ohhitumblr:

The question in this post is whether professors should be responsible for a) reporting students who cheat, b) make their classes more “cheat-proof,” or c) make students not want to cheat.

I think the latter option is unrealistic. And I think making classes “cheat-proof” is easier than NYU Local makes it sound. In the Linguistics Department, we’re encouraged to work together, and as long as we indicate who we’ve worked with and put ideas into our own words, cheating is not an issue.

In Stern, however, there’s this fierce sense of competition— only a certain number of students are going to get that A— that I think breeds academic dishonesty. Am I saying that business school should be less competitive? Not necessarily. But I think giving every student the same multiple choice test and then saying only 5 of them can get an A is going to create some problems. I think there are other ways to challenge and evaluate students that are not as conducive to cheating. And I think, as educators, our professors should be innovative and purposeful in the way they evaluate our learning.

The end of the blog post quotes and NYU official who says, “Smart students who are determined to cheat will outsmart faculty.” That might be true. Even so, rethinking the way we teach and learn at NYU is only going to benefit all parties involved.