Slashdot Mirror


Shadow Scholar Details Student Cheating

vortex2.71 writes "A 'shadow writer,' who lives on the East Coast, details how he makes a living writing papers for a custom-essay company and describes the extent of student cheating he has observed. In the course of editing his article, The Chronicle Of Higher Education reviewed correspondence he had with clients and some of the papers he had been paid to write. 'I've written toward a master's degree in cognitive psychology, a Ph.D. in sociology, and a handful of postgraduate credits in international diplomacy. I've worked on bachelor's degrees in hospitality, business administration, and accounting. I've written for courses in history, cinema, labor relations, pharmacology, theology, sports management, maritime security, airline services, sustainability, municipal budgeting, marketing, philosophy, ethics, Eastern religion, postmodern architecture, anthropology, literature, and public administration. I've attended three dozen online universities. I've completed 12 graduate theses of 50 pages or more. All for someone else.'"

93 of 542 comments (clear)

  1. No engineering? by mangu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    FTFS: "I've written for courses in history, cinema, labor relations, pharmacology, theology, sports management, maritime security, airline services, sustainability, municipal budgeting, marketing, philosophy, ethics, Eastern religion, postmodern architecture, anthropology, literature, and public administration."

    Hah! I'd love to see how this guy would do a physics or calculus paper...

    1. Re:No engineering? by somersault · · Score: 2, Funny

      code to draw and scale using the squiggly lines.

      Splines?

      It's pretty funny that you wrote a report on this but can't remember the name for anything :p

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:No engineering? by 91degrees · · Score: 2, Informative

      He says he doesn't do anything that requires math (or video documented animal husbandary).

    3. Re:No engineering? by somersault · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's flamebait if every I've seen it.

      In what world do you live in that accounting, sustainability, maritime security and ethics do not matter?

      Would you really like to live in a world where your employer had no money to pay you, farmers had no crops left to feed you, and pirates and foreign armies were free to invade via sea to rape your wife and daughters while everyone else either watched idly, or cheered them on?

      --
      which is totally what she said
    4. Re:No engineering? by Moryath · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I had professors who simply gave every student the chance to bring a note sheet to the exam.

      One 8-12x11" sheet of paper. Both sides. Put whatever you want on it. The kids who printed it up with every possible item in 3-point font failed, those who put down the relevant concepts and formulae in a quick and easy-access format succeeded, because the test was actually structured to test whether you had learned the concepts and how to apply them.

      Of course, this requires that the professor isn't a lazy asshole who's been using the same, unchanged scantron-based multiple guess test for the past 20 years.

    5. Re:No engineering? by martas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      you need a humor transplant, dude... GP was funny!

    6. Re:No engineering? by Kokuyo · · Score: 3, Funny

      Note that animal husbandry is okay, as long as it's not video documented.

    7. Re:No engineering? by umghhh · · Score: 4, Interesting
      In my time at school some of our teachers gave us free hand - bring what you want and see if you succeed. The problem was that these were the most difficult exams of them all as they required:
      • understanding of the tested subject
      • ability to solve puzzles related to subject

      And as such exams are time limited no dead tree or electronic material can really help you solve the task in time if you have no clue. These were exams I actually enjoyed as I could pass (albeit not w/o difficulties) and majority of my colleagues (the cheaters and those that learned by the letter) needed few more attempts usually.

    8. Re:No engineering? by Ash+Vince · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hah! I'd love to see how this guy would do a physics or calculus paper...

      When I studied Physics we had hardly any coursework. There was some but I don't remember it as I never did any. 80% of the course was based on reeling off mathematical proofs in exams.

      In this type of course it would be just too easy to cheat so they force you to reel the proofs off under closed conditions with a limited supply of reference material (if any) provided.

      I do remember when I was studying Physics though one of my house mates who was studying Sociology and Cultural Studies had to write an essay on Neil Stephenson and his book The Diamond Age. He had about as much interest in Science Fiction a I do in Sociology but he chose that book as he knew I had a copy. He also knew I liked the author.

      On the night before his assignment was due in he came and asked me for some help. I proceeded to waffle on about the book based on the leading question he had been given regarding it. He sat there with his pad and took notes as I pointed out the sections of the book that were relevant to the question and gave some examples of the how the technological change (nanotechnology) in the book had changed the separate societies that are mentioned. It probably also helped that I was studying Physics so had some idea of nanotechnology.

      After an hour or so he took his 1 or 2 sides of A4 notes and went upstairs to churn out an essay based on my ideas. He gained a first for that paper, and permanently changed my opinion of humanities subjects: Most of them are so easy to pass they should not even be taught in the same college as the sciences of engineering subjects, they are certainly not the same academic level and do not require the same amount of study. All they require is the ability to structure your ideas (or someone else's) into a well formed English essay.

      Incidentally the guy who wrote that essay passed sociology and now works as a building site labourer. I failed physics and work as a lead software developer for a fairly small but very friendly company. I guess the employment market does not really value his sociology degree either.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    9. Re:No engineering? by HazMathew · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I hardly ever used my "cheat sheets". By the time I was done studying and had created my sheet I knew the material well.

    10. Re:No engineering? by jythie · · Score: 5, Interesting

      A variant of that idea I rather liked. I had a professor who liked to give 'tests of 2'... i.e. every answer on the test was '2'.... but better show your work.

    11. Re:No engineering? by x_IamSpartacus_x · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I had a friend whose professor allowed this too. He said pretty much what yours did, that "You can put whatever you want on it, front or back." My friend was in an advanced logic class so he brought an empty 8-12x11" sheet of paper and a postgrad philosophy major who stood on the piece of paper and gave my friend all the answers. Because it was a logic class the professor allowed it. A professor who can admit that he's been outsmarted by a student is a pretty good teacher if you ask me.

    12. Re:No engineering? by friedo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Similarly, I had a Calc professor who gave all the answers on the test, but you had to show all the work on how to get there.

    13. Re:No engineering? by tophermeyer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Boom. This right here.

      I had them. Occasionally they were helpful to reference complex formulae or names/dates I never cared to memorize. But the activity of summarizing concepts and creating the cheat sheet was all the review I needed to handle the exam.

    14. Re:No engineering? by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'll reply to you of a few possible posts.

      I begin to think that meta-organization is becoming more important now. The guy with "bring in the grad student" did it right. It's how business really works. Courses reward the Specialist, but business rewards the Jack-of-all-trades if he can make himself CEO and is really savvy with hiring.

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    15. Re:No engineering? by digitig · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In my time at school some of our teachers gave us free hand - bring what you want and see if you succeed. The problem was that these were the most difficult exams of them all as they required:

      • understanding of the tested subject
      • ability to solve puzzles related to subject

      And as such exams are time limited no dead tree or electronic material can really help you solve the task in time if you have no clue. These were exams I actually enjoyed as I could pass (albeit not w/o difficulties) and majority of my colleagues (the cheaters and those that learned by the letter) needed few more attempts usually.

