Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by mrpg on Monday March 26 2018, @09:38AM   Printer-friendly
from the it's-tiresome dept.

Kevin Chen writes a post in his blog about incentives and scaling from his two years as a teaching assistant. Specifically in his current post he addresses plagiarism in computer science and why it has still not stopped.

The most important goal is to keep the course fair for students who do honest work. Instructors must assign grades that accurately reflect performance. A student who grapples with a problem — becoming a stronger programmer in the process — should never receive a lower grade than one who copies and pastes.

Finally, as educators, we also hope that the accused student can learn difficult lessons about ethical behavior in the classroom rather than the workplace.

From his experience, every semester somewhere between 10% to 40% of the students carry out blatant, indisputable cases of plagiarism with an unknown amount of less clear cases left unaddressed. How does this match with soylentil's experiences here, either in computer science or other fields? The perspectives are likely quite different from institution to institution as well as whether you are still studying in college or university, recently graduated, or in a teaching role.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 26 2018, @03:16PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 26 2018, @03:16PM (#658468)

    The best prof I ever had ran his computer classes thusly: people could do the assignments on their own, or as a group. The main thread through the course was taking the same program and modifying/adding features as the class progressed.

    Then came the final -- we were each given a new modification to make to the program we'd spent all quarter building, there were multiple modifications assigned, and everyone had 15 minutes to think about the problem and then we were marched to the computer room and we had to sit down and actually modify the problem, within four hours. Those who'd done everything themselves had no problem with the changes. Those who'd worked in groups but had actually done the work, also did well. Those who'd done nothing while relying on the group to do it all, failed utterly.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +4  
       Interesting=4, Total=4
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   4