Monday, February 22, 2010

RRJ3

Reference: Mac,R (2010, February 11) The Temptation to Cheat in Computer Science Classes at Stanford New York Times. Retrieved February 11, 2010 http://bayarea.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/11/heading-off-the-temptation-to-cheat-in-computer-science-classes-at-stanford/?scp=2&sq=computer%20science&st=cse
Summary:


The article talks about there a lot of computer science students in Stanford University who had cheated in some courses in the exam. Before the exam the professor always tried to warn the students not to cheat. A student who has been caught twice said he had never thought he could be caught. The university’s judicial panel reported that almost 22% computer science cases had occurred of the total honor-code violations, and there are only 75% students passing through a course before they graduated. The professor Roberts thought computer sciences courses cheating could be detected hardly. Stanford employs a new system called watchdog to detect the cheating but it can’t find all of them. Professor Roberts created a new system called “collective incentive” that is if one person cheats the whole class will face more pressure on the final exam. But still some students thought cheating is not worth doing, and some students thought the other major students also had cheating; in CS the cheating usually happened in lower-level courses.

Reaction:

Stanford University is the most famous university in the world. The students who studied in Stanford should have enough personal abilities. Computer science courses are really difficult to detect the cheating in. In my opinion the cheating cases that exist not only are the students’ responsibilities, but also show that the management system has problems. If one person cheats in the exam the whole class will be influenced, also should be doubted.

First, the most important thing we should figure out is why so many students choose to cheat in the exam and how to do it. Their purpose should be passing the courses. If the university makes the rules like if the student cheats or helps other cheaters, and he or she will not pass the exam, this will be more efficient. The students can use copy, cut or paste others work as their own. Generally, it is easier to cheat than in other majors, but different computer programs couldn’t be the same with another one. Even a part could be the same, but without another code the program couldn’t be operated. If the professor checks the students’ exam or homework carefully, I thought it can easily find the problems; We can change the exam styles too. For example the professor doesn’t ask the students to write a program instead they need to check the wrong sentences and make it able to be run; it maintains academic standards and makes the cheating more difficult.

Stanford uses the method in which one student cheats and the whole class will be influenced. I thought it is unfair. Other students didn’t do anything wrong so they should not be punished, and it can’t solve the problems. Actually some methods can be instead of it like the students supervise each other or make the rules that helping cheating and cheating are equal to stop them.

Students should be trusted; the goal of the university is try to make the students as good as possible, not only require the score, also the morality. Using the correct way to avoid cheating and helping the students to know what things they can do is the university’s’ responsibility. Students also need to know, trust ourselves, and do as much as we can; that is enough.

No comments:

Post a Comment