In Alfie Kohn’s argument, “Who’s Cheating Whom?” he explains that cheating happens because students are not engaged in class because of a few different factors, like a lack of interest in a subject, or the pressures of getting good grades instead of learning. He states evidence from different experiments, allowing him to appear more credible, showing that students are more likely to cheat because their school puts more emphasis on how well students do on tests and homework versus how much is being learned in class. Kohn effectively argues that if students were truly engaged in what is being taught, and learning was more encouraged than memorizing and passing a test, cheating would be less of a problem. In simplest terms, cheating is wrong because teachers cannot accurately assess how much is being learned in class, and what they need to improve on the next time they teach that lesson. Kohn stated, “when teachers don’t seem to have a
They are intended to remind people of their moral standards and encourage students to do the right thing and complete every single assignment with a high level of academic integrity. However this is not always a practical measure. Sometimes trying to instill values in people does not work, and the success of an honor code is ultimately dependent on what types of people are in the classes. Some schools have a large population of students who do not care about academic integrity: “If a student enters a college with mostly “cheater” types, not only are the costs of cheating very low, encouraging fellow “cheater” types to cheat, but the benefits of cheating (or the costs of not cheating) are very high, encouraging even “honest” types to cheat” (Source C). Honor codes lack practicality due to the fact that even if a minority of students are cheaters, their influence can pull students who value integrity down the wrong path.
The honor code is a system that many schools use to establish trust with teachers and students by having students report each other for cheating, plagiarizing, stealing, and getting consequences for violating those codes. I personally like the honor code but I believe it can be a little revised for the best. The part I think is too excessive is the students control each other. It may work in some schools but it could easily be corrupted. If you think about it many students are broke, a student could easily pay the other student to allow them to cheat or copy.
Standardized testing is an issue with students fearful to fail the tests, with all the pressure and tension on them to overcome this predicament, as well as teachers ' jobs being in jeopardy. Most students from lower income families are at a disadvantage with this setup and groundwork for standardized tests, such as the SAT. A wealthier, more affluent family can buy higher quality and superior preparation books. Students even turn to various methods such as cheating, in order to overcome the tests. Another bad example of the aftermath of standardized testing is cramming, which some might do as a result of the lack of concern with studies.
After students have taken the standardized tests, their scores are then averaged up and published and the different schools are then ranked from highest to lowest score. Because of this, teachers and professors end up teaching to the test due to the terror of losing their jobs. According to Scholastic.com, “it is unfair for schools to be compared because the test-takers are different sets of people, which cause a biased manipulation in statistics.” Educators neglect to teach students the appropriate skills that go beyond the classroom and tests, since they are now too caught up in preparing their students for these standardized tests. Educators are now using their time explaining the topics that will be a part of the tests, which leads them to forget to teach the students life lessons that go beyond the classroom walls. Another reason why standardized tests pressures mentors, is because the test results are used to examine their performance as an educator, which should not be the
Flunk means to fail to reach standards; students, parents and teachers think it’s a bad thing, but is it really? Instead of thinking the negative of repeating a grade or class, people should see this as practice and becoming successful. Many students may not understand the material and making them retake it will improve their knowledge. In Mary Sherry’s essay, she talks about how teachers and parents should show that flunking is a positive teaching tool. I agree with her because we aren’t all perfect and sometimes we need that extra lesson or we need to repeat the material again.
During discussions, teachers are often interested to hear students arguing about their own standpoints rather than the actual takeaways from the paper. Structure like this in classrooms only validates that students are able to argue but, diminishes the opportunities of creating values to the scholarly work and voicing out from the side that share the same opinion as the author. This leads to academic rewards for these arguing students as suggested by Deborah Tannen, leaving the rest to believe that they are not good enough for the academia. Based on personal experience, I would like to add that such agonism demotivates students to explore knowledge outside of their field and creates an impression that they are never meant to explore topics that they are least expert at. This structure has to be reshaped to bring back the original goals of criticizing work so that there is a value for everyone in the
In spite of the people who believe that standardized tests are a key factor to determine a student’s academic abilities, standardized tests distract students from their current studies, they are only designed for one way of learning and comprehending material, and they are biased to students. Standardized tests distract students from their current studies and take away any extra learning opportunities that they have to elaborate on a specific topic. Standardized tests take away time for students and teachers in the classroom to continue their studies or learn something with purpose
The accountability of the scores is meant to encourage teachers to adopt better and more effective methods of teaching, as well as to urge students to work harder. However the effects are more detrimental. Because of testing, students are more likely to be frustrated and discouraged at having to move so fast to cover all the ground needed. If a student is having a bad day or just is not a good test taker, all anyone can say is “tough luck.” The teachers will only focus on the select subjects tested on, and then only the select aspects they believe will be covered in the testing. Depending on how desperate a teacher is for good test scores, inappropriate preparations can be made before testing, sometimes even to the point of cheating.
Students on honor code campuses come to view cheating as socially unacceptable so people “embarrassed to have other students find out they were cheating” (McCabe and Pavela) and wanting to maintain the appearance of being an honest student will no longer lie, copy, or steal due to the threat of being branded a cheater. Peer culture that develops from having an honor code promotes academic integrity as a social norm that individuals are not willing to