Over the weekend I read yet another dower article on the percentage of students who self-report using Google and/or their cell phones to cheat on assignments or shortcut homework assignments by downloading prior semesters’ solutions.
Such concerns are not new, dating back at least as far as 1958 with Williams & Abrashkin’s publication of “Danny Dunn and the Homework Machine.” — which optimistically posited that programming a computer to do one’s homework would have at least as much pedagogical value as doing such work by hand.
Sadly, most students have their schedules so heavily overloaded in an attempt to woo collegiate and grad school admissions committees that they lack the time to pursue their own research interests. And even more sadly, many feel that not taking advantage of a search engine to avoid re-inventing the wheel and stashing a few key notes in their PDA to compensate for the vagaries of memory will grievously disadvantage them vis-a-vis their peers.
In short, lazy assignment and test designs that lend themselves to regurgitating stock answers invites an arms race in ways to avoid doing such ultimately pointless work. Students are not entirely wrong to view the memorization of facts or hand calculation of readily computable values to be utterly worthless skills in the modern age.
Herein lies the challenge for faculty. It is no longer acceptable to recycle past assignments of a “write a program to implement a binary search tree” or “write an essay about the Turning Test” variety. Instead we need to figure out ways to invoke today’s skill set of integrating the results of multiple discreet searches, reading and analyzing other people’s code, identifying bias and gauging the quality of others’ research.
Demands on today’s students are considerably higher than they were in previous generations as the sheer volume of human knowledge has exploded. Thus, the tools and skills that matter today have changed, as to must our approach to teaching.
Our Weblog
