USAFA Cheating Scandal

Luigi59 said:
However we as citizens, alumni, active duty, or cadets/mids feel about it, the USAFA has a written defined policy that seems to excuse honor violations in some cases and instead of "nor tolerate any among us who does" in fact tolerates them and even gives a detailed instruction manual as to when to tolerate them.
Click to expand...

That's a bit misleading. The policy allows for disenrollment, Honor Probation, or Honor Remediation, depending on the circumstances. None of those excuse the person of the violation. Probation involves some significant punishments, as cadet standards go. Remediation (for cases like Flieger cited) is the least punishing, but still does not excuse the violation.
 
raimius said:
That's a bit misleading. The policy allows for disenrollment, Honor Probation, or Honor Remediation, depending on the circumstances. None of those excuse the person of the violation. Probation involves some significant punishments, as cadet standards go. Remediation (for cases like Flieger cited) is the least punishing, but still does not excuse the violation.
Click to expand...

Then substitute "tolerate" for "excuse" and you still have a contradictory code.
 
I am chuckling inside reading this thread because so many posters are aghast by this scandal, venting, expressing opinions, etc., but seriously how many of you have contacted your MOCs?

I bet 0!

The SA's will change if you contact your MOCs. You cannot be a cadet/mid at any SA if you do not get a nom, and MOC's are a part of that process.

If this truly bothers you, contact your MOC! Discussing this until the cows come home won't change one thing.

JMP 0.01864320 cents

OBTW pages and pages ago, DevilDog got it right IMPO!
 
Luigi,

Seriously? This is where you want to parse my post? Okay you are 1,000,000 percent correct, CGA does not require an MOC nom.

However, again, seriously? You were the one that stated taxpayers, this is an AFA issue. My point was and is, if this is an OMG taxpayer issue, call your MOC!

Now if you want to just vent, and spin your wheels beaachhing about the AFA and the way they decided to handle the situation, that is fine too!

You choose.

I was only stating every poster here that is over 18 can change the AFA by using their rights.
 
From everything I've read about this incident; including the air force academy's position, it sounds like the instructions/understanding/parameters/etc... weren't as clear cut as they should have been. That the fine line of "Cheating" is what's actually the problem. The academy reported that there was no group cheat here. Answers weren't being passed to one another; sold; copied; etc... They even admitted that they won't offer this test the same way next year. That implies that if the parameters were clear cut, that the test wasn't a problem. That it was then totally on the student's shoulders. But all these comments give the implication that maybe the instructions what was and wasn't permissible wasn't quite clear. Therefor; the reason for leniency for these individuals.

For every subject; e.g. honor violations, rule/law infraction, drug use, gays in the military, etc..., people on forums or in person tend to take what little they've read or heard in the media and believe they know all the facts. Well, I have too much respect and confidence in all of our military academies. If they believe that this situation warrants not disenrolliing some or all of the individuals involved, then I trust that they have good reasons for such. I don't know why so many are so eager to pretend that they know better and know all the facts and that their opinion of what should happen "if they were in charge" is the "RIGHT" way? Opinions are great. Speculating "what ifs" is fine to. But to comment as factual, when in fact we don't know ALL the facts, is simply irresponsible. I'll maintain my trust in the army, navy, air force, coast guard, and merchants to decide these issues as their respective academies themselves.
 
For old posters like Bullet, Christcorp and Flieger, can you say DIRTY PURPLES?
This is not the 1st time, nor will it be the last time. Is it honorable? NO! Does it happen? YES!

I am still with DevilDog on this issue. I think posters find it convenient to pounce on a sister service.

Honestly, I went through this yesterday with our 2 youngest kids. They were so busy throwing stones at each other, they forgot they both lived in glass houses.

Seriously, this thread is becoming all about spinning wheels.

It happened. AF has made a decision. End of subject... unless of course you leave this forum and email your MOC!
 
Pima said:
Luigi,

Seriously? This is where you want to parse my post? Okay you are 1,000,000 percent correct, CGA does not require an MOC nom.
Click to expand...

Yes, seriously.

The purpose of this forum is to provide accurate factual information.

Your post was inaccurate.

