Part Ⅵ Writing (45 min)
In the wake of an increasing number of cheating cases and theemergence of cheating by advanced technology, the academichonesty contract has been introduced in numerous campusesbefore examinations. It is assumed that such contracts mayhelp discourage cheating. Do you believe that such a policy willwork wonder? Write a composition of about 400 words to state your view.
In the first part of your essay you should state clearly your main argument, and in the second partyou should support your argument with appropriate details. In the last part you should bring whatyou have written to a natural conclusion or make a summary.
You should supply an appropriate title for your essay.
Marks will be awarded for content, organization, grammar and appropriateness. Failure to follow theabove instructions may result in a loss of marks.
Contract Makes No Difference
In the wake of an increasing number of cheating cases and the emergence of cheating byadvanced technology, the academic honesty contract has been introduced in numerouscampuses before examinations. It is assumed that such contracts may help discourage cheating.As I see it, those contracts make no difference regarding the examinees’ honesty.
Firstly, the issue of honesty calls for the concern of the whole society. Living in this society theexaminees are influenced by what is valued in it in one way or another. The increasingly rampantcheating in examinations reveals the tragic fact that honesty no longer prevails in the society. It isrelatively easy to make students sign honesty contracts, but can we ask government officials andbusiness people to do the same? Even if we were able to do that, would there be no more corruptofficials and unscrupulous merchants? The answer is a resounding“No”. Likewise, without effectiveregulations and supervisions, honesty contracts signed by students can do little in deterringcheating, let alone address the root cause of the problem.
Secondly, honesty contract does not have any legal effect. Although the experience of signingsuch contract will be engraved in the examinees’ memory, few students took it serious becausethe practice seems to have taken some characteristics of a political movement and because it haslittle legal effect. In consequence, examinees feel little weight of the so-called promise or swearing aswe cannot deprive their right to take examinations if students refuse to sign the contract. If this isthe case, how can we expect this move to work wonders?
Thirdly, honesty contract is likely to offend the students’ self-esteem. Such contracts are based onthe presumption that most examinees are potential cheaters. Therefore students are inclined tobelieve that they are not trusted and respected. When they are treated like that, would they bewilling to do what they are expected? Probably it is just the opposite. With the help of moderntechnology, some students may conjure up imaginative ways to beat such policy. So the contractis more of a formality and it would not do much to eradicate cheating.
Finally, it is a waste of time and energy. Though I do not have the precise idea of the exactnumber of the student body in China, I can well imagine the colossal waste if all the students in thiscountry are required to sign an honesty contract before their examinations. On the one hand, thesame time and energy could be utilized in some more meaningful ways. On the other hand, priorityshould be given to enhancing the students’ awareness of academic honesty instead of going all outabout this bother.
Honesty is the best policy, yet honesty is not an inborn moral quality. To stamp out misconduct inexaminations, we should adopt a comprehensive approach. Honesty contract would not producesubstantial results as expected.