Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site uwmcsd1.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!uwmcsd1!jerry From: jerry@uwmcsd1.UUCP (Jerry Lieberthal) Newsgroups: net.cse Subject: Re: "Editing output, is it the only problem?" Message-ID: <545@uwmcsd1.UUCP> Date: Wed, 25-Sep-85 02:45:45 EDT Article-I.D.: uwmcsd1.545 Posted: Wed Sep 25 02:45:45 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 27-Sep-85 04:04:42 EDT References: <5560@fortune.UUCP> <2958@ut-sally.UUCP> Organization: U of Wi-Milwaukee, Computing Services Div Lines: 35 > > The big problem was more of code copying. People would trace through > > the class directories for people who either accidently or purposly > > left permissions to their directories and files so the world could > ======= > > It is real hard for an instructor to > > notice this so most people got away with it. > ======= > > I guess it all comes down to whether you're skimming the code or studying > it. I grade using the latter. You can tell a lot more about how much work > the student did by studying the code than by studying the output. > > > Brian H. Powell I agree with Brian's statement. I also used the method of studying the code, and also paying attention (somewhat scant, tho') to the output. I usually did not have a problem telling what was original, and what was not. There were usually about 40 - 60 submissions during a grading spell. Also, I had the fortunate aspect of using a machine so difficult for student work (and was able to disguise a lot of the job control) that they didn't have time to try and figure out how to rip off other's work. The machine we are *still* using for some work is a Sperry 1100. The hardware may be reasonable, but the software lacks greatly.... -- ------------------------------------------------ - jerry University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Computing Services Division {ihnp4, uwvax, uwmacc}!uwmcsd1!jerry uwmcsd1!jerry@wisc-rsch.ARPA Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com