By Brian Ray
It might be tough. Too tough a temptation for an average student struggling to pull a B, struggling with question number 37, and the only thing between him and his scholarship is the student’s shoulder next to him.
Although this scenario is fictional, there may be some truth to it and other scenarios at the University of Louisville. According to Shady Yousef, a senior computer engineering and computer science major, some students keep books in the restrooms, and in the middle of tests will go to the restroom in order to look over the material.
Yousef also said he has seen a student insert an old test between the pages of his test – but he was caught and kicked out.
Many teachers, including biology professor Dr. Arnold Karpoff, patrol the room where a test is being given and some also distribute multiple versions of a test. But, in spite of these efforts, Karpoff said students still can’t resist the urge to cheat.
“If I see body language that seems to indicate cheating, I loudly clear my throat and when the student looks up my eyes are locked on theirs,” said Karpoff. “However, the bottom line really is it is a case of the blind leading the blind.”
Section six of the code of student’s rights and responsibilities grants academic units the right to judge whether or not a student acted dishonestly. Academic units may impose any academic punishment on a guilty student they see fit.
Despite this, Graduate Student Council President Tim Brauch said the formal process of punishing a student for cheating is so long, many professors come up with their own solutions to the problem.
“The impression I have received is that it is difficult to actually go through the process with a cheater,” Brauch said. “In general, the professor or T.A. and the student reach an informal agreement and avoid the formal process entirely. Most agreements usually end up with the student having a lesser penalty than what could be expected in the formal process but is also less of a time commitment for the professor.”
Amber Carrier, a graduate teaching assistant, said teaching assistants are taught to be observant and instructed on what to do in order to catch cheating students. Carrier goes over the university’s policy on academic dishonesty on the first day of every class she teaches.
However, the decision on what to do about a cheating student should be made by the professor, according to Carrier.
“From what I’ve noticed, most faculty members will address the situation differently depending on what the student cheated on,” Carrier said. “For example, cheating on homework may be addressed differently than cheating on an exam or a quiz.”
Christine Steineck, a term instructor in the communications department, said acts of cheating are something traditionally handled within the classroom.
“I have not had to go through the process of convicting a student for cheating,” Steineck said. “I have had to fail students for cheating, but they did not appeal or complain, so that was the end of it.”
Steineck also said since cheating has never presented much of a problem for her, it keeps her from taking precautions against it, such as using different copies of the exam.
“It is possible I am being naive, but it is not something I have been aware of in my classes to any great extent,” Steineck said. “Since scores usually average out somewhere in the ‘C’ range, if there is a lot of cheating going on, they are not doing a very good job of it.”
Unfortunately, some in the student body have said cheating happens more than most think, and it presents the student who committed the act with an ethical dilemma.
“Cheating goes on all the time. It is a matter of whether you get away with it and if you can live with the guilt,” Erik Sturgeon, a junior secondary education major said. “Do you feel good when you get an A on a test, knowing that you have cheated?”
