Here’s my theory regarding why the research may be (and probably is in my opinion) inaccurate. It is likely that people who have cheated, when offered the opportunity via a survey to admit to cheating, are anxious to confess in order to alleviate their guilt. In survey research there is a construct known as nonresponse bias. That is, folks who are filling out the survey are significantly different than the folks who are not filling out the survey and thus the survey results would significantly change if we were able to poll those nonresponders – a tricky thing to do since they are not responding! If assessment of nonresponse bias was to be accomplished (and there are ways to do this) I predict that the findings would indicate that the vast majority of students do NOT cheat. I admit I have not read the original research so perhaps nonresponse bias has been addressed; however, the manner in which the findings are stated makes me skeptical. What do “cheated at some time” and “some cheating” really represent in real world Joe- and Jolene-student terms? Are we asking if they ever in their lives cheated? Are we asking strictly about school work? Are we asking about specific instances or just in general “have you ever cheated?” Nope, I do not trust the research. It does not match my lived experience nor by current observations. Not even close.
A related concern for me is the primary approach that both Lang and Davis take in addressing issues of cheating. Since these books are both oriented toward good teaching, why is the “because it’s just good teaching” argument so secondary to the question of what to do about cheating? Why not begin from the premise that good teaching by its very nature reduces students’ felt need and opportunities for cheating and progress from there?
This is going to sound like I think you are naïve, but to be sure, I do not. However, I feel like if you looked for cheating around you, you may be surprised. As an undergraduate, I would say that the 70% was probably accurate, if not a bit low. In fact, there were times where I was tempted and probably cheated as well. Most of these instances I probably did not think of as cheating at the time, but in hindsight….. This is probably because I did not plagiarize or cheat on tests. However, I can think of at least one course where I, or someone in my group, signed someone’s name in for attendance. Perhaps we can talk in person about other thoughts about this manner.
ReplyDeleteThough I have not read the articles either, I would be willing to bet that these surveys were a part of a greater survey that all students take. It is possible that the non-response bias is there, but I would be willing to bet that if it wasn’t controlled for and they re-did it controlling for it, there would be no change. You are assuming that the people not taking the survey are the good ones not trying to “confess in order to alleviate their guilt”. I predict that there are just as many, if not more, not responding for fear of “persecution”. Not to mention those that lie on the surveys for social desirability reasons.
I took a survey like this when I graduated from undergrad and presumed we all had to do it.
We have to be careful about applying our “personal lived experiences” to the real world. I have not personally experienced child abuse or rape or sexual harassment, but that does not mean it does not happen. As far as the current observations go; I do not think that you were looking for it. If you actively seek it out, I bet you would see more than you wish you did, and probably closer than you think.
What you said about “just good teaching” would be a good way to go about it. Unfortunately, I think many things get in the way of “just good teaching”. For example, 300+ student classes, lack of funding, lack of standards, etc.
I feel that the research is probably dead on, however I tend to believe many students don’t really know or feel like they are cheating until somebody spells out in black and white. I’m not talking about reading answers off of your hand or “phoning a friend” for help with your cell, everybody knows that is cheating. For example, I don’t remember any of my instructors ever going over exactly how cutting/pasting or plagiarizing was cheating (this may be just memory loss, as it was a long time ago). I am positive that during my undergraduate years, I “cheated” without really understanding what I was doing. After completing my thesis, I now realize the extent at which other’s ideas and work must be cited. I wonder how much of the survey is based on this type of cheating and whether the students actually realized they were cheating at the time??
ReplyDeleteCali (and Adam and Michelle), I think you make a number of important points. I think the statistics about cheating reported by Lang and Davis are likely accurate. Cali, on the surveys they discussed, I think it is possible that some people state that they have cheated, when they haven’t (i.e., nonresponse bias); however, I think it is just as likely that some people state that they haven’t cheated, when they actually have. After all, if people are willing to cheat, they are likely willing to lie about it on a survey (and there is research showing that people do lie on surveys to hide self-derogating information, even when their answers are anonymous).
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, Cali, from one perspective (or mindset), the statistics that Lang and Davis presented may not seem so bleak. For instance, let’s take the statistic that 70% of students have cheated at least some. This only means that 70% of students have cheated at some point during their academic career. I think it is safe to assume that the number of people who have cheated on most of their work is much much lower than 70% and that most of the survey’s respondents have actually cheated on a very small portion of their academic work. If this is true, then the overall percentage of academic work in which students have cheated is rather low.