Professor Zook’s findings at Hofstra are disturbing but not entirely surprising.
It is often said
that World War I was particularly deadly because new weapons (machine guns,
mustard gas) were being used with outdated tactics like trench warfare. The new
struggle between writing students and those tasked with grading their work
presents odd parallels. Students are using the new “weapons” that the Digital
Age provides, while professors are generally still just using intuition as
cheating becomes more sophisticated. It is easier to cheat now than ever before
in history, with word processors keeping previous work saved and the Internet
providing material on most any subject you can imagine. Professors are starting
to fight back with online databases that scan work for plagiarism but, just as
in World War I, the technology is far ahead of the tactics. I expect to see an
institutional response soon in the form of field-leveling universal database
and scanning software with the sophistication to match the innovation of
cheaters.
But the visceral
disconnect between an offending student’s behavior and their sense of having
done something wrong points to a larger attitude in society at large about
responsibility. A social psychologist would state this more eloquently, but I
find that negative actions today are generally discussed in a “pronoun only”
fashion so as not to offend anyone. We are taught that cheating is done by
“other people” who do X, Y, or Z actions. Alcoholism is a problem that “other
people” struggle with. Domestic violence is a specter that “some” face. Our
politically correct phrasing for negative actions is impersonal and distant, so
much so that perpetrators like Zook’s students cannot even understand that they personally did something wrong.
Their thought processes have not been conditioned with the possibility that
they even could do something wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment