{"id":3017,"date":"2020-06-01T00:28:04","date_gmt":"2020-06-01T04:28:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/?p=3017"},"modified":"2020-05-27T20:19:36","modified_gmt":"2020-05-28T00:19:36","slug":"maybe-next-time-hell-think-before-he-cheats","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/2020\/06\/01\/maybe-next-time-hell-think-before-he-cheats\/","title":{"rendered":"Maybe Next Time He&#8217;ll Think Before He Cheats"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"p1\"><a href=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/files\/2019\/07\/48355987_782468914642_4921722570606116864_o.jpg\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignleft size-medium wp-image-2631\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/files\/2019\/07\/48355987_782468914642_4921722570606116864_o.jpg?resize=223%2C300\" alt=\"\" width=\"223\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/files\/2019\/07\/48355987_782468914642_4921722570606116864_o.jpg?resize=223%2C300&amp;ssl=1 223w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/files\/2019\/07\/48355987_782468914642_4921722570606116864_o.jpg?resize=768%2C1032&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/files\/2019\/07\/48355987_782468914642_4921722570606116864_o.jpg?resize=762%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 762w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/files\/2019\/07\/48355987_782468914642_4921722570606116864_o.jpg?w=1072&amp;ssl=1 1072w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 223px) 100vw, 223px\" \/><\/a>It\u2019s so bizarre to me that since the forced online learning movement started, so many math faculty\u2014and not just at my institution\u2014have been worried about cheating.<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Why now?<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">It\u2019s not a new phenomenon. Students who want to cheat ALWAYS will find a way to cheat. This happens all the time, and everywhere. Every single place I have worked, I have caught a student cheating. Sometimes it\u2019s blatantly obvious like having a piece of paper literally labeled \u201ccheat sheet\u201d beside the exam, sometimes it\u2019s a notecard sticking out of a purse, sometimes it\u2019s a phone not-so-discreetly cradled in a hand, sometimes it\u2019s writing \u201clet a be a prime\u201d (which no one does except someone in a stackexchange answer forum on precisely the problem in question). Other times it\u2019s more subtle and a group effort. At larger universities for mass finals, TAs would pace the hallways and regularly check the bathrooms, sometimes finding notes and solutions on pieces of paper tucked behind toilets or written on the walls of stalls. Even with my online contracting for Art of Problem Solving, I\u2019ve caught sixth graders plagiarising in an extra-curricular math course (think about what THAT reality does to your outlook on mankind.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">So why is it that we\u2019re so worried about cheating now? Because it\u2019s now so \u201ceasy\u201d\u2014as if it weren\u2019t before? Because it\u2019s more obvious to us that it\u2019s possible? Because we\u2019re dreading the extra work trying to minimize it creates? Because the process once you catch a cheater got streamlined? I honestly don\u2019t get it. English departments have been dealing with this issue for years\u2014the internet has been a bane to their take-home essay and paper-writing existences. Decades ago, many students would purposefully join fraternities and sororities and athletic groups and clubs in part because of the test banks they\u2019d keep. This isn\u2019t new. Is it just now that math is suddenly thrown into the online\/modern spotlight that we\u2019re so concerned?<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Or is our fear more philosophical than practical? Deep down do we really believe people will do anything to get ahead, especially if they suspect they won\u2019t get caught? That whether we write it off as stress or societal pressure for good grades or family pride, people will backstab and cheat their way to \u201csuccess\u201d? That cheating is a bad seed in human nature that now is being given a perfect greenhouse in which to bloom? Certainly the LSATs in their administration take a bleak approach to human nature; having sat for the exam I know that you are fingerprinted, must show photo I.D., can\u2019t bring a phone, and are not allowed to leave the room during the exam. They know THEIR customers. Why don\u2019t we?<\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\">Despite my belief that it will happen regardless, and despite my underwhelming and frustrating outcomes when following through with academic integrity cases, I have been societally pressured to continue to do <em>something<\/em> to try to minimize cheating. Here are some tricks I used in-person and pre-pandemic to address cheating that still work in a co\/post-pandemic online setting:<\/p>\n<ul class=\"ul1\">\n<li class=\"li1\">Reuse problems as infrequently as possible. In upper-level courses this can be difficult. In abstract algebra, say, classifying all groups of order 8 is a drastically longer and harder exercise than classifying all groups of order 7. But for lower-level classes like calculus or differential equations or linear algebra there\u2019s zero excuse for reusing more than 10-15% of problems. The benefits I see are that it keeps my mind fresh\u2014you&#8217;ve got to do SOMETHING to keep yourself from becoming stale after teaching calculus 10 times. Moreover, it decreases the usefulness of any test banks, online or frat house.<\/li>\n<li class=\"li1\"><strong>Do not give out solutions.<\/strong> A lot of colleagues do this, and many students demand it. They all argue that it helps students learn, and makes them feel better in a security-blanket\/better-course-eval way. But what actually helps students learn is feedback, not perfectly worked out solutions. If students get appropriate feedback on a returned assignment, they shouldn\u2019t need solutions. But if they still need clarification, they should be able to go to their instructor. Their instructor should be willing to go over exams and mistakes with students. That cannot and will not occur if solutions are released. Back to cheating\u2014think about what\u2019s more likely to be found online. (1) Returned assessments with your blood-red ink feedback. (2) Your well-organized and flawless solutions.