Standing Up for the Power of Learning, by Jay Mathews

1069 Words3 Pages

The essay, “Standing Up for the Power of Learning,” by Jay Mathews explained how one of many students was accused of academic dishonesty. During the regular school session of the year 2001, three fourths of 187 students at Georgia Institute of Technology (GIT) were found guilty of cheating. This was because they collaborated on an assignment in a computer science (CS) course with friends. By communicating with others about the project, the students violated the course honor code that prohibited the discussion among students for that particular class.

Perhaps, some people may argue that no collaboration is unhealthy and ineffective in a learning setting. Well, that is not the case for freshmen students at GIT who are taking CS 1321. As claimed by GIT, students are graded on their individual abilities to do the required work. I believe universities should exercise their rights to set reasonable and effective academic policies for its students, but without any over defined measures or limitations. For instance, the policy that is explained by Mathews that GIT had in place for freshmen who were taking CS is over estimated with little considerations to how students will react to it naturally.

Mathews argued on the behalf of one particular student who was a victim in violating the computer science honor code. According to Mathews’ knowledge of GIT’s computer science honor code, it declared that “at no time is it acceptable for you [students] to share your solutions to the homework assignments with other students, whether these solution are complete or partial, nor is it acceptable to compare your solutions with other students.” (Mathews 210) Legally, I agree with GIT for convicting this student of cheating and applying the punishment...

... middle of paper ...

...s that made no sense.” (Mathews 212) It somewhat seems to the reader like to writer is trying to make his audience feel sorry for the students but that is not the case. The justification for the claim of the author not committing a logical fallacy are the use of adequate facts he gathered from student of? Whom was convicted of cheating and his person understanding of the issue.

Indeed, Jay Mathews had done an admirable job in illustrating his argument as effectively as possible for the best comprehension of the sad situation that took place at Georgia Institute of Technology. Again, he made strong and concise points with adequate reasons and supports. We, as a class community, should try and use strategies Mathews used to ensure that we argue to the optimum level as possible.

Works Cited

robert yagelski and robert miller. the informed arguments. eight edition

Open Document