      They're also the most representative of what most people need to do in the real world. Solve problems in real-time with access to reference material if they need it.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    16. Re:No engineering? by digitig · · Score: 4, Interesting

      On the night before his assignment was due in he came and asked me for some help. I proceeded to waffle on about the book based on the leading question he had been given regarding it. He sat there with his pad and took notes as I pointed out the sections of the book that were relevant to the question and gave some examples of the how the technological change (nanotechnology) in the book had changed the separate societies that are mentioned. It probably also helped that I was studying Physics so had some idea of nanotechnology.

      After an hour or so he took his 1 or 2 sides of A4 notes and went upstairs to churn out an essay based on my ideas. He gained a first for that paper, and permanently changed my opinion of humanities subjects: Most of them are so easy to pass they should not even be taught in the same college as the sciences of engineering subjects, they are certainly not the same academic level and do not require the same amount of study. All they require is the ability to structure your ideas (or someone else's) into a well formed English essay.

      I have a humanities degree and an engineering degree. Neither was easier than the other to pass, they just required very different skills. I note that you "waffled" but he had to "structure" the ideas into a "well-formed English essay". Don't you wish more engineers had that ability? And why do you assume he only used your ideas? To get a first he would have had to have shown how it linked in to the rest of the course, something he would have had to do himself when he got back upstairs.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    17. Re:No engineering? by onkelonkel · · Score: 3, Funny

      The professor supervising the final English 100 exam tells the 800 or so students in the exam hall “You will have 3 hours to complete this exam, not one minute more. Start writing when I say go and put your pens down when I stop.” When the three hours is up all the students stop writing except for one. He keeps furiously scribbling away as the papers are collected and stacked on the professors desk. As the last papers are stacked the student runs up to the front, paper in hand. The professor says “You know the rules; there is no way I am going to let you hand in that paper.” The student draws himself to his full height and in tones of Shakespearean high dudgeon says “Do you have any idea who I am!” “No” says the professor, and “I really don’t care.” “Good” says the student, slides his paper into the middle of one of the stacks of exams and walks out the door.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    18. Re:No engineering? by shadowrat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      this is OT, but in the real world, none of this is considered cheating. I'm a software engineer. I consider the lone wolf programmer who does everything in secrecy on his own to be a bad fit for my team. I want people to work together. I want people to compare notes and review each other's code. I want multiple people to be involved in working on one cohesive application.

      I suspect other engineering tasks are similar. When someone is building a building, is it forbidden for the other engineers to work together?

      Even when it comes to writing reports, having someone else do it for you is considered outsourcing and the ability to manage outsourced work is highly sought after.

    19. Re:No engineering? by dhermann · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wow, what an amusing and highly unverifiable anecdote! On the internet, no less!

    20. Re:No engineering? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yea. If you can derive a contradiction from the negation of the corresponding conditional you know that the argument is logically valid. Or, in english, if you can prove that the negation of a proposition leads to a logical contradiction, then the original statement is true.

      You can also use it to prove points that are irrelevant to your givens. Since (in deduction) your premises are all assumed to be true, if you can use them to form a logical contradiction, then you've basically divided by zero in that modality, and everything is equally valid.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    21. Re:No engineering? by xSauronx · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm going to university now. Im an older student, at 27 years old, and started in a community college wit the intent to transfer out. At the CC I had to take intro trig and college algebra.

      I hadn't had a math class in a decade.

      Turned out....the math professor at this little dinky community college was an *excellent* teacher. Very thorough, very knowledgeable, very very good at teaching the material. The guy had a Ph D from a state university (maybe in physics? I dont recall) so everything he had to teach here was stuff he knew inside and out.

      He allowed notes for the tests "write whatever you want on it. formulas, sample problems, fill it up, I dont care. If you dont know the material you will fail"

      He wasnt kidding. He even gave out last years tests (he always rewrote them) as study guides for the next test. If you didnt really know what you were doing, you were going to fail.

      Wish I had more teachers like him. He was thorough, interesting, and an excellent communicator of the material (this is a huge issue with a lot of instructors)

      --
      By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth. -- George Carlin
    22. Re:No engineering? by RobertinXinyang · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have run into the, "single page of notes," option many times. I have to say that it is extremely helpful to me as I have a poor memory of things like formulas and names. This is due to a named and diagnosable cognitive issue. Being in my final semester of an MBA program (with no cheating, mind you), I make up for it in other ways.

      I remember one instructors comment on the idea of books during exams and tests. It was during my undergrad yeas sin on of my engineering classes. His comment was, "no one is ever going to ask you to do anything significant and tell you that you can't use the book." In fact, I have found the opposite, people love it when they can come me with a question and I am able to, quickly, give them a referenced answer.

      Returning to the point of note sheets in exams; one thing I do not like doing is giving people copies of my exam notes. The reason for this is simple. There is tremendous value in making the note sheet. Further, it is personalized in regards to style. I tell people asking for a copy that, of course, they can ave a copy; however, to do well on the exam, they should use it as a basis for forming their own note sheet, not to use the one I had written as it was.

      That advise evolved to small study groups helping to insure that all at the study group had written a note sheet, and understood how to use what they had written (slightly off topic, running these groups is a great way for nerds to pick up on impossibly hot woman). I have sense taken this process to another step in my classes, I ask that all study sheets be written in the students own hand, to be turned in with the test for comparison to the handwriting on the exam. It should come as no surprise that there is a direct correlation between extensive note sheets and not only the students exam performance; but with, admittedly based on conversations with students, the students, overall, grasp of the subject.

    23. Re:No engineering? by ildon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm an engineer (well, comp sci, so sort of) and I can write A+ English papers all day. I just fucking hate doing it.

    24. Re:No engineering? by FoolishOwl · · Score: 2, Informative

      I was guessing that the point of the exercise was that there was some flaw with the givens -- a reductio ad absurdum.

    25. Re:No engineering? by FoolishOwl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Neither was easier than the other to pass, they just required very different skills. I note that you "waffled" but he had to "structure" the ideas into a "well-formed English essay".

      I certainly do.

      I've recently started an entry-level job in IT, in a network operations center. The computer networks we monitor are quite different from each other, with a mix of Linux, Unix, and Windows servers; the networks of corporations and teams are even more complicated. I've found my co-workers to be generally knowledgeable about the technologies involved, though each of us has a particular forte, of course.

      What has really stuck out is that there's a much wider divergence in my co-worker's abilities to explain what we're doing. Some are quite good at setting out context, and how particular details of technology and procedure fit into that context; others, when questioned, just explain technical details, neglecting context; and a few, when questioned, will just jump into fixing a problem, making no effort to explain what they are doing or why. The training documentation consists largely of lists of URLs for Web frontends to tools and archives of documentation, without a word of explanation what the tools are for or which of the thousands of linked documents are important to read. Many of those links are dead; most of the linked documents are just as poorly written.

