gwl@rruxa.UUCP (03/30/87)
A general problem that I am sure is encountered in any course in
which programming exercises are assigned is cheating on the part of
students. Reading each and every program may not necessarily catch all
forms of cheating. Certainly if a student copies the work of another and
makes only superficial changes to the code one should be able to detect
cheating. One of the oldest tricks in the book is to fake the output or
results of the program to make it appear to work when in fact it does not.
In the old days when punched cards were used, the program listing
and the output results were normally found on adjacent output pages that
were physically connected when output on a line printer. However, today
I am confronted with PC labs where output and code listings are generated
on laser printers on separate sheets of paper. It is quite easy for a
student to insert phony output with the code and hand it in. This has
made my job much more difficult in that I must not only ensure that the
student is writing good programs, but that they are also handing in work
that is correct. I can no longer depend upon the results that I am handed
due to the fact that I can not be sure that they were created from the
code I am inspecting.
Don't get me wrong. I DO NOT just look at the results and see if
the program works. I read programs. I also inspect the test data used to
ensure that the program will indeed handle all possible inputs. However,
due to the lack of confidence in the supporting output, I must inspect
each and every program with a fine tooth comb to ensure they even work
for the test data that is being used.
I have thought of a possible aid in solving this problem and I
would like some opinions from others to determine if this is an appropriate
step to take on this matter. All of the programs that my students write
on on IBM PC clones. It would be very simple to require them to not only
hand in a program listing with supporting output, but to also require them
to hand in the source on a floppy disk so that I may actually subject them
to my own test cases. This may make it possible to judge programs based
upon feeding them the identical test data and evaluating the results. It
would still be necessary to read the programs and judge them on style,
structure, readability, etc....., but at least I could reduce the effort
to determine correctness and have a more objective basis on which to grade
these programs.
Does anyone have any problems with this approach? The only
people who I see that would oppose such a process would be those who
would take the easy way out and doctor the output rather than
expend the extra energy and time to make the programs work properly.
--
George W. Leach
Bell Communications Research New Jersey Institute of Technology
444 Hoes Lane 4A-1129 Computer & Information Sciences Dept.
Piscataway, New Jersey 08854 Newark, New Jersey 07102
(201) 699-8639
UUCP: ..!bcore!{indra | yogi | njitcis}!reggie
ARPA: reggie%njit-eies.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
From there to here, from here to there, funny things are everywhere
Dr. Seuss "One fish two fish red fish blue fish"roy@phri.UUCP (03/31/87)
In article <248@rruxa.UUCP> gwl@rruxa.UUCP talks about ways to prevent
cheating on programming assignments. In particular, what to do about
people who hand in their code and some faked output.
When I was learning FORTRAN, our assignments were in the form of
"write a program which reads input in 1X,3F14.4 format and does foo to it."
When we were sure we had the program working, we would hand in our decks
and the prof would insert his own data cards and run the program.
It's trivial to do the same thing today. Tell each student to
prepare an executable file called, for example, assignment1 in his home
directory which the prof will then run using his own data set.
--
Roy Smith, {allegra,cmcl2,philabs}!phri!roy
System Administrator, Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
"you can't spell deoxyribonucleic without unix!"marvit@hplabsc.UUCP (03/31/87)
<Concerning cheating with program assignments and testing theose programs> I have never taught a class on a PC, so take my comments with the appropriate filter. Bottom line: I give my assignments with a specified Input, a specified Output, and some *sample* data. I then run each program on a set of test data unknown to the students. The test data I se to verify programs is (usually) designed to test boundary conditions, error handling, etc. The students are welcome to use any test data they wish during development, but the final product has to pass mine. This is simplified (frommy point of view) by, for example, the program looking at the contents of a file with a particular name, or taking preformatted input from a particular device (eg, keyboard), or have specific entry/exit points for their code which then is linked to some extant modules (for particularly hairy routines). On a time-sharing system, I have (on occasion) enforced program names and had a daemon which woke up at the due date/time, collected all programs from the student's accounts, and whisked them away to my directory to be graded. No problem with straggling late comers. No problem with forged or smudged pieces of paper. This system had some drawbacks, tho', including some difficulty with personal flexibilty with due dates, and (especially) the careful construction of the problems so the solutions would be amenable to this method. However, I feel it was also closer to "real" life where a programmer is given specifications for a module which must integrate into an existing body of work and for which the interface may be well-defined. While automated collection is more difficult with PC-based assignments, the rest of the approach for programming tasks shouls be adaptable. I'd be interested in your feedback. -Peter Marvit HP Labs marvit@hplabs.hp.com
toddb@bacchus.UUCP (03/31/87)
In article <248@rruxa.UUCP> gwl@rruxa.UUCP writes: [concerning students cheating on programming assignments] > ... > I have thought of a possible aid in solving this problem ... >It would be very simple to require them to not only hand in a program >listing with supporting output, but to also require them to hand in the >source on a floppy disk so that I may actually subject them to my own >test cases. Considering that these students may someday have to deliver software to a customer in the same way, it seems not only realistic and expedient, but almost urgent. Students MUST understand development problems and portablility. And this is simple portablility: from one pc clone to another (identical) one. I would require them to turn in the source language input which you can compile/interpret on your own machine. You provide them only with a sample test case, but they should be aware that any input with the same flavor should be accepted by their program. --------------- {CS,ARPA}net: toddb@athena.mit.edu c--Q Q US: Todd Brunhoff; Computer Research Lab; Tektronix, Inc. ` Temporarily at Project Athena, MIT - Phone: (617) 253-1326
wade@sdacs.UUCP (03/31/87)
In article <248@rruxa.UUCP>, gwl@rruxa.UUCP writes: > A general problem that I am sure is encountered in any course in > which programming exercises are assigned is cheating on the part of > students. Reading each and every program may not necessarily catch all > forms of cheating. > .... > All of the programs that my students write > on on IBM PC clones. It would be very simple to require them to not only > hand in a program listing with supporting output, but to also require them > to hand in the source on a floppy disk so that I may actually subject them > to my own test cases. This may make it possible to judge programs based > upon feeding them the identical test data and evaluating the results. It > ... > Does anyone have any problems with this approach? The only > people who I see that would oppose such a process would be those who > would take the easy way out and doctor the output rather than > expend the extra energy and time to make the programs work properly. > I don't see any problem with this, particularly since when I was taking programming classes in school 5-6 years ago this was a common practice. We were required to turn in a floppy with a program and perhaps a readme file on it, or if the class was being taught on a multi-user system, we had to mail a copy of the source to the instructor or TA. I think I may have had a class where we just named the program something specific like homework3.p and the TA used his group permission to go into your directory and compile and run it. I am not sure if these techniques are still used to verify the syntax (compiler wise) and correctness of output, but I sure did not mind knowing that after I spent an all nighter getting my program to run, nobody was going to get the same credit by faking output. A further question might be whether it is OK to use utilities like "diff" to catch duplicate code. Why, you could even write a program which ignored differences in variable names, and only checked the structure... Is this going too far, or is it simply using the computer to help you do your job, which, after all, is what you are trying to teach the students..right? Ethical debate passed on to the net for resolution... Wade Blomgren UCSD-ACS ...sdcsvax!sdacs!wade
spf@clyde.UUCP (03/31/87)
In article <248@rruxa.UUCP> gwl@rruxa.UUCP writes: > > I have thought of a possible aid in solving this problem and I >would like some opinions from others to determine if this is an appropriate >step to take on this matter. >It would be very simple to require them to not only >hand in a program listing with supporting output, but to also require them >to hand in the source on a floppy disk so that I may actually subject them >to my own test cases. Since my students are on a VM/CMS system (blech), my variation of this is "testing by walking around". Remember that you don't have to test EVERYONE'S program; if the student considers it reasonably likely that you'll test theirs, that's generally sufficient. So in my case, I tell them to hand in their compiler listing and data sets, and to keep the program in their directory (the compiler listing alarms syntax errors, so I don't have to read for syntax too). Then in lab, while their working on the next project, and I'm walking around helping out, I periodically ask to run someone's previous project with me there (often providing my own test data to try and break notarious weak spots, like boundary conditions or ridiculus input). Since they don't know if I'll run theirs or not, they are discouraged from "cheating" or even lesser crimes. I've caught one or two cheaters, but mostly I find programs that work ONLY for my required test data, and break otherwise. The floppy idea will work nicely, though I still recommend occassionaly running the program IN THE STUDENT'S PRESENCE. It's an enlightening experience to see someone else run your program and react to your user interface (which I stress). Cheers! Steve
bk0h#@andrew.cmu.edu.UUCP (04/01/87)
> It would be very simple to require them to not only > hand in a program listing with supporting output, but to also require them > to hand in the source on a floppy disk so that I may actually subject them > to my own test cases. This may make it possible to judge programs based > upon feeding them the identical test data and evaluating the results. This approach was tried in one of my CS classes (I'm a student), and it worked very well. Every student had to hand in a disk with his source code (turbo pascal) on it, along with a listing of his code. The graders then compiled the code and ran test files through it. On large chunks of code this might take a long time though. The only problem I heard about was that soemone with a working program was told that it didn't work. He talked with the graders, who tried again, this time with the correct results, so apparently the grader just compiled incorrectly. You might try sending mail to Matt Mason (mason@c.cs.cmu.edu) to ask if he had any problems. (He was my professor). Brett
burgess@izar.UUCP (04/01/87)
In article <248@rruxa.UUCP> gwl@rruxa.UUCP writes: > > I have thought of a possible aid in solving this problem and I >would like some opinions from others to determine if this is an appropriate >step to take on this matter. All of the programs that my students write >on on IBM PC clones. It would be very simple to require them to not only >hand in a program listing with supporting output, but to also require them >to hand in the source on a floppy disk so that I may actually subject them >to my own test cases. This may make it possible to judge programs based I also teach a class on IBM PCs and I do this at least once a semester (but I don't tell them which program I will require from them, just that one will be required). It does take a long time to do, though, if the program is interactive. I also try to ask questions on the tests that require intimate knowledge of the programs. Usually of the 'how would you add this subroutine to your program?' type. That catches the people who got 'too much' help. --- "When confronted with a choice between two evils, I always choose the one I haven't tried before." -Mae West Rebecca Burgess burgess@izar.unm.edu
ruffwork@orstcs.UUCP (04/01/87)
I have also graded many programs and the classic "fake your output" problem has bothered me also. Several times I have caught people handing in output and listing that are inconsistent (e.g. print statements in the code but the output doesn't match what the statement would have printed). One solution is going to get easier as we get more computer networks. Several lisp classes I have taken required that you submit your program online, and that it handle a predefined (and very complete) data set. The prof. would then run every program through an automatic grading function that would verify output and dump anomilities and all program commnets to the screen. This allows you to skip over uninteresting cases, and by looking at comments only you see the logic behind the program (if you can't you didn't get a very good grade...). The problem with this is it requires MUCH more time on the prof's part to design good assignments (of course we ALWAYS do this anyway :-). With networked computers students could do their work, then mail it to the prof/grader. It would be run, and hand inspected to verify that it wasn't just a big if/then/else clause (that ONLY handled the data set and printed out the proper answers for it). Corrected papers would be mailed back to students. --ritchey ruff (ruffwork%oregon-state@csnet-relay) Home for the Artificially Intelligent
philip@axis.UUCP (04/03/87)
This doesn't really answer the original question, but one technique I have used to convince students that copying each others work, or working in groups to solve an assignment, is not worth the effort was simply to do the following: Where I spotted something which looed remarkably similar to something I had already seen, I found the first one I saw (from person 'A'), and rather than putting a mark on that of person 'B', I put a comment saying to see the person 'A' to find out what your mark is. Finding further similar items, I built up a chain, person 'C' asks person 'B' etc ... Murphy's law usualy puts the original author quite far down on this linked list, and he/she gets annoyed at having to follow the chain to find his/her mark. It is also patently obvious to the students that you have recognised what they are doing, and it soon stops. This worked quite well with smallish classes. If you have 50 or more assignments to mark it probably becomes more difficult to manage. Philip
larry@utecfb.Toronto.Edu (Larry Philps) (04/03/87)
Several years ago 2 of us here at U of T wrote a (large) system called
"autotest". This system allows and instructor and his tutors to build
a database of test cases for a particular assignment. Solutions are
generated by running the instructors (working we hope) program against
all the test cases and storing the results. A reasonably flexible comparison
function that ignores white space, case, and believes that if you generate
an error message in the right place, you must be reporting the correct
condition comes with the system, or you can write, debug and have the
system run a program of yours to do the comparison.
