FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W98534450> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W98534450 startingPage "21" @default.
• W98534450 abstract "Mention the escalation of academic dishonesty and most of us working in education are immediately inclined to whistle for our moral high horse. But too much moralistic tongue-clicking can blind us to the ways in which we who constitute the system contribute to the very malady we lament. For if academic dishonesty is like a disease--and we repeatedly hear it described as an epidemic--we may all be carriers, even cultivators, of the virus that causes it. Let me explain. Socrates sought to understand the essence of a thing by asking what all instances of it have in common. This approach is open to well-known objections, but it can have its uses. In the present case, for example, I think it leads to the following important observation: all instances of academic dishonesty are attempts to appear cleverer, more knowledgeable, more skillful, or more industrious than one really is. Buying or copying a term paper, plagiarizing from the Internet, using a crib sheet on an exam, accessing external assistance from beyond the exam room by means of a cell phone, fabricating a lab report, having another student sign one's name on an attendance sheet--all such practices serve this same purpose. The goal is to produce an appearance that is more impressive than the reality. So far, so obvious, you might say. But what is not so obvious--and this is a key point in the argument I am making--is that this same prioritizing of appearance over reality permeates much of our education system. It is endorsed by parents, teachers, and administrators, and it is encouraged by many of our well-intentioned pedagogical practices. Students absorb this ordering of values over many years, especially in high school; so by the time they reach college they have been marinating in the toxin for a long time. Here are some examples of what I mean. The College Board, The Princeton Review, Kaplan and many other organizations offer extensive advice on test-taking strategies for students taking SATs, GREs, AP exams, and so on. Most of us view such guidance as innocent and making use of it as sensible; but underlying it is an attitude that should give us pause. Here is how The Princeton Review describes its approach to cracking the new SAT: This book will show you how to exploit the standardized format of the SAT. ETS uses the same tricks over and over again; once you become aware of them, you won't fall for them ... Our job isn't to teach you math or English ... Instead we're going to teach you the SAT. You'll soon see that the SAT involves a very different skill set.... You don't have to prove that you know why your answer is correct. The only thing EST's scoring machine cares about is the answer you come up with. If you darken the right space on your answer sheet, you'll get credit, even if you didn't quite understand the question. (The Princeton Review, Cracking the New SAT (New York: Random House, 2006), pp. 10-12.) There is nothing surprising here. But we should reflect on both the message being conveyed and the alternative view that is being undermined. The message conveyed is that although SAT scores are supposed to reflect knowledge and abilities within a field, there are clever stratagems you can use to boost your scores beyond what you would get if you just relied on what you actually know. These test-prep power tactics (as SparkNotes calls them) are, in effect, ways of making yourself look smarter than you are. The view being undermined is that what really matters is genuine understanding of the material: achieve this--ideally on the basis of an interest in the subject and a love of learning--and the tests can take care of themselves. Or consider a specific test-preparation methodology: using vocabulary lists to prepare for the verbal section of the SAT. One idea behind the test, presumably, is to gauge the range and depth of a student's grasp of English. …" @default.
• W98534450 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W98534450 creator A5090365473 @default.
• W98534450 date "2008-09-22" @default.
• W98534450 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W98534450 title "Academic Dishonesty and the Culture of Assessment" @default.
• W98534450 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W98534450 type Work @default.
• W98534450 sameAs 98534450 @default.
• W98534450 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W98534450 countsByYear W985344502014 @default.
• W98534450 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W98534450 hasAuthorship W98534450A5090365473 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C11413529 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C119770614 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C2776603611 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C2778024590 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C2778707766 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C2779151265 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C2780573756 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W98534450 hasConcept C98184364 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C11413529 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C119770614 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C126322002 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C138885662 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C144024400 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C15744967 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C17744445 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C199539241 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C2776603611 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C2778024590 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C2778707766 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C2779151265 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C2780573756 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C41008148 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C41895202 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C71924100 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C77805123 @default.
• W98534450 hasConceptScore W98534450C98184364 @default.
• W98534450 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W98534450 hasLocation W985344501 @default.
• W98534450 hasOpenAccess W98534450 @default.
• W98534450 hasPrimaryLocation W985344501 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W123152054 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W14806016 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W1519940520 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W1662326820 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W2079254572 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W2189441195 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W2281862240 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W24654845 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W2498974553 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W2564810033 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W2575216392 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W2914392779 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W2923555335 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W3121369112 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W313866256 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W410155293 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W615770134 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W651718527 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W2188788395 @default.
• W98534450 hasRelatedWork W2399773883 @default.
• W98534450 hasVolume "9" @default.
• W98534450 isParatext "false" @default.
• W98534450 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W98534450 magId "98534450" @default.
• W98534450 workType "article" @default.