Pima said:
However, again, seriously? You were the one that stated taxpayers, this is an AFA issue. My point was and is, if this is an OMG taxpayer issue, call your MOC!
Click to expand...

Not that important to me. If a MOC wants to get involved with re-defining USAFA's honor code, more power to 'em. I would think an AF family would want to make that call more than anyone else, as one of the cheaters may directly affect the lives of one of their loved ones sometime in the future.

What they really should do, however, is edit their honor "code" to make exceptions - tolerating cheating by 4/c cadets.

"We will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does,
except if they are 4/c cadets, then we give them another chance."​

There is no other way to spin it. They cheated. It was tolerated.
 
I know I am late to the party on this one . . . but, as a current teacher, it strikes me as possible that one reason the USAFA may not be taking the harshest line with all of these cadets is internal dissatisfaction of the senior administration with a set-up of a test that made it too easy to cheat? I quite understand that the honor code is meant to be protection enough against cheating in non-proctored situations, and I am not arguing against that view of the honor code. My thought is more that people within the academy may have felt that it was so poorly structured that they are keeping some of the cadets, almost as a tacit admission that they dropped the ball in how they administered this test?
 
Pima said:
For old posters like Bullet, Christcorp and Flieger, can you say DIRTY PURPLES?
This is not the 1st time, nor will it be the last time. Is it honorable? NO! Does it happen? YES!

I am still with DevilDog on this issue. I think posters find it convenient to pounce on a sister service.

Honestly, I went through this yesterday with our 2 youngest kids. They were so busy throwing stones at each other, they forgot they both lived in glass houses.

Seriously, this thread is becoming all about spinning wheels.

It happened. AF has made a decision. End of subject... unless of course you leave this forum and email your MOC!
Click to expand...

That's right, all of you. Stop having discussions! Pima doesn't like it!
 
AcademyFriend1 said:
I know I am late to the party on this one . . . but, as a current teacher, it strikes me as possible that one reason the USAFA may not be taking the harshest line with all of these cadets is internal dissatisfaction of the senior administration with a set-up of a test that made it too easy to cheat? I quite understand that the honor code is meant to be protection enough against cheating in non-proctored situations, and I am not arguing against that view of the honor code. My thought is more that people within the academy may have felt that it was so poorly structured that they are keeping some of the cadets, almost as a tacit admission that they dropped the ball in how they administered this test?
Click to expand...

If you listen to the statements from the Academy and their actions, which include changes to how this test will be administered from this point on. There is merit to your observation.
 
falconfamily said:
If you listen to the statements from the Academy and their actions, which include changes to how this test will be administered from this point on. There is merit to your observation.
Click to expand...

FalconFamily and AcademyFriend:
+100 Dead on.
 
Pima said:
. . .. I am still with DevilDog on this issue. I think posters find it convenient to pounce on a sister service.
Click to expand...

I don't think some of us are "pounc[ing] on a sister service." I for one never started a thread with a news that makes a sister service look bad.

This discussion is more about the Honor Code than a specific SA. All SAs have honor code, this incident could have occured at any other SA.

The reason I give my two cents is to have a discussion about the Honor code, not how screwed up AFA is.

As you said, we live in a glass house every SA faces similiar issues and challenges.
 
Pima said:
If this truly bothers you, contact your MOC! Discussing this until the cows come home won't change one thing.
Click to expand...

I don't think we want to go there. Do you honestly think getting the Congress involved will make things better? I say, it will make things worse. More than likely a MOC with an agenda will use this to get what he or she wants.

I think starting with West Point in 1802, SAs done a good job producing leaders for our nation. They made some mistakes along the way, but usually minor and as institutions they learned and evoled. West Point's cadet leadership development system didn't change from hazing/stressing to professionalism because some MOC intervention. Rather, it was an internal evolution.

Navy stopped the Herdon Climb with "lard" a few years ago. I think they are doing it with lard again.
 
raimius said:
Yes, the harshest action within the cadet disciplinary system isn't really doing anything. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

"We will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does"

:rolleyes:

Cheat / cheet/

Verb

1. to practice fraud or deceit.

2. to violate rules or regulations.