Students can access part of the data via a program called "exercise"
which will test their solution against a random set of data and
tell them whether or not they got an acceptable result. When satified
they "submit" their source and an executable. After the "due date"
a tutor runs "evaluate" which runs every submitted program against every
piece of test data and produces a performance summary for each.
Usually the tutors only actually look at about 20% of the paper submissions
for each assignment, and just rely on the evaluate output for marking.
I personally love having the evaluate output beside me when marking the
code. I is great when you see that their program failed in the case when
say, to much data was given. It is easy to find that part of the code
and circle it with an appropriate comment. Basically you can just read
the code for style and leave the test of functionality to "evaluate."
I addition, I just found out a few days ago, a grad student here wrote
a program which parses Turing programs to an intermediate form then
compares them. The result from 0 (different) to 1 (identical) is
completely independent of variable names, program structure, and
organization. This is now being run to compare all submitted programs.
If the result of a comparison is higher than about .85 (I think) then
the programs are virtually the same.
--
Larry Philps Engineering Computing Facility University of Toronto
NEW PATH: larry@ecf.toronto.edu
USENET: {linus, ihnp4, allegra, decvax, floyd}!utcsri!ecfb!larry
CSNET: larry@Toronto
ARPA: larry%Toronto@CSNet-Relay
BITNET: larry@ecf.utoronto.BITNETwayne@fmsrl7.UUCP (04/03/87)
Not that I want to start a major debate but what is the real problem
with students collaborating on programming assignments? In the real
world, how many professional programmers are expected to develop code
without talking to another programmer? (Just look at usenet traffic.)
The exchange of ideas between students fosters a feeling of working
with co-workers, not competing with them (as opposed to "curving" exam
scores).
Methinx the real issue is that is is very difficult for the instructor
to grade N people working on a joint assignment. ("Not everyone did the
same amount of work, therefore they do not deserve the same grade.")
The same argument can apply to exams (I have actually had one exam
where the instructor said to "Use any method you wish to complete this
exam." and we did it as a group project. Severe logistic problems,
it's not as easy as it first sounds!)
--
Michael R. Wayne Voice: (313) 322-3986 | philabs \
Working at (but not employed by) Ford Motor Company | pyramid !fmsrl7!wayne
| ihnp4!mb2c / brisco@caip.UUCP (04/03/87)
>Not that I want to start a major debate but what is the real problem >with students collaborating on programming assignments? In the real >world, how many professional programmers are expected to develop code >without talking to another programmer? (Just look at usenet traffic.) >The exchange of ideas between students fosters a feeling of working >with co-workers, not competing with them (as opposed to "curving" exam >scores). Not to reply to someone who doesn't want to start a major debate, *but*, I used to feel this - i.e. why have (student) programmers competing against each other, when (in the `real' world) they will need to learn to share programs and parts of programs. On the surface, pitting students against one another seems counter-productive -- however, there is a need to verify that each and every student is capable of making a worthwhile contribution to a project. Admittedly, as an undergraduate, the most difficult course I had was one where we were required to do a project in a group of 3 or more members. The project itself wasn't hard, but getting together along with, as well as coordinating a project, was difficult. Unless someone can make sure that the student has (at least) a resonable aptitude for programming (and not just an aptitude for cramming for exams) than I doubt that solo programs will go away. Tp. -- ---------------------------------------------------------- - ARPA: Brisco@rutgers - - UUCP: (ihnp4!ut-sally, allegra!packard) !caip!brisco - ----------------------------------------------------------
colsmith@ihu1e.UUCP (04/04/87)
When I was a TA the rules were simple. If 2 people handed in the same program, give them both a 0. The one that really wrote it will make that clear and you can give him or her points back if it seems appropriate. Often students cheat together, but sometimes one just steals from an unsuspecting other. And after you catch someone turning in stolen programs, watch them carefully! One student finally wised up and stopped using programs from other students in the same section. When he handed in a beautiful program I was suspicious. Our system administrator wrote a shell script to go through all programs the other students in that class were writing and look for unique procedure or variable names. It was slow but we found where he had stolen his program from! All he had changed was the name. Some nerve... Marcia Colsmith P.S. I flunked the student (he cheated about 6 different times, even repeatedly on the same assignment when I was a softy and gave him a chance to write programs over himself) and I married the system administrator, and we all lived happily ever after! :-)
scott@gitpyr.UUCP (04/05/87)
In article <843@fmsrl7.UUCP> wayne@fmsrl7.UUCP (Michael R. Wayne) writes: >Not that I want to start a major debate but what is the real problem >with students collaborating on programming assignments? In the real >world, how many professional programmers are expected to develop code >without talking to another programmer? (Just look at usenet traffic.) >The exchange of ideas between students fosters a feeling of working >with co-workers, not competing with them (as opposed to "curving" exam >scores). I wish that people would stop trying to compare the so-called "real world" with college. A learning environment is not the "real world." The learning environment's goal is to teach INDIVIDUAL students the concepts of a particular discipline. The goal of the "real world" is to come up with a good product in an efficeint manner. The ways in which you reach these goals are different. Personaly, I feel the best way to teach programming concepts is to have students work on individual programming assisgnments wich are designed to present individual concepts. If you allow students to work together on programming assignments, they will tend to specialize on particular concepts while learning very little about others. Once you teach them some solid core concepts, then you present them with projects which require them to tie all these concepts together. There may be a place for collaboration here, but only if the project is very complex or if one of the goals of the course is to teach group methodologies. To give you an idea of what I mean by complex, the undergraduate compilers class here at Tech requires a large project. When I took it last quarter, the project was to write a compiler which implemented a small subset of Ada. This subset supported integer and real types, arrays, records, recursive procedures with parameter passing, type coercion, simple boolean expressions, loops if-then-else statments, and procedure nesting. Support for abstract data types could be added for extra credit. The project was designed to introduce fundamental concepts of compiler construction such as scanning, parsing, semantic stack manipulation and code generation, plus how certain features common to modern programming languages could be implemented. The project was assigned as an INDIVIDUAL project. Had it been done as a group project, I don't think I would have gotten as much out of it as I did. Members of the group would have taken particular pieces of the compiler and made them their specialty. Yes, we could have implemented more of the language. No, we wouldn't have gotten any more out of it. >Methinx the real issue is that is is very difficult for the instructor >to grade N people working on a joint assignment. ("Not everyone did the >same amount of work, therefore they do not deserve the same grade.") How to assign grades should never be the real issue! Grades are ambiguous and often deceptive. A grade should definitely NEVER be based on the amount of work done, but rather on how well the concepts were learned. The major problem that I see with group projects is not that it is hard to determine if a student learned all the concepts, but rather that it is impossible to guarantee that a student will be exposed to all the concepts. With an individual project, you can be assured that if the student completes the project without colaborating with classmates, then all of the desired concepts have been introduced. Group projects do have their place though. I feel however, that they should be restricted to those situations where a goal of the course is to learn group interaction (such as a software engineering course), or where you want to develop skill at handling real world problems (such as a senior design project). I will agree with you, though, that exchange of ideas between students is very helpful, but it is often difficult to make sure that only ideas are exchanged. I'll also agree that fostering attitudes of competition is bad for students. Students should be treated as individuals and graded in relation to the quality of the work that they do, not the quality of the work that their classmates do. - Scott -- So this is the earth...big fat hairy deal. Scott Holt at Ga. Tech. ARPA: scott@pyr.ocs.gatech.edu BITNET: ccastsh@gitvm1 uucp: ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,masscomp,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!scott
ln63szb@sdcc13.UUCP (04/05/87)
At UCSD in the EECS department, some students cheat, they do it regularly, they are seldom caught by TAs or professors, and they are even less often forced to go through the university's judicial process. It is easier for most faculty members to give the student a zero on an assignment, or just to ignore the problem. Although many different methods of checking programming assignments are used, one thing I've encountered in every programming course: grades are based heavily on examinations. Exams never really reflect what was supposed to be learned by the programming assignments, but they seem necessary as long as students copy homework. Of course, students who cheat on homework often also cheat on exams.... Same at other schools? Grobbins.
levy@ttrdc.UUCP (04/06/87)
In article <2625@phri.UUCP>, roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) writes: < When we were sure we had the program working, we would hand in our decks < and the prof would insert his own data cards and run the program. < It's trivial to do the same thing today. Tell each student to < prepare an executable file called, for example, assignment1 in his home < directory which the prof will then run using his own data set. Can you say "Trojan Horse"? I know you could.... -- |------------dan levy------------| Path: ..!{akgua,homxb,ihnp4,ltuxa,mvuxa, | an engihacker @ | vax135}!ttrdc!ttrda!levy | at&t computer systems division | Disclaimer: try datclaimer. |--------skokie, illinois--------|
gwl@rruxa.UUCP (04/06/87)
I just wanted to thank all those out in netland for their
responses to my question. Some sent e-mail and others posted
helpful suggestions here. I haven't had the time lately to reply
to everyone directly, but I will as time permits.
--
George W. Leach
Bell Communications Research New Jersey Institute of Technology
444 Hoes Lane 4A-1129 Computer & Information Sciences Dept.
Piscataway, New Jersey 08854 Newark, New Jersey 07102
(201) 699-8639
UUCP: ..!bcore!{indra | yogi | njitcis}!reggie
ARPA: reggie%njit-eies.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
From there to here, from here to there, funny things are everywhere
Dr. Seuss "One fish two fish red fish blue fish"gwl@rruxa.UUCP (04/06/87)
In <843@fmsrl7.UUCP> wayne@fmsrl7.UUCP writes: >Not that I want to start a major debate but what is the real problem >with students collaborating on programming assignments? In the real >world, how many professional programmers are expected to develop code >without talking to another programmer? (Just look at usenet traffic.) >The exchange of ideas between students fosters a feeling of working >with co-workers, not competing with them (as opposed to "curving" exam >scores). > First, the project was not designed to be worked on by a group, but by an individual. The problem was far too simple to require a group effort. But that is not the point! As was pointed out in an earlier posting, the purpose was to teach the basic programming skills which must be learned on an individual basis before they may be applied on a grander scale. Also, if in the "real world" an individual were to either try to fake a program or rape the work of others and pass it off as his or her own the consequences would be a bit graver than receiving a zero grade. Chances are this person would be fired and possibly brought up on charges. -- George W. Leach Bell Communications Research New Jersey Institute of Technology 444 Hoes Lane 4A-1129 Computer & Information Sciences Dept. Piscataway, New Jersey 08854 Newark, New Jersey 07102 (201) 699-8639 UUCP: ..!bcore!{indra | yogi | njitcis}!reggie ARPA: reggie%njit-eies.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA From there to here, from here to there, funny things are everywhere Dr. Seuss "One fish two fish red fish blue fish"
wb8foz@ncoast.UUCP (04/06/87)
My illustrious undergrad institution had a ?better? idea
to this problem. On the (totally worthless) Big blue
mainframe, they removed the 'spool' command. Thus
students could not move files anywhere. Since your
account was assigned by class (yep 3 classes, 3 accounts)
and was pitched into a black hole each quarter,
you ended up typing in your execs (ie .rc files for
us real OS users) every 11 weeks.
And of course, all it did was convert the assignments into
a 'typing' class.
I sure am glad I was an engineering student.
We had a VAX cluster.
--
decvax!cwruecmp!ncoast!wb8foz
ncoast!wb8foz@case.csnet
(ncoast!wb8foz%case.csnet@csnet-relay.ARPA)
"SERIOUS?
Bones, it could upset the entire percentage!"
