Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Marshall Boyd
1184615
There is an opinion held in the world of academia that academic dishonesty should never
occur. This opinion is held on ethical and economic grounds. It is widely held that cheating in
any form is unethical and as such academic dishonesty is also considered unethical. In this paper
I will not discuss the ethical grounds other than to say that I agree; I do not condone cheating nor
advise anyone to engage in academic dishonesty. In this paper I will examine the economic
grounds of the argument that academic dishonesty is never optimal for a student. Many students
engage in academic dishonesty and many others are sorely tempted with only their conscience
preventing them. I cannot believe that so many intelligent individuals who otherwise act
rationally in most regards decide to behave so irrationally when it comes to academic dishonesty.
To begin I will lay out some assumptions regarding the types of students that attend post-
secondary institutions; there are two types that encompass most students and a third which I
believe exists but constitutes such a small number of students as to be largely negligible. The
first type of student is one who attends university or college to acquire particular credentials;
these credentials could be to qualify for a job (such as a BMSc) or to qualify for further
credentials (such as being able to attend graduate school). The second type of student is the one
who is there to learn, to further an education for the sake of an education. The third type of
student again is a tiny portion of the student population is that type of student who attends at
another’s behest; he or she has no interest in being there but is required to be, perhaps by a
domineering parent. I am satisfied that this third type is largely negligible and even were they to
engage in academic dishonesty would not make up the number of instances found on post-
secondary campuses.
1
Having now seen the types of students that attend post-secondary I will turn to the
argument as to why cheating is an irrational activity commonly put forth by the faculty of
institutions. It is widely held that cheating is never an optimal choice; the payoff for such a
choice is small compared to the risks incurred. If one is caught cheating they will be severely
punished, a failing grade on the assignment, a failing grade on the class, expulsion from the
institution, and a permanent note on one’s academic record. In regards to our student types, all
students are intimidated by such punishments; it would mean not receiving the required
credentials, an end to all future formal learning. If one is not caught there are still potential
negatives; one does not learn the material by cheating and risks future academic engagements by
not having a thorough understanding of the matter. The threat is made even more potent by the
promise of professors that they are able to tell almost instantly, in nearly every instance that a
student is cheating. Professors vehemently and regularly warn students of the consequences and
ask students on both ethical and rational grounds to not engage in academic dishonesty and yet,
There is, I believe, a rational explanation for why students cheat. They want better
grades. Undoubtedly the best option to achieving higher grades is to learn the course material
should be able to excel and achieve the grades they desire. Obviously, students only cheat when
they don’t have a proper understanding of course material; as such I will continue in this paper to
only discuss those students who do not have a complete and thorough understanding of course
material. Academic dishonesty is an attempt by students to convince professors that they have
an understanding, or a more thorough understanding than they actually do, of the subject matter;
2
if the professor is deceived by the dishonesty the students will be successful in their bid for
higher grades.
These reasons between the two groups of students are quite similar but have slight
differences between the two types of students and so I will examine each in turn. The first type
of student, those that are seeking credentials, is, perhaps, the more likely of the two groups to
engage in academic dishonesty. The pressure on this student is often high to score grades higher
than their classmates; not only is this student expected to understand the course material, he or
she is expected to know it better than his or her peers. The student forms expectations about
their ability and also the ability of their classmates; as the student does not know the matter well
his or her expectations on his or her own ability is quite low, lower than his or her expectations
The student is faced with two options: he or she can cheat and attempt to get the grade
needed to achieve particular credentials or the student can do poorly in the class, possibly failing
but surely not achieving the necessary grades. Either option presents the same worst case
scenario: failing to achieve end goals. An argument will often be made that it is better to fail
honestly than to be failed for a breach of ethics. This is an argument that appeals only to ego,
though; a student can only fail so often before the university does not allow him or her to enrol in
any more classes, the same result as the harshest penalty for academic dishonesty. The student
can be drummed out of the university putting an end to his or her academic career. However, the
best case scenario is different for each option. The student already knows that they do not have
the honest ability to achieve the grades he or she needs so to be honest will result in the failure to
reach one’s goals. The best case scenario for committing academic dishonesty is to get away
3
with the dishonesty and be able to achieve one’s goals. These students now have a rational
The argument is much the same for those students that attend post-secondary simply for
the sake of learning; the major difference will be that they do not have to do better than their
peers they need only reach the minimal level of competence to pass the class, in this way they
are less likely to cheat than their peers in the first category. Their reasoning will run much the
same course; a student will judge his or her ability in the class and form an expectation of
whether or not he or she has the skill required to pass the class while maintaining a GPA
sufficient to remain enrolled in post-secondary education. If the student expects to fail the class
he or she will have the motivation to commit academic dishonesty. Again the student will have
two options: cheat or not cheat. The worst case scenario involves failing the class or being
removed from the institution in either instance while the best case scenarios are different; not
cheating the student expects to fail but by cheating the student has a better chance of being able
to continue his or her education and has another chance at learning the material.
