Dillon Schafer's Response

Various forms of cheating occur on practically all college campuses, although the extent of cheating varies widely. In the article, “Cheating in Academic Institutions,” it was made clear that schools that consistently reinforce honor codes demonstrate less acts of cheating. Interestingly, the article noted that there has been a minor decline in the relation between honor codes and cheating in recent years. I think that this relationship has deteriorated slightly due to an increased pressure to succeed in today’s challenging economy, which serves as motivation for cheating. Furthermore, students at competitive schools, such as Washington University, often feel the need to cheat in order to do as well as their peers. Nevertheless, I believe that less academic dishonesty takes place at Wash U than other colleges because of its deeply embedded honor code and severe punishments for cheating. Also, as “Cheating in Academic Institutions” mentions, it is important for a school to give rewards for academic integrity, such as unproctored exams, self-scheduled exams, and student judicial courts, all of which Wash U seems to do at times. The article also states that peer behavior most significantly effects student cheating. While I agree that peer behavior has a large impact on the presence of cheating on a campus, I think that the existence of an embedded honor code ultimately has the greatest effect on student cheating, since it directly affects the behavior of peers. In other words, a deep honor code discourages a student’s peers from cheating, and thus deters the student from committing academic dishonesty. Furthermore, I believe that bad leadership directly enhances the cheating that occurs on campuses. Not only can students act as bad leaders by cheating, but also faculty members can be equally bad leaders by allowing cheating to occur in their classes. Only when students accept an honor code and see faculty reinforce it can campus cheating be reduced.