NRO Mossad intercept igniters plutonium Ollie North Tehran demasi@paisana.UUCP (04/06/87)
In article <807@sdcc13.ucsd.EDU>, ln63szb@sdcc13.ucsd.EDU (Grobbins) writes: > Although many different methods of checking programming assignments > are used, one thing I've encountered in every programming course: > grades are based heavily on examinations. Although I have no idea how many schools do this, I know of at least one other: Temple U in Philadelphia (Hi Guys! Got the net running yet?) At Temple, tons of programming assignments were regularly handed out at all levels with less and less weight placed upon actual assignments and progressively more upon exams as one advanced through the schedule. Initially, heavy weighting of programming assignments is probably good in that it demonstrates to the neophyte programmer the kind of hours and sweat required to become adept in the field (That is, blows out the non programmers early, while they still have time to change majors without too much hassle.) But in the long run far more emphasis was placed on the ability to understand and explain concepts in the abstract and general. In fact, some professors went so far as to assign difficult programming assignments and then never even bother to collect them. One learned rather quickly after straring at a few blank blue books during mid-terms that blowing off a program here and there was pure suicide. Of course, major projects still counted heavily towards one's grade, but there exists a simple way to verify their authorship. Talk to the kid who supposedly wrote it. It really shouldn't take more than ten or fifteen minutes of good questioning to determine how much of a given large project is actually origional. (How'd you handle this? What problems did you run into doing that? Where'd you get this from?) The same logic stands for group projects. Ask the students who did what, then quiz the individuals on their respective parts. If THEY say the works was evenly distributed, believe me, it was. -- Michael C. De Masi - AT&T Communications (For whom I work and not speak) 3702 Pender Drive, Fairfax, Virginia 22030 Phone: 703-246-9555 UUCP: seismo!decuac!grebyn!paisana!demasi "No matter where you go, there you are" - Buckaroo Banzai
biep@klipper.UUCP (04/07/87)
Warning: I am not English, and my English may be (and no doubt will be) rambling. In several articles several persons write about handing in copied programs. I think whoever steals anything doesn't belong on any self-respecting school (excluding cases where pity is more justified than justice, like non-cared-for children), and should be thrown out immediately. Once one starts accepting things like this, people get the idea that it is more of a sport than of a crime, and will try to outwit you and be proud of it. I consider cheating to be stealing of grades, and a very serious crime. A teacher isn't and shouldn't have to be a policeman, exams shouldn't have to be supervised and homeworks shouldn't have to be checked for own-ness (what's the English word for that?). Just make very clear that such behaviour doesn't belong here. Also, make very clear that if a student finds out that some other student cheats (or the like) and doesn't say it, he is choosing sides with that other student against the school and all hard-working students. Often, some student may feel guilty for "traiting" his mate, if he doesn't realise that if he doesn't he is traiting all others at that school. Of course, his best behaviour would be to go talking with the wrong- doer first and try to convince him to confess what he did to the teacher (or whoever). Any person who confesses what he did before being forced to should be judged lighter. This way of being strict also encourages the working (non-cheating) students, since knowing that other got the same exam (or even title) by cheating works discouraging. J. A. Durieux -- Biep. (biep@cs.vu.nl via mcvax) So you say that, besides the 36 known dimensions there is a 37th one, completely unknown by us? Sounds exciting!!
gh@utai.UUCP (04/07/87)
I am amazed to read in this discussion that the usual penalty for cheating seems to be a grade of 0, and nothing worse. What that means is that students have nothing to lose by cheating! Cheaters are usually people who can't do the assignment. They are in a position where they will get zero if they don't cheat, will also get zero if they cheat and are caught, and will get >0 if they cheat and are lucky. Cheating can only improve things. Analogy: Suppose the only penalty for theft was that if you were caught you had to return what you stole. That would be no deterrent at all. Unless the default penalty puts the offender in a much worse position than they would be if they stayed honest, it is useless. In my classes, the usual penalty for cheating is -1 * (max marks possible on assignment). (Lighter penalties are sometimes called for.) The penalty for permitting someone to copy from you is the same. In article <645@ihu1e.ATT.COM> colsmith@ihu1e.UUCP writes: >When I was a TA the rules were simple. If 2 people handed in the same >program, give them both a 0. The one that really wrote it will make that >clear and you can give him or her points back if it seems appropriate. This is a clear violation of due process, and would not be permitted at U of T. (In fact, it may allow the students to get off on a technicality if they appealed.) We are required to "invite" both students in to "discuss the situation", and that is how it should be. We can then press formal charges, if desired, if the students are unwilling to accept the penalty assessed. >P.S. I flunked the student (he cheated about 6 different times, even >repeatedly on the same assignment when I was a softy and gave him a chance >to write programs over himself) If a student does this, there are two things going wrong: (1) The student probably has a severe problem, and should have been referred for counselling. (2) Whether or not there were the mitigating circumstances of a personality disorder, the student should have been suspended from the university after the second offence until such time as he could his act together. Keeping someone like this around is doing nobody a favour, including the student. -- \\\\ Graeme Hirst University of Toronto Computer Science Department //// utcsri!utai!gh / gh@ai.toronto.edu / 416-978-8747
oyster@uwmacc.UUCP (04/08/87)
In article <1652@ttrdc.UUCP> levy@ttrdc.UUCP writes: <In article <2625@phri.UUCP>, roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) writes: << prepare an executable file called, for example, assignment1 in his home << directory which the prof will then run using his own data set. < <Can you say "Trojan Horse"? I know you could.... Can you say "Academic Probation"? I knew you could...
nate@cpocd2.UUCP (04/09/87)
In article <1355@uwmacc.UUCP> oyster@unix.macc.wisc.edu.UUCP (Vicarious Oyster) writes: >In article <1652@ttrdc.UUCP> levy@ttrdc.UUCP writes: ><In article <2625@phri.UUCP>, roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) writes: ><< prepare an executable file called, for example, assignment1 in his home ><< directory which the prof will then run using his own data set. >< ><Can you say "Trojan Horse"? I know you could.... > > Can you say "Academic Probation"? I knew you could... One way around this problem is for the student to have a source file, assignment1.p, say, in his/her home directory, which the prof could then copy, compile, and run. This would also allow the professor to see what, if any, compiler errors, warnings, and/or messages each student's program generates. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nathan Hess Workstation Group, ASIC Services Organization, Intel Corp. ...!{decwrl|hplabs!oliveb|pur-ee|qantel|amd}!intelca!mipos3!cpocd2!nate <domainish> : nate@cpocd2.intel.com ATT : (602) 961-2037
ccplumb@watnot.UUCP (04/11/87)
nate@cpocd2.UUCP (Nate Hess) says (in <568@cpocd2.UUCP>): >oyster@unix.macc.wisc.edu.UUCP (Vicarious Oyster) says (in <1355@uwmacc.UUCP>): >>levy@ttrdc.UUCP says (in <1652@ttrdc.UUCP>): >>>roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) says: (in <2625@phri.UUCP>): >>>> prepare an executable file called, for example, assignment1 in his home >>>> directory which the prof will then run using his own data set. >>> >>>Can you say "Trojan Horse"? I know you could.... >> >> Can you say "Academic Probation"? I knew you could... > >One way around this problem is for the student to have a source file, >assignment1.p, say, in his/her home directory, which the prof could then >copy, compile, and run. > >This would also allow the professor to see what, if any, compiler >errors, warnings, and/or messages each student's program generates. Having the prof compile the program personally still doesn't save him from trojan horses completely. It makes it possible to find them, but who wants to do all that work for a whole class? I could just use a deeply nested mess of #includes, which has a macro somewhere in the bottom which forks off a shell script. This shell script (now running as the prof) would then create a setuid prof shell (in a directory where it's untraceable - /tmp will do, but globally writeable directories that don't get cleaned out can be found with a little work) and start up a setuid student program which would change the culpable .h file and clean up any footprints. Once all traces are cleaned up (don't forget to change the time on the setuid shell, so it can't be correlated with the last accessed time of the various executables, and recompile your submitted program in toto, so noone can use adb to look for fork() and exec() calls) there's no way to find the culprit. As many have said, if you *really* want to break Unix security, there's precious little stopping you. -- -Colin Plumb (watmath!ccplumb) Silly quote: That's a horse of a different feather.
ark@alice.UUCP (04/13/87)
I think the penalty should be very simple. If X copies from Y, then X should be expelled from school. Period. And so should Y, unless Y can prove that Y did not know that X had copied Y's work.
kent@xanth.UUCP (Kent Paul Dolan) (04/13/87)
In article <139@utecfb.Toronto.Edu> larry@utecfb.UUCP (Larry Philps) writes:
->I addition, I just found out a few days ago, a grad student here wrote
->a program which parses Turing programs to an intermediate form then
->compares them. The result from 0 (different) to 1 (identical) is
->completely independent of variable names, program structure, and
->organization. This is now being run to compare all submitted programs.
->If the result of a comparison is higher than about .85 (I think) then
->the programs are virtually the same.
->--
->Larry Philps Engineering Computing Facility University of Toronto
->NEW PATH: larry@ecf.toronto.edu
Need it be mentioned, every computer science teacher in the known universe
wants a copy of the source and documentation to this, preferably yesterday!
Kent. ;-)
--
The Contradictor Member HUP (Happily Unemployed Programmers) // Also
// A
Back at ODU to learn how to program better (after 25 years!) \\ // Happy
\// Amigan!
UUCP : kent@xanth.UUCP or ...{sun,cbosgd,harvard}!xanth!kent
CSNET : kent@odu.csnet ARPA : kent@xanth.cs.odu.edu
Voice : (804) 587-7760 USnail: P.O. Box 1559, Norfolk, Va 23501-1559
Copyright 1987 Kent Paul Dolan. How about if we keep the human
All Rights Reserved. Author grants race around long enough to see
retransmission rights recursively only. a bit more of the universe?edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (04/13/87)
In article <3891@utai.UUCP> gh@ai.UUCP (Graeme Hirst) writes: >I am amazed to read in this discussion that the usual penalty for cheating >seems to be a grade of 0, and nothing worse. What that means is that students >have nothing to lose by cheating! Cheaters are usually people who can't do >the assignment. I kind of disagree. The past discusion has only included those people who have cheated 100% . What about those people who cheated between 1 - 100% or are these students not in the same category. Here at Madison we have Graduate students and undergraduate students sometime taking the very same classes. The graduates must get an A or B, the graduate full load is 9 credits while the undergraduate is 12 credits. So now what if we have a graduate and an undergraduate taking the same classes, but since both are taking the full load the undergraduate is taking one more class then the graduate. The undergraduate is therefore at a disadvantage. This probably is not cheating but ..... What about those who are only taking one or two classes ... Another variation that graduates and undergraduates used was to drop the course before the 12th week if they were not doing as well as they wanted to. They could then take the course again, having some of the programs already written!! What if a student copies one of the difficult routines and then writes the rest of the program? What if a student sees the algorithm that another student used to accomplish his program with? What if a student gets help from other students to complete the program? What about students who purposely take a certain instructor because they know him to be easy? What about students that transfer, or enter graduate school and take classes that they have really already had, but the credits did not transfer ? Say the program is a project of three programming tasks, what if the student has access to a completed project, thus he can analyze all three and insure that his first program is upwardly compatible. When I was trying to get my BS, the biggest hinderance was time. I had no problem doing all the projects. The only problem was that some of the projects took a lot of time, which I didn't have. Now a days with cheap pc's, students should not have to worry about trying to run on a 780 with a load average fluctuating between 20 and 40. I was extremely envious of those who had "friends" who had already taken the class with a specific instuctor. I also was envious of students in other majors that didn't require them to stay up late, or get up early (4:00AM) just to get computer resources that were usable. I think there are many different aspects to cheating, of which only one, the 100% cheater, is being addressed. What do other people think ? If you get half the program from some one else is it cheating? Where do you draw the line ? How can you draw the line? I do not think that cheating is so clear cut as the cheated or not, the only problem is that the person who gets caught is the one who did it 100%. mark -- edwards@unix.macc.wisc.edu {allegra, ihnp4, seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!edwards UW-Madison, 1210 West Dayton St., Madison WI 53706
bzs@bu-cs.UUCP (04/14/87)
> So now what if we have a graduate and an undergraduate taking the same > classes, but since both are taking the full load the undergraduate > is taking one more class then the graduate. The undergraduate is > therefore at a disadvantage. This probably is not cheating but ..... > What about those who are only taking one or two classes ... > Another variation that graduates and undergraduates used was to drop > the course before the 12th week if they were not doing as well as > they wanted to. They could then take the course again, having some > of the programs already written!! You should bring this up with the faculty, probably the dept chair. A typical resolution is to require an extra paper or something similar from grad students taking undergrad courses. If it's an undergrad taking a grad course then you knew what you were getting into. At any rate it's no excuse to cheat, nothing is, so what's the point? > I think there are many different aspects to cheating, of which > only one, the 100% cheater, is being addressed. What do other > people think ? If you get half the program from some one else > is it cheating? Where do you draw the line ? How can you draw > the line? I do not think that cheating is so clear cut as the > cheated or not, the only problem is that the person who gets > caught is the one who did it 100%. > > mark Wrong. Cheating is cheating. It's like asking if it's ok to be just a little bit pregnant. I would take full action against a student who "only got 1/2" the program from someone else. Unpardonable. The only rule of thumb is "did the plagarized work improve the student's grade?" If the answer is yes, it is cheating and should be punished (of course if the bozo copied the wrong solution, as often happens because bozos tend to come in bunches, it's still cheating.) The safe thing to do is: When in doubt, point it out. If a student put a comment above a routine indicating that they had gotten this routine from another student the worst I would do would be to lower his or her grade by the same amount as if they had missed it entirely (the *worst*, more likely I'd try to give them some credit, or speak with them to find out what's going on.) If you did this it shouldn't be construed as cheating. Useless, perhaps, but certainly not cheating. -Barry Shein, Boston University
edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (mark edwards) (04/14/87)
In article <6487@bu-cs.BU.EDU> bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) writes: >Wrong. Cheating is cheating. It's like asking if it's ok to be just a >little bit pregnant. Please define cheating. Gee I think I cheated, because I look at other peoples work in books and in online programs to give me a good idea on the proper way to write programs. I use "i" and "j" as variables in simple loops, I use the Pascal style of indenting blocks of my programs, instead of the K&R. I do not think cheating can be that well define. There is some fuzzy ground where it is very hard to clearly say yes or no. People who copy an entire program cheated. The rest, well, I would be hard pressed to judge them. > >I would take full action against a student who "only got 1/2" the >program from someone else. Unpardonable. What if they only got the algorithm? >The only rule of thumb is "did the plagarized work improve the >student's grade?" If the answer is yes, it is cheating and should be >punished (of course if the bozo copied the wrong solution, as often >happens because bozos tend to come in bunches, it's still cheating.) What is plagarized work? It seems that scientist plagarize all the time. They use tools, computers and lab devices (that other people made and invented), to extend the knowledge of a particular discipline. Is just a direct copy plagarism or are stolen ideas just as good. That gets us to Apple's strong point they can sue anybody and win, if they can prove the look and feel of. mark ( Just some idle ramblings that my fingers typed .....) -- edwards@unix.macc.wisc.edu {allegra, ihnp4, seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!edwards UW-Madison, 1210 West Dayton St., Madison WI 53706
kens@hpldorp.HP.COM (Ken Shrum) (04/14/87)
With regard to `fractional cheating' - the manner in which a student performs/completes an assignment is either in accordance with instructions or not. I see no gray area. If the student isn't supposed to get outside help, use literature references, use non-textbook references, etc. and then proceeds to anyway then cheating has occurred. Taking a class multiple times (regardless of where), having better background knowledge, or being able to spend additional time on the class is neither cheating nor an unfair advantage over other students. Education is a preparation for life afterwards, whether in academia or industry. Plagiarism, falsification of experiment results and taking credit for another's work have much more serious consequences in these realms than merely being expelled. Ken Shrum hplabs!hpldola!kens As a closing note, it rather bothers me that people are looking for an exact definition of what is cheating and what is not. Is this so that they can abide by the letter of the law yet cheat anyway by finding loopholes? We're talking personal integrity here, folks. "You shall not take unfair advantage of any member of the Caltech community." - The Caltech honor code - not an excerpt, the whole thing.