      In general, I've seen that an enormous amount of time is wasted by poor communication, in particular by the neglect of context. Data is a necessary condition for knowledge, but not a sufficient condition.

      The liberal arts, for all the bad reputation they've gotten, are necessary and sorely under-appreciated by the tech community, because the liberal arts are supposed to teach the art of communication. In saying that, I must admit that there's good reason for the bad reputation of the liberal arts and the social sciences, as there certainly are a lot of students who coast through their coursework, on their way to careers as pointy-haired bosses. Part of the trouble there is the inflation in credentials; another part is the bizarre world of managerial culture. But in general, I think we'd be better off if more people took the liberal arts more seriously, and if more science and engineering students took more humanities courses, even if we had fewer liberal arts majors and more science and engineering courses for liberal arts majors.

  2. Re:what a douche! by 91degrees · · Score: 2, Informative

    RTFA. He appreciates the irony.

  3. Re:No science? by Spad · · Score: 2, Informative

    Science & Engineering papers usually depend on new work or research, whereas a lot of the subjects he mentioned just want you to repeat whatever the current received wisdom is with your own little bit on why you agree with it

  4. Re:No science? by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Insightful

    science and physics course work you can copy much easier by yourself as it's "absolute truth" from the course material(that's been running in any given university for couple of decades with the same problems and assigments). it's much harder to prove that you copied 1+1=2 than to prove that you copied sentences directly from someone else.

    here's a nice plagiarism tip: use a source that's in another language than the one you're submitting in, then just translate. it's a method many many many songwriters, book authors, reporters, national heros etc have used with great success. the less has been translated to any given language the easier it is.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  5. The source of the problem by 2.7182 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You can't really test students with projects/papers. They cheat. Even if they don't use a professional service. I spent years teaching CS students and it was always a problem. It helps to use detection software, like the system Berkeley provides. But the humanities just have to suck it up and admit that they need to give only in class exams.

    1. Re:The source of the problem by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My wife ran into that and caused hell for an instructor.

      She turned in 10 years ago a paper on a subject.

      last semester she use the same topic and paper as a basis for her new class, updated it with new info.

      You can not plagiarize or cheat from yourself. But it was marked as copied from another student. So she challenged the school and won.

      Software makes the teacher lazy. Get off your ass and READ, you can tell if johnny pot-head wrote the paper or if he copied a lot of it.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:The source of the problem by jeff4747 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No the source of the problem is the value of the degree exceeds the value of the courses.

      The piece of paper at the end is the important part, the classes leading to that piece of paper are failing to provide sufficient benefit to the students.

    3. Re:The source of the problem by j0nb0y · · Score: 4, Informative

      Many schools have a rule that you cannot use work you did for a prior class.

      --
      If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?
    4. Re:The source of the problem by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When was the last time a person with an English Degree really had value in society?

      Many people with English degrees become teachers. I've had several such teachers, some quite talented. Are you saying teachers aren't valuable?

      And since when is essay writing all that valuable in say the techie world?

      When you work for a small company that can't afford a technical writer. Holy fuck is it annoying to completely rewrite document after document produced by a bunch of slackers who think because they know how to ping something that means they can be practically nonfunctional at everything else including such basic things as language.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    5. Re:The source of the problem by i.r.id10t · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've seen instructors fail students after using Turnitin.com's service. What was "non original"? The bibliography page... but on a 2 page paper, the bibliography is 30% or so, and the instructors never looked to see what wasn't original, just how much wasn't original.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    6. Re:The source of the problem by arivanov · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sure you can.

      Have a seminar and make the student present the paper to peers. That is what good universities in Europe do and they have had to deal with the shadow scholar industry for many centuries. If the class is too big split the class and have the grad students run the seminars helping them out on a round-robin basis. They need to learn the trade too.

      In fact in most cases the other students _WILL_ catch them for you. There is nothing as merciless as an audience of your peers especially if they are getting a grade percentage or grade bonus for successful critique. Especially in humanities.

      Divide, conquer, rule.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    7. Re:The source of the problem by jythie · · Score: 2, Informative

      Perhaps 'valued by society' would be a better way of putting it. Teachers might be valuable, society does not hold them in high regard.

    8. Re:The source of the problem by Skater · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The piece of paper at the end is the important part, the classes leading to that piece of paper are failing to provide sufficient benefit to the students.

      College: You're doing it wrong.

    9. Re:The source of the problem by cervo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well you can. You just have to have them explain the project/paper and ask questions. I think for computer science the best thing you could do is have a programming project and then an "interview" with the student. If they have no clue at all what they are talking about, then obviously they cheated. If they had someone else do it for them and then they studied the code and looked up everything until they understood it, then I would have no problem giving them an A because they learned the material which is the point of having exams...to make sure they learn the material... In that case it's not much different from slapping together the various algorithms from the text book along with examples from the language documentation for system calls into a coherent program.

      Basically everything is copying. It took years to get binary search correct on its own. Most students are just parroting out algorithms from memory that they got from a book which is more or less copying anyway. Programming is really about slapping together a bunch of algorithms/library calls into a coherent program...

      Also even an open book take home test is not so easy to cheat on. If you say define term x, define term y, then the answers are in the book/google/bing/etc.. If instead you come up with some problem that uses the stuff but is not so obvious, then only people who really studied will get it. Often the cheaters all get it wrong, and it becomes obvious they cheated because they all get the same exact wrong answer....

    10. Re:The source of the problem by cervo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Plus there's nothing like the professor asking sitting in the back of the room asking tons and tons of questions about every aspect of the paper deliberately exposing what you know and what you don't know.... But it only works with a good professor. Some can't even be bothered to read the textbook at all even though the class is not the area they are researching.... My biggest pet peeve is when I get an exam and a question is "wrong" but then on further review the answer sheet is wrong. Then the professor has to give everyone credit for that question, even though my version is right and a lot of the other ones are wrong..... That really pisses me off!! Anyway assuming the professor at least read the book, and his lectures are not full of inaccuracies/wild speculation because he is too lazy to look it up, then he has a good idea of what you should know and what you shouldn't. so while questioning you about your paper, he can question using concepts in the book and see if you can apply them. Also some stuff in papers is open to speculation, even that if you have completely no clue then your speculation will be random guesses... Whereas many times based on the way the paper went, you can do an "educated" speculation....

    11. Re:The source of the problem by catchblue22 · · Score: 2

      No the source of the problem is the value of the degree exceeds the value of the courses.
      The piece of paper at the end is the important part, the classes leading to that piece of paper are failing to provide sufficient benefit to the students.

      The "source" of the problem, in my opinion, is the shifting of education from being something of value in and of itself, to it becoming something of value largely based on the future financial gain to the student. This corrupts the purpose of education, making it a selfish pursuit instead of a noble search for truth. When education becomes a selfish pursuit, it subconsciously licences the student to use whatever means are necessary to receive the credential. Do you think Einstein sought his theory for money? Newton? Galileo? Aristotle? Plato? Socrates? Most of the posts I read here circle around the real philosophical issues without directly addressing them.

