The blame game: for hundreds of years teachers have complained about students who cheat.  Teachers ask: why can’t students take pride in their work?  Why do I have to keep telling students over and over that this is wrong?  Why won’t they try harder?  Whether the cheating takes the form of getting the answers to the test in advance, either from someone who has already taken the test or now getting the answers off the internet, plagiarizing material in writing assignments, or having someone else do the work for them, teachers have to constantly be on guard looking for the cheating and spending what seems like the majority of their time managing issues related to cheating. 

In the classroom setting, teachers have to watch for students who write answers on the underside of their baseball caps, on the insides or soles of shoes, on their arm or leg under clothing, crib notes written in the tiniest size that still allows them to see the information, or use technology during the test to message a friend in order to get answers.  In the online setting, proctors are used during an exam so students cannot use notes or other cheating devices, and written assignments are run through plagiarism detectors in order to determine if the student did their own work.  Students are exceptionally creative when they feel the need to cheat.  Once cheating is identified, teachers then have to determine what level of punishment should be applied.  If the punishment is too lenient the rest of the student body gets the message that it is okay to cheat.  If the punishment is too harsh the students are all angry at the teacher.  Finding the middle balance is difficult to do and many teachers struggle with this throughout their entire careers.

What is the motivation for students to cheat?  There are many speculations, such as insecurity of knowledge in the information – also known as they did not study enough, fear of academic writing because they have not developed their own voice, a focus on the outcome instead of the journey, and/or test anxiety.  The list of possible causes goes on and on.   

Lang, however, says there are five contributing factors.  An “emphasis on performance” occurs when people are celebrated for their excellent performance, regardless of the activity (2013, p. 21).  When someone gets a great deal of attention for their achievements, others want the same attention and will do whatever needs to be done to gain the same attention.  Next, when the stakes are high for the student, such as he/she has to pass the class in order to continue moving forward in the educational journey, to get the next round of student loans, or the student’s parents have offered a big prize if the grades are high (2013, p. 26).  This brings to mind the “you’ve won a new car!” scenario from a game show. 

Extrinsic motivation is the third factor identified by Lang.  He suggests that when someone else, such as parents and teachers, are pushing the student to get good grades but the student does not have the same motivation.  Often, this factor is attached to high stakes (2013, p. 30).   Lang goes on to explain the fourth factor, which is low expectation of success, is when the student feels like no matter what they do they cannot succeed in a class.  This may be due to feeling as if his/her skills are inadequate to grasp the material, or based on the demands of the teacher (2013, p. 35).  It is this author’s opinion that earlier teachers in a student’s educational journey contribute greatly in shaping the expectations of a student.  When all of their earlier teachers reward a student’s work with high scores, regardless of quality, or the instructor does not give feedback on areas that need improvement, students get the false belief that their work is of excellent quality.  Lang also addresses this in the book in a later chapter covering metacognition. 

Lang’s final factor is the behavior of peers.  He states “if a student believes that his fellow students approve of cheating, and are cheating themselves, he is far more likely to cheat” (2013, p. 50).  These thoughts take the form of several scenarios for students.  First, if they are amongst peers who are cheating regularly, a student’s own grades may suffer if he does not cheat.  Secondly, when a large segment of the student body is cheating, the policies and penalties related to cheating seem insignificant.   Lang feels peer influence is the greatest factor in whether or not students cheat.

With all of this being said, what is the answer to reduce or eliminate cheating?  Lang offers a number of scenarios of methods faculty members have used to reduce cheating.  The common theme through all of those scenarios is to connect the student to the material.  Identifying how the course material impacts their lives and how it is useful to their futures is fundamental to reducing the level of cheating. 

Structuring a classroom and learning activities in such a way that students have more opportunities to prove their abilities, are more responsible for the methods of learning, allow them to reflect upon how the material impacts their overall learning, and providing positive feedback on each segment of the assignment even when the students do not fully complete the work are methods Lang has identified as successful ways of reducing cheating and engaging students in the material.  Further, offering opportunities and autonomy in how students meet the challenges of the course as well as the choice of the types of assignments they choose to complete in order to demonstrate mastery of the material increases interest (Lang, 2013, p. 75). 

Finally, Lang offers recommendations about how schools can approach dialogue about cheating and how to address instances of cheating.  Involving everyone on a campus, including staff members and students, expands the message and addresses peer-driven behaviors.  Identifying academic norms and sharing tools to help them achieve those norms are positive steps.  Explaining how academic honesty is about getting a higher-quality education, rather than ethical behavior, is also part of Lang’s recommendations. 

In short, Lang’s statement “dishonesty can help us learn how to become better teachers” is a challenge to faculty to change their expectations and assignments if they want students to learn in the classroom (2013, p. 4). 

References:

Lang, J. (2013). Cheating lessons: learning from academic dishonesty.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

© 2014 Lynne Trevisan

Lynne Trevisan, College of Health, Human Services, and Science, Ashford University