Is Copying Homework Justifiable When Overwhelmed by Schoolwork?

[Blahness]

See, in real life, we have a good reason for doing the "superfluous" tasks within jobs is because you get PAID and see direct RESULTS.

Being FORCED to do superfluous tasks to "learn", even when pointless? Much different.

"Only cheat yourself in school"? If you have the knowledge, why do pointless work? This is about learning, not working itself.

See, generalizations of students is what makes it difficult, since some students don't care to learn, while others care to learn, but not what is being taught. Very seldom do students learn everything they want through school only.

About homework relating to work ethics: Why can't they teach us good work ethics early on, instead of trying to teach them later in life, eh?

1 last note for the "Unsatisfactory school system" endeavor: I was taught false information in biology, that you can graph the relation of resources to consumers as a negatively correlated STRAIGHT LINE, which is obviously false. That, and for the "Find the independent and dependant variables for this: Measure the speed that a candle burns", She believed that the candle depended on the burn speed, not the burn speed depended on the candle. Z.Z

***End, and sorry for mistakes***

 

[StykFacE]

See, generalizations of students is what makes it difficult, since some students don't care to learn, while others care to learn, but not what is being taught. Very seldom do students learn everything they want through school only.

in the working field it's called "learning the trade." good post. lol

 

[Loren Booda]

So people do not cheat for money, but they do for superfluous scholarship?

 

[Blahness]

Scholarships are based on school grades, but more importantly, tests.

You aren't cheating, because if you already know how to do it, and can PROVE that you know it, why do the overextensive homework about it?

 

[Francis M]

Let me play devil's advocate to all who are arguing the morality of copying home work or out and out not doing it because you "already know it and can prove it". Your teachers will then ( if they're worth their credentials) tell you that you should've brought this up sooner (if you didn't) and then should challenge you with homework more suitable to your intelligence (if it's because you're bored due to the home work not challenging you).

The other thing I will say is what's the problem? If you know the homework that well then you shouldn't have to copy it! You should be flying through it and done well before everyone else thus freeing up the rest of your after school hours for doing other things.

 

[Hurkyl]

You aren't cheating, because if you already know how to do it, and can PROVE that you know it, why do the overextensive homework about it?

Let's try an analogy:

You "know" you're the best chess player at your school. However, you don't bother to enter the school chess competition. You then take the first-place trophy before it can be awarded to the winner. Would you then say it's not stealing, because you already know you're the best chess player, and can prove that you're the best chess player?

 

[neurocomp2003]

i don't think that's avery good analogy hurkyl...because stealing the trophy is stealing from others(but not doing your homework are you stealing from others?)...however i guess if you apply a scholarship(as the tropy)to that then it changes. But most of the time there's usually a test involved to get a mark that's used for the scholarship

 

[Blahness]

Tests are for scholarships; Not homework. (Well, homework is for grades, which are sometimes for scholarships, but the anology is weak.)

 

[bomba923]

Addendum: Bom, why do you think teachers give pop quizes, or assign "superfluous" homework? Do you actually believe your future employers will never make such "outrageous" demands? Unless roasting over an open fire [unemployment] is your idea of a good time, get used to the notion of being a trick pony in the real world [i.e., asked to perform on demand.]

Responsible learners don't cheat themselves. Irresponsible robots who churn out "completed" homework (that superfluous work you mean) cheat themselves.
One's individual academic responsibility depends on one's individual academic ability, not on how many numbers one can "plug" into formulas he/she knows nothing about.

Future work really depends on the employer. Even as an industrial accountant or physics researcher, you probably won't be asked to draw portraits of mathematicians, plug in numbers into programmable formulas, or to finish homework that no one really needs. If there's work to be done, someone is in need.
Like Blahness said, most likely you'll be paid for the labor. In addition, such work usually won't fall under the pretense of "academic edification".
*In my previous post, I mentioned a little difference in the "superfluous"-ness of certain assignments...

Now for my fabled "Why our education system is screwed up and needs to be repaired at a desperate level" section .. ..

And now for my fabled "..." as well
Add this:
*Teachers grading on comprehension => slight increase in bad grades for students
*Bad grades => parental involvement. Teachers won't like to deal with parents, especially those who come to class saying, "But Johnny did ALL the work...please.. .."
*Bad grades => discouraged students =>Parental involvement ...