ccplumb@watnot.UUCP (04/15/87)
bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) says (in <6487@bu-cs.BU.EDU>): >> I think there are many different aspects to cheating, of which >> only one, the 100% cheater, is being addressed. What do other >> people think ? If you get half the program from some one else >> is it cheating? Where do you draw the line ? How can you draw >> the line? I do not think that cheating is so clear cut as the >> cheated or not, the only problem is that the person who gets >> caught is the one who did it 100%. I agree. >> >> mark > >Wrong. Cheating is cheating. It's like asking if it's ok to be just a >little bit pregnant. This claim is some of the worst nonsense ever posted to the net. I know that's going some. Cheating is *not* black-and-white. (It's not really relavent, but there *is* such a thing as being just a little bit pregnant. Quite frequently, a fertilized egg gets started, but is reabsorbed by the body before it's noticed.) >I would take full action against a student who "only got 1/2" the >program from someone else. Unpardonable. > >The only rule of thumb is "did the plagarized work improve the >student's grade?" If the answer is yes, it is cheating and should be >punished (of course if the bozo copied the wrong solution, as often >happens because bozos tend to come in bunches, it's still cheating.) What if the plagarized work improved the student's grade *in a different course*, because he/she could have written it, but had a mid-term on the due date and didn't want to put in the time to do something they could otherwise have done themselves, perhaps better? What is plagarism? Is borrowing something from a piece of PD software plagarism? If the student did just a miniscule amount of reformatting (say, changing the comments and a few variable names `for clarity'), they could claim it as theirs under copyright law. I wonder how much of a leg you'd have to stand on. Is borrowing from an assignment done last term plagarism? Is it, if the author consents? Is it, if the author consents by having it put in a book of course notes put together by a student society? What if I decide to try and write my own book of course notes, and get a bunch of students taking the course to try the stuff I've produced (including sample solutions) and tell me how helpful it is? Unless you expect students to rely *completely* on your lectures and the textbook/course materials, you'll have to decide how much help is considered fair to receive. Reminding another when the assignmet is due is, I think, considered fair by even the most vindicative of markers. Also, it's quite possible to get huge amounts of help (including having most of the assignment done for you) by just getting it from a student who isn't taking the course in question. The only way to detect this is to notice that the student doesn't understand the program `they did' too well. Anything short of this blatant is undetectable. So you're going to exact terrible tolls from people who get less help from within the class? Stupid, stupid, stupid. -- -Colin Plumb (watmath!watnot!ccplumb) Silly quote: It is better to have tried and failed than never to have failed at all.
collett@uwmacc.UUCP (04/15/87)
In article <6799@alice.uUCp> ark@alice.UUCP writes: >I think the penalty should be very simple. If X copies from Y, >then X should be expelled from school. Period. And so should >Y, unless Y can prove that Y did not know that X had copied Y's ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >work. ^^^^^^ This is silly. Presumably, you have proved that X had copied Y's program. Then X should suffer some sort of punishment (you say expulsion). I agree with this. But then you say that Y should suffer the same punishment, unless Y can prove that X had copyied his or her program without his or her knowledge. In essence, you are saying that Y is guilty until proved innocent. This doesn't seem right to me. Kendall Collett P.S. It is also possible for Y to know X had copied his or her program, but still be innocent of wrongdoing.
bzs@bu-cs.UUCP (04/15/87)
From: edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (mark edwards) > What is plagarized work? It seems that scientist plagarize all the > time. They use tools, computers and lab devices (that other people > made and invented), to extend the knowledge of a particular discipline. > Is just a direct copy plagarism or are stolen ideas just as good. Plagarism is using someone else's work and not documenting the fact as I clearly said in the original article and you conveniently left out to make your point. Besides, you're not a scientist, you're a student (or the hypothetical cheater is.) When you become a scientist you can use other's work like that to extend the field. You are not extending the field by writing a bubble sort for an intro programming class so copying it out of the ACM Algorithms is cheating. Do you understand the difference between learning a field and extending it? Good. My point was solid, if you want to do your homework like a scientist does his/her research then you will give full credit, in writing, to all ideas which are not your own. As I said before, anything less is cheating (for a student or a scientist.) -Barry Shein, Boston University
dickey@ssc-vax.UUCP (Frederick J Dickey) (04/15/87)
When I was a computer science TA, my experience was that usually only the dumb students cheated. Dumb students seemed to have the characteristic that their friends were dumb too. They would cheat by borrowing the code of some other dumb guy. This meant that if they weren't caught, they wouldn't get a very good grade anyhow. Consequently, I didn't worry too much about cheating, I let divine justice solve the problem. =======> Fred
jsk@phoenix.UUCP (Jerry Kickenson) (04/16/87)
I have been reading several postings concerning cheating on programming assignments. I've been quite surprised about how it seems to be handled. I have been a graduate teaching assistant and then an instructor in computer science at the University of North Carolina. An instructor there is not permitted to punish a student in any way for cheating. If the instructor suspects cheating, he/she must present the evidence to the student attorney general of the University (a student elected by the students). The attorney general then decides whether to pursue the matter. If the decision is not to pursue, that is the end of the matter (unless the instructor is very upset). If pursued, the case goes before the University honor court, made up of students, faculty and staff. The process is laborious but is designed to protect students and faculty. Determining whether cheating has occurred is often difficult. This decision should not be made by one teacher. Instead a court makes this decision. The instructor simply presents evidence. A student is protected from a possibly biased instructor. What constitutes cheating is standardized across the university, not defined differently for each instructor. Instructors are protected from angry students (a meek instructor can "hide" behind the decisions of the attorney general and the court) and also from possible law suits. If a student is convicted of cheating, the punishment is harsh. Unless there are exceptional mitigating circumstances (rare), a student convicted of cheating is suspended from school for the remainder of the semester and withdraw failing is placed on his/her transcript for the course in which he/she cheated. Personally, I have suspected cheating several times as a TA. The professor chose not to call in the attorney general. As an instructor, I did submit a case to the attorney general. The student eventually admitted cheating (the case was pretty damning) and the court suspended him. Cheating (and plagiarism) should be treated seriously. Punishment should be harsh (I believe a student at Princeton was once thrown out of school in her senior year and lost her degree). To balance things, the establishment of cheating should also be careful and involve several unbiased and experienced people. I feel that an instructor should not have the power to unilaterally give out zeros because he/she thinks cheating has occurred (is appeal possible?), and that a zero on a program is a slap in the wrist for cheating.
ttorgers@udenva.UUCP (04/16/87)
In article <6799@alice.uUCp> ark@alice.UUCP writes: >I think the penalty should be very simple. If X copies from Y, >then X should be expelled from school. Period. And so should >Y, unless Y can prove that Y did not know that X had copied Y's >work. Isn't this a little like saying Y is guilty unless proven innocent instead of being innocent unless proven guilty like it is supposed to be?? This also puts the burden of proof on the accused (Y) instead of on the accuser. . . Pretty simple alright. -- Troy Torgerson Email (UUCP only): {hplabs, seismo}!hao!udenva!ttorgers or {boulder, cires, denelcor, ucbvax!nbires, cisden}!udenva!ttorgers When the tough get going, the weak get screwed!
