Comment by tossacct | Hacker News Reader

Comment by tossacct | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

stdbrouw, here's your link :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_dishonesty#Academic_di...

The following is for anyone who hasn't heard of wikipedia:

Wikipedia is often a good place to begin research. It can often provide a set of words that you can use to look for scholarly works that can provide "good, non-anecdotal data".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_dishonesty

This article features words like: Plagiarism, fabrication, deception, cheating, bribery, sabotage, professorial sabotage, and personation. These may help you in your search for "good, non-anecdotal evidence".

Wikipedia also provides links to "good, non-anecdotal evidence" from time to time, and calls these links "references". These references can often be accessed online, but sometimes require you to access a physical book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_dishonesty#References

The things that you read in wikipedia are not necessarily the truth. Wikipedia has information and mis-information on many topics.

Thanks for the resources, but it was a rhetorical question. The "modern kids" theologic talks about don't necessarily cheat more than people used to, which is what they were implying. In fact, right there in that Wikipedia article, with a reference to back it up: "In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, cheating was widespread at college campuses in the United States, and was not considered dishonorable among students."

Part of the text of your citation is available on google books. It seems like an academic memoir to me - lots of personal accounts, some quotes from period books on cheating, little else. Certainly not scientific. Here's a quote:

>>>Certainly not all - and probably not most - college students cheated and plagiarized.

It has neither data nor studies. It is Sue Carter Simmons' professional opinion.

That said, I agree with you that modern kids don't necessarily cheat more than non-modern kids do. I agree that parts of theologic's comment were directed at "modern kids" and the teachers of these modern kids. I can see how a reasonable person (you, stdbrouw) could infer that theologic was saying that modern kids have different cheating habits than non-modern kids. I submit that there is another reasonable person (myself) that does not infer that theologic was saying that modern kids have different cheating habits than non-modern kids. Let me explain:

>>> The best way to slow cheating is to not give an opportunity to cheat in the first place

This is the last line of theologic's comment. The proposed "best way to slow cheating" works equally well for modern and non-modern kids, it does not target either group.

The other references to modern kids inherently do not explicitly say anything about non-modern kids. There is no comparison or contrast, which leaves room for you and I to make our opposing inferences.

To be fair, if theologic had said something explicit about non-modern kids, I would tend to agree with your inference.

Schab in 1991 reported that cheating trends had significantly increased in surveys over 3 decades.

I can't remember where I read the idea that lack of ownership may be fueling the rise of cheating, and my google-fu is weak tonight.

I like to remind the young ones here, however, that in the old days it was hard to cheat because you had to find a library or a smart friend that would help you. If you were really unlucky, you asked your Dad, who would inevitably give you the wrong answer. It was easier to simply do the work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com