...but it all boils down to
*Parental involvement => increase in the popularity of politicians who BS "Most wonderful parents, it's not Johnny's fault! He's overworked, he needs more free time on things besides education. The teachers are unfair/stupid! Educational misunderstanding/discrimination rampant and everywhere!.. .. .. ... ..Vote for me! .. ..." ...and the such, as you see
--->And you pretty much know what happens next: *Direct Democracy*
---------------------------------------
Then again, public schools are public schools .. .. /.

.. ..your lack of honest, hard earned knowledge will punish you relentlessly for the rest of your life.

...As well as the lives of thousands who believe "superfluous" work = honest hard-earned knowledge..,
Oh, and Especially those for whom "high school knowledge" is so "hard learned"...

Seriously, the easier knowledge and understanding is acquired, the better off you should be academically, at least in HS. "Knowledge" is neither honest nor dishonest .
What may "punish" one so "relentlessly" may be context-unjustified academic pride. Fortunately, truly responsible learners have none.
*By "context-unjustified" ==> meaning public HS barely covers the most basic principles in academic subjects. In the "context" of international consortiums or authoritative bodies of information (sometimes we call them, professors!), ease in HS academics means little to nothing.

(Then again, if you're in HS, why not relax and demonstrate this academic talent? Raise your hand & speak, get some test A's...etc. Remember to be academically prepared for college after HS, to intensify all studying and efforts)

Which is why responsible learners (those academically prepared for college!) pursue understanding+skills, even at your supposed "cost of missing superfluous work," passed off as genuine academic edification. However, the irresponsible ones might somewhat suffer ...//
-----------------------------------------------------------
As for the chess analogy, it would appear more like:
*All the school's chess players are informed of an upcoming tournament. They spent some months practicing (i.e., doing homework), but the school's best player just spends a week or two. At the tournament (the big test), he/she defeats everybody there, and take home the trophy
\--Yes, some of the players feel "cheated" as if their efforts and trophy had been "stolen" from them. But intelligence is intelligence, knowledge is knowledge, and skills are skills. The end. (at least for my version)

... superfluous scholarship?

Scholarships attained just by looking at raw school grades are superfluously gained. But entry into a college is by no means superfluous at all.

See, in real life, we have a good reason for doing the "superfluous" tasks within jobs is because you get PAID and see direct RESULTS.

Being FORCED to do superfluous tasks to "learn", even when pointless? Much different.

"Only cheat yourself in school"? If you have the knowledge, why do pointless work? This is about learning, not working itself.

I agree.

.. ..since some students don't care to learn, while others care to learn, but not what is being taught .. ..

Once we get past the whole political "children being academically misunderstood / discriminated against ... etc" we approach that conclusion.
There ARE indeed students who are misunderstood/discriminated. But by *FAR* not all "under-achievers" are so misunderstood/discriminated. Many are, indeed, just as you described!

.. However, to review for a final test, you NEED notes .. ..

Eh, not quite, not always. But I'll get back to you on that

 

[Hurkyl]

Responsible learners don't cheat themselves. Irresponsible robots who churn out "completed" homework (that superfluous work you mean) cheat themselves.

Yes, that is one way of cheating yourself.

Another way of cheating yourself is to deny yourself the experience of applying what you have learned.

Another way of cheating yourself is to develop a habit of avoiding work. (Your work ethic doesn't magically appear when you do want to do the work)

Another way of cheating yourself is to develop a habit of lying and cheating to get out of things you don't want to do, or of which you do not see the point.

One's individual academic responsibility depends on one's individual academic ability

Which includes the experience of applying knowledge.

Even as an industrial accountant or physics researcher, you probably won't be asked to draw portraits of mathematicians

And yet, those same artistic skills will be useful when you need to, say, draw a diagram that explains some aspect of your work.

plug in numbers into programmable formulas

I plug numbers into formulas quite a bit -- maybe I don't know what you mean by "programmable" formulas.

or to finish homework that no one really needs

And yet, you could easily have a project at work that nobody will ever wind up using. Also, you could easily be assigned projects for which you cannot possibly fathom why anyone would want it, and yet someone else will need it.

Like Blahness said, most likely you'll be paid for the labor.

As you are paid for your labor in school by good grades.

Which is why responsible learners (those academically prepared for college!) pursue understanding+skills

Through which the ability to swiftly do homework would be attained, thus eliminating the argument that homework is taking "too much time".

As for the chess analogy, it would appear more like:
*All the school's chess players are informed of an upcoming tournament. They spent some months practicing (i.e., doing homework), but the school's best player just spends a week or two. At the tournament (the big test), he/she defeats everybody there, and take home the trophy
\--Yes, some of the players feel "cheated" as if their efforts and trophy had been "stolen" from them. But intelligence is intelligence, knowledge is knowledge, and skills are skills. The end. (at least for my version)

As long as we're refining analogies...

