.....and I expect you to be keeping score!

P.S. about the medical school tests.....maybe to shed more light on those low passing grades, but mainly because I think it's pretty much a hoot....

Back in the day, and maybe still, but I sure hope not many of those tests went through a fad in their format. A lot of the questions would give 4 "statements" and then the question would be something like this

".....Choose A if 1,2 and 3 are true
Choose B if only 1 and 3 are true
Choose C if 2 and 4 are true
Choose D if only 4 is true
Choose E if none are true" (or maybe it was if "all" are true, I'm not sure)

So, in order to get it right, you needed to know 4 things. It didn't differentiate between someone who knew 3 out of the 4 things, or none; you got 0 either way. And very often, one of the things was either a very small point, or sort of "trick" -- you couldn't necessarily tell how it was meant and you could argue it either way -- but the question depended on it. If you knew all the main things but couldn't guess right on the arcane thing, you got no credit.

I think the person who came up with that format might have been on drugs. Why the establishment went along with it for a long time, I can't explain. And as you can see, I'm still both traumatized by it and laughing my arse off over it.

Wow!!! The one answer that stuck with me was the post with the recording of the transaction on the android and placing it on YouTube. This should be a warning to all you students on PW. Wow! Just think.... If you ask someone to write your paper, you may be on YouTube or paying the blackmailer until you graduate! So... Write your own papers! And... Never write someone else's for them.

Well, I confess, I had to look it up!

Depends on your program...for what I'm doing, a 65% average is required to keep going on, but to gain entry into my program, everybody had a 90+ average in high school. The result is near-impossible exams which break up this group of students a wide range of marks again. I've had exams where the standard deviation was over 30 percent, where some people got 100s, and others, just above 10%...

So yeah, standards vary across schools. Though it seems for me, at least at my school, that every prof would rather fail everybody, make a huge mark distribution, and then adjust all of the marks back to a normal (65-70% average), than give an exam which results in an 80% average overall.

Testing in UK higher education traditionally works on the basis that a reasonably competent, reasonably diligent student will score 50-60% on exams. The tests are set so as to deliver those figures. That is, we set tests so that competent people will score just over half marks.

Traditionally, the situation in medical education was just slightly different, in that degrees were not graded as they were in other subjects. I presume that's because it would undermine public confidence if they knew their doctors were graded 'lower second class'. But 'lower second class' is, and always has been, academic-speak for 'basic competence'.

These days many medical students combine their traditional clinical education with a science degree so that they, too, can graduate second-class.

The testing system is designed to put basic competence in about the middle of the scoring range (i.e., halfway between nothing and full marks). That way there's room for the exceptional candidates to demonstrate their prowess. If the pass mark was 90%, there would be little to distinguish the basically competent entrant from the genius.

I'm not defending the system -- just pointing out why it is the way it is.

And, as Kreisler says, we don't emply doctors, or anybody else, on the basis of test scores alone.

Just to play Devil's Advocate, I would have to say that the ethical violation lies with the student offering to hand in the paper under the false assumption that they wrote it - you (as the ghost writer) are not lying to anyone, they are. You are nothing more than a ghost writer. It is none of your concern what they do or don't do with the paper, because once you take the money and hand over the paper, it no longer belongs to you, i.e. it's not your responsibility.

Here is an analogy: If a person buys a car from a dealership and then uses this car to intentionally kill somebody, it is illogical to blame the dealership. Unless, the person buying the car informed the dealer they were going to use it as a murder weapon.

So, as I see it, the only way this business of writing the person's paper could be considered un-ethical is if the behaviour of lying to the professor actually hurts other people.

Now, clearly the professor is not going to be hurt by this lie (assuming he does not find out about it), so I don't think that is really a issue. However, if, for instance, the person's grade is curved among other student's grades, then (assuming the paper you write results in them getting a higher grade than they would have got had they written it) the other student's grades will drop unjustly. This would be un-ethical. However, if the grade this person receives is in no way contingent upon the grade of anyone else, then I see no ethical violation on the part of you, the ghost writer.

It's "YOUR" fault only if you have 100% control over your DNA, your upbringing, your social matrix, the times you live in, etc. etc. etc.