      --
      This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
    12. Re:The source of the problem by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Can we begin with "loose" vs "lose"?

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    13. Re:The source of the problem by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think that everybody has to be a professional grade technical writer, just be able to employ correct basic grammar and formatting. Honestly that's something that people are supposed to master in high school, but performance at the university level remains abysmal for many. (Even in exclusive humanities-focused programs. I was in the Honors Program at Seattle University which hand-picks 25 students a year, and even there I was confronted with grammar so terrible in paper reviews that I started diagramming other students' sentences on the backs of their papers. Seriously, there were long "sentences" with no verbs.)

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    14. Re:The source of the problem by digitig · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I believe one of the reasons why students cheat on the Humanities is because we don't value the humanities and we force students to take course that they simply aren't interested in.

      Cognitive psychology, accounting and pharmacology (three subjects from the list in the summary) are not "humanities". And you can bet the only reason that person wasn't doing maths or computing coursework was that he wasn't up to standard in those subjects. People cheat because they want the results without doing the work.

      What I believe these services do is allow students the opportunity to get through work they simply will never have any interest in--or they BELIEVE they won't be interested in. When was the last time a person with an English Degree really had value in society?

      If they don't think they will be interested, why do they choose that subject?

      And since when is essay writing all that valuable in say the techie world?

      The "techie world" isn't a world, and the techies that can write good proposals and reports and can communicate effectively with customers or with other departments in the company are likely to do better than those who can't.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    15. Re:The source of the problem by chrb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And I've seen an instructor pass students after they turn in ~10 pages of nearly identical answers. Years ago when I was marking CS Masters degree coursework, I noticed that two papers were almost identical. The only thing changed was the spelling had been corrected in one version. I took it to the course organiser, who said he agreed that it was certainly copied, but we should drop it because a) it just wasn't worth the hassle and b) these were foreign students (Taiwanese) who were paying a lot to be at the university, and it may be a cultural thing that they don't see copying as a bad/prohibited thing, and it just wasn't worth the hassle of following the official plagiarism process.

      Another anecdote: several hours before a big programming deadline, I am sitting in the lab, and one of the guys from my course comes in. He's one of the guys who isn't so knowledgeable about computers - computer science students tended towards being geeky and into programming, math, electronics, physics etc. but there were always a few who were just there for the qualification so they can get the money whilst learning as little as possible (to be honest, these were the ones who were usually doing joint degrees in business or management)... with about 4 hours to go, this person asks his friend to send him a copy of his work, and promises to change all the variable names and add a few dummy declarations, so they won't get caught. It was blatant copying, he didn't have any idea how the program worked, and he didn't care how it worked.

      Another interesting anecdote I have comes from an EE friend of mine. He got so fed up of people stealing his work that he stopped using the lab printers during normal hours. He was known as one of the more knowledgeable people on his degree course, and it was just completely normal that, coming up to a deadline, he would print his circuits and associated text ready for handing in, and it would get stolen by someone while it was sitting next to the printer.

      So, whilst I agree that it is sometimes difficult to tell whether or not cheating has really taken place, there is no doubt that people do cheat. I think we should actually use more automated systems to detect possible cheating, pay people to find out whether it is cheating, and have strict processes and penalties in place to remove habitual cheats. Doing otherwise just devalues the whole academic institution.

    16. Re:The source of the problem by ShavedOrangutan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And since when is essay writing all that valuable in say the techie world?

      A software developer who can't communicate is worthless.

      On the other screen of my computer right now is a design proposal that is every bit as linguistically complex and eloquent as any essay or term paper I wrote in school. It is a deliverable requirement for a major software project and is, in fact, more highly valued than the source code that will eventually back it up.

      --
      Godaddy is a scam and a ripoff.
    17. Re:The source of the problem by story645 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would assume that someone in a graduate program might actually be interested in the topic...

      I make fun of my friend for being in an EE master's program where something like %40 of his coursework is non-EE. He likes the material, but he's also in it 'cause the job market is so lousy that a masters is becoming somewhat standard.I also know plenty of guys in the masters program 'cause they want to become management. Then there fields like education or psych where a masters is required for most positions. Basically it may be that money, not interest, is the motivator for being in a masters program.

      --
      open source modern art: laser taggi
    18. Re:The source of the problem by gorzek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      God, I wish I had mod points.

      In the world of enterprise software, you must have well-written requirements. And specs. Everything needs to be written down so five years down the road you aren't left wondering why you did something a certain way. Or, God forbid, you get hit by a bus and some other poor sucker has to figure out what you did and why. I've seen programmers whose written English is so poor as to border on illiteracy. They write specs that are complete nonsense. It doesn't matter how good a programmer you are if you can't put what you code into plain English so others can understand it.

      On the subject of cheating, I recently had a candidate who was given a coding assignment so I could gauge their programming abilities. Nothing too serious, I just wanted to make sure this person could actually code, right? They submitted something blatantly copied from a website. Very little Google searching turned up the original source. I don't know what's worse: that they didn't think they'd get caught; that they thought I was too stupid to figure out what they did; or that they simply didn't care enough to do the assignment on their own. I mean, if you'd cheat in the process of applying for a job, why the hell would I want you to work for me?

    19. Re:The source of the problem by Combatso · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is why i dont equate cheating with copying... The purpose of education (in my lowest-common-denominator-speak) is to copy your instructor (or course material).. We copy their notes, we copy their conclusions... most importantly, we copy their process for drawing conclusions.. Cheating to me is sidestepping the process and being given the conclusion..

      I did a little teaching at a local college, it was just Second year VB6. I told students its much easier to google up an algorithm, than to try and rewrite it every time.. The real test is how you use them.. Students that called sub routines often (re-use code) rather then past the same logic over and over again.. those are the ones I knew had a knack for code.. The marks I gave out were mostly on interaction... The ones that asked questions, and specifically, the ones the re-asked the question when it seemed contradictory to any prior advice I had given them... The ones that stay quiet in the back, or dont show up for class... then suddenly turn in a perfect project, would get my attention... then I would set out to decide if they were savants, or just cheaters... I was happy to find out most were savants, as they had been tinkering with programming concepts at home and at previous schools..

    20. Re:The source of the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That is incidental. The source of the problem is the basic failure of the relationship between business and citizens. Most citizens want good paying jobs. Business wants labor to be trained before they are hired. But, high schools don't successfully prepare students for work or college. Therefore, business demands college education. Now the colleges see that they can make a buck by enrolling all these new students and lowering their standards. However, the institution designed for cultivating the best and brightest has been effectively reduced to a diploma mill. Hence, all the cheating.
       
