Editor for this issue: <lveselin
emunix.emich.edu>
The list is a welcome research tool IN ADDITION to all the other research tools available to us, such as books etc in the libraries, telephones and colleagues who can be button-holed and queried in the halls as well as in public at conferences etc. If the opportunity for cheating exists on the list, e.g., getting someone else to do your homework, it exists elsewhere as well, even if not in as convenient or cheap a form. The list should not be distracted by the possibility of such abuses. Instead, perhaps, there should be a rethinking of the types of assignments that are used to train and judge students. Admittedly, primary school students are still taught at first to write with a pencil even though word processors are increasingly available, even at their age. However, I think we are dealing with a different level of phenomenon here. The analogy just has to do with changes in the array of resources for learning whatever it is that we're supposed to learn. What if you didn't have a word processor and you have to leave a message. You better know how to use a pencil. What if you didn't have access to the list, you better know how to ...? Is that the list's problem? BenjiMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
I have been following the discussion regarding cheating with great interest. I am currently doing a Masters of Applied Linguistics (distance learning mode). I am living in a small city in rural Japan, a city of 300,000. As I am not a member of a Japanese university I do not have the usual library privileges enjoyed by university students. The English language library facilities consist of a title catalog of a few thousand books. Therefore, I must purchase supplementary materials that I require, usually from overseas. Additionally, the nearest major center is 3 hours away by bullet train at a cost of about $ 80 US one way. If you add, hotel and meal expenses, going to a library that may or may not have something of use is a very expensive proposition. If I were to ask for help in tracking down a list of materials that would aid me with a dissertation or thesis would I be considered a cheater? My point is that when people do ask for information on the list, it does not necessarily mean that they are trying to dodge work or cheat. Does the academic community now presuppose cheating? Is this not what this kind censorship would mean to people who are still completing graduate work? I urge those of you who would support this kind of censorship to give the "students" who post these question the benefit of the doubt. For if one is able to cheat their way through a program, the program has some fundamental flaws in design, and the students are cheating no-one but themselves. Peter Lutes Graduate StudentMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue