Defeating Cheating to Win

An analysis of Anne Mullen's
"Cheating to Win"
By: Jun Paa


Plagiarism and all sorts of cheating have invaded the campuses, even those that exude high standards and reputable institutions are not spared from this menace, so thinks Anne Mullens in her article, “Cheating to Win.” Here, she introduced her subject in the first paragraph by citing a story about plagiarism in the campus. She used truth and controversy effectively to capture the audience’s attention in opening her essay.

To support her thesis, she continued with the controversial story of the two students who submitted a gritty revelation on an essay about “persuasive opinion” where the subject was, the increase in cheating at large universities because “the institutions were too large, too impersonal, too lazy and too stupid to catch the perpetrators”. The story went on, where the students were caught with their plagiarized compositions.

This narrates support to the central idea that plagiarism and other forms of cheating is actually happening and the driving force that compels the students to commit the act. She further re-enforces this idea by citing internet websites and the concern that this poses “more opportunities for cheating, such as buying papers from the internet” and the fact that the present culture “is more competitive, with more pressure to do well and more to lose if they fail”.

By organizing a presentation of a series of events, Mullens dissected her subject into
parts wherein every paragraph is linked to the one ahead, thus creating a smooth
transition from paragraph to paragraph. Each paragraph states a subject similar to the one the paragraph followed, yet it takes the audience to a higher degree of truth as the train of thoughts goes on with a lot of researched material. This certainly is the confirmation – the body of proof for the points Mullens is trying to pitch. Her use of reputable persons and institutions (i. e., Patrick Finn, Ph D of University of Victoria, Frances Bauer of the University of Western Ontario, Donald McCabe, Ph D of Duke University) add more truth to what she is saying – an effective persuasive style.

To defend her thesis, Mullens created sub titles (Mount Allison survey and Compulsory tests) to expound the subject by using facts from surveys done by, again, reputable people. One sub title (Mount Allison survey), used statistics and numbers as facts to answer would be rebuttals that cheating is not happening even in such well-known institutions. She further goes on to explain why the faculty of such institutions are reluctant to penalize cheating by quoting Dr. McCabe: “They don’t want to become involved in the bureaucracy or in the threat of litigation from the parents. Sometimes they think the threat of penalty, such as failing grades or expulsion is too harsh, so they simply reprimand or warn the students or make them do the assignment again”. “It isn’t always the poor, lackadaisical students who perpetrate the crime. Sometimes it is the best students, accustomed to obtaining good marks and doing well who resort to cheating,” says Dr. McCabe. “When students feel they are under tremendous pressure, that is when they make bad decisions,” adds Lynn Smith, director of student advocacy at the University of Manitoba. These are statements to further bring into light why cheating is prevalent in campuses.

The subtitle, Compulsory tests, explains the idea that students who would not cheat in their area of specialty are compelled to cheat on courses that are required to complete the program they are in, but feel that these courses are not as important. Mullens goes on to give an example on the situation of Engineering and Business students who would pay to have their English essays written or cheat on English exams. These are accepted facts in campuses, which Mullens exploited to perfection, driving her thesis home.

In her conclusion, Mullens implies that the faculty has a responsibility to lead students away from cheating by employing ways and means as that of Dr. Grove-White (UVic) who require her students to submit their English essays in stages. That is, topic and thesis statement first, then bibliography, then outline, then first draft and finally second draft. “It teaches them that writing is a process, not a product,” says White. “We must be much more thoughtful about what we teach and how we tech it. It is probably making us become better teachers,” adds Dr. Grove-White.

In its entirety, Cheating to Win is an example of a well-researched, well-written essay, which followed Cicero’s sequential method of arrangement, a coherent rhetoric of a sane person!