Do Cheaters Ever Prosper?

It’s crunch time at the college. After a semester of instruction, it’s time to see if the students not only can get the homework completed correctly and participate in class discussions, but also to determine whether the student can apply the education in a practical application. In math, calculate correct responses to complex computations; in science, develop the hypothesis, then design, conduct, and evaluate the experiment; in composition, write an analytical essay with a clearly defined thesis that is supported by credible evidence from legitimate sources. Do it and move on; don’t do it and repeat the course; but copy an essay from an on-line source and be held accountable for cheating.

Google the word “plagiarism” and the list of well-known public figures attached to that key word confirms that far too many individuals take the written words of other authors and make them their own. Many people think that making a few changes here and there avoids the issue of plagiarism, but that’s not true. Citing the original sources of information “covers” the use of another author’s content at the college level, using in-text cites at the site of the source material. Back in the day, however, it was easy to plagiarize because the odds of anyone recognizing the stolen words were slight; however, today’s internet can find the phraseology in mere seconds.

There are world-class plagiarists, those writers who find obscure sources of information and rewrite the original text in their own style to fool readers into thinking the ideas are original. According to writer Jonathan Bailey, searching for well-known plagiarists reveals that “… five men on the list, Stephen Ambrose, T.S. Eliot, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Dr. Richard Owen and H.G. Wells are all well-known cases in plagiarism circles” (www.plagiarismtoday.com). Alex Haley, in the seminal TV series Roots, was caught by the still-living author of the 17 pages he stole word-for-word from her published book. The case went to court, Haley’s reputation was tarnished, and the original author accepted a financial settlement. Perhaps if Haley had contacted the author, conducted an interview, and invited her to participate in the process of his own writing, he would still be basking in the glory of his authorship, but that is not the choice he made.

It’s curious why famous individuals borrow from others without crediting the original source, but it’s understandable at the college level: the clock is ticking on the semester, the student has fallen way behind in completing the requirements of the course, and a sense of panic develops that leads many students into believing that it’s okay—just this once—because the teacher probably will never know that it’s copied from an on-line source. It’s not a good decision, and it’s made on flawed logic, but it’s a coping mechanism that far too many people use. Whereas the societal expectation back in the day was that it’s always wrong to lie, cheat and steal, today’s operating system is situational ethics: it’s okay as long as I am not caught and/or don’t hurt anyone. I have to pass this class, and I'll do whatever it takes to get a passing grade, including lie, cheat and steal.

What many writers don’t get is that each writer has a unique syntactical rhythm, a way of selecting words and forming them into thoughts that are expressed as sentences. Readers recognize their favorite authors by the style and know immediately if/when a co-author comes on-board or the author has gone public, writing far too many commercial products to support a lavish lifestyle. The original vocabulary of the writer reflects his/her generation: older writers have more archaic words in their vocabularies, while younger writers develop a kind of linguistic short-hand that incorporates street slang, conversational catch-all phraseology, and limited academic language choices. For instance, an inexperienced movie review writer may capture an idea by writing that a character “... comes across as a no-B.S. mother with a strict agenda, but just as [another character] goes through a complete change, so does she” (www.cincemablend.com), an opinion that is not just expressed in a modern slang syntax, but says nothing of an analytical nature about the main character's, mothering, a strict agenda, or the process of complete change for either character. Whereas most readers know what B.S. is, that abbreviation would never be used in an academic environment. A complete change indicates that an individual no longer is any part of what s/he was before an inciting incident caused a total transformation, such as an individual who is critically injured in an accident and no longer is the same person physically, mentally, or emotionally. Using an example from the vernacular of today’s culture, Chas Bono has truly gone through “a complete change.” Simply inviting another person into one’s life does not cause a “complete change” of the individuals involved in the new relationship, but it can begin a metamorphosis from what one is to what one becomes, often referred to a transformational process.

Additionally, there are standards for academic writing, which include no acceptable use of contractions (they’re instead of they are, for example) and no instance of analytical analysis using the word “you.” The focus is reflected in the thesis statement, and every word of every sentence in every paragraph is carefully selected to present the analysis of an idea captured in the thesis. Concluding a movie review with the challenge to “Do yourself a favor, don’t get too picky, take the film for what it is—an inspirational sports movie—and you’ll win big” is not a conclusion, but a cop-out (www.cincemablend.com), and a poorly-written one at that.

Students say they don’t get it, they don’t understand, and create their own version of an assignment and present it with the expectation that doing anything is better than doing nothing. If the student is held accountable for not meeting either the criteria or the standards for the assignment, it becomes the result of "bad teaching," rather than "bad learning." Students rely on the kindness of the academic community to accept whatever they present as valid, as well as valuable, but that is simply not the case, especially when some of the students do get it and actually submit quality written work. No one ever says to a math professor, “I couldn’t figure out how to do the problem your way, so I did it this way – and I think my way is good enough to earn me a passing grade in this class.” An analytical error in math results in a nuclear disaster as there is only one way, the right way, to compute mathematical problems. In written expression there is some leeway, but analysis is analysis is analysis, the same way that a person’s ethics should prohibit anyone from first, thinking, and then deciding that passing off someone else’s source material is okay as long as the student who makes this choice is either not found out or not held accountable.

In the legal system, ignorance of the law is not a reason not to follow the law; in the classroom, “I didn’t know” is simply an excuse that demonstrates an individual’s inability to accept responsibility for all the decisions s/he makes, not just the ones that are not exposed. Do cheaters ever prosper? Certainly, as evidenced by the Jonathan Bailey article (plagiarismtoday.com), but perhaps more certainly as evidenced by the fact that few students think that copying to get a grade is a problem. Cheaters do seem to have the upper hand in defending their actions as acceptable, rather than illegal. When our role models, our authors, our politicians, our ministers, our teachers, our family and friends lie, cheat and steal and get away with it, why would any reasonable person not do likewise, especially if the chances of being caught are minimal.

A society is only as strong as its most honest citizen, and a lack of morality indicates a crack in the fabric of honesty. When I cannot participate in the ages-old trust exercise, falling backward into the arms of those who claim to have my back, I know that contrary to the claim that “no man is an island,” I am, indeed, standing alone.