UC Davis Students, Cheating and Chegg
UC Davis Students, Cheating and Chegg
Plus, ICAI Conference and statement on Ukraine. Plus, doctors in Ireland may have cheated on medical exams.
Issue 98
To subscribe to “The Cheat Sheet,” enter your e-mail address below:
To share “The Cheat Sheet:”
Thank for sharing “The Cheat Sheet.” If you enjoy or support my work, please consider chipping in via Patreon:
UC Davis, Chegg and Computer Science
The Aggie, an independent student-run publication at the University of California, Davis, has run two articles on cheating in the past few days.
One is an editorial, which does correctly call out the wealth and privilege advantage that cheating-for-profit companies such as Chegg afford. It says:
the members of the Editorial Board find the fact that the service requires payment particularly problematic. Students who can’t afford to pay for Chegg may feel disadvantaged, given how many of their peers use it. Sites that not only allow students to cheat but also require payment for cheating only encourage elitism in education.
It’s an argument we don’t hear to often but is nonetheless dead-on accurate. Rich kids can buy their answers, putting less fortunate classmates, as well as those who actually do the work, at a steep disadvantage.
The other piece in The Aggie is a news item about students in Computer Science programs using Chegg to cheat. It starts directly:
With the shift to online learning during the pandemic, hundreds of reports of academic dishonesty have been made by faculty to the Office of Student Support and Judicial Affairs (OSSJA) each quarter
Adding that
computer science faculty have stated that they have been especially irritated by instances of cheating and have had intense discussions about homework-help websites.
And guess which “homework-help” site is a particular problem, according to the faculty.
Go ahead, guess.
Chegg, an online academic help company worth $12 billion, is a commonly used site to cheat, particularly for science and math courses. Computer science instructor Dale Fletter explained specifically the takedown process for questions on Chegg.
“I take down one [question and answer]; a student searches for the question,” Fletter said. “They don’t find it. They submit it and ask for an answer and then within 24 hours, another answer is up. So you see that it’s a whack-a-mole problem.”
Shocker, I know.
Chegg said it is not a cheating site. Though, for a site that’s not for cheating, Chegg seems to be mentioned in stories about cheating pretty always.
Doctors in Ireland Accused of Cheating in Medical Exams
The Independent (IRE) has the story of four doctors who have been called to account for alleged cheating during their medical exams two years ago.
The article says the doctors admit to talking to one another and being disruptive during the exam but deny cheating. The allegations include that one doctor:
verbally communicated with [another doctor] as he went to the toilet by uttering the words “Triple A” which was believed to be an abbreviation for the answer to an exam question.
[One doctor] is accused of holding his paper up to allow it to be seen by [another] who was sitting directly behind him.
[Another] is charged with making hand signals and turning around to [another of the accused].
Honestly, if I were on the inquiry board I’d fail them. Not for cheating but for being so bad at it - for being such Keystone Docs. I’ll show myself out.
Proctorio Seeks Communications Records from Fight for the Future
Remote proctoring provider Proctorio has requested records from the non-profit “Fight for the Future” (FFF), which has been highly critical of proctoring in general and Proctorio in particular, including advising or assisting litigants in legal cases involving the company. The Verge has some coverage and some background.
Caveat: The Verge is not an impartial observer. Their coverage on this and related topics has been flagrantly biased and often factually inaccurate. Even so, it does appear that Proctorio is trying to subpoena records from FFF.
FFF, mind you, is awful. Their “reports” on proctoring are jaw-droppingly sensationalized and just wrong. All the time. They are margin screamers, not problem solvers.
Nonetheless, it is, in my view, shockingly dumb for Proctorio to try to engage them legally. In the context of Proctorio’s legal challenges of other critics, it’s easy to believe the response from FFF - that this latest Proctorio effort is an attempt to silence or intimidate them. And that’s a shame because FFF is, on this subject, not believable.
By dragging them to court and asking for their records, Proctorio has elevated their criticism, afforded them credibility and made them victims. It’s boneheaded.
ICAI Conference Begins Next Week - Organization Issues Statement on Ukraine
The International Center for Academic Integrity’s annual conference will begin this coming week, running from March 8 to 10.
The ICAI also released a statement this week on the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
ICAI rightly notes the work it and others have done with education leaders in Ukraine:
Through workshops and webinars across Ukraine, members of ICAI have spent the past several years in collaboration with the National Agency for Higher Education Quality Assurance in Ukraine to educate leaders about integrity within the institution of higher education as well as their communities.
ICAI further expressed support for a:
letter from the National Agency for Higher Education Quality Assurance in Ukraine to Ministers of Education and E4 organizations of the European Higher Education Area … to suspend Russia’s involvement in the European Higher Education Area, Russian institutions’ memberships in the EUA and the EURASHE, and halt all collaboration with Russia’s higher education and scientific institutions.