Teachers are becoming bigger cheaters than their students on standardized tests, according to a British study. Allegations of British invigilators (that’s what they call proctors in the Mother Country) ”over-aiding” pupils is on the rise.
“Teachers’ leaders have warned that their members are under increasing pressure to make sure their pupils do well in tests because of schools’ desire for a good showing in government league tables listing primary school results,” Britain’s Independent newspaper reports.
I haven’t seen hard data on “over-aiding” in U.S. schools but I suspect it’s not uncommon, especially in struggling schools. Teachers in my elementary school were ordered by the district to engage in ”active proctoring,” continually moving among students, during state exams. We were expected not to sit down. Active proctoring, we were told, had been demonstrated to result in higher test scores.
I suspect if that’s true it’s because “active proctoring” encourages “over-aiding.”
A colleague of mine, a kindergarten teacher, has an arch and winning way of describing bad or questionable behavior or just plain stupidity by people who should know better. Using the language and tone of her classroom, she will point out how someone “is making a bad choice.”
It seems lots of people, as Ms. Pearson would say, are making bad choices. A national survey of nearly 30,000 high school students shows that 30 percent admit to stealing from a store in the past year, while two-thirds have cheated on a test. Against the available evidence, “93 percent were satisfied with their personal ethics and character,” as Joanne Jacobs notes.
Boston Herald columnist Michael Graham says as Americans, we’re not shocked by the survey results because “it’s impossible to be shocked without first being judgmental. And in contemporary America, the only remaining universal sin is to declare anyone else’s behavior sinful.”
When the bullets fly in Dorchester or the blood spills at Wal-Mart, we crank up the Great American Excuse Machine and let fly: Dorchester is violent because of poverty. Scared Americans trample each other at Wal-Mart because of the terrible “Bush economy.” Our kids cheat because academic standards are too high, etc., etc.
“Here’s an idea,” says Graham. “Let’s try holding someone responsible for his own actions for a change. It wouldn’t be a shock. It would be a revolution.”
No plans this weekend? Plan to spend some time on You Tube checking out the dozens of videos posted by students demonstrating innovative methods for cheating on tests. For example, there’s not a teacher alive who won’t closely examine a Coke bottle on a student’s desk after seeing this:
“I know it’s not a good thing to cheat,” explains Kiki in one video. “It’s, like, academic dishonesty and blah, blah, blah. But I think everyone has at least done it once.” She then demonstrates a low-tech way of inserting information inside the clear tube a ballpoint pen. “Hopefully, none of my teachers will see this video,” she adds.
Well over half of high school students admit to serious test cheating and plagiarism, leading one academic to pilot a program to promote “academic honesty.” Jason Stephens, described as “a rising star in the field of academic dishonesty,” by the Hartford Courant, wants to let students and teachers “come up with a strategic plan to promote academic honesty in their school and encourage teachers to emphasize learning over simply acing tests and getting a good GPA,” the paper reports.
An assistant professor of educational psychology at the University of Connecticut, Stephens has launched a pilot project to test his theory at six Connecticut high schools– two in a wealthy suburb, two in a middle-class neighborhood and two urban schools. Half of the schools are working on Stephens’ anti-cheating program, half are control groups. Stephens hopes his work leads to the development of a toolkit for high schools nationwide to combat the cheating epidemic among students.
Virtually all of them are cheating because the pressure of having good grades is extraordinary, more so now today than 20 to 30 years ago. It’s not because these kids are morally bad. It’s because the stakes are higher and the time is less…It’s not enough to get a 4.0 grade point average. It’s also being involved in a varsity sport, volunteering in the community, maybe having a part-time job – along with the social lives these kids live.
Seen through this lens, cheating is something of a time management exercise. “Most kids see that as wrong,” Stephens says. “The sad thing is that most kids do it anyway.”
It all sounds noble and good, but color me skeptical that you can get a lot of traction for a program that downplays grades at competitive schools.
The views, conclusions and opinions of authors, contributors and commenters on the Core Knowledge Blog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Core Knowledge Foundation.
Recent Comments