ed@plx.UUCP (Ed Chaban) (04/17/87)
In article <6487@bu-cs.BU.EDU>, bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) writes: > > > the course before the 12th week if they were not doing as well as > > they wanted to. They could then take the course again, having some > > of the programs already written!! > Why do professors assign the *SAME* problems every semester anay? When I was taking Pascal & Fortran, I made a deal with the instructor. I could write whatever programs I wanted to as long as I included the "Topic" for that assignment (i.e. using linked-lists). This solves *THREE* problems. (1) Plagiarism is minimized. (2) Creativity is encouraged and (3) The student begins to *APPLY* the concepts he has learned! Usually, I wrote programs for use in Physics Labs (saved me *LOTS* of time formatting and tabulating and calculating.) By the end of the semester, I had a "toolkit" for preparing my homework. -ed-
trent@cit-vax.UUCP (04/17/87)
Of course, this wouldn't work everywhere, but... (BTW, I'm a TA, and thus have experience from both ends) We don't have much of a cheating problem here for at least 3 reasons: 1) Classes are small. It's easy to notice cheating if you only have to grade 10 assignments. Also, if profs and TAs encourage the asking of questions and prompt for answers from the class, they get a pretty good idea how much the students know even if they don't assign homework. 2) We have an honor system that really works. Basically, the students are trusted and live up to that trust. The benefits of living under the honor system are greater than the rewards of cheating. Besides, people who are caught cheating and are "convicted" by the Board of Control (an entirely student run organization), are usually tossed out. (i.e. expelled) Cheating doesn't happen much. There is 1 rule here: Thou shalt not take unfair advantage of any other member of the Caltech community. This applies to everything, not just academics. (and yes, people have been nailed to the wall for non-academic honor code violations.) 3) There are few enough people here so that everyone knows everyone. If you are cheating, you'll get caught. Of course, all this depends on recruiting only students who are genuinely interested in learning, and trusting in their integrity. (something which many/most schools seem unwilling to do, for political and economic reasons) A related issue: professors here traditionally specify what amounts of collaboration and reference using are allowed in their classes. (because policies differ widely from class to class and prof to prof.) Another related issue: almost 100% of our mid-terms and finals are take-home. On the cover of the test is a list of the resources that are and are not allowed and the time limit for the test. (there is also good reason to believe that this liberty is not abused) -- <this space for rent> ../ray\.. (trent@csvax.caltech.edu, rat@caltech.bitnet, ...seismo!cit-vax!trent)
bzs@bu-cs.UUCP (04/17/87)
In article <6487@bu-cs.BU.EDU>, bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) writes: > > > the course before the 12th week if they were not doing as well as > > they wanted to. They could then take the course again, having some > > of the programs already written!! > I never wrote this. -Barry Shein, Boston University
lyndon@ncc.UUCP (Lyndon Nerenberg) (04/18/87)
In article <6799@alice.uUCp>, ark@alice.UUCP writes: > I think the penalty should be very simple. If X copies from Y, > then X should be expelled from school. Period. And so should > Y, unless Y can prove that Y did not know that X had copied Y's > work. You've been listening to the guys in the legal dep't a bit *too* much lately! I think the penalty for not casting to void *every* function whose return value is ignored should be very simple. If X forgets to cast, X should be forced to finish the I/O driver using FORTRAN II. Period. Don't worry about Y, he's already in shit for leaving the copyright header off of /bin/true. (Dennis, would you come here please? There's something we would like to discuss with you... :-)
malice@wolf.UUCP (Gib Wallis) (04/19/87)
In article <6799@alice.uUCp>, ark@alice.UUCP writes: > I think the penalty should be very simple. If X copies from Y, > then X should be expelled from school. Period. And so should > Y, unless Y can prove that Y did not know that X had copied Y's > work. don't you think that expulsion is a little severe? even in our law system we don't sentence someone to the electric chair for lying, cheating, and stealing on a first offense. [read: first time caught]
ark@alice.UUCP (04/20/87)
In article <301@wolf.UUCP>, malice@wolf.UUCP writes: > In article <6799@alice.uUCp>, ark@alice.UUCP writes: > > I think the penalty should be very simple. If X copies from Y, > > then X should be expelled from school. Period. And so should > > Y, unless Y can prove that Y did not know that X had copied Y's > > work. > > don't you think that expulsion is a little severe? > even in our law system we don't sentence someone to the electric > chair for lying, cheating, and stealing on a first offense. > [read: first time caught] I've gotten a few flames about my original statement, and I think I'd like to modify it a little. I believe that deliberate academic cheating is totally unacceptable and inexcusable under any circumstances. Thus I think expulsion is entirely appropriate for a first offense, provided that guilt is established. I also believe that allowing someone else to copy your work should be punished as severely as copying someone else's work. So, that leaves two sticky issues, and I was a little too draconian with regard to them: How does one esablish guilt? How much responsibility does one have to guard one's work against copying by others? These are both tough questions and I don't have easy answers for them. I do, however, have one real-life anecdote. Once upon a time I taught a programming class at Stevens Institute. When I teach programming classes that are not completely elementary, I always give the same first assignment: write a program that prints the prime numbers less than 10,000 in five columns down the page, 50 lines per page, as many pages as needed. The purpose of this assignment is to weed out the people who don't know how to program at all and to force everyone in the class to establish access to a computer somewhere. I'm sure you'll agree it is not a particularly difficult assignment. Anyway, one student turned in a truly remarkable program: it began by defining three arrays with 997 elements each (there are 997 primes less than 10,000). Now, while I had never stated this explicitly as a requirement, I felt that such a program did not really solve the problem, as it could not have been written in the first place without already having solved it! So I decided the program could not rate more than a B. The total lack of comments and spaghetti code reduced the maximum grade from B to C. Since the program produced the correct output, I gave it a C. A few papers later I encountered another program that defined three arrays with 997 elements! Comparing the two programs revealed that they were identical up to identifier names. In all, I found five variations of this program. What to do? I started by trying to confirm my judgment. I made photocopies of the five listings after removing the students' names and showed them to a few colleagues. Everyone who saw them volunteered that these programs were clearly copied from each other. So I presented all the evidence to the department chairman. His action was, I believe, overly magnanimous: he called all five into his office and told them that if they dropped the course right now, he would be spared the trouble of filing formal disciplinary charges against them and they would be allowed to stay in school. I never saw them again. There are two things to realize about this incident. First, there was never any attempt to discover who had copied from whom. There was plainly collusion here and all were judged equally guilty. Second, I have no doubt that if formal charges had been lodged, all five would have been expelled. Finally, I went through a good part of that semester genuinely concerned that I might be beaten to a pulp by those five students or their friends. I think I did the right thing anyway. --Andrew Koenig
collett@uwmacc.UUCP (Kendall Collett) (04/21/87)
In article <6812@alice.UUCP> ark@alice.UUCP writes: >There are two things to realize about this incident. First, there was >never any attempt to discover who had copied from whom. There was plainly >collusion here and all were judged equally guilty. Second, I have no >doubt that if formal charges had been lodged, all five would have been >expelled. You cannot be sure that the original author of the program was aware that his or her program was copied! As I was in this very position, I know I would resent being denied a chance to defend myself. And that resentment would be warranted. > --Andrew Koenig Kendall Collett -- ARPA : collett@unix.macc.wisc.edu UUCP : ...!{harvard,topaz,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!collett BITNet: collett@wiscmacc.bitnet
mc@notecnirp.Princeton.EDU (Mara Chibnik) (04/21/87)
To: kens@hpldorp.HP.COM Subject: Re: Cheating on Programming Assignments Newsgroups: comp.edu In-Reply-To: <11370002@hpldorp.HP.COM> References: <250@rruxa.UUCP> Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Princeton University Cc: Bcc: In article <11370002@hpldorp.HP.COM> you write: [ . . . ] >As a closing note, it rather bothers me that people are looking for an >exact definition of what is cheating and what is not. Is this so that >they can abide by the letter of the law yet cheat anyway by finding >loopholes? We're talking personal integrity here, folks. > Not really. We're interested in determining standards that we can impose on other people whose notions of personal integrity might differ from our own. Suppose we fail to make perfectly clear what lines we draw: at what point can we say that someone else has clearly overstepped generally accepted bounds? But I agree that it's sad to spend so much time thinking about it. Mara Chibnik mc@princeton
narten@percival.cs.purdue.edu (Thomas Narten) (04/21/87)
Catching cheaters is not black and white. Or rather, catching cheaters
is easy. Doling out appropriate punishment is not black and white. If
you think otherwise, you haven't dealt with it in all its forms
before.
Several years ago, I wrote an electronic submission facility that was
used for an intro Fortran course of about 1000 students. One thing it
did was compare all programs to one another. The program was very
simple. Basically, it counted occurences of certain things (e.g.
number of distinct variables, numbers of certain control structures,
etc.). Stats were collected on every program, and when the results
were in, all the data was combined and every set of data points was
compared to every other set. There was some leeway in what was
considered a match, for one thing, it was easy to get lots of matches!
Once you have matches, the programs listed as matches were compared by
hand and a decision was made as to whether they were similar or not.
In all the cases we pursued, it was *obvious* that there was extensive
"collaberation" (read code sharing). In all cases there were little
quirks that appeared in both listings. E.g. a *very* peculiar
indention scheme, very unique ways of doing formatted I/O (that hadn't
been discussed in class), a very nonstandard algorithm chosen in
implementing a subroutine, etc. To be even more sure, we would look
for 2 or 3 such quirks before calling in the students.
In the end, we ran it production for only 2 assignments. We hauled 20%
of the students into conferences to hear their story of what was going
on.
1) No one was willing to admit they had cheated. I mean NO ONE. The
evidence was always clear. We had enough clear cases, we didn't need
to bother with the borderline cases.
2) Some cases involved person A copying the assignment from person B
without B's knowledge. Some of these were easy to verify, person A
could not convince us that they knew anything about what their program
did.
3) By far the most cases involved friends working on assignments
together. They never felt that they were violating the rules. They
"never shared code". They "never shared pseudocode". They "never
wrote code together". They did "discuss the assignment". These cases
are very hard to deal with.
You cannot deal with case 3 the same way as case 1. At least not the
way things currently work. There is an awful lot of 3 going on. If you
don't think so, get a student in your office to explain what a certain
routine is doing and why they chose to implement it the way they did.
(E.g. what does this specific line do? What would happen if we took it
out?) I would bet money, that you will be very disappointed in what is
going on.
If I were to do it all again, I would have to think very carefully
about what cheating is. (I still don't know). You almost have to cut
out all out of class discussions to avoid 3, but that is self
defeating. Once the definition is clear, make sure that all the
students know it, and insure that punishment is severe, and enforced.
Thomas Narten
narten@cs.purdue.EDU or {ihnp4, allegra}!purdue!nartentrent@cit-vax.UUCP (04/22/87)
In article <4385@princeton.Princeton.EDU> mc@notecnirp.UUCP (Mara Chibnik) writes: >Not really. We're interested in determining standards that we can impose on >other people whose notions of personal integrity might differ from our own. >Suppose we fail to make perfectly clear what lines we draw: at what point can >we say that someone else has clearly overstepped generally accepted bounds? At last it comes out. (I expected it all along) Cheating is doing something your prof tells you not to do. 1/2 :-) The generic assumption around here is that collaboration, either with other students or with books, is allowed. If the prof doesn't want this to go on, this is made clear at the beginning of the term. The students abide by the prof's strictures. An anecdote: one physics final a long time ago contained the line, "you may use <insert random physics text here>, Feynman, and your class notes" (for those of you that don't know, there is a set of 3 books written by Richard Feynman that are standard elementary physics references) Anyway, one student went up to Richard Feynman himself and asked for help on one of the problems. Feynman was amused, and gave him help. The physics department complained to the Board of Control. The verdict was that the student had acted within the rules. (now these physics finals say, "...Feynman (the book, not the person)...") The moral? If you don't want certain behavior in students, tell them, or don't complain when you see such behavior. (of course, I really believe our honor system) -- <this space for rent> ../ray\.. (trent@csvax.caltech.edu, rat@caltech.bitnet, ...seismo!cit-vax!trent)
ns@maccs.UUCP (Nicholas Solntseff) (04/22/87)
At McMaster cheating is considered as Academic Dishonesty and is a case of plagiarism, i.e., passing someone else's work as your own without attribution. Our students are told that discussion between any number of students is NOT discouraged, provided that students leave such a meeting WITHOUT anything written down. Working from memory is akin to copying the IBM BIOS purely from external specifications! Closer collaboration is acceptable provided that ALL students have their name on all material handed in. We are advised not to repeat the same assignment two years' running! Nick Solntseff
bzs@bu-cs.UUCP (04/22/87)
Once when I was teaching a course I noticed a few assignments had the same, rather clever (for the level of the course), algorithm and data structure to solve a problem. I sez to myself, oh boy, one kid got it working and then the rest just got it. I showed it to my teaching asst to see what he thought about the (to me obvious) possibility of collusion here. I was relieved when he pointed out that this is what I had written on the board in answer to a question from one of the students one day. The few using this algorithm were probably the only students that were listening and capable of seeing how my scribble cracked the nut of the problem. Obviously I had forgotten that. Yeah, I knew the job was dangerous when I took it... -Barry Shein, Boston University
oyster@uwmacc.UUCP (Vicarious Oyster) (04/23/87)
In article <6799@alice.uUCp> ark@alice.UUCP writes: >I think the penalty should be very simple. If X copies from Y, >then X should be expelled from school. Period. And so should >Y, unless Y can prove that Y did not know that X had copied Y's >work. Right. And people going 56 mph (or is it 66 now?) should have their driver's license revoked permanently, except for Barry Shein, who should be electrocuted if he so much as parks on a hill with his wheels turned the wrong way. Sheesh.
