The Absurd Herohood of Professional Cheaters
Plus, ICAI announces annual conference. Plus, The Score drops another episode. Plus, a high school student writes about cheating in Katie Couric Media. Yes, Katie Couric Media.
Issue 239
To join the 3,635 smart people who subscribe to “The Cheat Sheet,” enter your e-mail address below. New Issues every Tuesday and Thursday. It’s free:
If you enjoy “The Cheat Sheet,” please consider joining the 14 amazing people who are chipping in a few bucks a month via Patreon. Or joining the 20 outstanding citizens who are now paid subscribers. Thank you!
Insider Gives its Pages to Professional Cheater, Essay Mill Founder
Insider has shared a personal story from the founder of Killer Essays, an essay mill.
I have a few things to say about it.
The founder, who remains anonymous “for his privacy,” says that when he tells people what he does for a living:
I'm bombarded with questions: "Is that legal?" Yep. "How much money do you make?" A lot more than my friends who went to medical school.
In the US and in Canada, where he says he is based, sadly, it is legal. In most of the rest of the English-speaking world, it is not. On the money he makes - what a prick.
He says he seeks the comfort of anonymity because:
There are vehement detractors who say my business is unethical, as well as ruthless overseas competitors who routinely slander and attack my business with fake reviews, impersonation sites, and even DDOS attacks.
Dude, your business is unethical. And I never thought I’d root for the antics of overseas essay mills, but here we are.
He goes on:
Some think that I'm helping rich, lazy students cheat. But in my opinion, my services are helping level the college playing field. Most of my clients work part- or full-time jobs, and many have children or come from disadvantaged backgrounds. They use Killer Papers to help them compete against students who don't need to work, have less responsibilities, had private tutors in the past, or attended better schools.
I see, students who work or can’t afford tutors don’t have to do their own work. And somehow, surprisingly, they can afford to pay an essay mill. Remarkable. It’s the same junk that Chegg says (see Issue 224) - and pure rationalization.
He says that when ChatGPT emerged, everyone thought the essay-writing business was cooked. He says he was mocked online and that:
in March, the growth disappeared. From March through mid-May, sales started declining year-over-year, and April was the worst: we saw revenue drop a staggering 28%.
Heartbreaking.
He also offers:
Tutoring services were also struggling. Even Chegg, a billion-dollar homework help site, saw its stock drop almost 50% in a single day.
That’s because - and stay with me here - Chegg and essay mills are in the same business.
Anyway, two more notes about what’s in the article, followed by a few notes about the article.
If it was needed, the author shares more evidence that the shift to online learning during the pandemic really fueled the expansion of professional cheating. He says that during Covid:
Killer Papers continued to grow and saw a 70% year-over-year revenue growth from 2021 to 2022. We benefitted from strong virtual tutoring services during the pandemic (when most in-person tutoring and writing centers were closed).
We weren't just surviving. We were thriving.
I love that they - like Chegg - call it tutoring. But that’s not my point.
My second quick point is that our author says that he noticed his business pick back up in part after:
Assignments became more complex, and warnings were given at most major universities that educators would run all completed assignments through AI detection software.
AI detection software, huh? You don’t say.
On the article, it’s the second or third example we’ve seen in credible news outlets wherein professional cheaters are characterized as brave, pioneering, heroic stalwarts battling and adapting in the face of AI. Suddenly, professional fraudsters are the victims and we should applaud their fortitude and perseverance. In addition to this piece, that was the essence of the recent Forbes write-up on Course Hero (see Issue 238).
Consider this, for example, from our Killer Papers friend:
Although I was genuinely terrified of what AI could do (and was doing) to my business, I knew crying about it wouldn't do any good. I was either going to adapt or die, but I was determined to prove people wrong again.
My mom said it best, "Fight like hell to keep what you've built."
So I did.
Awww - his mom encouraged him to keep his cheating business going. What courage it must have taken to soldier on.
I confess, I do not get why readers are being given this storyline. What these cheating companies are doing is literally illegal in like nine different countries. And it’s obviously illicit and unethical.
