In a 2008 article titled, Professors Use Technology To Fight Student Cheating, Kim Clark argues that recent anti-cheat technologies have empowered teachers and giving them the ability to catch students who don't uphold their schools academic integrity guidelines. Clark begins the article be reminding us that the landscape of higher education has undergone a dramatic change over the pas two decades. Nearly forty percent of all students have admitted to cheating in an academic setting and they also stated that cheating was made easier by using technologies such as "loaded" calculators & mobile devices. Clark claims that the internet is the main culprit behind this recent surge in student cheating. The internet is filled with how-to videos, where viewers can ascertain valuable knowledge on what tactics work best to achieve an A. What seems to be even more alarming to Clark, is that there are now dozens of websites where students can purchase custom made papers and use them as their own. These websites are known as paper-mills; students go there simply to cut and paste entire essays, students who visit these sites not only plagiarize but they fail to create any of their own original work.
The good thing to come from technologies that allow students to cheat, are the technologies that allow professors to be proactive in the war against academic dishonesty. Clark reports that more and more universities are installing anti-cheat software on their campus computers. This software only permits students to access the test they are taking. There is no internet access on these computers with anti-cheat software, no usb ports where flash drives can be inserted, and lastly some computers are even equipped with web cams-tracking both imagery and sound. In addition to the new anti-cheat software, teachers are becoming more tech-savvy. According to Clark, a growing number of professors are online under pseudonyms patrolling student activity. Instructors do promote student collaboration outside of class but they are aware that in these times students often concoct up ideas to cheat. By monitoring class discussion boards or student blogs, teachers can recognize students who need genuine help on assignments as well as they can thwart any attempts a student makes at illegally using information to get a head up on an exam/paper. Moving forward Clark observes that tougher monitoring of students is a necessary step in order to shorten the gap between professors and students in the cheating arms race. Students are being asked to leave all electronics outside the classroom, put away all food/drinks, and most importantly remove all unnecessary clothing items (hats, scarfs, jackets) where notes can be stored. To conclude Clark insists that cheat proof homework and tests may be the answer to preventing students from copying from their peers. Randomly assigned questions coupled with mandatory outlines and rough drafts will not offer students any advantages if they do decide to cheat.
Overall Kim Clark's argument was credible. She did not use a wide range of rhetorical strategies to strengthen her claim, but the ones she decided to use were well developed. For example, throughout the article Clark injected a variety of quotes from both students and professors across the country. Theses quotes gave insight into the epidemic of student cheating.Clark also used great detail when describing some of the steps students took to smuggle information into the classroom. For example Clarke spoke of how students would get coke bottles, rip off the labels, scan them on their computers , insert new information on them , and finally print them off and take them to class. With Clarke giving so much detail about different instances of cheating , I as a reader was able to visualize what lengths students go to in order to cheat and I now understand why instructors have to take so many steps to ensure that their classrooms are free from cheating.
No comments:
Post a Comment