Content area
Full text
The flap at Harvard points to key questions about teaching: Is it really a good thing to have students collaborate outside of class? And if so, when is it appropriate?
The notion that students should collaborate with one another outside of class has been embraced nearly universally in higher education, but is this a good thing? And when is it most appropriate?
Those are some of the questions prompted by the news last week that Harvard University is investigating 125 students for allegedly cheating on a take-home final examination last spring.
The allegations of academic dishonesty on the open-book, open-note, open-Internet exam range from "inappropriate collaboration to outright plagiarism," Jay M. Harris, dean of undergraduate education, wrote in a letter to students. Nearly half of the more than 250 students in the course "may have worked together in groups of varying size to develop and/or share answers."
The university said the incident "betrays the trust upon which intellectual inquiry at Harvard depends." In a statement to The Chronicle, Harvard said that a committee of faculty members and deans was reviewing the allegations and would meet with each student under investigation over the next several weeks. Some students may be asked to withdraw, depending on the offense.
"We expect to learn more about the way the course was organized and how work was approached in class and on the take-home final," the university said. "It will take time and require patience, and we cannot comment on specific cases."
Harvard has not specified the class under investigation. The Harvard Crimson identified it as a government course, "Introduction to Congress," which is taught by Matthew B. Platt, an assistant professor.
While Mr. Platt expressly forbade his students to discuss the final exam with others, some students...