difficulty collecting evidence.

Specifically, the school reported:

a 115% increase in reported academic integrity violations from Fall 2019 to Fall 2020.

To deal with the surge and adjudication delays, the school says it’s adding more staff to its Student Affairs offices.

A “Steep Rise” in Cheating in South Africa

A local news report from South Africa says the nation has seen a “steep rise in cheating, misconduct with move to online assessments.” It’s not subtle, saying the increase in cheating is:

attributed directly to the move to online assessments 

You don’t say.

Stellenbosch University, with an enrollment of nearly 30,000, initiated disciplinary action against 183 students for “collusion” during online exams last year. The year before, a total of two students were cited for similar activities.

Other schools mentioned in the story more or less dissembled as to whether cheating had increased at their institutions saying that they’d used remote proctoring or test design that limited misconduct. They did not provide data.

Higher Ed Publications Prop Up Course Hero Too

I’ve written a good bit about the upcoming “summit” from cheating provider Course Hero and those who are giving the company undeserved and dangerous credibility by appearing at the event. See Issue 39 for a list of some of those folks but they’re also on the webpage, linked above.

But it’s not just professors who are giving, or perhaps selling, their credibility to a company that profits from the intellectual property of teachers and enables cheating.

Two higher education publications - Inside Higher Ed and the Chronicle of Higher Education - have joined in, sending e-mails promoting the Course Hero “summit.”

On May 25, The Chronicle of Higher Education sent out a “sponsor message” e-mail promoting the event, its scheduled speakers and encouraging readers to register.

On June 29, Inside Higher Ed sent a similar e-mail encouraging readers to “Reserve Your Seat: Online Teaching Event for Higher Ed Faculty.” This one is less clear it’s paid for by a cheating provider saying only, “We thought you might be interested in this message from Course Hero.”

Neither sponsored message mentions academic integrity.

I tried to ask Dana Miller, the Director of Marketing at Inside Higher Ed, about the Course Hero affiliation and partnership. I also wanted to see whether Inside Higher Ed would send e-mails on behalf of, say, EssayShark or EasyA.com or KillerPapers.com. She did not reply.

Inside Higher Ed in particular has a history of bleaching or downplaying the seriousness of academic misconduct including this overly generous Course Hero profile piece from last year and this piece just yesterday which grossly misrepresents a 2010 research study on cheating - see Issue 23 for some context.

Knowing that some of the speakers at the upcoming “summit” have been paid, it’s not too surprising that Course Hero is writing checks to higher education publications too. What is surprising, but probably should not be, is that these publications are willing to take the money and essentially pretend that Course Hero is not what it is.

Something You Don’t Hear Every Day: Turnitin is “a sigh of relief for the research community.”

Many countries are deeply and seriously struggling with academic integrity issues, not just in student ranks but in the academy as well. China, India and Indonesia are in a constant, pitched battle with fraud and outright plagiarism among professors in academic journals.

I don’t write about academic misconduct in those nations very often because if I did, I’d write about nothing else. In India, not a day goes by without someone quite literally being arrested for cheating.

Nonetheless, here’s an opinion piece from an engineer in Indonesia expressing “a sigh of relief” on the recent decision by the government to use plagiarism detection company Turnitin in public universities. The author wrote:

The implementation of this software will significantly reduce plagiarism in research papers, since teachers and students will be held accountable if they resort to any wrongdoings. It will also ensure superior standards in writing research papers, which in turn, will boost the country's image in the international arena.

I share it because it’s an unusual voice and an unusual perspective.

In the next “The Cheat Sheet” - more cheating in more places. Plus, that story about a big company doing big things to swat cheating companies.

Also, see that very tiny little box with the up arrow? The one all the way up top and right next to the date? That’s the “share” on social media button. Please do.

And, as always, share “The Cheat Sheet” directly and/or subscribe below.