USNA Physics Exams Being Reviewed for Inconsistencies

The Dean has not directly stated they suspect cheating. We were told they are working to "resolve uncertainty about the fair administration of the final examination." What that means, I do not know. Notably, the exam was administered as "Long-answer" type questions with no opportunity for partial credit. This differs significantly from the previous format: multiple choice with no partial credit.

Also: My opinion is no different than what I posted on the USMA forum: convene an honor board. Recommend for separation if deemed appropriate.
 
Last edited:
For candidates out there seeing this (and to be clear this has not been verified to be a cheating scandal or wrong doing was done by Mids - it could be inconsistencies in even how a proctor gave an exam) and the USMA thread wondering what the heck is going on? Every few years one of the Service Academies has a scandal of some kind. Usually they are in a course that all Mids/Cadets take in across a class. We had one of these "scandals" while I was at USNA (not my class though). It gained major media attention and it ended up the LT teaching the class gave tons of pre final gouge to his class (basically the entire final). That then got shared with room mates and then company mates, etc. By the end of it everyone combined the "gouge" to have the entire test. None of this was against the rules or Honor Concept. They had never been told to not share gouge, it was common practice (probably still is???).

The Honor Code/Concept is taken seriously at the Service Academies. It is one of the items you will see creates a big divide among OGs also. For most of us who graduated a few decades ago or further, honor violations were almost a guaranteed out from a SA. It was a guaranteed out probably 30+ years ago. This has been lightened in recent years and falls more on the side of remediation then automatic out. There are many OGs who do not agree with this and is a major sticking point with many. This is not something that current Mids control in terms of out or not, its a leadership decision. When you are on the outside looking in the Honor Code/Concept looks very clear and easy to follow/enforce. The part that no one sees, unless you live in Mother B (or the other respective SAs walls) is how hard it is to turn someone in or some of the nuances of these cases. Yes, it is encouraged to sit down and talk to that person and encourage them to turn themselves in. Many do this. For those who do not, it can create a major divide. On one hard we are taught to never turn on your classmates, yet we live with this Honor Concept also. It is an internal struggle. I have seen it divide companies, friendships, room mates, etc.
 
Right or wrong, I think the change was in large part to the perception of the punishment often not fitting the "crime". There is a well-known case at USMA of a Firstie who turned themself in for an honor violation less than a month prior to graduation for a failure to cite a reference on a paper. It was a mistake rather than a conscious choice, but since this was under the old system the Firstie was separated and sent to the ranks. It was something the professor did not even notice and probably would have slipped by. They ended up having a long and distinguished enlisted career.
 
NavyHoops said:
For candidates out there seeing this (and to be clear this has not been verified to be a cheating scandal or wrong doing was done by Mids - it could be inconsistencies in even how a proctor gave an exam) and the USMA thread wondering what the heck is going on? Every few years one of the Service Academies has a scandal of some kind. Usually they are in a course that all Mids/Cadets take in across a class. We had one of these "scandals" while I was at USNA (not my class though). It gained major media attention and it ended up the LT teaching the class gave tons of pre final gouge to his class (basically the entire final). That then got shared with room mates and then company mates, etc. By the end of it everyone combined the "gouge" to have the entire test. None of this was against the rules or Honor Concept. They had never been told to not share gouge, it was common practice (probably still is???).

The Honor Code/Concept is taken seriously at the Service Academies. It is one of the items you will see creates a big divide among OGs also. For most of us who graduated a few decades ago or further, honor violations were almost a guaranteed out from a SA. It was a guaranteed out probably 30+ years ago. This has been lightened in recent years and falls more on the side of remediation then automatic out. There are many OGs who do not agree with this and is a major sticking point with many. This is not something that current Mids control in terms of out or not, its a leadership decision. When you are on the outside looking in the Honor Code/Concept looks very clear and easy to follow/enforce. The part that no one sees, unless you live in Mother B (or the other respective SAs walls) is how hard it is to turn someone in or some of the nuances of these cases. Yes, it is encouraged to sit down and talk to that person and encourage them to turn themselves in. Many do this. For those who do not, it can create a major divide. On one hard we are taught to never turn on your classmates, yet we live with this Honor Concept also. It is an internal struggle. I have seen it divide companies, friendships, room mates, etc.
Click to expand...

I wonder if this change was driven at all by a desire to promote peer and self accountability. Usually (not always) what happens now is if someone is accused of an honor violation and they’re guilty, they immediately confess and repent, which ends up in the honor system and the Dant viewing them more favorably since they came clean and ostensibly regret their action. If a mid’s gonna get separated no matter what, then they have no incentive to do that.

Likewise if mids (or even profs and COs) think that a violation occurred but isn’t serious enough to warrant separation they may have just brushed it under the rug. I’ve definitely seen this happen with the conduct system. When the new Dep Dant came in a couple years ago, he changed the room inspection policy so that a first failure immediately resulted in 5 tours. What happened next? The 1/C midshipmen tasked with inspecting rooms saw this as disproportionate, so they simply didn’t fail rooms. Dep Dant noticed and walked back the policy change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top