That's Outrageous! Caught Cheating (page 2 of 2)

Advertisement
 
Image
It's more prevalent than anyone wants to admit

Once a Cheater, Always a Cheater?

Maybe some of the teachers who cheat got their degrees through fraud in the first place. In recent years, and in many places, wannabe teachers have sent ringers to take their certification exams. So several states, including Georgia, Oklahoma, Illinois and California, now require fingerprints to prove identity. In a climate like this, maybe we shouldn't be surprised that young Americans have stunningly casual attitudes toward cheating. According to one 2006 study, 60 percent of high school students admitted to cheating on a test in the past year.

Cizek worries that we're just not taking cheating seriously enough. "These days, a lot of people cheat and it seems kind of okay. When a baseball player uses steroids, he says you pay me to hit home runs, not to be a role model. And that's true to some extent. But teachers can't say that." And of course, kids know about all the other cheaters—Enron executives, millionaire tax dodgers, and the usual spate of sleazebags that have ripped off almost $9 billion in Iraq.

At least some good has come from all this bad: School systems are getting wise to the amount of cheating going on. More and more states, including New Jersey and South Carolina, are watching for suspicious jumps in school performance. Others have added oversight like outside monitors at problem schools.

Parents should make sure their state and local officials are aware of these problems and demand to know what they're doing about it. After all, if we let the cheaters get away with it, we wind up cheating ourselves.

What YOU Can Do

Ask your school if it can:
1) Require a code of ethics specifically prohibiting cheating, to be signed by students and teachers. If caught cheating, a student may be immediately suspended and risk expulsion, and a teacher may have his or her license revoked.

2) Hire independent monitors to proctor major exams.

If you're still not satisfied, ask your state educational official for a statistical audit by a reputable test-security firm. They look for oddities in test answers.

Michael Crowley is a senior editor at The New Republic.

Outraged? Write to Michael Crowley at outrageous@rd.com.
From Reader's Digest - January 2008
 
Must Read Should Everyone Read This? Yes! I vote for this story
Share Your Comments
Post a Comment
 
Remaining Character Count:
 
continued from next 3 comments: for every student no matter what level they start out at, salaries for teachers commensurate with their education level and responsibilities, and adequate funding for teacher training and special education programs to achieve these goals. Thank you, Kelle L. Gibbs M.A. CCC-SLP Rineyville, KY

By kgibbs, on 10/28/2008
This and the next two comments are all from one letter: Strangely, opposition to NCLB seems to have stalled and teachers and school systems are now focusing on how the impossible can be done. If any cheating has occurred, be assured that it is not because of a sudden increase in unscrupulous teachers. The absurdity of NCLB and the relentless pressure have consequences. How much more reasonable it would be to expect proficiency at achievable levels and without state variances, academic gains for every student no matter what level they start out at, salaries for teachers commensurate with their education level and responsibilities, and adequate funding for teacher training and special education programs to achieve these goals. Thank you, Kelle L. Gibbs M.A. CCC-SLP Rineyville, KY

By kgibbs, on 10/28/2008
The root of the problem is the No Child Left Behind (NLCB) act. Though briefly mentioned in the article, it is quickly dismissed and not thoroughly explained. The intent of NLCB legislation was that all children be proficient at their grade level. Unfortunately, little provision was made for students with disabilities and levels of proficiency vary from state to state. All except those students with severe delays are factored into the equation determining if a school has attained annual yearly progress (AYP). Schools that fail to meet AYP will be subject to loss of funding. Administrators, faced with the prospect of less revenue (which would further cut already sparse programs) place incredible pressure on teachers to ensure that students score well on these tests. The result is that learning is no longer focused on developing a child’s skills required for analysis and future learning, but rather on taking the test.

By kgibbs, on 10/28/2008
See All Comments

Advertisement
 
Related Links

Advertisement

Digg

Popular stories from the source site rd.com sorted by diggs
Powered by Digg's Users