[geeks] Academic Stupidity

[Lionel Peterson]

>From: Mark <md.benson at gmail.com>
>Date: 2008/03/08 Sat AM 08:49:07 CST
>To: The Geeks List <geeks at sunhelp.org>
>Subject: Re: [geeks] Academic Stupidity

>On 7 Mar 2008, at 16:45, Lionel Peterson wrote:
>
>>> From: Sridhar Ayengar <ploopster at gmail.com>
>>> Date: 2008/03/07 Fri AM 10:26:46 CST
>>> To: The Geeks List <geeks at sunhelp.org>
>>> Subject: [geeks] Academic Stupidity
>>
>>> http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/309855
>>>
>>> This Luddite professor needs to be strung up by the balls.
>>
>> Well, hold on - it is a fair question to pursue, and the outcome may  
>> be obvious, but I think it should be asked. Two quotes from the fine  
>> article:

<snip>

>> Honestly, the key words are "to be done independently" - the very  
>> nature of this group, it's very reason for being was to violate that  
>> "rule".
>
>I think sending the guy down for it (that's British for being kicked  
>out of a Uni) is too harsh, I think they should penalise all people  
>involved equally and penalise them academically.

I suspect they have to start somewhere, and the Prof. sent this kid on for punishment. The Prof. probably didn't have a means for identifying the 147 others involved, so the prof. took action against the easiest target.

>The institute in  
>question has over-reacted, and also has made him a scapegoat for the  
>148 or so people using the group, which kinda sucks. Cheats should be  
>taught the error of their ways, but kicking them out makes you look  
>bad and also ends the education of a perfectly intelligent (all though  
>lacking common sense, but the two are not necessarily nesting partners  
>as I'm sure people here well know) and potentially good student.

I agree with an earlier poster, that the threat to kick him out of school is just one of all possible outcomes.

I further feel that if he is found guilty and punished, the others in the study group will be punished - the school has to start somewhere...

>I'm with Lionel, it strikes me he screwed up, and now instead of  
>admitting a fair cop, is whining that he's done nothing wrong when he  
>clearly has, in the eyes of the academic establishment and anyone who  
>has read about it.The rules regarding working individually are there  
>to strengthen your individual abilities, something that is as  
>important when in the 'big wide world' as being able to collaborate  
>with others. If they'd wanted group collaboration on the exercise and  
>wanted conferral they'd have asked or permitted the students to  
>confer. Rules are set on academic exercises for a reason. If you  
>violate them you should be responsible for the consequences. I think  
>it's a hurricane in a teapot myself...

Agreed.

I suspect the only reason you are hearing about this is because it has the magic word "Facebook" in it. Take the technology out of it, and let's say he made a binder and put it in the library, called called it "Chemistry 101 homework notebook" and put questions and answers in the book about how to solve the HW problems for the class - he'd be just as wrong.

Now that I think about it, there is some conflicting info in the report - did everyone get different homework or the same homework? The article seems to say both are the case...

Lionel