Finding cheaters using multiple-choice comparisons

Post by smcgivern » Wed, Feb 25, 2015, 5:58 PM UTC

littletimmy wrote: post #33

chucksmash wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think you are automatically entitled to a good job straight out of college? Your reply vis-a-vis a Mercedes vs lifetime earnings seems to imply that you are willing to sell your integrity for some value x: $(Benz - Toyota) < x <= ~$2,000,000 (spread out over a lifetime). I'm a bit incredulous that your reply was basically that the only reason you would act ethically in my hypothetical situation was because…

I don't think one is entitled to a good job straight out of college. I do, however, think that in a marketplace saturated by unfairness (berkowitz's dad is a partner let's hire him) and bullshit (jump through these hoops to make us like you), one is entitled to employ any and all effort necessary to further one's interests.

Post by potatoyogurt » Wed, Feb 25, 2015, 6:12 PM UTC

hashmymustache wrote: post #39

I'm surprised he didn't break it down to probabilities according to answer distributions instead of right vs wrong. For instance, given 2 questions with their answers and the percent of the class that answered for each choice: 1. A is the answer A - 60% B - 20% C - 5% D - 15% 2. C is the answer A - 10% B - 5% C - 70% D - 15% The probability of randomly selecting 2 students that both chose: - A and C (both correct) is…

Post by hnnewguy » Wed, Feb 25, 2015, 6:33 PM UTC

chucksmash wrote: post #17

littletimmy wrote: post #12

Cheating is a natural consequence of society putting a huge value on grade-point-averages and other dullard measures of achievement. If I had to sit through a lecture room with 200 students (TWO HUNDRED!) and I was absolutely confident that the professor cannot possibly give a shit about my learning in this crowd, I too would cheat.

"a natural consequence of society......" You could use this justification to rationalize any sort of unethical behavior you like. Embezzlement is a natural consequence of society putting a huge value on owning a Benz and other dullard measures of achievement! That is to say, I disagree wholeheartedly.

Post by navait » Wed, Feb 25, 2015, 6:36 PM UTC

xkcd-sucks wrote: post #21

MollyR wrote: post #2

I don't particularly like the idea of harassing possibly innocent students. Innocent students might be under pressure with no proof of innocence, since they assumed to be guilty. They might do a cost/benefit analysis and admit guilt. Also if cheating is really such a concern, why not just handle it in a similar way to the american GRE's or SAT's ?

Based on the policies of the two universities at which I've taught, it seems like there's no possible benefit to admitting guilt. The only foolproof way to "convict" someone of cheating is to have (several) people witness/record the incident. If a student accused of cheating categorically denies everything, they're usually in the clear (although faculty will say nasty things in private).

Post by cpwright » Wed, Feb 25, 2015, 6:42 PM UTC

hurin wrote: post #46

defen wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because apparently you need a 3.5+ from an ivy league school to model in excel It's not that you need those credentials to model in Excel. Rather, you're signaling that you have a proven capability to work long hours, deal with bullshit, work "within the system", etc. It's not about intelligence.

>> It's not that you need those credentials to model in Excel. > Rather, you're signaling that you have a proven capability to work long hours, deal with bullshit, work "within the system", etc. It's not about intelligence. I'm going to argue the opposing part for a bit here: So OP's response should be (something along these lines): HA, there you admit it's putting up with bullshit! But if it's bullshit what's wrong…