Use of Social Media For Classes Raises Cheating Concerns
Exeter prides itself on having a culture of respect and collaboration both inside and outside the classroom. Without it, the teacher-student bond of trust disintegrates, cheaters reap the rewards of dishonest acts and the school’s reputation is tarnished. The widespread use of class group chats at Exeter has raised questions about social media’s effect on this culture of respect. While some have warned that these platforms have the potential to proliferate academic dishonesty, many others point out the beneficial role that online collaboration can play in exonians’ education.
It’s not whether you’re going to get caught, but whether you’re solid with yourself, whether you are honest with yourself. If nobody finds out, does that mean that it’s right? Of course not, and you are the only person who will live with that.
A study on cyber-bullying administered by Paediatr Child Health concluded that people become more confident with fewer inhibitions behind screens. “Cyberbullying also provides anonymity to the bully not possible with traditional bullying. Because of this, bullies cannot see the reactions of their victims and studies have shown that they feel less remorse,” it said. Whether this feeling of anonymity found in cyberbullying also makes students more daring while using the internet in other contexts, such as class group chats and thus more likely to commit acts of academic dishonesty online, remains unclear.
Lower Dawson Byrd believes that, for the most part, online tools such as social media proved beneficial to students. “We can exchange notes about yesterday’s class discussion to better understand the material,” he said. “And it’s all convenient because everybody’s connected.”
Despite this, Byrd himself has witnessed how such group chats and other social media platforms can make students less honest, especially amongst themselves. “The idea of social media is that it’s casual, so maybe that’s why people are more likely to say certain things they wouldn’t in person, like ‘explain how to solve this problem from start to finish,’” he said.
Byrd added that such tools could be used with virtually no consequences. “I doubt people can hack into professional platforms like Facebook or Snapchat to check if you’re cheating,” he said. As a result, Byrd hoped that students would uphold the moral standards themselves.
“Teachers can say all they want about doing a take home test individually, but at the end of the day it’s up to us to enforce it,” he said. “Sometimes it’s hard to not just send a quick text of the answer, but doing that will actually hurt them because they’re not learning.”
Lower Brian Liu also views social media in both lights. “Social media is essentially a double edged sword,” he said. “On one hand, it is much easier to communicate with your teachers and classmates on projects or homework and much easier to obtain help if you need it. Conversely, its interconnectivity also leads to easier academic dishonesty. It’s also a lot harder to regulate which definitely fuels the cheating problem.”
Senior Emmett Shell believed that certain dishonest acts were going to happen regardless of social media usage. “I’ve heard of people taking tests in the morning and telling people taking it in the afternoon exactly what questions are on the test,” he said. “In my experience, social media hasn’t added to it that much.” Shell added that in his own experience, such tools do not heavily facilitate cheating, even if they provide features to do so. “I think there’s sharing of information that perhaps goes a little too far, but nothing as extreme as posting labs or discussing take home tests, but just discussing single problems.”
Science Department Chair Alison Hobbie holds a similar view, saying, “I’d like to think that students would be just as honest talking over text as face to face.”
In order to prevent the use of social media and the internet, teachers specify the sources allowed. “I try to be absolutely explicit about saying when collaboration is allowed. For example, I gave a take home assignment that says on the very top, ‘open textbook, open notes, closed mouths,’” Hobbie said.
However, although the department would like to believe that students are always honest, teachers still have to be sure to check a student’s own capabilities. “As teachers we’re always, unfortunately, having our antennae out to make sure that students are submitting their own thoughts and ideas,” Hobbie said. “Sometimes we have to check their own abilities for sure, and that’s why we sometimes have class tests to make it easier for them not to be dishonest in certain situations. Nobody likes it when dishonesty rears its ugly head. Learning doesn’t happen, and the consequences can be even more severe.”
Both the Science and Math Department give teachers control of their own class when it comes to enforcing standards of honesty on take-home assignments. “All teachers have autonomy in the way they run their class, deal with hand-in assignments and establish norms for cooperative learning outside of class versus non helpful student cooperation,” Chair of Math Department Eric Bergofsky said. “That said, we have a standard department statement on academic dishonesty. Essentially, if something is to be graded, it should be the student’s own work, unless the teacher has specifically said otherwise.”
A majority of students and faculty overall disagreed with the notion that social media causes an increase in cheating. While it may be a useful tool for cheaters, it appears that attempting to curtail the prevalence of group chats and social media would only hurt honest students without dissuading dishonest ones. “A lot of the time they [group chats] are just good for for finding out what the homework is in case you missed it,” senior Dalton Vega said. “They’re also to clear up any confusion, either about the due date or the content of assignments without having to contact the teacher.”
Instructor in Biology Townley Chisholm added that it would only hurt the student, saying “You’re not doing your own work on a daily basis and you’re not learning the material and you’re not preparing for class the way you should be.” He added, “By getting there as easily as possible, you’re missing the point of the exercise.”
Some have concluded that the issue is ultimately a matter of personal integrity rather than the tools through which dishonest individuals use. “The fact that you may be behind a screen might make cheating easier,” Instructor in Chemistry Albert Leger said. “And you can probably get away with it. Adults get away with things all the time. It’s not whether you’re going to get caught, but whether you’re solid with yourself, whether you are honest with yourself. If nobody finds out, does that mean that it’s right? Of course not, and you are the only person who will live with that.”
“A lot we do here is based on trust,” Hobbie said. “We’re going with the initial assumption that students want to be honest. And I try to remind them that this is the expectation.”