> Cheating is only an issue in the artificial world of academia, where it goes against how the system is supposed to work.
What about other artificial systems with defined rules, like sports? Is doping or other cheating permissible? If so, at all levels, or only professional levels?
> * Academic grades and degrees, to the extent that they affect your life after academia, should be based on what you can accomplish or explain, not how well you can write answers.*
In large part, the current forms of evaluation (closed book, silent, proctored exams) are a result of people cheating in honour-based systems. As cheating continues to be a problem, pressure is increased on institutions and staff to prevent it, which ultimately leads to a worse learning environment for everyone.
Edit: I should point out this isn't a theoretical concern. I personally resent the people who have attempted to 'beat the system' with simple dishonesty and caused me to have to endure uncomfortable and tedious attempts to minimise cheating during my education.
In a similar vein, I feel it was a lot better for just about everyone back when you could take more than a thimbleful of liquid onto an aeroplane.
> Employers should be using other methods to screen prospective employees -- looking at past projects [...]
So having cheated my way through schooling, I should probably drop a few more bucks into getting some jobs-board contractors to knock out a couple of 'passion projects' to throw onto github?
> What about other artificial systems with defined rules, like sports? Is doping or other cheating permissible? If so, at all levels, or only professional levels?
Actually you raise a good point. The sports system is like that too, it's just an artificial system. I don't watch sports so I don't care what goes on inside that system.
> Edit: I should point out this isn't a theoretical concern. I personally resent the people who have attempted to 'beat the system' with simple dishonesty and caused me to have to endure uncomfortable and tedious attempts to minimise cheating during my education.
I resent the fact that I had to spend so much time in world renowned educational centers learning so much theory that I never use in the real world.
I resent the fact that we put the college-as-job-credential system on a pedestal instead of coming up with something more efficient and doesn't let professors hang the fucking sword of Damocles over your head.
> So having cheated my way through schooling, I should probably drop a few more bucks into getting some jobs-board contractors to knock out a couple of 'passion projects' to throw onto github?
Isn't the legal system 'artificial' by that sort of definition? Should people feel obliged to follow those artificial rules?[1]
Also, dismissing a system with a simple "Well, I don't watch it / it doesn't affect me" is a pretty weak argument compared actually addressing how dishonesty & cheating affects those who do participate. (And whether you personally engage or not, I'm sure sport, like education, does somehow impact your life in some way.)
> I resent the fact that I had to spend so much time [...] learning so much theory that I never use in the real world.
Like what? Are you certain you have never and will never use it? Is it equally worthless to everyone, or is there some benefit to some of the people that happen to not be you?
Was it completely unavoidable? Did you investigate your curricula before enrolling, and choose only things directly related to your present career?
I agree that the current qualifications system is broken, IMO having a lot to do with (especially in the UK) pitching university as an essential part of education, and destroying/replacing the whole technical college system in its favour.
I can't accept that the best way to fix it is to make everything worse for everyone until it finally collapses though.
> Nice straw man bro
If we accept that I'm a dishonest person attempting to bypass the 'has good university credentials' check, why wouldn't you expect me to also cheat at building a portfolio, and maybe practising my interview-bullshit techniques in order to best land a job?
I can't imagine any system that has to assume maximum dishonesty could ever be more efficient than one where you can actually trust the information given to you.
Granted, it's a spectrum, but you're seemingly arguing in favour of some sort of 'distrust, then verify, then verify some more' approach, which seems weird.
[1] There are plenty of good arguments for and against, this isn't just a trick question.
What about other artificial systems with defined rules, like sports? Is doping or other cheating permissible? If so, at all levels, or only professional levels?
> * Academic grades and degrees, to the extent that they affect your life after academia, should be based on what you can accomplish or explain, not how well you can write answers.*
In large part, the current forms of evaluation (closed book, silent, proctored exams) are a result of people cheating in honour-based systems. As cheating continues to be a problem, pressure is increased on institutions and staff to prevent it, which ultimately leads to a worse learning environment for everyone.
Edit: I should point out this isn't a theoretical concern. I personally resent the people who have attempted to 'beat the system' with simple dishonesty and caused me to have to endure uncomfortable and tedious attempts to minimise cheating during my education.
In a similar vein, I feel it was a lot better for just about everyone back when you could take more than a thimbleful of liquid onto an aeroplane.
> Employers should be using other methods to screen prospective employees -- looking at past projects [...]
So having cheated my way through schooling, I should probably drop a few more bucks into getting some jobs-board contractors to knock out a couple of 'passion projects' to throw onto github?