      Who can blame the students? They are not the best and the brightest. They want a job. The piece of paper stands between them and gainful employment. Therefore, they will do whatever it takes to get it. Business doesn't demand that people actually know anything. They demand a piece of paper.
       
      What we need is more trade schools. Business needs to get together with the people (and the government) to design schools that will fill the needs of the job market. Business needs to bite the bullet, and help pay for said schools. Graduates would be trained, with experience, so that they can step into their new job. This would satisfy the needs of business, and the needs of the student who doesn't care about Pavlov's dog, or the integral of e^-x. Then college enrollment would go down, and they could get back to the business of educating people who actually want to be there.

    21. Re:The source of the problem by Firethorn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I was thinking 'in the commercial world' - English majors are mostly an 'internal product' of the teaching world. You generally don't become an english major if you're looking for work outside the teaching environment. Which would make for some distortions, since most works in english aren't written by, or even reviewed by, english majors.

      That's not to say that I don't value their education and teachings, but that I honestly see more personal value in a technical writing course than I do most literary appreciation type courses. Because I'm NOT going to be the one to write the next great novel - I'm more likely to be trying to write regulations, personal evaluations*, reports, documentation.

      *One line bullet statements; it's not real english.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    22. Re:The source of the problem by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 3, Funny

      You know what's ironic? (And I'm surprised nobody's called me out on it yet...) I realize after review that I put a sentence in that post without a verb. I have met the enemy, and he is me.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    23. Re:The source of the problem by jafac · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your statement is true; and suggests an economic inbalance; an unnatural inflation in wages in the US job market. . . which, in my observation, is true: to match, certain other (heavily subsidized and/or legislatively monopolized) segments of the economy whose costs have spiraled out of control: entertainment, medicine/healthcare, law, banking/finance (especially including housing and automotive).

      The "matriculated class" deals with these highly-inflated segments. The "uneducated" do not; usually. The governmental interference in these segments has been meant to address problems of income shortfalls in the working class, but instead, inflated those prices; made the degree into some sort of "magical piece of paper" - required to gain entrance into the magical land of >$40k salaries and bennies. (which, used to cut it back in the 1980's, doesn't cut it anymore. now it's more like >$100k, or >$150k for that standard of living). Unfortunately - the associated skills learned are not even roughly equivalent to 5 years professional experience in the field.

      Why does the government need to interfere in these segments of the economy by subsidizing? Because of our ideology. So we can pretend to be a free-capitalist market, while, in actuality, being a heavily corporatist/socialist economic system. Because our government lacks the very fundamental power to create its own currency. (and therefore, is not a real government.) Because of this: these subsidies are "for show" subsidies - and only act to distort the market. They help no-one, and long-term, to more harm than good. Due to the geometric progression of interest owed on borrowed money, eventually, we (the "responsible parties" of the government debt) are going to be completely screwed.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    24. Re:The source of the problem by mikestew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And since when is essay writing all that valuable in say the techie world?

      It's not valuable at all if you're content to be the low-level code monkey who just does what he's told. The instant you need to communicate proposals, specs or requirements to other people, it will serve you well to not come across as borderline illiterate. I've actually heard the ol' "you know what I meant" defense from people that would never say that to a compiler. (Well, they probably say it same as I do, but they wouldn't expect the compiler to take them seriously.)

      Hope you like working for The Man(tm). If you want to strike out on your own, it's been my experience that potential clients or VCs often hesitate to give money to folks that can barely string two words together in a proposal or business plan.

      Essay writing is valuable, as are other less technical subjects. Despite whatever we might have thought in college, we don't spend our entire day feeding instructions to a machine.

    25. Re:The source of the problem by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is anybody valuable due to their degree? I think people either have a talent for their field or they don't. Some people can coast off of a piece of paper earned through regurgitating lecture notes, but I don't think many if any truly excel in and/or advance their field as a direct result of their degree-earning process.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    26. Re:The source of the problem by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know what's ironic? (And I'm surprised nobody's called me out on it yet...) I realize after review that I put a sentence in that post without a verb.

      That just might have something to do with the fact that not all verbless sentences are wrong, or inappropriate. They're just bad style from time to time.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    27. Re:The source of the problem by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Which code would you rather maintain?

      Preferably one in which the meaning of the latter would be readable in the body of the function without resorting to describing the algorithm in English.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    28. Re:The source of the problem by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Fully/well lived? By now or by then? Or is this a continued project?

      Consider someone who does nothing.. maybe plays Go, works, comes home and meditates a lot. A person who sits around calming themselves, focusing introspectively, and considering everything around them, thinking about things, trying to understand things. Seems like a waste of time, right?

      Many people I know actively reject knowledge. They "don't want to know, don't want to learn" anything new. When I try to explain simple things that are new, I often get cut-off by anyone over 30 who figures they learned enough in college and now should be able to put up a brick wall to all new knowledge and just watch TV and work. (By the way, parenting problems much? You're watching TV, who is watching the kids....)

      I have difficulty respecting this. Zero-feedback self enrichment I can respect. You're useless to me but you have a job, you get paid to work, I can't demand more of you. What I can't deal with is people around me that want to just stop, as if they're now working so they're now entitled to close off the entire world and live in their little life like they're finished ... well ...living. These are the people that get laid off when the company moves on, or that get lost in the growth of technology or the market, and complain it's not fair they no longer have a job. These people are cogs in machines, easily replaced and overall worthless... necessary, but worthless.

      Why would you actively avoid any form of self-enrichment, any and all forms of mental exploration, any new knowledge? Why recoil from the thought of putting anything new and technical in your brain? Why throw a tantrum like a child if something suggests you might need to think for fifteen seconds to figure something out? I don't get it.

    29. Re:The source of the problem by hesiod · · Score: 3, Funny

      Or, God forbid, you get hit by a bus and some other poor sucker has to figure out what you did and why.

      Why are hypothetical programmers always being hit by hypothetical buses? Also, why is it always suggested that they are poor at documenting their hypothetical code?

    30. Re:The source of the problem by gorzek · · Score: 2, Informative

      For "bus" you may substitute some other sudden or not-so-sudden tragedy. The point is, the people who work here today may not be here tomorrow, and the software must still be maintained in any case.

      It's not just documenting code that matters, it's having documented specifications. The specs say how the system should work. The code says how it does work. These things are not always the same and it's worthwhile to know where you have discrepancies.

      Programmers often seem to think of documentation and other paperwork as useless overhead. Some of it may be, but bona fide requirements and specifications are invaluable for any kind of large, complex system.

    31. Re:The source of the problem by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 2, Informative

      The antecedent for 'none' was 'teachers'. The real mistake which would have been damning had you pointed it out was that the pronoun 'which' should have been 'whom'.

      (And before any criticism is leveled at my punctuation, I take the British approach to quotes as it is more logical.)