There are, as can be seen, several factors that affect a student’s choice to cheat; they
could include, but are definitely not limited to: the expectation of personal performance, the
expectation of peers’ performance, the expectation of the ability of the professor to detect
academic dishonesty, the number of times a particular class has been attempted, and program
requirements. If these factors align in certain ways it is definitely in the student’s best interest to
commit academic dishonesty. It is definitely an immoral activity but if viewed in purely rational
terms it is the action which offers the highest payout with the same level of risk as not cheating.
There are, however, changes that post-secondary institutions could put in place to reduce
the occurrences of academic dishonesty. The conventional methods include warning students of
4
the consequences of academic dishonesty, increasing the severity of punishment for academic
dishonesty, and training professors in ways to detect academic dishonesty among students. All
of these methods are effective and will have some influence in deterring academic dishonesty.
As these methods are already put in place in most institutions and widely used I will raise some
The reasons that students cheat are typically related to standing in classes and result from
the current organization and policies at academic institutions. If this organization and the
policies could be changed cheating would become a far less optimal choice for students. The
two changes that I will propose are very simple sounding but will face opposition from many
people and from the university in general as it is, by and large, a conservative body that does not
change quickly. My two proposals are to allow students to take a course an unlimited number of
times until he or she becomes competent in the subject matter and to replace the current four (or
perhaps more correctly five) point grading system with a simple pass/fail grading system.
As universities and colleges exist primarily as places of education they should be geared
towards effectively passing on knowledge to students. There should be no limit on the number
of times a student can take a course. The point is not to test how quickly a student can learn a
subject but to ensure that they have a lasting understanding of the concepts. If a student does not
institution but rather he or she should be encouraged to take the class again if he or she is still
interested or to take another class if he or she is no longer interested. The student would still be
required to pay any applicable fees and so would have incentive to do well in classes but could
be assured that even if he or she does not pass on the first attempt he or she could take the class
5
again until an acceptable level of competence is reached. The message at post-secondary should
This system could still encourage some few students to engage in academic dishonesty as
the cost of schooling would not have decreased but it does remove the incentive to cheat to
ensure that one is not removed from the institution. If there is no threat in being required to
withdraw from studies fewer students would cheat. It does not entirely remove the incentive to
The second recommendation is to replace the current four point grading system with a
pass/fail grading system. There is little reason to rate students against their peers. This allows
for situations in which few or no students actually learn the concepts well but some students are
assigned grades of excellence on the four point scale or alternatively if an entire class learns the
concepts well some students must be scored lower and so despite having a thorough
understanding are given grades of satisfactory or minimal pass. Passing a class should reflect the
fact that one has the required competence in the subject not that one is simply more or less
competent than a classmate. A pass/fail system would allow for a much more objective
than others but simply an emphasis on doing the best one can to ensure competency. The level of
competency expected from students could increase with the seniority of the class to ensure that
students in higher level classes have higher levels of competency in the subject area. Again this
This system could still have flaws in the subjectivity of professors or others who assign
grades. It could appear that a student is more competent as the assessment of ability will vary
from person to person but this flaw also already exists in the current grading system. The only
6
way to remove this flaw would be to have a single person grade every assignment by every
student in a course or even faculty and this is entirely impossible. Students could still have the
incentive to cheat to appear to be more competent and receive a pass rather than a fail. The
incentive to appear better will always be present as long as a person is being judged but if one is
judged solely on one’s own ability rather than compared to another’s ability the incentive is
lessened. It matters less if one does better than another and more if one can simply demonstrate
competency.
In closing there are times that rationally, economically it makes sense for a student to
cheat. This does not mean there are no morals surrounding cheating and students should refrain
from cheating simply because it is wrong. However, many of the incentives for cheating are
created by the institution and by changing policies regarding student performance the incentives
for academic dishonesty could be reduced, though never removed altogether. Post-secondary
institutions could without extensive changes to current practice refocus on education and help to
ensure that students are more thoroughly educated and less likely to engage in academic
dishonesty. Negative consequences should still exist to deter academic dishonesty but by
removing the negative consequences for not cheating institutions would be much more