Cheating Culture
Cheating Culture
In today’s society the needs and means to cheat certainly seem readily available. The controversy surrounding the use of SAT and ACT test scores probably has been questioned since they were first administered and certainly is still today. Especially, with all the stories one reads of student cheating to obtain the high scores needed on the SAT in order to be admitted to a university. David Callahan 's Cheating Culture websites contained an article about the other side of cheating in which Claremont McKenna College lied about its students’ SAT scores to increase its place in the annual ranking of colleges by the U.S. News and World Report (Callahan, 2012).
University officials are legendarily fanatical about these rating, and Claremont McKenna College is not the first to confess to altering data, nor will it be the last. The rationalization for lying about SAT scores is based on a common phenomenon in which universities worry unceasingly about the rankings reported by U.S. News and World Report because of the extraordinary affect it has from the superiority of student candidates, to the capability to entice faculty, and solicit funding. These numbers are perceived as immensely important, so it is comprehensible why there is a temptation for a university to manipulate the reported data (Callahan, 2012).
The Merton’s adaptation theory that best applies to this scenario is “innovation” because the university is prescribing to illegitimate means to obtain it goal of recruiting superior students, enticing faculty, and solicit funding. The university may have comprehended or believed there was limited potential for recruiting superior students, enticing faculty, and solicit funding if it continued to play by the rules. According to Merton, the strain between the university needs and lack of opportunities to recruit superior student, entice faculty, and solicit funding plus the enormous emphasis placed on SAT scores is more than likely
In today’s society the needs and means to cheat certainly seem readily available. The controversy surrounding the use of SAT and ACT test scores probably has been questioned since they were first administered and certainly is still today. Especially, with all the stories one reads of student cheating to obtain the high scores needed on the SAT in order to be admitted to a university. David Callahan 's Cheating Culture websites contained an article about the other side of cheating in which Claremont McKenna College lied about its students’ SAT scores to increase its place in the annual ranking of colleges by the U.S. News and World Report (Callahan, 2012).
University officials are legendarily fanatical about these rating, and Claremont McKenna College is not the first to confess to altering data, nor will it be the last. The rationalization for lying about SAT scores is based on a common phenomenon in which universities worry unceasingly about the rankings reported by U.S. News and World Report because of the extraordinary affect it has from the superiority of student candidates, to the capability to entice faculty, and solicit funding. These numbers are perceived as immensely important, so it is comprehensible why there is a temptation for a university to manipulate the reported data (Callahan, 2012).
The Merton’s adaptation theory that best applies to this scenario is “innovation” because the university is prescribing to illegitimate means to obtain it goal of recruiting superior students, enticing faculty, and solicit funding. The university may have comprehended or believed there was limited potential for recruiting superior students, enticing faculty, and solicit funding if it continued to play by the rules. According to Merton, the strain between the university needs and lack of opportunities to recruit superior student, entice faculty, and solicit funding plus the enormous emphasis placed on SAT scores is more than likely
References: Callahan, D. (2012). Quantifying the damage of the rush to quantify. Retrieved from http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/02/02/quantifying-the-damage-of-the-rush-to-quantify/ Clinard, M. & Meier, R. (2011). Sociology of Deviant Behavior. Wadsworth, Cenage Learning: Belmont, CA, 14 ed.