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    32. Re:The source of the problem by Doomdark · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I used to think this way, but over the years I have come to conclusion that talent as a factor tends to be overrated. Talent is important mostly for the absolute best in the field, where it can differentiate; but below that, hard work actually matters a lot. And hard work typically comes from enthusiasm of individual, and is part of virtuous cycle (see "10k hours rule") of one working hard doing things one likes, which is influenced by positive feedback.

      This is just to say that while degree itself may not be all that important, having had to actually work to get it helps a lot, and so most people with degrees are better in their profession as a result. I certainly knew how to program well before college. But I also learnt a lot in college, and it would have taken much longer to get equivalent of theoretical knowledge. I was motivated to study of course, so just copying papers or code would have been of very little value.

      --
      I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
    33. Re:The source of the problem by dkleinsc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I can argue by anecdote too!

      All my schooling prior to college was in a public school system. While they didn't pay their teachers at great rates, they were better than most of the surrounding area, which definitely helped. I had a mix, but most were either competent or better than competent. My second grade teacher in particular did some really innovative math teaching, and my fifth grade teacher taught me a great deal about writing well rather than just writing correctly.

      But none of that really counts as evidence. What might count is that my public high school had higher average SAT and AP scores (among those who chose to take those exams) than either the Catholic high school or the private rich-kids high school in the same area.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    34. Re:The source of the problem by Darinbob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ugh, one of my worst classes was a writing class done this way. Most people, and myself, were in engineering or science or social sciences. The star student however was a philosophy major. He would rip apart everyone's paper like it was a competition (we were NOT graded on a curve and it was pass/no-pass), and rip it apart in a way that made it clear that you were an inferior human being. And the grad student instructor would always agree with him. I had liked writing before, and the only thing I learned in that class was that I no longer liked writing. I still don't decades later.

    35. Re:The source of the problem by catchblue22 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you and I have rather different conceptions of education.

      Einstein and the others had completed their education, and were driving forward the boundaries of knowledge. Aka scientists.

      I think the above statement indicates your conception of the purpose of education. You imply that the purpose of a scientific education is to "drive forward the boundaries of knowledge". At first this sounds very much like what I think. However, I believe there is an implicit assumption that the sole purpose of "driving forward the boundaries of knowledge" is to increase the material well being of society; aka to make money. If you do believe that, then our ideas of education differ greatly.

      While education can and does increase the material well being of society, this cannot be its only purpose. If I were Socrates, I would probably be able to ask you a series of questions that would lead you to realize that the assumption that education is only for material gain leads to logically fatal self-contradictions. But I am not Socrates. So I am left to give some quotations from Greek philosophers:

      "The purpose of education is to teach us to love beauty." Plato

      "The educated differ from the uneducated as much as the living from the dead." Aristotle

      "The un-considered life is not worth living." Socrates

      The above quotations point to a type of education which I believe is increasingly foreign to contemporary students. You see glimpses of it, in passionate scientists like Carl Sagan, or Richard Feynman. However, I believe that most students today receive an education that seems intended to make them into drones, drifting through life with no other purpose than to fulfill a role in a huge bureaucratic machine.

      The fact that in the public sphere we have largely ceded education to the purpose of wealth creation is disturbing to me. By your comment I can tell that you didn't have a conception of what I meant from my original comment. Many of my educational ideals are gained by reading the writings of the ancient Greeks.

      I believe that it is very important for more of us to begin reading the Greek Philosophers again. Their ideas, their ideals were what lifted civilization out of the Dark Ages. Greek philosophy is what sparked the modern scientific revolution. The Greeks gave us our ideals of law and justice. They were the first moneyed society, and many of their tragic plays can be seen as warnings about the perils of money. The Greeks created the first recognizable universities, and our modern educational system is largely modelled after Greek institutions.

      So if you really want to understand my ideas of education, read some Greek literature. Read Plato's "The Apology". Read some tragedies by Sophocles. Read the Iliad. Twice. Read some Aristotle. Study some philosophy. Read Kant. Read Locke. Then come back and tell me that we should educate the vast majority of citizens to be corporate drones.

      --
      This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
  6. Students will only punish themselves by Albanach · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Students are placing a lot of trust in these folk. What if one of the writers sells an old laptop on eBay and the recipient posts the hundreds of essays on the interwebs. If you were to wait twenty years before doing so, you would probably find at least a few of the clients now hold well paid jobs. Similarly, these folk are at very great risk of future blackmail when their job, family and home are on the line.

    Students will eventually suffer if it becomes too much of a problem. Courses will simply revert back to 100% final exams.

    1. Re:Students will only punish themselves by Frequency+Domain · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As someone who has worked at a university I have to let you know that after the grade/degree is final it is final. There are no consequences of finding out afterwards, and the potential for blackmail here is minimal.

      Sorry, but that's not true. I knew somebody whose PhD was rescinded due to plagiarism. The guy basically chucked away ten years of his life, because he can't do anything related to the field he studied - nobody will write recommendations for him.

  7. also he may be a liar by FuckingNickName · · Score: 5, Interesting

    At the risk of pointing out the obvious, why are we prepared to take it on trust that this man who claims to make his life from cheeters isn't himself cheating the system by exaggerating the extent of his abilities and achievements?

    If it is easy to write an undergraduate nonscientific essay, it is even easier to fake correspondence.

    1. Re:also he may be a liar by FuckingNickName · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Which, of course, won't be plagiarised...

      Except he can't release evidence because that would get the non-authors in trouble.

      So we can't reasonably falsify his statement, as he is aware.

      I get the feeling this man is a scientist and a troll, and he intentionally indicated that he was not writing science/mathematics/engineering papers to mock the other disciplines as bullshit.

      8/10 very good effort.

    2. Re:also he may be a liar by szquirrel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Except that his story isn't that hard to believe. I can remember busting out 20-page papers overnight when I was in college and I'm not a particularly fast writer. It's easy to imagine that someone with enough practice and motivation could churn out papers like this for a living.

      Today I code web applications and I recognize the process he describes. He has essentially built a research paper "framework" that lets him quickly build products that fit a baseline set of requirements. In fact it sounds like he rarely even has to come up with a true finished product, essentially building one proof-of-concept after another. It's amazing how fast you can work when you honestly don't care about the details.

      How many code geeks will spends hours and days and weeks over meaningless bullshit projects just because they can? This guy does the same thing with words and he found a way to get paid for it.

      --
      Never approach a vast undertaking with a half-vast plan.
  8. Re:No science? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I suspect a combination of two factors:

    1. Humanities and soft sciences, in my experience, tend to be taught in courses whose grading depends much more on take-home essays than in class exams. Unless you have a smartphone with a nice camera, and a very on-the-ball internet cheating service, you can't really cheat in class over the internet; but doing so on a take home is absolutely trivial. Math and hard sciences often have take-home problem sets, some even worth a few points; but those are mostly just drill/practice for the exams that will curb-stomp you if you haven't done the work outside of class.