oyster@uwmacc.UUCP (Vicarious Oyster) (04/24/87)
In article <11370002@hpldorp.HP.COM> kens@hpldorp.HP.COM (Ken Shrum) writes: >I see no gray area. If the student isn't >supposed to get outside help, use literature references, use >non-textbook references, etc. and then proceeds to anyway then >cheating has occurred. And how many courses do you take where the instructor *explicitly prohibits* the use of anything but a single text? In my humble opinion, both as one who learns and one who teaches, that'd be tantamount to telling the students that they aren't *really* supposed to be learning much. "Oh, and, by the way, don't do any reading outside class, because you might learn more than me, and we can't have that!" Right. >As a closing note, it rather bothers me that people are looking for an >exact definition of what is cheating and what is not. Is this so that >they can abide by the letter of the law yet cheat anyway by finding >loopholes? We're talking personal integrity here, folks. Thou shalt not kill. That's a perfectly clear statement which falls (at least) under the umbrella of personal integrity. However, if somebody tormented me for weeks unending with the most diabolical devices of torture (sarcasm, early Heinlein, etc), and did other things most nasty, like raping and killing my wife, children, and pet hamsters in front of me; but I got a single chance to plunge my Bic through the person's eye socket into his/her brain (so I watch too many mad slasher movies), rendering that person quite dead, should I be damned forever? Or fried in the electric chair? Or even committed as criminally insane? A lot of people would think not. The point is, if you like things in black and white, you're welcome to try to find a place where you can have it that way. My world, however, comes in all shades of gray, and in a multitude of colors. I suspect this is true for most people. Think about it.
tlh@mordred.cs.purdue.edu (Thomas L. Hausmann) (04/28/87)
In article <1419@uwmacc.UUCP>, oyster@uwmacc.UUCP (Vicarious Oyster) writes: > In article <11370002@hpldorp.HP.COM> kens@hpldorp.HP.COM (Ken Shrum) writes: > >I see no gray area. If the student isn't > >supposed to get outside help, use literature references, use > >non-textbook references, etc. and then proceeds to anyway then > >cheating has occurred. > > And how many courses do you take where the instructor *explicitly > prohibits* the use of anything but a single text? In my humble opinion, > both as one who learns and one who teaches, that'd be tantamount to telling > the students that they aren't *really* supposed to be learning much. "Oh, > and, by the way, don't do any reading outside class, because you might learn > more than me, and we can't have that!" Right. > There is a clear difference (to me anyway) between doing outside reading to gain perspective on some material and "digging" to find answers. So there is a gray area here. It depends on the students motivation for doing the outside reading. But asking students not to use outside references on an assignment is encouraging them to develop certain thought processes on their own and learn something. Tom ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thomas L. Hausmann | Graduate Assistant | tlh@mordred.cs.purdue.edu ( ARPA ) Dept of Computer Science | Purdue University | ...!purdue!tlh ( UUCP ) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
wb8foz@ncoast.UUCP (David Lesher) (04/28/87)
> Article <6812@alice.UUCP> From: ark@alice.UUCP
#
# I also believe that allowing someone else to copy your work should be
# punished as severely as copying someone else's work.
#
I have a thought and an experience to share.
A good friend of mine, who did not do so well in classwork,
yet is proving to be an excellent engineer, helped a classmate
who inquired how he had worked a specific part of a project.
Since he was busy on other work, he passed said classmate his
completed work, and returned his attention to his other task.
The classmate copied it word for word. Ed had no idea
until he got his grade.
Now Ed, by his own admission, survived in school with
the help of his friends. We worked with him, explained
things over, studied for tests together, etc.
Ed returned the favor, to a non-friend, and got stung.
My question to those profs on-net is this:
Is it worth creating such paranoia midst the student body
that we would not have helped Ed (or anybody else) for
fear of our own hides?
Must it be every (wo)man for him(her)self?
BTW, if you think we dragged Ed along, and he got
a free ride, he and I took the EIT last year.
We both passed with wide margins.
--
decvax!cwruecmp!ncoast!wb8foz OR ncoast!wb8foz@case.csnet
(ncoast!wb8foz%case.csnet@csnet-relay.ARPA)
NRO Mossad intercept igniters plutonium Ollie North Tehran
SERIOUS? Bones, it could upset the entire percentage!"benson@alcatraz.ksr.com (Benson Margulies) (04/28/87)
In article <551@maccs.UUCP> ns@maccs.UUCP (Nicholas Solntseff) writes: >At McMaster cheating is considered as Academic Dishonesty and is a case of >plagiarism, i.e., passing someone else's work as your own without attribution. > >Our students are told that discussion between any number of students is NOT >discouraged, provided that students leave such a meeting WITHOUT anything >written down. Working from memory is akin to copying the IBM BIOS purely >from external specifications! Closer collaboration is acceptable provided that >ALL students have their name on all material handed in. > I disagree. I'm not the only person I know with a pretty good medium term memory for detail. In a system like that, I would have a great advantage over some other people, because I'm capable of retaining an hour's conversation more or less verbatim. Hardly seems fair at all. I want to rattle the cage on the "institutional reputation" justification for worrying about the problem. As an interviewer, I have never asked someone about their grades. I ask them what sort of projects they have done, and to tell me about them. Someone who cheated their way through school would either (a) make a fool of themself, (b) have learned something in spite of it, or (c) demonstrate that they are a mamagement candidate, on the basis of having taking the "coordinate and organize" job in group work. In fact, I once refused to interview for a job when the recruiter told me that the hiring individual wanted my grades. My grades are fine, thank you very much, but anyone who cares what they were now that I have been working for several years is not someone I want to work for. So from my point of view as am employer, I say "let 'em cheat!" and leave it to me to sort out the result. As for the AT&T problem, I bet that asking grades is as potentially discriminating as anything else, since that nasty university may have had discriminatory cheating enforcement policies. On the other hand, much of the anti-cheating discussion seems to understand that students are more like adult offenders than like juveniles. I have precisely mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I would have thrown a fit had MIT not had a fundamental principle of "If you are sure that you know what you want, you can do it, (almost) whatever it is." On the other hand, there were certainly some confused people there who needed such complete freedom like a hole in the head. Somehow, university has to take care of both types. How many cheaters are truly dishonest, and how many are confused, desperate, or mislead? Those of you faculty that complain about cheating, what's your TA to student ratio? How accessible is help? Are there tutorials? Does anyone on the entire campus think its their business to check in on your students' general state of affairs, or do you wait for them to cheat or dive off of a tower? Rather than spending brain-power on defining cheating, writing programs to detect it, and arguing about how to punish it, \I/ think that you should be spending your time on building a learning environment in which its irrelevant. You are bound to succeed on helping at least some of your students. At the margins, its more important to help one confused individual than to catch one cheater. Benson I. Margulies Kendall Square Research Corp. harvard!ksr!benson All comments the responsibility ksr!benson@harvard.harvard.edu of the author, if anyone.
cdshaw@alberta.UUCP (Chris Shaw) (04/30/87)
In article <551@maccs.UUCP> ns@maccs.UUCP (Nicholas Solntseff) writes: >Our students are told that discussion between any number of students is NOT >discouraged, provided that students leave such a meeting WITHOUT anything >written down. That reminds me of a prof of mine who said that one could collaborate to any degree you like as long as a) you didn't take notes AND b) you immediately followed said collaboration with at least 2 hours of prime time TV! (In John Houseman's voice: "You come in here with a SKULL full of MUSH.. and you go out thinking like a LOOOOHYYER!) -- Chris Shaw cdshaw@alberta University of Alberta CatchPhrase: Bogus as HELL !
root@herman.UUCP (system administration) (05/01/87)
In article <83@ksr.UUCP>, benson@alcatraz.ksr.com (Benson Margulies) writes: > Rather than spending brain-power on defining cheating, writing > programs to detect it, and arguing about how to punish it, \I/ think > that you should be spending your time on building a learning > environment in which its irrelevant. .... First of all i have to let out a little school rah-rah: I did my undergraduate work at the University of Virginia (wah-hoo-wah (:-)) which has a famous (at least on the east coast) honor system. Essentially, its precepts are: One does not cheat, and therefore there need be little energy spent on it. One did not have to worry about covering one's test up in class, etc. Overall, i would say it worked quite well, and i'm always amazed at "other" colleges where rampant cheating is accepted as a way of life. At UVA, rampant honesty is more the norm. This allowed one to expend oneself on learning, not preventing others from cheating off of you. As far as cheating on programs, in my experience as a computer consultant at the Academic Computer Center, there was little cheating that i was able to detect (but i'm the first one to admit that i'm not perfect -- and i wasn't looking for it very hard given the honor-system environment i was in). But it seemed that the few times there was something funny going on, it was quite blatent. Usually on the order of wholesale copying of someone else's program listing out of the trash and just changing variable names. Most people who could do better at hiding their cheating were, by definition therefore, able to at least squeak by without resorting to cheating. Furthermore it was considered by most (again i'm really speaking of MY experiences) that if you cheated you only hurt yourself. You get what you put into it and that is what ultimately counts, doesn't it?
gwl@rruxa.UUCP (05/05/87)
In article <278@herman.UUCP> root@herman.UUCP writes: >In article <83@ksr.UUCP>, benson@alcatraz.ksr.com (Benson Margulies) writes: >> Rather than spending brain-power on defining cheating, writing >> programs to detect it, and arguing about how to punish it, \I/ think >> that you should be spending your time on building a learning >> environment in which its irrelevant. .... > >First of all i have to let out a little school rah-rah: I did my undergraduate >work at the University of Virginia (wah-hoo-wah (:-)) which has a famous (at >least on the east coast) honor system. Essentially, its precepts are: One >does not cheat, and therefore there need be little energy spent on it. One did >not have to worry about covering one's test up in class, etc. >Overall, i would say it worked quite well, and i'm always amazed at "other" >colleges where rampant cheating is accepted as a way of life. At UVA, rampant >honesty is more the norm. > This is a crock. Honor Systems are a joke. I attended Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, NJ my freshman year. At Stevens they also had an honor system. No one proctored the final examinations. You were allowed to leave the examination room and walk around the building during the exam. The only restriction was you couldn't exit the building. Well little old naive me. When I decided that nature had called and I headed to the mens room, I was due for a rude awakening. All that I heard in the bathroom stalls were the sounds of rustling papers and the sound of toilets flushing. People were cheating left and right! Some honor system. Dumb old me. I was honest and I got screwed because of it as compaired to others who cheated and did better on the exam. Obviously, I feel much better about the incident now. I know that the reason for attending a university was for an education, not to get the grade or piece of paper by any means available. However, I do not appreciate the fact that people can get away with this and enter the real world with the approval of a university. It somehow makes my efforts less meaningful. George W. Leach Bell Communications Research New Jersey Institute of Technology 444 Hoes Lane 4A-1129 Computer & Information Sciences Dept. Piscataway, New Jersey 08854 Newark, New Jersey 07102 (201) 699-8639 UUCP: ..!bellcore!{indra | yogi | njitcis}!reggie ARPA: reggie%njit-eies.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA From there to here, from here to there, funny things are everywhere Dr. Seuss "One fish two fish red fish blue fish"
cetron@utah-cs.UUCP (Edward J Cetron) (05/06/87)
In article <263@rruxa.UUCP> gwl@rruxa.UUCP writes: > >In article <278@herman.UUCP> root@herman.UUCP writes: >> >>First of all i have to let out a little school rah-rah: I did my undergraduate >>work at the University of Virginia (wah-hoo-wah (:-)) which has a famous (at >>least on the east coast) honor system. Essentially, its precepts are: One >>does not cheat, and therefore there need be little energy spent on it. One did > > This is a crock. Honor Systems are a joke. I attended Stevens >Institute of Technology in Hoboken, NJ my freshman year. At Stevens whooooaahh..... now I'm not familiar with the honor system at stevens, but if its like most, the punishment is simply an f, maybe even probation or suspension. U.Va. has a slightly more draconian punishement - full expulsion - you are gone for good with no appeal or lesser punishment - just like the military academies used to be. After 3 years as and undergrad I saw NO cases of cheating, but did get to watch 1 honor trial - and watched the student expelled. My fourth year (being a good boy :-) ) I spent time as a TA and sort-of and intstructor in physical chemistry among other things. Even then, when specifically charged with looking for cheating and also since I was now from the other side, I never saw any examples of cheating. But the clincher was when i helped TA the pre-med organic chemistry labs - which are the most obvious place to expect cheating given the moral fiber of most pre-meds. Maybe the honor system at stevens is a joke 'cause the students feel it is a joke (or maybe just students without pride) but the honor code (in spite of its draconianess) works just fine at the University of Virginia. -ed cetron (college '79) Computer Services Manager Center for Engineering Design Univ. of Utah cetron@cs.utah.edu
dam@uvacs.UUCP (05/07/87)
In article <263@rruxa.UUCP> gwl@rruxa.UUCP writes: >In article <278@herman.UUCP> root@herman.UUCP writes: >>>In article <83@ksr.UUCP>, benson@alcatraz.ksr.com (Benson Margulies)writes: >>> \I/ think >>> that you should be spending your time on building a learning >>> environment in which its irrelevant. .... >> >>First of all i have to let out a little school rah-rah: I did my undergrad >>work at the University of Virginia (wah-hoo-wah (:-)) which has a famous (at >>least on the east coast) honor system.... > > [story of a final at Stevens Tech under an honor system] > All >that I heard in the bathroom stalls were the sounds of rustling papers >and the sound of toilets flushing. People were cheating left and right! >Some honor system. Dumb old me. I was honest and I got screwed because >of it as compaired to others who cheated and did better on the exam. Your problem here lay not with the system as a whole, but with your part in it. At U.Va. if this had happened to me, I would knock on their stalls, confront them, get their names and turn them in to the honor committee. The four basic tenets of the Jeffersonian honor system, as originally defined, are: I will not lie. I will not cheat. I will not steal. I *will* report anyone I see doing so. Its first use was at William and Mary, where it's still in effect after 208 years. The penalties there range from reprimands to expulsion, with F's and one-semester suspensions being most common. A second offense may only be punished by expulsion. Furthermore, harassment and threats against person A for turning person B in (whether the threats are by person B or not) is *also* an honor offense and is usually punished by immediate expulsion. Here at U.Va., as at W&M (my undergrad college), there are very few cases of cheating. We caught one in the class I TA'd last fall; the culprits are HISTORY. We do proctor exams, as a courtesy measure if nothing else (you get the most *interesting* questions during a final). The point is that if everyone does their part (see tenet 4), then the honor system works; the cheaters get dumped out, word gets around, and fewer people with propensities to cheat will attend your institution; repeat until 'rampant honesty' becomes the norm. -- From the University of Virginia at Boar's Head, C.S. Department-in-Exile: Dave Montuori (Dr. ZRFQ); DAMONT quandum, DAMONTque futurus. dam@uvacs.cs.virginia.edu or {allegra | cbosgd | ncsu}!uvacs!dam NSA line eater food: terrorist, CIA, drugs, cipher, secret, fnord, FBI, decode.