You are participating in a year-long chess league. You, the best player skip most of your matches because you feel they're beneath you. You win the few tournaments that are held, but they're not enough to propel you to the top of the rankings. Then, you demand to get the first-place trophy anyways, because you have "proven" yourself to be the best chess player.

There ARE indeed students who are misunderstood/discriminated. But by *FAR* not all "under-achievers" are so misunderstood/discriminated. Many are, indeed, just as you described!

I'm "discriminating" against you based on your ethics.

 

[Chronos]

There are real world consequences for taking shortcuts. I guess only us 'old' folks appreciate that fact. The exercises you do in school are just that... exercises. It's 'batting practice'. If you have any realistic expectations of performing well in 'game' situations, practice and conditioning is everything. If the assignment is not 'challenging' enough for you, you should find a way to make it challenging. You can't shine if you're not polished. On the other hand, if your goal in life is to be a career minor league player, only do as much as necessary to get by.

 

[bomba923]

Yes, that is one way of cheating yourself.

Another way of cheating yourself is to deny yourself the experience of applying what you have learned.

I agree , but you misunderstood me before. I did not mean "superfluous" work as in "doing no work at all" --> I mean "superfluous" in being marginally Ineffective in the amount assigned.

Doing some hard physics problems, and maybe 2-3 easy ones aside is not "superfluous." Completing a required 62 problem set for homework is individually superfluous for someone who needs only 7 or 15 problems around that to learn the valuable skill or skills. The rest 55 or 47 problems are marginally insignificant in forming an understanding or developing skills.

But how "much" homework should one do? Well, that comes from a reflection on earlier "experiences of application." The student is responsible for his/her learning+skill ; however much "homework" he/she does is completely variable to that individual. What matters is what he/she learned, and so far it is best reflected within test/exam scores.

Another way of cheating yourself is to develop a habit of avoiding work.

Not quite. Avoiding all work is wrong. However, a habit of avoiding marginally insignificant work is actually quite helpful. We learn faster w/o wasting time.

Another way of cheating yourself is to develop a habit of lying and cheating to get out of things you don't want to do, or of which you do not see the point

And thus it requires a responsible learner to distinguish for him/her-self between what is useful and what is not; what is marginally significant in the learning process, and what is not. Sometimes this difference is not clear, but in many cases it is.

One's individual academic responsibility depends on one's individual academic ability

Which includes the experience of applying knowledge.

Why of course.

As you are paid for your labor in school by good grades.

Though I'd much rather be paid with a meaningful learning experience.
(as long as one's grades are not too low )

Quote:
Even as an industrial accountant or physics researcher, you probably won't be asked to draw portraits of mathematicians
And yet, those same artistic skills will be useful when you need to, say, draw a diagram that explains some aspect of your work.

Then why not start with basic technical drawing? I certaintly wouldn't mind!

And yet, you could easily have a project at work that nobody will ever wind up using. Also, you could easily be assigned projects for which you cannot possibly fathom why anyone would want it, and yet someone else will need it

I dispute usually the grounds of homework, not projects. Who will need my 62 answers to some review problems? That's why textbook authors publish study guides, better than any scratch you'd get from my homework.

Projects, however, are slightly more difficult to dispute. Then again, whoever needs a large poster wasted on a list of basic formulas seriously needs to study harder and prepare better in academics. Or even take language courses to better understand the text (in a darker scenario...). The reason being is that some projects are unmistakeably superfluous (perhaps maybe only 98% superfluous. But often times, that 2% does Not justify the effort spent).

There are real world consequences for taking shortcuts. I guess only us 'old' folks .. ..

Where some only see "shortcuts", others see initiative. Taking a more advanced math class is not a "shortcut" to a major. It is an initiative.

The exercises you do in school are just that... exercises. It's 'batting practice'. If you have any realistic expectations of performing well in 'game' situations, practice and conditioning is everything.

Personally, I distinguish between sports and academics, but anyway:
*"Practice and conditioning" in reasonable amounts. Not in a marginally insignifant superfluous heaping of labor. Again, what determines the amount of school labor
is the test grades, knowledge, and earlier experience of an individual.
Some need more labor, others can excel with less.

For example, those extra hours of weight training I would need to get results--a school athlete would consider "superfluous." (btw i don't weight train). When one complains of or deems work superfluous, he/she is doing based on his/her own individual self. This means test grades, knowledge, earlier experience, etc.