    2. I'm sure that internet cheating is a large enough business to support specialization of labor. The writer of TFA clearly specializes in writing. He/she probably has a good academic prose style, and good research skills, along with a jstor subscription or nearby university library. Quite possibly, he did a liberal arts or social science degree, which gave him the necessary practice; but found the job market unexciting with those credentials. Those things would equip him to produce adequate material in a wide variety of writing-heavy areas. If his skill is in writing, and he gets enough business, why would he turn away paying customers in order to brush up on his math, which, unless he has a genuinely unusual talent in the area, could take a couple of years? Presumably(and, taking a quick look at rentacoder, certainly), there are equivalent people who specialize in math, CS, and science. If his area of comparative advantage is writing, why go up against people who have a comparative advantage in other areas?

  9. School to Corporate Prep by mbrod · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It doesn't take students in higher education long to see cheating and lying are the norm, even required. It prepares them for what they are about to have to do for the Corporations.

  10. Re:It's the modern way by Zuriel · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have a Liberal Arts degree - where do I sign up?

    http://mcdonalds.com.au/careers/join-us

    Sorry, someone had to say it. :P

  11. Wonderful Article by crow_t_robot · · Score: 2, Insightful
    This article is loaded with gems. This one particularly caught my eye:

    I, who have no name, no opinions, and no style, have written so many papers at this point, including legal briefs, military-strategy assessments, poems, lab reports, and, yes, even papers on academic integrity, that it's hard to determine which course of study is most infested with cheating. But I'd say education is the worst.

    These are the people that will be future teachers that are too inept to do their own course work that will eventually fail their own students who will in turn purchase academic papers from a professional writer. The vicious cycle continues.

    This appears to be a business that will continue to boom for a long time especially considering how everyone is pushed toward college these days.

  12. Obligatory South Park ref by justleavealonemmmkay · · Score: 4, Funny

    You told us to write an ese, so we sent letters to our friends in Mejico

    1. Re:Obligatory South Park ref by justleavealonemmmkay · · Score: 3, Funny

      The actual text "I wrote three eses: my ese back home, my ese in Denver, and my ese in Glenwood even wrote me back."

  13. leik omg! lol! by Sean_Inconsequential · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "thanx so much for uhelp ican going to graduate to now".

    He helped Lolcats graduate. Now they can "haz cheezburger and duhploma."

    Honestly, I would love to be able to afford to go back to school. I would absolutely bust my ass the entire way through, and do so proudly and without complaint. This is either sickening and disappointing or i am just old and cantankerous.

  14. Yeah, but by xx_chris · · Score: 2, Insightful

    have you scored a -1 on Slashdot for someone else?

  15. Re:No science? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Interesting the lack of scientific subjects amongst his claims. Yes, he mentions psychology but I'm talking about things like physics and mathematics which are not that easy to plagiarise or regurgitate from other sources without justification.

    It's not that much more difficult. A friend's father wrote some twelve PhD dissertations for other people for a living, in mathematics and economics, at the Sorbonne no less (not exactly a degree mill). All the while he never completed his own, for personal reasons. Basically it's all about having at least some grasp of the ideas behind it, and about being express yourself in the language and jargon of the subject.

    If you know the methodology and the style of the typical paper or dissertation well enough, I don't think there is a fundamental difference between subjects. I have degrees in Oriental philology and CS, and I don't think it would have been that much easier to write a paper in the former just because it's not considered a "scientific subject". After all, knowing a language or two (to the extent that you can do critical editions of ancient texts in it) doesn't come cheaper than calculus or compiler construction. One shouldn't be too smug as an engineer - other people do hard work, too.

  16. Ha! Obviously he hired someone to write it! by syousef · · Score: 2, Funny

    code to draw and scale using the squiggly lines.

    Splines?

    It's pretty funny that you wrote a report on this but can't remember the name for anything :p

    That's proof that he hired someone to write the report ;-)

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  17. Re:anonymous coward by goose-incarnated · · Score: 4, Funny

    don't be so smug, engineering-assholes, a little humanities would go a long way toward civilizing you.

    Yeah, then they would be ... like .. civil engineers :-)

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  18. The one nice thing about a music degree... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
    It's tough as hell to have someone else walk up there in your tux with your horn and give a recital in your name.

    And that 10-pager I wrote on French opera in a two-year span of the 18th century, the only one in the class that got an A -- I'd like to see some shadow writer pull that out of thin air in 6 hours like I did.

    ....yeah, I'm just trying to make myself feel better after finally raking in the salary that my peers got right out of school.

  19. Re:Ethics by Sean_Inconsequential · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, It could make a rather interesting thesis: pay someone to write a paper on ethics for you, use the paper as part of your thesis showing how easy it is to have someone else do the work for you and use the paper written for you, your correspondence, et cetera to question the morality of having someone else do the work for you. I am sure i could explain it better but i would rather pay someone else to explain it better in my words.

  20. Re:Ethics by Spad · · Score: 4, Funny

    "The Ethics of Cheating on my Ethics Thesis: Did I Cheat? Can You Tell? Does It Matter Anyway?"

  21. Consult Feynman? by mangu · · Score: 5, Funny

    In my time at school some of our teachers gave us free hand - bring what you want and see if you succeed.

    The best anecdote about this was a physics exam at CalTech where the teacher allowed students to "consult Feynman", which was the standard textbook.

    One student grabbed the exam sheet and ran to professor Feynman's office. Feynman, practical joker that he was, was glad to do the whole exam for him.

  22. Re:No science? by szquirrel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The writer of TFA clearly specializes in writing. He/she probably has a good academic prose style, and good research skills, along with a jstor subscription or nearby university library. Quite possibly, he did a liberal arts or social science degree, which gave him the necessary practice; but found the job market unexciting with those credentials.

    Go back and read TFA. I'm saying this not to be an asshole but because it's genuinely fascinating.

    The author states that:

    * He went to college to be a writer and found out that there's more than one way to get paid for what you write.

    * He uses mainly Wikipedia (for background), Amazon for the free pages, and Google Academics for the abstracts. Everything else he spins from educated guesswork and outright bullshit with lots and lots of filler.

    * He doesn't edit his work at all, this helps him work faster and heads off requests for him to "dumb it down".

    * His clients often thank him for making typos (presumably because it looks more authentic that way).

    He's not producing high quality work for top honors, he's producing "good enough" work for the sake of graduating at all. It may pay to get A's but C's get degrees, etc.

    I've said for years that not everybody needs a college degree. I would guess (I would hope) that this guy is helping along the raft of mediocre graduates who won't ever really use their degree except as resume fodder. Unfortunately this just devalues college degrees even more so that employers keep on requiring degrees for jobs that don't really need special training.

    He's right about one thing, blame the colleges that are more interested in collecting tuition fees than in producing actual, competent scholars.

    --
    Never approach a vast undertaking with a half-vast plan.
  23. Re:It's the American dream by h00manist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...what happens once the cheaters get high-ranking positions in the business or political world. That's when the entire economic system turns to shit.