As it happens, I never cheated in school and never helped anyone else cheat, nor have I ever been dishonest on job applications or in interviews. I have fought difficult moral battles in a big corporation. I don't cheat on taxes and I don't tell lies to get ahead. I have never shoplifted so much as a paper clip. I even try to avoid the "little white lies" commonly used as social expedients.

But I am not so egotistical and stupid as to imagine that all this honesty is a result of some kind of wonderful sense of personal responsibility on my part. It isn't. It's a result of many factors, none of which are my own doing. I am pretty sure that just a few slight changes in the variables that resulted in the "me" I am today could have turned me into almost the opposite of who I am, i.e., turned me into a lying cheating criminal, and again, in a way totally beyond my own control.

Having a well-developed sense of personal responsibility for oneself is important, if for no other reason than it is good mental hygiene. But pretending that each of us is some wholly self-determined island of responsibility in the world is ludicrous, IMO.

Well, I'm sure there are a few things you can reasonably take credit for

But, in general, I agree wholeheartedly. We all do the best we can within the limitations of our environment and genetics.

Those of us who have always worked hard, played fair, etc., very easily fall into the trap of assuming that we have no-one or nothing else to thank for our successes. It's easy to lose lose sight of the influence of blind chance, grace, or fate (according to your worldview) on the kind of person you are. I was very lucky to start my educational life with all the advantages one can possibly have. I'm not about to start rubbishing people without knowing what kind of shitty hand they may have been dealt.

I could go further and say that the entire political ideology of the Western world is founded on the entirely incorrect belief that we make ourselves what we are. But that, perhaps, is even more of a tangent than we need.

Sounds to me like a counsel of despair .... or a bit of good old-fashioned Calvinist predestination.

Even if we do NOT have 100% control, and only an egotistical fool would think that they did, there is a lot of mileage in behaving as though you do. This is where personal responsibility becomes a social as well as personal virtue.

If you rationalize that it's just fine to sell your papers, knowing full well what they will be used for, you have abdicated personal responsibility for a few pieces of silver. Poor choice, as far as I'm concerned.

Ok.

For the sensetive ones, it's better NOT to click on the first image

There is a story about Kevin Carter, a photographer, who after taking a picture of a young girl in Sudan trying to escape a vulture, did NOT help her (because he was told that these kids wouldn't stand a chance anyhow and that they were filled with deseases). The pic won a nobel prize and the photographer killed himself. The pic can be found HERE and some words about him HERE. It is 100% certain that the poor girl, whose fate is unknown had no power over her life really...

On the other hand there is a guy who gave a speech about "Are you going to finish strong?". The video can be found HERE (nothing bad here, just watch it, it's amazing. It's hard to say that he gave up because of the troubles he had in life, or because of various situations, right?

In other words, the girl asking to cheat is probably not deserving to cheat... Other cases mentioned by Kevin, they could and still finish strong and be ok in life, despite a tiny bit of cheating...

Sorry that this stuff causes you despair.

And, as you probably know, this response of yours is exactly what is expected from you. Don't let that get you down.

The person writing the paper for another student knows exactly what will be done with it.

Graduates who apply for jobs or graduate school are partly selected by their grades. So there is automatically some possibility for competition between the student who got the grade honestly and the one who didn't.

There's also the simple factor of the student not writing the paper getting the day off to do something they'd prefer to do. Would it be appropriate to give some people Monday off every week?

The perfect riposte! I'm glad I wasn't sipping coffee.

Well, yes, we all have to act as though we had some measure of control over our lives. Presumably there's a place between deterministic fatalism and selfish individualism where reasonable folk can live.

You didn't comment at all on my main points.

Sorry. Is this really the place for a discussion of testing methodologies for medical students? I mean, I'm happy to discuss it, but it just doesn't to have much to do with pianos.

First, I have to know, is she hot?

True! But you're the one who brought up the subject, and I just replied -- and then you addressed it further without addressing what I had said to you! I mean, it's OK. Just sayin'.

Nothing personal, honest. I just wasn't paying attention

Then you shouldn't be so proud of giving tests that med students only got 40 on!