<\/li>\n<li class=\"li1\">When possible, give multiple versions of the exam. In an in-person setting this is especially good if you also have, say, seating charts or general knowledge of where students sit. And you don\u2019t have to get too fancy with this. Suppose you have a multiple choice section. Just reorder the problems and\/or answer choices. Whether students talk to each other online or peep at each other\u2019s papers, if Student A\u2019s #4 is Student B\u2019s #7 and A\u2019s answer is D and B\u2019s answer is E\u2014you\u2019ve done something nontrivial to \u201ccatch\u201d this type of cheating. It only helps if you\u2019re using some online system where there are actually random number generators.<\/li>\n<li class=\"li1\">For the upper-level courses, if you\u2019re giving a semi-standard exercise that you know is challenging, before you administer the assignment start looking online for solutions. Chegg and sites like that are much more for the lower-level calculus courses. Mathoverflow and places like that are where to go for upper-level. You may want to rethink assigning even a \u201cclassic\u201d problem if there are too many easily-available (correct) solutions. Or, you may want to bookmark sites that say \u201clet a be a prime\u201d so when you\u2019re grading you can be on alert.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p class=\"p1\">That\u2019s just in writing and returning the assessment. Here are some other suggestions:<\/p>\n<ul class=\"ul1\">\n<li class=\"li1\">Be detailed with students as to what \u201ccheating\u201d means on a given assignment. Remind students regularly about this. There\u2019s the obvious aspect that what materials are allowed will vary from class to class; there\u2019s the sweet, if unlikely, possibility they\u2019ll just forget what cheating means to you. But IF you catch a student cheating, and IF it\u2019s \u201csevere enough\u201d that you have to take it further, the burden of proof is on you as the instructor. The students are innocent until proven guilty. So making sure it\u2019s clear in writing (and emphasized to them orally because we all know students don\u2019t read instructions) will only help you. Send emails before assessments are due, make it a tab in your online classroom platform, put it on your cover sheets.<\/li>\n<li class=\"li1\">Be realistic that no matter what you do, there will be students who cheat. Think about which students are more likely to cheat. Students cheat out of desperation. So who is desperate? Those on academic probation or those at risk of being on academic probation. Those who have an F or a D but who \u201cneed\u201d a D or a C (even if it\u2019s mathematically impossible for them to get a higher grade, do you think given their grade they\u2019ve figured that out?). Those who have a B but &#8220;know&#8221; they are A students. All of these people have great personal incentive to do anything for a better grade. Do all of those students cheat? No. Are those the only students who cheat? Also, no. But if you\u2019re not looking out for ANY cheaters, you will never find them. So whether it\u2019s my suggestions or not, come up with a starting point.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p class=\"p1\">Still, with all these discussions now about cheating, and use of lockdown browsers and cameras for proctoring, and with companies like Respondus getting a lot of new contracts, I worry sincerely about the human nature aspect and the greater message being sent. What&#8217;s next?\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.dailyprincetonian.com\/article\/2020\/05\/princeton-teaching-assistant-math-department-slader-mat202-academic-integrity-cheating-covid?fbclid=IwAR2V7U_iYA3hoR5-3_xyQ-7D8vNQ62rh2GmxzSJ3c-xkaA832I8eESYOgTA\"><em>Minority Report-<\/em>esque tactics on the border of espionage and entrapment (#Princeton)?\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n<p class=\"p1\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.vox.com\/recode\/2020\/5\/4\/21241062\/schools-cheating-proctorio-artificial-intelligence\">Vox had an article recently<\/a> that echoed my sentiments, as did <a href=\"https:\/\/www.insidehighered.com\/blogs\/just-visiting\/choose-cooperation-and-collaboration-rather-surveillance\">insidehighered<\/a>. If we create an environment where it\u2019s very clear that we are EXPECTING students to cheat, how could we be surprised that they meet our expectations? How is assuming they&#8217;ll cheat not in some way encouraging them to cheat? When we use lockdown browsers and make them Zoom in with a camera to be proctored, we\u2019re telling students from the start that we do not trust them. We\u2019re treating them like they\u2019re guilty until proven innocent, yet giving them zero opportunities to demonstrate their innocence.<\/p>\n<div style=\"margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;\" class=\"sharethis-inline-share-buttons\" ><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>It\u2019s so bizarre to me that since the forced online learning movement started, so many math faculty\u2014and not just at my institution\u2014have been worried about cheating. Why now?<\/p>\n<div style=\"margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;\" class=\"sharethis-inline-share-buttons\" data-url=https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/2020\/06\/01\/maybe-next-time-hell-think-before-he-cheats\/><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":158,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[47,88,301,63,31,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3017","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cheating","category-classroom-design","category-classroom-management","category-exam-feedback","category-math-problems","category-technology-for-teaching"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p3c1jI-MF","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3017","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/158"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3017"}],"version-history":[{"count":13,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3017\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3037,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3017\/revisions\/3037"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3017"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3017"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ams.org\/phdplus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3017"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}