    Read any newspapers lately? Heard of Enron, Tyco, Ireland, Greece, Fannie and Freddie?

    Is their any way keeping track of the cheaters and blacklisting them from ever managing any sizable projects or organizations?

    You could start with the Fortune 500 and extrapolate to any organization with similar accounting and management methods. Um, yes, that's basically just regular accepted business method - lies and obfuscation.

    --
    Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
  24. Future managers of America by Angst+Badger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I certainly hope most of the students who use these services are going into management, where they'll never be required to use any skills.

    --
    Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
  25. Re:No science? by Alioth · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And there's also an *awful* lot of waffle in these types of things, too.

    When I was a first year student, one thing I had to do on my degree course was Industrial Socieology. A group of us were sitting around in one of the computer rooms one evening, having been given an assignment for this course, and we were having a bit of a group-moan about the awful paper we had been forced to read first. The first paragraph of this tortured and abused the English language as far as it would go: a single run-on sentence full of long obscure words and we decided the authors of these ghastly things did it just to sound "academic" and "learned" when in fact the whole damned thing was completely devoid of actual content.

    So what we did is found some English "obfuscation" program on the net (I don't remember what it was called, this was a while ago, but think of one of those "Jivespeak" things except it turns what you wrote into "academicspeak") and turned our essays, by means of this program (and a little, but not a lot, of correction of the obvious grammatical problems the program introduced), to convert all our essays into "Sociologyspeak".

    A+ grades all round. What we handed in looked pretty unintelligible.

    Some years later I got around to reading "Surely you're joking Mr. Feynman". I was most amused to see that Richard Feynman had made exactly the same observation as we had (he explained he read this mountain of impenetrable prose which basically translated to "People listen to the radio. People read books", and that was about it). I felt vindicated :-)

  26. Essay writing in the techie world by dtmos · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And since when is essay writing all that valuable in say the techie world?

    Are you kidding? It's especially valuable in the techie world -- a world that incessantly suffers from misunderstanding by the general public. Ask yourself how popular Linux would be today, if Linus had published a well-written series of introductory articles about it in the popular press, 20 years ago. Ask any small company: The technical writer is key to the success of the organization, because he/she introduces the product to the customer -- either directly, in the company documentation, or indirectly, by ghostwriting articles in the trade and popular press.

    If you don't believe me, try the following. Take a collection of your peers. Ask them each to write a four-page article for the trade press presenting and explaining Moore's Law. Now compare their papers with Gordon Moore's original. Which one is easier to understand, and more persuasive? Which one do you think would still be remembered 45 years later?

    Words matter.

  27. English & Liberal arts not for the weak-minded by Aquitaine · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was a liberal arts major at an Ivy League school and graduated with a BA in English. I later lived for a year or so with a fellow graduate who had taken a job for one of these paper mills for the money. I saw the kind of people who ran the place as well as the kind of people who needed work done.

    All the points about how this is easier with a humanities degree because you're not being tested in class are correct, but they're not a complete picture. Liberal arts degrees are indeed much easier to get than a science degree for the simple reason that you can't BS your way through math and physics (at least nowhere near as much as you can through the humanities). But a humanities education isn't meant to train you as a scientist or for a specific career, or a group or specific careers. It's meant to give you the intellectual tools to analyze anything. It's meant to make you intellectually agile, so that you can learn new (and possibly completely unrelated) fields very quickly. It's meant to give you a sense of what it means to be a damn human being and to give you the chops to appreciate arguments and ideas that might be contrary to your own, and to get to the bottom of why that is.

    My experience was that, if you did the work and applied yourself, you got exactly that. But the nature of the work is such that there are not as many external factors forcing you to do the kinds of things you have to do in organic chem. It used to be that this kind of intellectual laziness would mean you washed out, but these days, even at an Ivy, you have to be pretty terrible for that to happen. I've seen resumes and letters from some of my fellow graduates with English degrees -- people who, presumably, ought to be expert writers -- and they aren't. Sometimes it's just because they're lazy, and sometimes it's because they got all their credits studying ultra-specific intellectual theory, whether it's queer theory, post-modernist theory, feminist theory, or anything else that makes for interesting graduate work but shouldn't be forming the entire basis of your undergraduate curriculum. But the grad students are pretty much forced into claiming an intellectual niche and working it to death, and that is reflected in the classes they teach. All of this in the name of a 'broad' intellectual base!

    My recollection is that my friend was not writing papers for top tier schools most of the time, but it did happen. I remember that a lot of her clients were in one- or two- year master's programs (and sometimes MBAs) and almost always had the attitude that they just couldn't be bothered to do it themselves. Even if it started out as a single occasion where some kid just couldn't finish one paper on time, it became like a gateway drug.

    And the people who ran the paper mill were absolute scumbags. This one was in NYC. They would withhold payment from their writers, promise things like health insurance and not deliver, and otherwise screw the people doing the work as much as possible so that their margins would be as high as possible. But they always had work.

  28. Re:No STEM by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Shrug. I think it'd be more work to fake your way through a liberal arts class than a big math/science class. I took classes that had more than 1000 students in the section, where the exams were given by TA's who'd probably never seen you before.

    For the price of a fake student ID, you could have someone take the exams FOR you. Easy. I once took a geology class where I only came to class for the exams, and aced the whole course. I did roughly the same for physics (I went to the practicums religiously, but never to class). I never saw my TA at the exams, and, indeed, I took the exams at the wrong location every time, due to a scheduling conflict. My professor might have been there, but I don't know because I didn't know what he looked like.

    In short, just because this guy specializes in liberal arts, doesn't mean there aren't people out there who can churn out easy science classes. And saying that, "Well you couldn't do hard science classes" misses the point: the people who do this stuff are doing it to knock off course requirements. It'd be equally hard to bluff your way through higher level liberal arts classes, with maybe 10 other students, and a heavy dependence on class participation.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  29. Re:No science? by serialband · · Score: 2, Insightful

    science and physics course work you can copy much easier by yourself as it's "absolute truth" from the course material(that's been running in any given university for couple of decades with the same problems and assigments). it's much harder to prove that you copied 1+1=2 than to prove that you copied sentences directly from someone else.

    You've probably never graded any assignments. For something as simple as 1+1=2, what you've stated is true. For complex math, science and engineering equations that require multiple steps, there are enough variations in arriving at a correct answer that you can easily spot the lazy cheaters. People indent differently. People start different parts of the problem first. In a class of 30, I easily spotted the obvious duplicates, even when I saw the 2nd student's paper hours later. Except for the obvious duplicate, no two papers in that class of 30 had the same organizational structure to arriving at the final correct answer. There were a few that had similar structures, but still varied enough to be different. Of course a single duplicate isn't necessarily a sign of cheating, but if you notice someone duplicating several problems and several assignments, it's obvious they're just copying. The answers may be absolute truths, but the process at arriving at the answers differs quite a bit from person to person.