If it’s on the internet, it must be true: Part II

11 Sep

Patrick M. Scanlon

While scouting around the internet for data on academic dishonesty in universities last week, I kept landing on the claim that 75 to 98 percent of college students have cheated. Often a link would take me to the same page: Cheating is a Personal Foul, which was part of a campaign by the Education Testing Service and the Ad Council to discourage cheating among middle school students.

Cheating is a Personal Foul appears to have gotten off the ground in the late 1990s and come back to earth soon afterward. All the links are broken, and when I dialed the phone number, 1-888-88CHEAT, a recording asked me to take a survey on a Caribbean vacation. However, you can still view some of the television spots produced for the campaign.

In a previous post, I mentioned finding a newspaper article including this:

In 1940, just 20 percent of college students admitted to cheating during their academic careers. Today, that number ranges from 75-98 percent, according to Michael Hartnett, an English professor at Long Island University whose research led to his writing the book, “The Great SAT Swindle.”

I contacted Mr. Harnett, who in fact is a high school English teacher who has done some adjunct teaching. In an email, he wrote that he had lost his notes for that book—which is a novel—but he did send me a couple links. These went to the same lists I began with.

One of those lists by Cheating is a Personal Foul included something interesting:

According to Stephen Davis, a psychology professor at Emporia State University in Kansas: “about 20% of college students from across the nation admitted to cheating in high school during the 1940’s. That percentage has since soared, with no fewer than 75% and as many as 98% of 8,000 college students surveyed each year now reporting cheating in high school – and the majority admitting doing it on several occasions.”

Davis is a credible source whose work I know. He’s retired, but I’m in the process of getting his contact information from Emporia State. I hope he can clear some of this up.

But in the meantime I pulled up one of Davis’s publications: Davis, S. F. & Ludvigson, H. W. (1995). Additional data on academic dishonesty and a proposal for remediation. Teaching of Psychology, 22, 119-121. The authors report that in a survey of college students, 71% to 79% of each sample reported cheating in high school. Also, “Virtually all (98.64%) students who reported cheating on several occasions in college had also cheated on several occasions in high school.”

These numbers (I can imagine someone splitting the difference on the range to come up with 75 percent) seem too close to be a coincidence. So, my theory so far: Davis has been rather badly misquoted.

The hunt continues.

If it’s on the internet, it must be true

7 Sep

 

 

by Patrick M. Scanlon

10371526_10202689615496391_6476564143098151997_nI’m on a research treasure hunt.  It began when I came across an online claim about college-student cheating that seemed a bit hard to believe.  The search so far says something about how rapidly a contention becomes an oft-cited fact on the internet.

According to Education Portal, “75 to 98 Percent of College Students Have Cheated.”  As the source of that assertion the article cites NoCheating.org, an address that takes us to the website of the Educational Testing Service, where I can find no reference to those data.  I emailed someone at ETS about this but haven’t gotten a reply yet.

The original (I think) page with these numbers is titled “Cheating is a Personal Foul:  The Educational Testing Service/Ad Council Campaign to Discourage Academic Cheating.”  That page consists of a long list of bad news about cheating, including the high percentages that originally caught my eye.

So I plugged “75 to 98 Percent of College Students Have Cheated” into a search engine and received millions of hits. One after another of the linked pages included those percentages, often with a link back to “Cheating is a Personal Foul.”  One page cites Stanford University as the source of the data.

I also landed on a newspaper article, in the January 28, 2012 issue of TimesDaily.com (Florence, Alabama), “Educators see cheating epidemic,” including this: 

In 1940, just 20 percent of college students admitted to cheating during their academic careers. Today, that number ranges from 75-98 percent, according to Michael Hartnett, an English professor at Long Island University whose research led to his writing the book, “The Great SAT Swindle.”

Here’s where it gets interesting.  “The Great SAT Swindle” is a self-published novel.  I found the author’s website with a blog and contact information. I just sent off an email to Mr. Hartnett, who actually is a high school teacher who has done some college adjunct teaching.

It could turn out the percentages are from a legitimate survey, but so far I cannot identify what that might be.  But the comment about 1940 is suspicious because the first reliable, multi-campus study of academic honesty among college students—a landmark study well known among scholars of the subject—is “Student dishonesty and its control in college,” by William Bowers, published in 1964 and based on data from the early 1960s.

On its face, the 75-to-98-percent allegation looks like a low-profile meme, a factoid with legs.  We’ll have to wait to hear what ETS and Mr. Hartnett have to say.  Stay tuned.

Ice Bucket Challenge: A Health Communication Win

4 Sep

By Tracy Worrell

Tracy2 What does ice water have to do with a neurodegenerative disease? Nothing. What do viral videos have to do with raising awareness and millions of dollars for charity? Everything. Just ask the ALS Association.

