Detecting cheating in written medical examinations

Editor—McManus et al suggest a promising initial step towards identifying occurrences of potential academic dishonesty.¹ A computer program, however, should not be seen as the final decision or a solution to the problem, although it is an effective tool.

Objections may be raised to the purely statistical and circumstantial nature of the method, but it mirrors the qualitative, side by side comparison of exams by an administrator—except that it is objective and has a high throughput. To say that focusing efforts at preventing cheating is more important than expending resources on penalising it is a weak attempt to remove a fundamental academic responsibility from students.

The computer program may prove effective in identifying potential cheats, but the burden of regulation should be placed on students. Some schools have successful and traditional “honour codes,” in which issues of academic integrity are dealt with directly by representatives of the student body. Along with building substantial solidarity and students' pride in academic honour, the degree of cheating seems to be much less than in other systems; self regulation is also an effective method of catching those who do try to cheat. Furthermore, student wide accordance on academic integrity tends to support aggressive action against cheating, based on student defined levels of certainty. When coupled with appropriate and public punishments, this can help reintegrate and strengthen the bond between honour, academics, and medicine. Doctors are increasingly under public scrutiny; maintaining the reputation of the profession in the future is a process that begins in the halls of learning now.