I feel as though this is the equivalent of someone who was doing booming business fraudulently selling Florida swampland through the mail in the 1970s and 80s complaining how the Internet is killing their business - ripping people off is so much easier and faster now, what about what I’ve built? What about me? I refuse to stop defrauding people because I am so brave.
It’s beyond absurd and I am amazed that outlets such as Forbes and Insider are falling for it.
And finally, our hero cheater reveals that his business is growing again - “From June 1st through August 25th of this year, revenue at Killer Papers grew almost 35% yearly.” He says that’s partly because:
some clients started asking us to edit or expand upon work that AI had created for them. For instance, clients generated outlines or thesis statements using AI, and then ask us to find supporting sources and build out the writing further.
I don’t brag too often, but I’m going to. For a second.
In early December, when ChatGPT was new and shiny, some folks were saying it would obliterate essay mills. I dissented and wrote in Issue 170:
if accuracy turns out to be an Achilles heel for ChatGPT, having an essay mill play fact-checker and cleaner will be highly valuable.
What if, for example, essay mills went from a turnaround time of days to just hours and shifted their labor to fact-checking and sourcing? If they just cleaned up what ChatGPT spit out?
That may be a different model for selling cheating but my guess is it will be better, faster and even more profitable.
So, I called it. One point for me.
The Score Podcast Interviews Professor Garret Merriam
The podcast The Score, which covers academic integrity, has released a new episode.
This one features an interview with California State University, Sacramento professor of philosophy and ethics Garret Merriam. You may remember him for having posted fake answers to his exam questions at cheating provider Quizlet, catching 40 of his 96 students in the process (see Issue 214 and Issue 219).
The new episode, like the others, is worth a listen.
Among the important things the professor shares in his interview are:
I want to give credit to professors and other instructors who have found ways to effectively discourage cheating, but I would also say you shouldn’t rest on your laurels and recognize that it is, I think, a best practice to double-check your methods and your sources and to find out in any way you can, whether or not there actually is academic dishonesty going on. You should not simply assume that you are one of the fairly small percentage of instructors who has managed to stamp out academic dishonesty in their ranks completely.
And:
one thing which I did not realize when I reached out to these students and accused them of cheating was that for many of these students, websites like Quizlet are not thought of as forms of academic dishonesty, but just tools that students can use on the internet to study. Several of my students’ claims, and I have no reason not to believe them, that they were just looking for study guides.
To address this, the professor made changes to his syllabus and:
I made it explicit that the use of websites like Quizlet were not acceptable for the purposes of this class.
It’s good stuff and a recommended listen.
ICAI Sets Conference - March 7-10 in Calgary
The ICAI - International Center for Academic Integrity - has set its annual conference in Calgary for March 7-10. Details are here.
And here: https://academicintegrity.org/events-conferences/annual-conference
Katie Couric Media Publishes on Cheating
Katie Couric Media - I know, right? - ran an article recently on the threat of generative AI to academic integrity.
If you travel in this space even casually, it does not cover much new ground, though it is written by a high school student. So, that’s kind of new. Still, the most noteworthy thing about the piece in Katie Couric Media is that it’s in Katie Couric Media.
From the article:
ChatGPT makes plagiarism much too tempting, thanks to the way it puts detailed fast facts at a student’s fingertips. As a high school student who’s constantly stressed out during the academic year, I understand the appeal: Why spend time writing a four-page paper when AI can do it instead? (Especially when you have five other assignments to finish, and three other tests to study for simultaneously.)
Feels right.
There’s also this:
Schools can announce policies concerning AI all they want, but when students complete their assignments alone, it can be nearly impossible to monitor which websites they’re using — and to punish anyone who breaks those rules.
You probably know what I was going to say.
Lastly, I’ll share this bit, where the student writer says he spoke to:
a recent graduate of Indiana University’s Kelley School of Business, who says he used ChatGPT on multiple occasions for his schoolwork. He asked it to compile research and generate outlines, saying, “It’s an amazing tool to use when writing an essay and doing research — it even helps with composing emails.” (Most of his professors weren’t sure if they should ban or incorporate the tool into their curriculum, so instead, they just gave students subtle hints to not use it for their papers.)
On reflection, I reverse. The article is worthwhile. I think those three sections above illustrate rather well where we are on this.