[Nan3cy]

My alleged memory may be inventing this, but it seems to me that back in the day, if you heard anything about cheating it was in premed classes, where I presume the competition would have been most brutal. (Especially since in those days, med school was a ticket out of the draft pool...) So there may very well be something about the competition angle.

[Nan3cy]

My alleged memory may be inventing this, but it seems to me that back in the day, if you heard anything about cheating it was in premed classes, where I presume the competition would have been most brutal. (Especially since in those days, med school was a ticket out of the draft pool...) So there may very well be something about the competition angle.

[CTcard]

My alleged memory may be inventing this, but it seems to me that back in the day, if you heard anything about cheating it was in premed classes, where I presume the competition would have been most brutal. (Especially since in those days, med school was a ticket out of the draft pool...) So there may very well be something about the competition angle.

It seems to me that back in a somewhat different day, there was plenty of cheating but Stanford students diligently tried not to see it as they would then have to decide if they would comply with the part of the honor code that says you have to turn in anybody you know of who cheated.

I still believe that having the honor code led to considerably less cheating than not having it - but cheating wasn't in short supply in the mid to late 80s.

[CTcard]

My alleged memory may be inventing this, but it seems to me that back in the day, if you heard anything about cheating it was in premed classes, where I presume the competition would have been most brutal. (Especially since in those days, med school was a ticket out of the draft pool...) So there may very well be something about the competition angle.

It seems to me that back in a somewhat different day, there was plenty of cheating but Stanford students diligently tried not to see it as they would then have to decide if they would comply with the part of the honor code that says you have to turn in anybody you know of who cheated.

I still believe that having the honor code led to considerably less cheating than not having it - but cheating wasn't in short supply in the mid to late 80s.

[Farm93]

It seems to me that back in a somewhat different day, there was plenty of cheating but Stanford students diligently tried not to see it as they would then have to decide if they would comply with the part of the honor code that says you have to turn in anybody you know of who cheated.

I still believe that having the honor code led to considerably less cheating than not having it - but cheating wasn't in short supply in the mid to late 80s.

My early 90s view of the scene was not too different.
Pre-Med students were constantly trying to determine which professors gave the best grades, which TAs were most helpful, and "study groups" seemed rather common.  The course selection obsession did not seem materially different from the type of frats class lists many covet and/or the Stanford AD class list.

Engineering students, in my recollection, seemed to be developing a similar set of concerns with even more impressive "collaboration" during my days on The Farm.

As I was not in those classes or on those tracks I never bothered to determine if the group efforts were consistent with the guidelines from the class, but fairly certain a few pushed the boundaries.  Still maintain that in-test cheating must have been very rare at Stanford.  Admittedly during a test I was never concerned with observing if others were cheating, like most I was too busy trying to finish my own test to worry about possible cheaters many rows away.

No doubt in my mind that smartphones are making it possible for more to cheat.  Can't even imagine how people might use iWatch or Google Glasses!!!

[Farm93]

It seems to me that back in a somewhat different day, there was plenty of cheating but Stanford students diligently tried not to see it as they would then have to decide if they would comply with the part of the honor code that says you have to turn in anybody you know of who cheated.

I still believe that having the honor code led to considerably less cheating than not having it - but cheating wasn't in short supply in the mid to late 80s.

My early 90s view of the scene was not too different.
Pre-Med students were constantly trying to determine which professors gave the best grades, which TAs were most helpful, and "study groups" seemed rather common.  The course selection obsession did not seem materially different from the type of frats class lists many covet and/or the Stanford AD class list.

Engineering students, in my recollection, seemed to be developing a similar set of concerns with even more impressive "collaboration" during my days on The Farm.

As I was not in those classes or on those tracks I never bothered to determine if the group efforts were consistent with the guidelines from the class, but fairly certain a few pushed the boundaries.  Still maintain that in-test cheating must have been very rare at Stanford.  Admittedly during a test I was never concerned with observing if others were cheating, like most I was too busy trying to finish my own test to worry about possible cheaters many rows away.

No doubt in my mind that smartphones are making it possible for more to cheat.  Can't even imagine how people might use iWatch or Google Glasses!!!