Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site celerity.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!celerity!boston
From: boston@celerity.UUCP (Boston Office)
Newsgroups: net.cse
Subject: Re: students editing output
Message-ID: <350@celerity.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 18-Sep-85 18:52:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: celerity.350
Posted: Wed Sep 18 18:52:52 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 23-Sep-85 00:35:26 EDT
References: <236@uwai.UUCP> <433@uvm-cs.UUCP> <300@uwvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: boston@celerity.UUCP (Boston Office)
Organization: Celerity Computing, San Diego, Ca.
Lines: 21

In article <300@uwvax.UUCP> david@wisc-rsch.arpa (David Parter) writes:
>> Stephen Hartley (hartley%uvm@csnet-relay) worries (and, I believe, not
>> without cause):
>
>> > ... students ... tailor[ing] their output with an editor to be more
>> > correct. What do other people do?
>
>David Luner (luner@wisc-ai) writes:
>> I make a point to tell my classes that the faking of results is a serious
>> breach of trust and will be dealt with severely. I emphasize that the programs
>
>the problem is to prevent such cheating.

NO, NO, NO!

The problem is to create an atmosphere in which students take responsibility
for their actions!  An honor code IS sufficient... as long as (a) it has
some teeth in it, as David pointed out, and (b) the rest of the system makes 
it clear that fraud is WORSE than momentary failure.

-- Roger B.A. Klorese


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com