The Message, Volume 6, Number 28, April 1979 Page: 2 of 4
[4] p. : ill. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
RABBI SEGALS COLUMN:
ARE OUR PARENTS AT FAULT?
*
I have asked the editor of our Message to print the sermon I
delivered Friday evening, February 16 because of the many
requests I received for copies of the sermon but even more so
because it deals with a problem that I feel must be corrected —
especially since so many people do not even see it as a problem.
“CHEATING ON EXAMS — IT’S BECOMING A COMMON
AMERICAN OCCURRENCE”
if you like, collaborate with some of your friends (you do half the
exam and have a friend do half of the exam and help each other «
so that you may do well on it); an exam for which I notified the
students that I was not interested in tricking them but rather I
was interested in having them learn the material — in spite of all
this, 71% stated, “I cheated on the exam" while only 29% stated, <
“I did not cheat on the exam.”
Obviously, the young boy’s accusations were true and I asked
myself — “Why? Why would these students violate their own
sense of ethics?”
In addition to this I have asked myself, “This was an exam
given in a synagogue. Did that not really mean anything
to them?”
Finally, I asked myself, “This was a Confirmation class whose
express purpose was to attempt to apply Jewish ethics to the
latter part of the twentieth century. Did that not have any special
meaning for them — cheating on an examination for a course *
on ethics?”
As I sat in my study pondering this entire incident it all boiled
down to one simple question — “Why?”
But I must admit that it was not very difficult for me to come
forth with a response to this question. Allow me to explain.
My friends, I personally feel that vast numbers of Americans
today are like the Norwegian lemmings that live in Scandinavia.
Every few years these 6 to 7 inch rodents begin to migrate in
large numbers toward the sea and they plunge in and continue
to swim until they are exhausted — and then they finally drown.
And when you ask the question, “Why? Why do they do this?
Don’t they realize that they are going to drown?” The reply is:
“They do not have time to think about that question. They are
too busy concentrating on following the lemming in front of them.
They are followers. Their lives are molded and shaped by the
environment in which they find themselves.” And I say — this
is equally true in regard to the youngsters in my Confirmation
class and also in regard to so many other youngsters all over our
nation today. Today, our youngsters are turning in all directions
and they are constantly being confronted with cheating and dis-
honesty in front of them, in back of them, and to the side of
them — and no one seems to be upset.
The January 15,1979 Wall Street Journal contained an article *
that was headlined: “To Some At Harvard, Telling Lies Be-
comes A Matter Of Fact. Untruths Can Improve Grades In
Business School Class.”
The article went on to describe how Gerald Thonchick had
received the highest grade in his course (“Competitive Decision
Making”) in the Graduate School of Business. Mr. Thonchick
said, “I was willing to lie and get a better score.”
However, his professor was not oblivious to that which was
taking place. Professor Howard Raiffa said that this was fine
with him. He merely said that this should not be called “lying.”
It should merely be called “STRATEGIC MISREPRESENTA-
TION.” The professor stated that this type of action was often
resorted to in business negotiations since that was the true world.
However, that was not an isolated case at Harvard. In a book
called Harvard Hates America by John Le Boutillier the author
stated that his class was once confronted with a problem that
involved conforming with state regulated building codes. He >*
said, “Some quick mathematical figuring indicated that the
requirements would cost $25,000. This would mean decreased
profits . . . however, a member of the class . . . explained how
much simpler, and cost effective, it would be to simply pay the
inspector a $10,000 bribe thereby preserving at least $15,000
in profit.”
But when Le Boutillier protested he was greeted with
snickers and a patronizing lecture from the instructor. The in-
structor said, “Obviously, you haven’t been out in the real world
because if you had you’d know that if our competitors do it, then
we also have to do it.”
In a sense, that professor was saying: “You must learn to be
a ‘super-lemming’ in this world. Do not try to change the tactics
of the day. Just be more unethical than your neighbor if you
want to be successful.”
Every year in January, after the completion of the first
semester of my Saturday morning Confirmation class, I usually
ask the 50 to 55 tenth graders to complete a questionnaire which
helps me evaluate the Confirmation course of study and also my
personal techniques of instruction. I usually ask the students to
anonymously reply as to whether they considered the course
excellent, very good, good, fair, or poor. They are also asked to
comment on whether they would, or would not, like to take
another course with me; whether the subject matter covered was
interesting, average, or boring; how I, the instructor, presented
the material — was it in an interesting manner, average manner,
or boring manner; and I also usually ask them whether they were
forced and coerced by their parents to attend Sabbath School
classes or whether they attended of their own free volition.
This year, however, I decided to add two more questions to the
questionnaire because of a specific incident that had occurred
in my class after the completion of the 162 question final exam.
Several weeks ago, immediately after the students had taken
the Confirmation final examination, a student said to me,
“Rabbi, I think it’s unfair. There was a lot of cheating on the
exam. Some students were constantly looking at other students’
papers and one girl even had a crib sheet in her shoe. It isn’t
fair that we had to study so hard for the examination but we
will have to compete with others who simply came in and
cheated.”
I listened attentively to the student and I told him that I
totally agreed with him; however, I added that I had personally
only seen two students whose eyes had merely begun to wander
but I had not personally seen anyone actually cheating. Hence,
I said, if this matter was to be further pursued the student would
have to personally press charges before an Educational Com-
mittee sub-committee against a specific student or against a
specific group of students. However, the student later told me
that he had decided not to do so. (Frankly speaking, I think his
decision was extremely wise.)
But after the student notified me that he was not going to
personally press charges against those whom he had seen cheat-
ing, I must admit that I became extremely curious and I felt
that I should do something. Therefore, when I distributed my
questionnaire to the students this year, one week after the final
examination, I added two additional questions which normally
would not have been there.
The first question stated: “I think taking answers from some-
one else’s paper, or using a ‘crib sheet’ while taking an exam
is improper and unethical.”
The second question said: “I took some answers from someone
else’s paper, and/or someone told me some of the answers during
the exam, and/or I used a ‘crib sheet’ during the exam.”
When the anonymous replies were tabulated I discovered the
following: 82% stated that they thought it was improper and
unethical to cheat during an exam; 9% stated that they did not
think it was unethical to cheat during an exam; and 9% stated
that they thought that it was only sometimes unethical but at
other times it was not unethical to cheat on an exam.
However, in regard to the last question — how many had
cheated on my Confirmation final exam — an exam that I had
sent to the students 13 weeks earlier so that it would not be a
surprise to them; an exam for which I had personally given them
60 answers in class the week before; an exam for which I had told
them a month earlier, and had even written to their parents,
“Get your parents to help you at home to complete the exam, or,
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Congregation Beth Yeshurun (Houston, Tex.). The Message, Volume 6, Number 28, April 1979, periodical, April 13, 1979; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1294411/m1/2/: accessed July 9, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.