gwl@rruxa.UUCP (05/07/87)
In article <4546@utah-cs.UUCP>, cetron@utah-cs.UUCP writes: > In article <263@rruxa.UUCP> gwl@rruxa.UUCP writes: > > > >In article <278@herman.UUCP> root@herman.UUCP writes: > >> > >>First of all i have to let out a little school rah-rah: I did my undergraduate > >>work at the University of Virginia (wah-hoo-wah (:-)) which has a famous (at > >>least on the east coast) honor system. Essentially, its precepts are: One > >>does not cheat, and therefore there need be little energy spent on it. One did > > > > This is a crock. Honor Systems are a joke. I attended Stevens > >Institute of Technology in Hoboken, NJ my freshman year. At Stevens > > whooooaahh..... now I'm not familiar with the honor system at stevens, but if > its like most, the punishment is simply an f, maybe even probation or > suspension. U.Va. has a slightly more draconian punishement - full expulsion ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The same is true at Stevens. > - you are gone for good with no appeal or lesser punishment - just like the > military academies used to be. After 3 years as and undergrad I saw NO cases ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Ever hear of the flap a few years back at West Point over cheating scandals??????? ***** Other stuff deleted ***** > Maybe the honor system at stevens is a joke 'cause the students feel > it is a joke (or maybe just students without pride) but the honor code (in ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Or maybe because people are human and may give in to temptations, especially when under great stress. Are you trying to tell me that there is something about the people who attend U of Va. that sets them apart from the rest of humanity? I don't think it is a case of the system works just fine, its more like people don't get caught that often. George W. Leach Bell Communications Research New Jersey Institute of Technology 444 Hoes Lane 4A-1129 Computer & Information Sciences Dept. Piscataway, New Jersey 08854 Newark, New Jersey 07102 (201) 699-8639 UUCP: ..!bellcore!{indra | yogi | njitcis}!reggie ARPA: reggie%njit-eies.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA From there to here, from here to there, funny things are everywhere Dr. Seuss "One fish two fish red fish blue fish"
det@herman.UUCP (Derek Terveer) (05/08/87)
In article <4546@utah-cs.UUCP>, cetron@utah-cs.UUCP (Edward J Cetron) writes: > In article <263@rruxa.UUCP> gwl@rruxa.UUCP writes: > > This is a crock. Honor Systems are a joke. I attended Stevens > >Institute of Technology in Hoboken, NJ my freshman year. At Stevens > > Maybe the honor system at stevens is a joke 'cause the students feel > it is a joke (or maybe just students without pride) but the honor code (in > spite of its draconianess) works just fine at the University of Virginia. Ed has delved to the crux of the matter here, i think, and that is: Given two equally "draconian" honor systems where one student body regards the whole affair as a sometimes-inconvenient joke, and the other student body that takes the system seriously, obviously the latter will work and the former fail. So it is a little more than just the words on the paper. *I* believed very strongly in it (I still do -- it affects my life even today (like it should) (:-)) when I was there and I know that even though perhaps I was somewhat more of a hazy eyed idealist than quite a few of my fellow students, I detected vastly more awareness of the honor system at UVA than at other schools. Sigh, i almost hate to do this, but: "Has anybody else had similar experiences as gwl (the majority, i presume) or Ed (the minority, i expect)?" P.s. I also missed gwl@rruxa's followup article to the lamb that i threw into the ring. P.p.s. Glad to meet another who has Grounds for discussion on this matter. derek terveer (seas '83)
trent@cit-vax.UUCP (05/08/87)
In article <264@rruxa.UUCP> gwl@rruxa.UUCP writes: > Or maybe because people are human and may give in to temptations, >especially when under great stress. Are you trying to tell me that there >is something about the people who attend U of Va. that sets them apart >from the rest of humanity? I don't think it is a case of the system >works just fine, its more like people don't get caught that often. Hmmm, I've said this before, but the real problem is that schools don't want to work hard enough to find students that are more interested in learning than in getting good grades. The honor system here works just fine. (believe me, I have expereince both as a student and as a TA grading homeworks et al) There are occasional slime balls, but the incidence rate of cheating here is *much* lower than at other schools with Draconian test proctoring schemes. (or so my friends at such schools tell me.) Of course, Caltech is the most selective school in the country (very slight exaggeration), and we only have about 800 undergrads, but...I never said this would work everywhere. The trick is to find people who don't have temptations to give in to. I mean...why is it tempting to cheat...you don't learn anything. (yes, yes, I've heard it all before...but *really*...think about it.) -- BAN NETWORK TV!!!!! ../ray\.. (trent@csvax.caltech.edu, rat@caltech.bitnet, ...seismo!cit-vax!trent)
kludge@gitpyr.gatech.EDU (Scott Dorsey) (05/08/87)
In article <1466@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU> dam@uvacs.UUCP (Dave Montuori) writes: >Its first use was at William and Mary, where it's still in effect after >208 years. The penalties there range from reprimands to expulsion, with >F's and one-semester suspensions being most common. A second offense >may only be punished by expulsion. Furthermore, harassment and threats >against person A for turning person B in (whether the threats are by >person B or not) is *also* an honor offense and is usually punished >by immediate expulsion. It works VERY, VERY well at William and Mary. I can't say anything about any other schools, but in two years there I didn't really see a single case of cheating, and I would have reported it, had I seen it. I didn't even see students studying old tests; they felt that it was more valuble to know the material than the format. Now I am here at Georgia Tech. I have seen three people blatantly cheating this week. I have seen students networking HP calculators, running wires down the aisle in class. I have seen students tapping out answers to multiple choice tests in morse code, with the end of their pencils. It takes more than an honor code. It also takes honor. A code must be enforced, and it must be enforced by the people that it affects. If this is not done, it is most probably worthless. The honor does not lie in the code, but in the students themselves. -- Scott Dorsey Kaptain_Kludge ICS Programming Lab (Where old terminals go to die), Rich 110, Georgia Institute of Technology, Box 36681, Atlanta, Georgia 30332 ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!kludge
beth@brillig (Beth Katz) (05/08/87)
In article <3546@gitpyr.gatech.EDU> kludge@gitpyr.UUCP (Scott Dorsey) writes: >In article <1466@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU> dam@uvacs.UUCP (Dave Montuori) writes: >>Its first use was at William and Mary, where it's still in effect after >>208 years. The penalties there range from reprimands to expulsion, with >>F's and one-semester suspensions being most common. A second offense >>may only be punished by expulsion. Furthermore, harassment and threats >>against person A for turning person B in (whether the threats are by >>person B or not) is *also* an honor offense and is usually punished >>by immediate expulsion. > > It works VERY, VERY well at William and Mary. I can't say anything >about any other schools, but in two years there I didn't really see a >single case of cheating, and I would have reported it, had I seen it. >I didn't even see students studying old tests; they felt that it was >more valuble to know the material than the format. Okay, this makes W&M students sound saintly. They are far from it. I spent four years there. I testified against someone after showing rather convincingly that they had grabbed someone's program out of the trash and copied it. They were given an F in the course. I know of athletes being expelled for second offenses. Yes, they were star players. Tough. They blew it. Proceedings are confidential, but you hear rumors about these things. In general, William and Mary students don't cheat. If I had seen someone cheating, I would have asked them to turn themselves in. (They have 24 hours to do so.) The honor system works because people believe that it works. The system is administered by students, and they are generally pretty good about it. Thomas Jefferson took the idea to Virginia. I gather it works pretty well there, too. And it seems to work at Cal Tech. I'm sure it works at other places as well. In general, most students don't cheat. At W&M (and UVa and Cal Tech) they know that there is a very small chance that they will get away with it. And if they manage to get away with it once, they know that somewhere down the line, they'll find that they've cheated themselves. Maybe they don't feel the same way at other schools. I don't know. Maryland will be reinforcing its honor code next year. It looks like they are aiming for something closer to W&M's. I don't know that the students will believe it. And if the students don't believe that the honor code works, it falls apart. Beth Katz W&M Class of '81 Univ. of Maryland beth@brillig.umd.edu
kludge@gitpyr.gatech.EDU (Scott Dorsey) (05/09/87)
In article <6601@mimsy.UUCP> beth@brillig.UUCP (Beth Katz) writes: >Okay, this makes W&M students sound saintly. They are far from it. >I spent four years there. I testified against someone after showing >rather convincingly that they had grabbed someone's program out of >the trash and copied it. They were given an F in the course. I know >of athletes being expelled for second offenses. Yes, they were >star players. Tough. They blew it. Proceedings are confidential, >but you hear rumors about these things. That's a good point. At William and Mary, if anyone is seen cheating, people notice it. They bring them into an honor court. People testify against them. This is because the majority of people follow the code, and that is all that is needed to enforce it. Here at Tech, as a TA I have see huge numbers of people cheating. I give them zeros for the assignment or test. I could send them to the dean, which I have done, but this does little good (nothing is done), and only raises students' ire against me. If a student is noticed cheating, his fellow students don't report him, they get the answers from him. -- Scott Dorsey Kaptain_Kludge ICS Programming Lab (Where old terminals go to die), Rich 110, Georgia Institute of Technology, Box 36681, Atlanta, Georgia 30332 ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!kludge
ln63szb@sdcc13.ucsd.EDU (Grobbins) (05/09/87)
In article <1466@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU> dam@uvacs.UUCP (Dave Montuori) writes: >The four basic tenets of the Jeffersonian honor system, as originally >defined, are: > I will not lie. > I will not cheat. > I will not steal. > I *will* report anyone I see doing so. This last rule is the one that bothers me. While I realize it may be fundamental to the success of an honor code, it seems that it is not a fair responsibility to place on students. The first three require a student to be an honest student; the last requires him to be a judge and possibly an executioner. Grobbins.
cetron@utah-cs.UUCP (Edward J Cetron) (05/09/87)
In article <854@sdcc13.ucsd.EDU> ln63szb@sdcc13.ucsd.edu.UUCP (Grobbins) writes: ->In article <1466@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU> dam@uvacs.UUCP (Dave Montuori) writes: ->>The four basic tenets of the Jeffersonian honor system, as originally ->>defined, are: ->> I will not lie. ->> I will not cheat. ->> I will not steal. ->> I *will* report anyone I see doing so. -> ->This last rule is the one that bothers me. While I realize it may ->be fundamental to the success of an honor code, it seems that it is ->not a fair responsibility to place on students. The first three ->require a student to be an honest student; the last requires him to ->be a judge and possibly an executioner. Not quite, there is still an honor trial with a judge,jury and if necessary 'executioner'. The student in case 4 is simply the accuser and the the other student the accused. -ed
nw@amdahl.amdahl.com (Neal Weidenhofer) (05/11/87)
I always thought that meant that the Faculty had the Honor and the
Students had the System.