.. you should find a way to make it challenging .. You can't shine if you're not polished

I agree. Take more advanced classes, enter more academically challenging programs... .. etc! Take the initiative, polish the individual

Which is why responsible learners (those academically prepared for college!) pursue understanding+skills

Through which the ability to swiftly do homework would be attained, thus eliminating the argument that homework is taking "too much time".

And how much "time" does it take to attain/learn such wonderful "swiftness" ?
*From my experience colleges do not usually assign "superfluous" homework, or even grade much on homework at all. If a large out-of-classroom assignment is required, then the resulting project is quite academically-engaging and usually quite non-superfluous indeed. The other major component are tests and exams.
*However, such factors depend on the instructor and the course taught...

.. .. "proven" yourself to be the best chess player .. ..

The only way to prove yourself the best chess player is via a tournament.

Similarly, the only way to assess your knowledge is via test grades.

-When one deems work "superfluous," one must found that statement based on earlier experience, knowledge, and test grades. NOT random speculation.
Which is why what someone individually consider superfluous, another might consider meaningful.

Now, why did you change my edit to the analogy ??

I'm "discriminating" against you based on your ethics.

I sense no such discrimination here

 

[Francis M]

Every argument I've seen here so far for not doing home work or copying home work from my perspective boils down to one thing and that is:

"I'm bored and the works not challenging enough"

To those of you with this problem I'll say again either go to your teachers and ask them for something more challenging (and specify challenging to mean HARDER problems not MORE of the SAME)
Or brease through the problems that are given and use the spare time for other things of interest, perhaps personnaly challenging yourselves if no one else will, go out and find a mentor who will challenge you if no one is stepping up to the plate.

I'm sorry if this sounds sarcastic or harsh, it's not meant to be.

 

[zelldot]

cheating in any test will do you no good in the future, your grades reflect on who you are, and if you have higher grades, but unable to life up to them grades, you will always find it hard in life

 

[Blahness]

Only thing I read so far:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blahness
.. However, to review for a final test, you NEED notes .. ..


Eh, not quite, not always. But I'll get back to you on that

Okay, it's true that you don't ALWAYS need notes, but sometimes they help.

cheating in any test will do you no good in the future<snip>

We're talking about copying homework, not cheating on tests.

(Then again, if you're in HS, why not relax and demonstrate this academic talent? Raise your hand & speak, get some test A's...etc. Remember to be academically prepared for college after HS, to intensify all studying and efforts)

I'm one of 3 people who raise their hand in class. x.x
I get A's and B's on my tests(usually A's.)

Another way of cheating yourself is to deny yourself the experience of applying what you have learned.

I'm never taught applications, I have to find those out for myself.
They don't teach applications of learned material in class. (Which is why I'm here, by the way. ^_^)
Watch this post for edits.

 

[neurocomp2003]

zelldot i disagree. sometimes students are overburdened by work. Some students take 6 credits...to get ahead...
and they know they can do the more advance stuff so they do and leave the basic classes alone. It all comes done to do you have a valid reason for what your doing.

 

[Genecks]

Here is what I think of cheating:

If you are screwing around, playing games, not learning, not talking about education, then you are failed to doom. I don't think you have any right to cheat.

However, if you're helping others learn, being productive towards society, and yet having a large ass load, I accept cheating. However, you only cheat yourself when you decide not to learn about the topic you just cheated on.
Thus you will be doomed in the future.

Why doom yourself now when you prevent it in the future?

I don't think I've ever cheated on tests. Maybe like twice in my life.

 

[Blahness]

Dude, cheating on tests is wrong. Tests show how much you know, and besides, if you have to cheat on a test, I feel sorry for you: All tests I've ever taken are easy.

 

[Jameson]

All tests I've ever taken are easy.

I'm sure you'll encounter one that isn't so easy sometime soon. We all do.

 

[Blahness]

Are the SATs considerably challenging?

How about AIM tests?

 

[Loren Booda]

Cheating is neither morally nor socially relative, as it is a sign of absolute willful ignorance. When you cheat others, you cheat yourself most of all.

What will be your policy towards cheaters when you are the teacher, parent or leader? How do you explain this ethic to those who practice honesty?

 

[Jameson]

You bring up a topic that I would love to start a new thread on - honesty. I really believe that sometimes being honest is not the best option. Things are not always so black and white.

Question - if a system is flawed, is it morally right to follow it? That has been my point from the beginning. That if the whole concept of homework in my particular class is purely concerned with writing on paper and not content, why should I follow it?

