Academic Cheating: Causes, Ethics, and Early Prevention

Introduction: Cheating as a Moral Problem

Cheating is a significant problem in contemporary society. Everything from professional athletes using performance-enhancing drugs to questionable elections seems to suggest that succeeding at any cost is acceptable. But is this really the case? Morally speaking, almost any ethical framework would answer with a definitive "no."

The simplest way to test the moral correctness of an action, I believe, is to ask whether you would accept being on the receiving end of it. In this case, cheating is only morally justifiable if it is acceptable to be cheated out of something — and virtually everyone would agree that it is not. Some might argue that cheating doesn't really hurt anybody; this is the common, unspoken thread running through most of the excuses for cheating uncovered by Rebekah Nathan (Nathan, 29). At first glance, that argument seems to carry some weight — it does appear more defensible when the course being cheated is one the student was forced to take and will never use. But the fact is that cheating, regardless of circumstances, degrades the integrity of the cheater and undermines the educational process as a whole.

Even though cheating appears to be on the rise — both in academia and in our culture at large — I believe there are ways to reverse this trend. There are practical steps that can be taken to catch and punish cheaters, but a more important issue is understanding why people cheat and exploring whether there are ways to persuade them not to.

How Cheating Harms the Cheater

This is the central point that David Fink makes in his 2005 article, "The Toughest Test is Saved for the Teacher." In it, he describes his experience as a part-time college instructor catching a student cheating. He tells the student that stealing an achievement will not bring happiness — and that is one of the most powerful arguments against academic dishonesty. Cheating causes harm to the cheater, whatever the circumstances, and is therefore wrong.

Fink also notes — both to the student and in the article — that he knows people who have essentially cheated and manipulated their way through life, and that these individuals are neither happy nor admirable. This observation deserves wider attention. Most people can recognize someone who fits that description: always asking for things, behaving as though they have a right to what others have earned, lacking any sense of personal dignity. Cheating teaches dependence, and plagiarism is simply another way of silencing and limiting oneself. There is no sense of accomplishment, no commitment, and no development of a work ethic when cheating is used to reach a goal. While I have doubts about whether Fink's words resonated with the student he caught, they are genuinely persuasive.

Ethics Education and Early Moral Development

I was an easy person to convince, and anyone who knew my parents would understand why. I was raised with a strong moral and ethical code, and cheating has always seemed reprehensible to me from the earliest age I can remember being aware of it. Perhaps this kind of moral grounding — like attitudes toward personal relationships and the property of others — must be learned young if it is to be learned at all.

According to J.D. Heyman et al. in their article "Psssst…What's the Answer?," the authors note that "Anita Cava, co-director of the [University] Ethics Program, believes ethics should be taught as early as kindergarten" (Heyman et al., 37). This is not a bad idea. At that age, children are not yet subject to the pressures that college students cite as justification for cheating. This makes it easier for them to understand and acknowledge that cheating is wrong — ask any five-year-old, and you are unlikely to hear anything but a clear "no." Explaining why cheating is wrong at that stage may help the lesson remain ingrained, potentially reducing the number of students who cheat in college once such a program takes effect. This would be a proactive ethical approach — curing the problem rather than merely addressing its symptoms.

Conclusion: Universal Standards and Prevention

Cheating is wrong regardless of how anyone attempts to justify it. There can be extraordinary pressure or a seemingly trivial outcome, but if an action is wrong in one situation, it is wrong in all of them. The sooner people internalize this message, the sooner expectations will become more realistic, and the less temptation there will be to cheat in the first place.