USAFA Cheating Scandal

AFDAD, Wasn't making any assumptions at all. I didn't believe any of the things I put out myself. I was just trying to get a dialogue started. I imagine the cadets are being watched pretty closely right now and perhaps ordered not to comment.

We are all one big family and may occassionaly tease and fight among ourselves as families do, but a slap by the media to one is most often a slap to all. I just want to understand why this Whitaker guy tried to tie the semester GPA to the cheating allegations, if, in fact, he really did. If I were jumping to conclusions, I would think that he were trying to imply with a "hey, look what we had to work with" type statement and shifting the blame. Not a good military response. However, I am sure there is more. Someday, I hope to find out why. Thanks for the insight. Quoting only one person though to develop a hypothesis, I am going to have to sic WP on you for relevancy. However, we only have to look at numbers of Rhodes Scholars and other prestigious fellowships to counter that comment.

Actually my first thought was that the alleged low achievement was morale related. I first wondered if perhaps it was the war in Iraq maybe and then remembered the recent reduction in force measures which has to have a huge negative effect on AF morale. But neither of these really makes any sense for first year AFA cadets.

Interesting thought on one of your comments though. My understanding is that the USNA supt really started stressing physical fitness with the Class of 2010, commencing with letters even before their arrival on I-Day. He thinks this increased time, effort, and emphasis on PT is one of the primary contributing factors in the overall outstanding performance of the class.
 
Last edited:
Good post. It will be interesting to see if the academic performance issue persists beyond class of 2010. If it doesn't, it's probably an anomaly not worthy of focus. If it does, I hope it will be a LOT of people's focus!
 
The first semester grades for freshmen the past two years have been very low. Personnally, I think this is partly due to a new method of teaching started three years ago. It emphasises the students learning most of the material by themselves, so that class disscussions can be on a higher level. However, I have seen some technical classes where the work is graded before the lesson is taught in class. I know it has hurt a lot of freshmen.
Also, a lot of freshmen are using myspace, facebook, and AIM more than they should. I think that has already subsided after the first semester grades jolted a few cadets into better time management.

I think there were 200+ freshmen with below a 2.0GPA during the first semester. So, that would be about 19% failing.

USAFA's honor probation is somewhat similar to USNA's. It varies from 3 to 12 months (average being 6 or 9). The cadet is restricted to base, must complete journals, give presentations to their squad., and is reviewed by higher ups. I know one former cadet who was expelled for going off base while on honor pro. They take all parts of honor pro seriously.
 
raimus,
Thanks for the update and insight. Do you feel that the new teaching method is actually detrimental to learning the material or is it just a grading issue? Or to put it another way. Does having to spend time learning it oneself cause more study hours to be expended for a given grade?

Thanks again. Keep your head down. These things will pass.
 
My opinion is that the method is flawed. Expecting us to learn the techie material at an application level from books (books I have seen that are very ineffective at the lower math and science levels) before class, AND be graded on it is unreasonable in my opinion. It means more time trying to understand, less teaching on the teachers' part, and a tendency to revert to just "screw it."

A couple classes I have figured it out. My MSS class has pre-flights (homework due online before class) based on our readings and it does actually help since the answers come straight out of the readings and we then discuss in class. My Economics class has a quiz passed out at the beginning, then taken at the end over that class's material. But having physics/calculus/chemistry pre-flights expecting one to solve problems based on the next class's material is difficult for most IMO.
 
The more I learn about this new method of teaching the less I like of it. What's the point of even having teachers if you have to learn everything before class? They might as well save the taxpayers a load of money and just not have any professors there anymore.

I definately do not think I would have fared well in a system such as that.
 
The method sounds suspiciously like the "Thayer Method" used at West Point, and it's equally unpopular there.

My own theory on the approach - and the likelihood I'm completely wrong is quite high here - is that it's designed to teach students how to learn on their own, and turns them into life-long learners. Either that or the teachers have become unusually lazy lately....
 
Well, that is the idea. However, trying to learn calculus or chemistry from the book, just does not always work. I'll admit that half the time I didn't read the book until after class. I would learn very little when I did read beforehand. It also made classes more difficult when I came from a school that would explain everything, then test it...a complete 180.

In "fuzzy" classes, I think this method can and does work. I can read my history, english, or MSS material and understand the vast majority of it. In techie classes, it just doesn't work the same way. Trying to apply vector cross products just seems a little harder than comming to class prepared to discuss Clausewitz.

I do think that we have to study longer to learn the same material this way. What usually winds up happening is, after bashing your head against the wall for an hour, you give up. The only people who do well are those who intuitively pick it up, or constantly ask for help. IMO
 
Last edited:
Back
Top