 

[Hurkyl]

That if the whole concept of homework in my particular class is purely concerned with writing on paper and not content, why should I follow it?

Then don't follow it, if you don't want to. In such a case, your choices are to be a moral person and accept your bad grade, or to be an immoral person and lie, cheat, and steal to get a good grade.
(Assuming that you are unable to find some alternative method of achieving a good grade that is ethically up to snuff)

 

[bomba923]

I'm sorry if this sounds sarcastic or harsh, it's not meant to be.

Not at all Indeed I would support students taking initiative towards more challenging courses

However, if you're helping others learn, being productive towards society, and yet having a large ass load, I accept cheating.

Ok...I think I see where you're headed, but not quite.
-One's grade in academics should be based specifically on his/her understanding+skill in those academics.
*Whether or not he/she is "productive towards society" or "helping other learn," I would not pass that student in Calculus II, for example, if he/she does not understand integrals. An individual grade for an individual should be based on that individual understanding+skill, whether or not they are "societally productive."

*If that student needs a "large ass load" of work to understand+acquire skill a subject, then so be it.
------------------------------------------------------
Btw, Jameson, If you extend it a little further, the question might be the morality of using an "unfairity" to combat a previous "unfairity" :

*E.g, affirmative action. To combat an earlier "unfairity" (i.e., wrongful discrimination, prejudice, racism, etc), a new "unfairity" is imposed (i.e., a racial/ethnic factor in work/college enrollment-->some people call it "reverse" discrimination, I think.)

*Same with the "cheating" -->to combat some "unfairity" (or homework/test imperfection in its estimation of your ability), people resort to cheating.

The question being, "Is it moral/ok to use this 'unfairity' to combat this/that other 'unfairity' ?" (something along the lines)

||*Personally I never cheat on tests (though sometimes people cheat off of mine).

What will be your policy towards cheaters when you are the teacher, parent or leader?

Same as that of almost any parent, teacher, or leader

*If someone can rationally point out an truly avoidable imperfection in a teacher's tests, so what? All that the teacher would do is just deduct the problem from a test, and add the lost points (for those who didn't solve it ).
Then again,
Most likely (around 99.9% of the time from my experience) there is NO such imperfection. I mean, what kind of math teacher would ask students to "Name three of Renior's paintings" on a calculus quiz ??

But aside from those strange examples, I think you see what I mean, in general: Cheating on tests is wrong.
(unless you have that sort of artsy calculus teacher, which I seriously doubt anyone will ... ever)

Cheating is neither morally nor socially relative, as it is a sign of absolute willful ignorance.

Quite an oversimplication indeed!

"Cheating" really says nothing lest you interpret it within a specific context.
Not all cheaters are alike. One must see the circumstances surrounding those individuals' specific situations in order to interpret their rationality in cheating.

Here's a brief example of a somewhat specific context:

If you are screwing around, playing games, not learning, not talking about education, then you are failed to doom. I don't think you have any right to cheat.

 

[Chronos]

Maybe a strict definition of 'cheating' is in order: Cheating = utilizing a resource that is foresworn or unavailable to all other participants in a competitive event. A test is a competitive event where students demonstrate their comprehension of subject material presented by an instructor. If you crib, or peek at your neighbors paper, you are cheating. I hate to ask, but, is Ethics 101 now an elective?

 

[neurocomp2003]

how did we go from copying homework to cheating?

 

[Chronos]

Copying lecture notes is not cheating. Copying answers to graded assignments or test questions is cheating. Is that too difficult to comprehend?

 

[Temporarily Blah]

*cough* Explain how we went to test cheating...

We were talking about copying homework, start "test cheating morality" in a different topic, please.

 

[neurocomp2003]

chronos: it is because some of us do not believe copying homework cheating.

Why isn't copying lecture notes cheating-i think it would be if you called copying homework cheating?...its copying someone elses notes to benefit yourself, then you get to use it on your homework whereby you can copy straight from the notes; Is copying one question on an assignment cheating? Is copying part of a question on an assignement cheating?...is asking for help whereby you get most of the answer called cheating? Homework is the benefit for the student, if they choose to do it or not do it, it is their problem...whether it will benefit down the road or not it is their choice. If it buys them time to do other(more eventful) things then it is a gain

When they copy the homework they can easily as learn as if they were doing it themselves. I know many students who were brilliant and they chose to copy becuase of time/finance/other obligations...but they knew the stuff and they would show it on tests.

 

[Blahness]

But people ask for grades, so benefits or no benefits, you HAVE to do it, leading back to the original question:

Is it moral?