Or, ask the skeptics, critics and detractors, after all these videos aren’t curing a disease and some people aren’t even donating money. It’s just about narcissism and wet T-shirt contests. Wrong. The #alsicebucketchallenge and viral campaigns like this are meeting the No. 1 challenge of health communication, raising awareness.

Recently, in my Health Communication class at RIT, students discussed how “lame” or “uninteresting” the majority of health messages are to them. How they tune out or forget the message almost immediately after exposure.

Health campaign practitioners struggle with this on a daily basis. How does one get the message of disease across to the larger population, particularly for illnesses that are unknown? While dumping ice water on heads may not be the “go to” health campaign move it stars two groups that most people will listen to: celebrities and more importantly peers.

Millions have watched celebrities from Oprah to Katy Perry dump their buckets. Even more have witnessed their friends, for better or worse (see some of the more awkward videos), participate.

Tracy_bucket_1

Dr Tracy Worrell takes the #alsicebucketchallenge

My best friend challenged me to dump and donate, of course I complied. I challenged my husband, brother and nephew, each one complied (albeit rather grudgingly). I then posted my video, showing my 363 friends and tagging the aforementioned nominees. The potential reach of my own narcissism – over 1,500 friends now see that their peers are talking about ALS.

Not only has awareness of ALS increased but donations have skyrocketed as well. The ALS organization reports it received $100.9 million in donations between July 29 and Aug. 29 of this year. In the same time period last year it received $2.9 million … an increase of over 3,000 percent. Here, the New York ALS has raised $4.3 million compared to $131,560 in 2013.

Not only does this awareness increase donations, but it puts ALS on the “map” when it comes to government policies, grant consideration and interest in the field of research.

This has been great news for ALS and a great study for health communication researchers. Social media may, in fact, be a stronger tool to utilize in health campaigns than anyone realized.

What’s disappointing in all of this is the number of “news” sources that belittle it all. That the challenge won’t “solve real problems” or people are only donating to the ALS now and one should “leave the fads to hula hoopers.”

My professional opinion: Get over it. Let ALS have one “win” for a disease that kills everyone who is diagnosed with it.

To donate:

The ALS website

The Charity Navigator website

 

Journalists’ changing priorities are being taught at RIT

28 Aug

By Hinda Mandell and Andrea Hickerson

Newsrooms and the journalists who work in them have for years been nervously watching as digital, mostly free, sites and services have become the go-to sources of news for many, many consumers.

Image taken from Jim Romenesko’s blog

From Jim Romenesko’s blog

Some have embraced the changes and found ways to use such things as social media to connect with a wider range of sources and listen for a broader perspective on their communities. Some have not.

Recent moves announced at some Gannett newsrooms show that the big companies behind our news sources are finally taking steps to force newsrooms to adapt to the new reality.

As reported on Jim Romenesko’s blog on The Poynter Institute website Gannett plans to introduce what it calls the ‘Newsrooms of the Future’ at several newspapers. As part of that the company telling newsroom employees to reapply for their jobs. Many of those jobs have new titles and include multiple digital and social responsibilities.

What is also being widely commented on is that these new-look newsrooms will feature people who have capabilities across many platforms and are good social media engagers and promoters of their own stories and content.

How does this impact the journalists of the future (i.e. our journalism students at RIT)?

Hinda MandellHinda Mandell: Often times I find students reluctant to promote their own work. This typically comes up in Multiplatform Journalism, where students are required to install Google Analytics on the journalism sites they create.

When students share their Google Analytics numbers in the middle of the term they’re usually fairly low. Maybe they only have five or 15 daily visits to their site. When I ask if they share new posts via Facebook or Twitter I’m often met with blank looks that I interpret as “No.”

By the end of the term it’s common for visits to jump to 150 per day – simply because students began promoting their work via their social media networks.

I totally get the hesitancy to self-promote. But you know what? We need to get over this shyness because here’s an example that when everyone self-promotes, and we don’t, then people – including future employers – assume we’re snoozing at our desks. And why would we cultivate that misperception when the opposite is true?

In this day and age, as the journalistic overhauls its priorities – and a story’s clickability is right up there – we’re only hurting ourselves when we keep our work to ourselves. Get out there and share it.

AndreaHickersonAndrea Hickerson: One of the ways RIT helps prepare journalism majors is by teaching journalism as a collaborative endeavor between people with varied skill sets including computing and business.

The Digital Journalism Incubator class specifically trains students from all majors to work together to pitch a civic problem and then experiment telling the story using different digital tools.  To see what exciting things these students are cooking up, follow it on Twitter  at #RITDJI.

I honestly believe that now is an exciting time to go into journalism.  The skill set for journalists is changing, but the public’s need for information is not.

In fact, with an ever growing menu of digital information available, I believe we need journalists more than ever to sort through the facts and tell stories with the richness and context they deserve. 