The opinions expressed above are mine (but I'm willing to share.)
Regards,
Neal Weidenhofer
Nothin' ain't woth nothin' ...{hplabs|ihnp4|seismo|decwrl}!amdahl!nw
But it's free. Amdahl Corporation
1250 E. Arques Ave. (M/S 316)
Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3470
(408)737-500 8roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) (05/11/87)
In article <263@rruxa.UUCP> gwl@rruxa.UUCP writes: > This is a crock. Honor Systems are a joke. I attended Stevens >Institute of Technology in Hoboken, NJ my freshman year. At Stevens >they also had an honor system. This is a comment, not on honor systems, but on Stevens. If you can't conduct your life with honor, it's probably not worth conducting at all; too bad the fools around you don't get with the program. If you feel you need an enforcement system to protect your interests from their cheating... well, that's what's wrong with "the curve". -- (a proud and honorable Dartmouth '77...) -- ///==\\ (No disclaimer - nobody's listening anyway.) /// Roger B.A. Klorese, CELERITY (Northeast Area) \\\ 40 Speen St., Framingham, MA 01701 +1 617 872-1552 \\\==// celtics!roger@seismo.CSS.GOV - seismo!celtics!roger
roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) (05/11/87)
In article <854@sdcc13.ucsd.EDU> ln63szb@sdcc13.ucsd.edu.UUCP (Grobbins) writes: >In article <1466@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU> dam@uvacs.UUCP (Dave Montuori) writes: >> I *will* report anyone I see doing so. >(This rule) requires a student to be a judge and possibly an executioner. No, this rule requires a student to be a contributing member of society. Isn't that what college is there for? The attitude you express is the same sort of silly "don't want to get involved" nonsense that left Kitty Genovese dying in an alley. If you won't report an honor code violation, how can I expect you to report when someone's holding a knife to my throat? After all, your testimony might get my assailant convicted... -- ///==\\ (No disclaimer - nobody's listening anyway.) /// Roger B.A. Klorese, CELERITY (Northeast Area) \\\ 40 Speen St., Framingham, MA 01701 +1 617 872-1552 \\\==// celtics!roger@seismo.CSS.GOV - seismo!celtics!roger
edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (mark edwards) (05/13/87)
In article <1532@celtics.UUCP> roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) writes: >In article <263@rruxa.UUCP> gwl@rruxa.UUCP writes: >> This is a crock. Honor Systems are a joke. I attended Stevens >>Institute of Technology in Hoboken, NJ my freshman year. At Stevens >>they also had an honor system. > >This is a comment, not on honor systems, but on Stevens. > >If you can't conduct your life with honor, it's probably not worth >conducting at all; too bad the fools around you don't get with the >program. If you feel you need an enforcement system to protect your >interests from their cheating... well, that's what's wrong with >"the curve". I guess the problem is that there are as many different interpretation of what honor is, as what cheating is. It seems clear that most of the students at Steven's had no sleepless nights worring about their honor, tests may be a different story. Honor can be very destructive also. Think of the Captain going down with his ship. Or how about a fight over your honor, your family's honor or perhaps even your sister's. The US and Russia seem to think that they must observe nuclear testings, placements of nuclear arms and so forth. Why did the Soviets build electronic bugs into the steel beems that were to go into the building of the American Embassy? Is there no honor between nations? The orient has a thing called "saving face". Sometimes it costs them lots of money. Honor seems to be a thing only quantifiable in a persons mind. Some people seem to have more of it, or perhaps just a better understanding of it. Honor is probably also culturally based, or defined. So what is honorable for one culture may be jailable for another. Since the US is made up of people from most of the countries in the world it would seem natural that honor would differ from area to area within the US. more idle ramblings mark -- edwards@unix.macc.wisc.edu {allegra, ihnp4, seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!edwards UW-Madison, 1210 West Dayton St., Madison WI 53706
ln63szb@sdcc13.UUCP (05/14/87)
In article <1533@celtics.UUCP> roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) writes: >In article <854@sdcc13.ucsd.EDU> ln63szb@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Grobbins) writes: >>In article <1466@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU> dam@uvacs.UUCP (Dave Montuori) writes: >>> I *will* report anyone I see doing so. >>(This rule) requires a student to be a judge and possibly an executioner. >No, this rule requires a student to be a contributing member of society. >Isn't that what college is there for? The attitude you express is the >same sort of silly "don't want to get involved" nonsense that left Kitty >Genovese dying in an alley. Honor situations are seldom simple. When I turn in a cheater, I must judge for myself if that person really was cheating, and then I must be willing to have them suffer a serious penalty based on my judgement. I assure you, it's not a good feeling to have condemned another's academic career based on your quite limited understanding of a situation. >If you won't report an honor code violation, >how can I expect you to report when someone's holding a knife to my >throat? After all, your testimony might get my assailant convicted... I may report an honor code violation, I may report your hypothetical assailant. Then again, I may not; I may not be certain of just who your assailant was, I may not feel he should be punished for holding a knife to your throat. All I'll promise is that I won't cheat, that I won't hold a knife to your throat, and that I'll follow my conscience. Grobbins ln63szb@sdcc13.ucsd.edu
kens@hpldola.HP.COM (Ken Shrum) (05/14/87)
>> Maybe the honor system at stevens is a joke 'cause the students feel >> it is a joke (or maybe just students without pride) but the honor code (in > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Or maybe because people are human and may give in to temptations, >especially when under great stress. Are you trying to tell me that there >is something about the people who attend U of Va. that sets them apart >from the rest of humanity? I don't think it is a case of the system >works just fine, its more like people don't get caught that often. >George W. Leach I don't think that the people at U of Va are different than anyone else. Honor systems seem to work when people believe that they do. The honor system at Caltech is *extremely* successful, and I don't know why. My only guess is that everyone believes that everyone else is abiding by the system and that noone is willing to risk the advantages of the system. When I was a freshman, my 3rd term Chemistry prof announced that the midterm and final would be in class (unproctored) rather than take home. There was a buzz of conversation, and then a fellow stood up and said "Excuse me, but we feel that you don't trust us." (to murmured agreement). Since that's been nine years now, you may gather that the incident made quite an impression on me. Yes, we were young and naive in that trust wasn't involved, only convenience. Interestingly enough, the honor system at Caltech seems to not work as well among the graduate students. Again, I don't know why, but I can guess: (1) there are *major* efforts made with incoming undergraduates to educate them about the honor system; (2) graduate students don't believe that the honor system works, so it doesn't for them. Honor systems can work well, I've seen it in action. I'm sorry that you don't believe that they can work. Ken Shrum hplabs!hpldola!kens
det@herman.UUCP (05/15/87)
In article <854@sdcc13.ucsd.EDU>, ln63szb@sdcc13.ucsd.EDU (Grobbins) writes: > This last rule is the one that bothers me. (....) > the last requires him to be a judge and possibly an executioner. Well, i'm not sure how else one could have a working system without hiring a bunch of bounty hunter types to go around reporting on people.
det@herman.UUCP (05/16/87)
In article <1501@uwmacc.UUCP>, edwards@uwmacc.UUCP (mark edwards) writes: > [...] > The orient has a thing called "saving face". Sometimes it costs them > lots of money. And lots of lives too. Consider what typically happened to a defeated army in Japan during their (numerous) civil wars: The losing side all submitted to beheading. Very efficient for the victorious side. Very disasterous and final for the losing side. Very face saving for both sides. > [...] Honor is probably also culturally based, or defined. So what [...] Not probably; rather, most definitely! > [...] would seem natural that honor would differ from area to area within > the US. Unfortunately, it appears that you can go even farther than that, it differs so much from person to person in the US. It seems that the US is enough of a cultural melting pot that i haven't been able to discern any kind of real "pools" of attitudes towards honesty. Of course, i haven't been to too many places in the US either! (:-) derek
gilbert@aimmi.UUCP (Gilbert Cockton) (05/20/87)
In article <493@herman.UUCP> version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site aimmi.UUCP aimmi!hwcs!its63b!ukc!mcvax!seismo!columbia!rutgers!dayton!meccts!herman!det det@herman.UUCP (Derek Terveer) writes: > >Unfortunately, it appears that you can go even farther than that, it differs so >much from person to person in the US. It seems that the US is enough of a >cultural melting pot that i haven't been able to discern any kind of real >"pools" of attitudes towards honesty. Of course, i haven't been to too many >places in the US either! (:-) > I'm not sure that the melting pot argument accounts for everything, especially as most countries have been melting pots at some time in their development. USENET readers in the States may be interested in a common European analysis of the apparent lack of solidarity and communal consciousness in the U.S. Roughly, the idea is that America has always been big enough to allow people to move out rather than conform to group pressures. If this is true, then years of pushing back the frontier will have eroded the ability to toe the line for the sake of group values. As America seems to be running out of space, this could cause social problems in the decades to come, with only outside threats developing any sort of cohesion (e.g. reds in Mexico, Arab missiles in the Gulf etc.) Note also though that Durkheim's analysis of mechanical and organic solidarity proposes that any society with a highly developed division of labour will tend to fragment into groups with differing and even opposing values. Thus all (post-)industrial societies are bound to be less conformist than pre-industrial ones. What may have happened in European colonies where the natives were pushed into reservations is that the effects of the division of labour were amplified by the ease of running off rather than shaping up, hence the rampant individualism which seems to characterise America and the white Commonwealth. -- Gilbert Cockton, Scottish HCI Centre, Ben Line Building, Edinburgh, EH1 1TN JANET: gilbert@uk.ac.hw.aimmi ARPA: gilbert%aimmi.hw.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk UUCP: ..!{backbone}!aimmi.hw.ac.uk!gilbert
jcz@sas.UUCP (05/30/87)
In article <20@aimmi.UUCP>, gilbert@aimmi.UUCP (Gilbert Cockton) writes: > USENET readers in the States may be interested in a common European > analysis of the apparent lack of solidarity and communal consciousness > in the U.S. Roughly, the idea is that America has always been big > enough to allow people to move out rather than conform to group > pressures. If this is true, then years of pushing back the frontier > will have eroded the ability to toe the line for the sake of group > values. As America seems to be running out of space, this could cause > social problems in the decades to come, with only outside threats > developing any sort of cohesion (e.g. reds in Mexico, Arab missiles in > the Gulf etc.) Many Americans hold this same analisys, however, the fact that noncomformants could move to another place has allowed the creation of several varying cultural climates in the US. People can always move around until they find a place that suit them. All in all, the tolerance level is pretty high, not withstanding cetain well-publicized incidents. Couple that with very strong attitudes towards local Government as opposed to federal Government, you get a situation where many diverse 'social climates' exist. The unifying problems mentioned above are remote in that most people see them 'exploited' in national publications that vie for shares of the 'united' market. I would venture that most americans feel themselves to be 'North Carolinians', 'New Yorkers', 'Mountain Folk', and etc. more than they feel American. This is primarily due to the fact that the 'international' experience is so rare among the population. However, when an foreigner is deals with them, he does so as a <x> to an American. I have noticed that many Europeans do not really grasp how big the US is. When I met someone from London, and I tell them that I am from Cary, they are likely to sat to me, "Oh, Well, I have some friends in Houston. . ." Standing together to solve NATIONAL problems is not impossible. However, MOST social problems are indeed local problems that warant local solutions. In this sense, the Federal system should be able to supply resources. > > Note also though that Durkheim's analysis of mechanical and organic > solidarity proposes that any society with a highly developed division > of labour will tend to fragment into groups with differing and even opposing > values. Thus all (post-)industrial societies are bound to be less > conformist than pre-industrial ones. > Gilbert Cockton, Scottish HCI Centre, Ben Line Building, Edinburgh, EH1 1TN I agree; however, this affect is mitigated by the uniformity of consumer goods and other products. It is hard to be *really* individualistic when your problems are the same as every one elses because your diet/clothes/car/etc. are the same. The fragmentation mentioned above then becomes more of a 'stylistic' or 'fashion' division. That is, many of the factors in dividing society are not substantive except in a few cases, and even those can become stylised: religion, politics, etc. -- --jcz John Carl Zeigler SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC 27511 (919) 467-8000 ...!mcnc!rti-sel!sas!jcz