Academic
dishonesty punished more leniently
Cheating:
Documents obtained by the On-line Forty-Niner
show that far fewer students are being suspended
for cheating and plagiarism. Many students
applaud the shift.
By
Jeff Overley
On-line Forty-Niner
On
the evening of April 14, as he read student
essays following a day of classes, Max Rosenkrantz
came across an obvious case of plagiarism.
“It
was clearly written in a way that was much
more polished, much more sophisticated than
what you get from an undergraduate,”
he said.
But
as he sat in his office the next afternoon
with his feet on his desk and his shoes
on the floor, the assistant professor of
philosophy expressed his reluctance to take
tough action against the apparently guilty
student.
“My
own view is, I don’t like it when
students plagiarize,” he said. “But
should they be suspended? Should they be
kicked out of school? I don’t know
if that’s right for them.”
Rosenkrantz’s
disinclination toward penalties such as
suspension for academic dishonesty is not
uncommon at Cal State Long Beach. In fact,
it mirrors the findings of documents obtained
and a survey conducted by the On-line Forty-Niner.
The
documents are a comprehensive compilation
of cases of academic dishonesty at CSULB
during the past six years. In 1998, the
documents reveal, eight instances of cheating
or plagiarism were referred to the Office
of Judicial Affairs on campus. In five of
the eight cases, students were suspended.
Since that time, from 1999 to 2003, the
office handled 48 cases, but only four of
these cases resulted in suspensions.
Instead
of suspensions, the university is routinely
assessing conduct probation, courses in
ethics and essays by students detailing
why cheating is wrong. It is also issuing
stayed suspensions, a kind of middle ground
between suspension and conduct probation.
“It
allows us to have a sanction between conduct
probation and [a] suspension, which would
separate a student from the campus,”
said Steven Katz, the director of judicial
affairs. “The ice is thinner [than
with conduct probation]. It takes less to
trigger the suspension.”
Whether
the student receives a failing grade in
the course is up to the individual professor’s
discretion.
The
other person who decides the nature of discipline
in cases of academic dishonesty takes responsibility
for the shift toward leniency during recent
years.
“It’s
probably because of me,” said Dean
of Students Mike Hostetler, who began working
at CSULB in 2000. “In my view, when
we administer punishment, we’re not
doing it like they do down at the [courthouse].
There, it’s punitive. We should be
doing it educationally.”
Hostetler
said that he tries to look at each case
as an “educational opportunity rather
than a punitive opportunity” unless
the student’s actions are extremely
unethical. Additionally, he said he is less
likely to give leeway to repeat offenders.
“Twice?
Now you’ve prostituted the academic
community and you’re going to sit
some time out.”
Hostetler’s
approach reflects the preference indicated
by a majority of 200 students who participated
in an unscientific On-line Forty-Niner survey.
Fifty-four percent of students questioned
said that a failing grade for the course
in which cheating or plagiarism occurred
would be an appropriate punishment. Another
9 percent recommended lesser measures, including
a failing grade on the specific assignment
in which academic dishonesty was involved.
“I
think [cheating] is certainly enough of
a crime to be punished,” said Arlene
Zeller, a computer science major who recommended
assessing a failing grade for the course.
“But it’s not enough to be expelled
or suspended. I think [an F] fits the crime
better.”
Ivan
Milko, a computer science major, also said
an F grade for the course would be a more
fitting punishment.
“Being
expelled or suspended from the school, that’s
not fair, that’s really too much,”
he said.
Some
students said that a harsher punishment
would be warranted in cases of academic
dishonesty. Twenty-three percent of students
said cheaters and plagiarizers should be
suspended, while 14 percent said that such
behavior should be punished with expulsion
from the university.
Adriana
Fernandez, a social work major, said expulsion
is appropriate.
“Because
it’s not [the student’s] own
work, and they’re here to learn. It’s
to their own benefit to be able to give
their own knowledge of what they’ve
learned.”
The
university defines both cheating and plagiarism
explicitly, and now requires that professors
outline personal policies on them in course
syllabi. Plagiarism is defined by the university
as “using the ideas or work of another
person or persons as if they were one’s
own, without giving credit to the source.”
Cheating is “obtaining or attempting
to obtain academic credit for work by use
of any dishonest, deceptive or fraudulent
means.”
Despite
this clear-cut definition, professors run
into gray areas when it comes to enforcing
the policy.
“Plagiarism
is hardly ever a cut and dry measure. If
someone inadvertently lifts a phrase, suspension
might be too strict,” said Norbert
Schurer, an assistant professor of English.
“[In other cases], I do agree it would
be a good thing to take it to a higher level.”
Hector
Neff, an associate professor of anthropology,
noted the difficulty in proving suspicions
of academic fraud.
“I
did in one case suspect a student had cribbed
a bunch of stuff off a Web site, but I didn’t
know enough to prove it.”
Of
course, there are still cases where the
cheating is quite overt.
“After
I gave back a quiz, a student erased an
answer on the Scantron and changed it,”
said Douglas Domingo-Foraste, a professor
of classics. “She came back later
and admitted it, and she felt really bad
and was crying and all that.”
David
Hood, a professor of history, recalled a
particularly blatant episode.
“In
a Roman history class, I had one student
who plagiarized straight from the textbook,”
he said. “I thought the paper sounded
kind of familiar.”
Like
Rosenkrantz, many professors agreed on one
thing: cheating isn’t hard to spot.
“Professors
catch this kind of thing,” Schurer
said. “If I’ve read three essays
by a C student and all of a sudden I get
this brilliant essay, I’ll notice.”
Domingo-Foraste
noted that “most cheaters aren’t
very good cheaters. They’re usually
cheating for a C, and they could get a C
without cheating. A students don’t
cheat.”
Professors
have in some instances moved beyond the
traditional means of oversight to discourage
cheating. Hood has been using turnitin.com,
an Internet service that receives student
essays through e-mail and checks for plagiarism.
Professors register with the Web site and
require their students to submit papers
to the site.
“Turn
It In doesn’t detect plagiarism so
much as it deters it,” Hood said.
The
service is a conspicuous example of how
the Internet can both prevent and assist
academic dishonesty. With the advent of
the World Wide Web, a plethora of so-called
term paper factories have sprung up that
will, for a price, draft an original essay
based on a specific topic.
“I
don’t know how much there is that
can even be done about that,” Rosenkrantz
said.
Collegians
also have virtually instant access to scholarly
works from the canons of all fields of work.
“I
think this generation of students is in
a much more difficult situation than [my
generation], because you’ve got this
thing here,” Hostetler said, tapping
the top of a computer monitor.
“What
it all comes down to,” he said, “is
this,” and he pointed to a large framed
picture of The Pyramid, above which was
one word in big white letters: “Ethics.”
City
editor Sonya Smith and staff writer Daniel
Frias contributed to this report.
|