Mike Johansson helped compile this post

 

A new social media adventure

21 Aug

RIT's first all-social media class is Critical Practice in Social Media and will be offered in the Fall of 2014

Kelly Martin and Mike Johansson are the instructors for RIT’s first all-social media class

By Kelly Martin and Mike Johansson

Social media is finally getting the respect it deserves as part of the pantheon of communication technologies with its own dedicated class at RIT.

As the instructors in this first-ever class, Critical Practice in Social Media, we are both excited and feeling slightly pressured (there is so much to cram into a mere 15 weeks!).

Think about this: We want to cover all of the critical cultural issues, relevant communication theory, social organizing theory , and the legal and ethical issues as well as demonstrate the most effective uses of social media for individual and organizational purposes.

As we prepared for this class we quickly realized this could easily have been two entire classes. But in the meantime we have a course that is jam-packed and will both be challenging and fun for us and students.
So, how will this class be taught differently? We will teach a good portion of it (about a third) using social media platforms. A few brief examples of what this means …

• Showing students the value of a completed and professional Linkedin profile (something less than a third of Linkedin users have)

• Using Twitter chats, Google Hangouts and Skype to bring experts from around the world into the classroom

• Using visual platforms such as Pinterest, Instagram, YouTube and Vine to demonstrate the power of visuals to show a story rather than just tell it

• Demonstrating the power of social media to uncover digital artifacts about others on social media – whether it’s to prepare for a job interview, to find sources for a news story or to understand what makes a competitor tick.

As we prepared this class we also had a feeling that we were at the beginning of something exciting for RIT.

What exactly will happen with this class? We aren’t sure … yet. But we do know that we’re looking forward to compelling discussions and experimenting with new social platforms in order to understand the very social media we are using.

Yeah, we have new students!

18 Aug
RIT's annual Tiger Walk welcomes incoming freshman to campus

Thousands of incoming freshmen are welcomed to the RIT campus by faculty and staff each August as they march in the Tiger Walk on their way to the new student convocation

By Mike Johansson

The lifeblood is once again pulsing through the RIT campus this week as students return for the new school year.

It’s like having spring in mid-August. The campus that has had only a few students and faculty through the summer has felt a little sleepy, even dormant.

The walkways were almost empty, the hallways hollow and the quads were there in all of their well-manicured glory for almost no one to enjoy. But that all changes this week as students return breathing life back into the bricks and stone.

From returning second years (who are now “old hands”) to juniors and seniors and graduate students the mass of humanity that makes up the student body at RIT comes streaming back onto campus.

By the end of this week finding a seat in one of the many campus cafeterias and cafes may be hard (students who have spent the summer apart have so much catching up to do) and the lines will be back at the coffee shops and snack stops.

Then there are the welcome-back rituals. The most-fun of which is Tiger Walk (this year at 2:30 p.m. on Wednesday, Aug. 20) which precedes the new student convocation in the Gordon Field House.

Faculty and staff don as much orange and brown as is humanly possible and gather up noisemakers and signs before assembling on the east side of the Field House. There they group in colleges and try to outdo each other with how loud they can be as the thousands of freshmen file by into convocation.

President Destler and Ritchie the mascot are always there high-fiving students as the RIT Pep Band tries to bring a semblance of musical order to the cacophony. It’s a great way to make new students feel welcome and help them see the liveliness that is RIT.

This is why it’s hard not to be excited by the new school year once students return. Like the robins that return each spring signifying new life and new beginnings so too does the return of students to the RIT campus.

Welcome back students … we’re delighted to have you back.

Suicide Contagion and Responsible Reporting

14 Aug

“Contagious” brings to mind the common cold, influenza, and, recently, the Ebola virus. But suicide?

Taking the death of Robin Williams as its jumping-off point, an article in today’s New York Times, The Science Behind Suicide Contagion, by Margot Sanger-Katz, describes how suicide can spread like a communicable disease, particularly due to sensationalist news stories. Reporting about suicide thus becomes a matter for responsible health communication and journalistic ethics.

Sanger-Katz points out that high-profile suicides, such as those of Marilyn Monroe and Kurt Cobain, often lead to a temporary spike in suicide rates.

“Publicity surrounding a suicide has been repeatedly and definitively linked to a subsequent increase in suicide, especially among young people,” writes Sanger-Katz.

This link has led to a set of guidelines for news media coverage of suicide deaths published by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention.

For example, the recommendations advise reporters to “inform the audience without sensationalizing the suicide and minimize prominence.” Rather than the headline “Kurt Cobain Used Shotgun to Commit Suicide,” write “Kurt Cobain Dead at 27.”

As Sanger-Katz points out, such advice can seem unrealistic. Some details are so much a part of a story that leaving them out would be irresponsible. That Robin Williams killed himself IS the story.

But journalists will benefit from studying the guidelines, among which is a recommendation to include, in any story about suicide, information about suicide hotlines as well as other resources.

What the Times story brought home for me is how journalism can be implicated in health communication, unintentionally or otherwise.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 198 other followers