After administering your well-designed summative assessment, you see two of your students looking at each others test papers. After collecting their papers, you see that each has the same four incorrect answers. You talk to them individually and they each deny the charge of copying. What do you do?Recalling a prior discussion, I responded as follows:
What do you think about my response? How would you respond to the question?If this happened in my class, I would be very happy. Why? Because I know that such an event would provide a tremendous learning opportunity for my students and for myself.
Here is what I would do. Shortly after the alleged cheating incident, I would devote an entire class session to a philosophical analysis of cheating. I would initiate the discussion by guiding the students to arrive, on their own, at the fundamental questions of the sugya, such as:
- What is the definition of cheating?
- How do people cheat? Categorically, how many different types of cheating are there?
- Why do people cheat? Categorically, what are the motives for cheating?
- What are the possible short-term and long-term natural
consequences of cheating?- What are the causes of the mistakes which lead to a cheater getting caught? How could the cheater have avoided these mistakes?
- What is the relationship between cheating and lying, dishonesty, or stealing?
- What's wrong with cheating? And for that matter, what's wrong with lying,
dishonesty, or stealing? (If the first five questions have been answered
satisfactorily, then this question will almost answer itself.)- Is cheating ever appropriate or good? Is there a time to cheat?
The discussion would be grounded in real-life examples and cases. My role would be that of a discussion moderator. I would guide the discussion by keeping it anchored in productive questions, and I would help students to clarify their thoughts and to arrive at their own understanding and judgments about cheating. At the end, I would summarize our conclusions.
In my experience, discussions like these are where the real learning is at. They cause students to genuinely think about themselves and their decisions, and they actualize their potential to make real bechirah-decisions. Chances are, a discussion like this would be far more beneficial than the content of the test itself.
Moreover, this is the type of discussion that can take place several times throughout the year. I guarantee you that every time you discuss this with your students, new ideals will be discovered and the old ideas will be clarified in the minds of all.
And if, as a consequence of this discussion, one of my students makes a rational decision to cheat on a future test, then so be it. If I have helped this student to make a bechirah-decision by understanding the definition of cheating, the psychological motivation behind cheating, and the consequences of cheating, then I have succeeded as a teacher.
11 comments:
I would say that my response to your approach would depend on the ages/grade of the students. The age/grade would tell me how much exposure the students had had previously to what cheating is and why it should be avoided. It would tell me whether a bechirah-decision was possible or not given their stage of development.
And it would also depend on what I, as a teacher, might have said about cheating in my classroom, and what the consequences would be. If I had laid out clearly (as I do as a teacher, on the first day and in writing) what my view and class rule on cheating/plagiarism was, why I felt this way and what the consequences would be to any students caught cheating, then no, I would not excuse the cheating and have a discussion. But as I started this comment, how old and how experienced in school the students were would matter.
My students are college students, seniors for the most part, full time yeshiva students for the most part as well. If or when they cheat in their classes it's not for lack of having been exposed to what cheating is and how it can erode a person's character. At that point it is about getting away with what you can get away with if you can get away with it. It's about a disrespect for the learning environment they are in. They've made their bechirah-decisions, even if not formalized in a classroom. What they do learn in my classroom is that actions have consequences. They learn this the old fashioned way--I fail them. The fact that I won't discuss the cheating or let them attempt to rationalize their way out of their dilemma is a powerful "discussion" all on its own.
Matt-
would you leave the situation at a discussion and allow their bechira to take hold without punitive measures or would you excersize your right to punish them for their choice?
Ya'akob ibn Avi Mori,
The initial question was vague in that it didn't take into consideration the rules and consequences already that might already be in place.
I responded as I did in order to emphasize that whether to punish or how to punish is not the only question, and that the opportunity for teshuvah through discussion and reflection.
Practically speaking, I would have already established rules and consequences at the beginning of the year which would be enforced on their own terms. These consequences, though "artificial," should still be taken into account in their bechirah-decisions.
"Azrieli" as in the YU grad school I suppose..?
הצעיר וגומר,
Yes, the YU grad school
Matt,
Tzvi Sinensky here. I thought your answer was excellent.
I just wonder, would you simply explore the different issues and allow them to arrive at their own conclusions, or would you in any way try to convince them of a particular point of view? Let's say all your students think it is fine to cheat, in this and in other contexts. Would you just leave it at that, or would you try to convince them of another view? That wasn't clear to me from your response.
Tzvi,
I would treat it like any other chavrusa/chavurah: I would go into the discussion with an open mind and engage in mutual exploration of the area, but at the same time, if I think a certain idea is true, then I would say so, and I would defend my position with reasoning until one of my students shows me a flaw in my argument or provides a better one.
Got here through ProfK.
As a parent who is attempting to help my children learn personal responsibility and connect their actions with certain outcomes, I would hope that the teachers they make sure that any discussion is accompanied by (age-appropriate) consequence.
An elementary student might respond well to a threat to call home if it happens again (my cheating was promptly ended by such a threat in late elementary by such a threat). I think a tough stance is perfectly appropriate in high school. Life is tough and the years before a student enters the "real world" shouldn't not be overprotective.
oops shouldn't be overprotective
Let me preface this to say, I am not a teacher. If I were a teacher the ground rules for my class would be laid out at the beginning of the semester and students would know the consequences for not turning in required work, missing exams and cheating, as well as any other infractions. If caught cheating by turning in another's work or copying someone's test, the student would get a failing grade. Having a "learning opportunity" about cheating is something I would do prior to an event of cheating.
I do not think cheating should be sanctioned and despite the fact that so many people get away with it, I would not want it in my classroom.
Matt,
Sorry I didn't respond to your comment earlier.
I would just ask further - what about not only trying to argue the point intellectually, but inspiration and affect as well? For example, let's assume that you offered a story, one that illustrates the value of honesty and integrity lishmah. Wouldn't use also want to use such a story or some other affective means to inspire your students to follow your position. Intellectual argumentation will get you very far, but intellectual argumentation coupled with inspiration will get you even further.
Also, isn't your mode a bit biased toward students who are intellectually inclined? If all you do is argue and discuss the intellectual aspects of the issue, won't you be sidelining some students? What about the students who are either less intellectually inclined or less intellectually capable? They may not have an argument to offer, but they may have a story. By utilizing a wider range of approaches, you include a wider range of students.
Shabbat Shalom,
Tzvi
Post a Comment