3. to take an examination or test in a dishonest way, as by improper access to answers.
Click to expand...

tol·er·ate /ˈtäləˌrāt/

Verb

1. Allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of.

2. Accept or endure.
Click to expand...

an·y·one / en-ee-wuhn, -wuhn/

pronoun

1. any person at all; anybody
Click to expand...
 
Luigi59 said:
"We will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does"

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I sum it up this way. Many heads should roll and according to Falcongirl, that is underway. I'd start with disinrolling 100% of the cadets that failed the final and were caught cheating and work up from there.

Until the investigation is complete, I'm reserving judgement.
 
Pima said:
I am chuckling inside reading this thread because so many posters are aghast by this scandal, venting, expressing opinions, etc., but seriously how many of you have contacted your MOCs?

I bet 0!

The SA's will change if you contact your MOCs. You cannot be a cadet/mid at any SA if you do not get a nom, and MOC's are a part of that process.

If this truly bothers you, contact your MOC! Discussing this until the cows come home won't change one thing.

JMP 0.01864320 cents

OBTW pages and pages ago, DevilDog got it right IMPO!
Click to expand...

I can't help but notice how many times I see derogatory posts about USAFA, USNA, and USMA from posters that have ties to another academy. It just may be an error in perception on my part, but there are certain posters that seem to posts articles on here that do not present those academies in a good light.
I have been on this site for almost 4 years and have noticed it for a good portion of that time.
I am not trying to justify what happened, or even sweep it under the rug. I am just trying to state my perception of some of the posters.
 
AcademyFriend1 said:
I know I am late to the party on this one . . . but, as a current teacher, it strikes me as possible that one reason the USAFA may not be taking the harshest line with all of these cadets is internal dissatisfaction of the senior administration with a set-up of a test that made it too easy to cheat? I quite understand that the honor code is meant to be protection enough against cheating in non-proctored situations, and I am not arguing against that view of the honor code. My thought is more that people within the academy may have felt that it was so poorly structured that they are keeping some of the cadets, almost as a tacit admission that they dropped the ball in how they administered this test?
Click to expand...

You don't cheat no matter how easy it would be to cheat.
It would be disappointing if the powers that be at USAFA are lenient on the cheating cadets in this situation because the 'set-up of a test that made it too easy to cheat'. Really?
I realize that statement is just speculation, but I sure hope that is not true.
You don't cheat no matter how easy is would be to cheat.
Pretty black and white.
The answers could be at the bottom of every test and the cadets should be expected not to cheat.

It should not matter how long you have been at USXA. Cheating is not a difficult concept. The kids that go to our SAs are pretty smart. They know what cheating is. You don't do it - no matter if failing the test would result in separation.

I usually like to reserve judgment on situations where we don't know all the facts. But in this particular situation either you cheated or you didn't. It seems that it will be possible to see who logged in and when to Wolfram Alpha.
Logged in prior to submitting test = cheating. Black and white. I don't see any grey area.

Cheating should not be tolerated at any USXA.
 
Buff81 - I humbly submit that none of us have all the facts. But clearly there is more to the story, so far we think we know that 78 cadets are undergoing some sort of remediation, there is a rumor that there might be another 100 or so cases to be heard, we also hear a rumor that many will face disenrollment, so this situation is far from settled. In 1984 they were forced to suspend the honor boards because the scope of the problem was immense. Draconian remedies did not work then and only made the honor boards ineffective (the boards refused to find honor violations even when the evidence of wrong doing was overwhelming). Same with the Naval academy scandal of 1993-1994, which ultimately resulted in the intervention of the Sec of the Navy. In a scandal where 134 Senior Midshipmen were implicated in STEALING and in some cases SELLING a test, 24 were expelled. The lessons from those scandals are that an effective honor system cannot have a single sanction, that each case needs to be considered within some framework of justice. While we all care about the reputation and integrity of the institutions, we must also acknowledge the limits of our particular knowledge of the situation and respect the manner in which people with the responsibility to make these decisions are doing their best for the Air Force, the Cadet Wing, and the Academy.

We are all disappointed and upset, but we do not need to inject personal opinions and partial truths into a volatile situation - Just my humble opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top