Cheating is not a valuable workplace skill.

Joanne threw out a provocative headline: Cheating is a valuable workplace skill, but she's a blogger so I can assume she might or might not actually agree with it.

Homeschool your kids so they learn to cheat, writes Penelope Trunk on her homeschooling blog. What schools call cheating — getting the right answer from others — is “effective workplace behavior” and a valuable skill, she argues.

Some 85 percent of students admit to cheating, Trunk writes. . . .

Stuyvesant, a New York City magnet school that’s harder to get into than Harvard, had an incredibly organized cheating system that rivals best practices for productivity types in Fortune 500 organizations. . . .

What made Stuyvesant’s cheating system so effective was that everybody had a certain topic that they would be expert on, and everyone else knew how to get the answers from that person. That’s a great workplace skill, and you do kids a disservice by training them to think that it’s improper behavior. 

Compared to their elders, Generation Y is “incredibly productive because they’re great collaborators.”

In the age of information, sharing information rules the day, and there’s no longer a place for a Lone Ranger at the office who works independently of everyone else. Today’s business world is too complicated and too networked for people to work so independently as to not be getting information from other people. 

Teachers have been pushing collaborative work on projects and peer tutoring for many years now. Collaborative work on tests is another matter.

Does Trunk have a point?

Cheating is not collaborative work. “What schools call cheating — getting the right answer from others — is “effective workplace behavior” and a valuable skill, she argues.” and she would be wrong.

 She wants to mask the true problem with excusing cheating by equating it with workplace skills. In school, you are learning how to do things. You are developing the abilities and information base and your “production” is that development. Collaboration doesn’t “work” unless you learn the material or skills. No one is expecting students to produce an advertisement campaign for real even though the task might approximate the steps to doing so.


School is about that base of fundamental skills that can be applied to any situation and the fundamental knowledge that all future tasks would appear to require. The problem with the Stuyvesant scandal was that the students weren't learning, someone else was doing it for them. There was also the whole "honesty" and "plagiarism" thing.

Which employee would you hire and trust?

Copying from other students isn’t learning because it doesn’t promote acquisition of either material or methods, it merely provides you with a meaningless result, quickly forgotten and never to be repeated. School isn’t about the result, it is about the learning.

Why is the workplace different? Because it is assumed that the workers already have achieved the “learning”, the acquisition of skills and methods, and the acquisition of a fundamental knowledge base. You can tolerate “research” and “getting the answer from others” if the job to be done is a unique job compared to the skillset of the worker. It is cheaper to pay for usage rights, or copyright, or independent contractor for that one job and then move on to the next. If the worker, however, cannot produce on his own, can ONLY copy from others, it is in the company’s best interest to fire that worker and hire someone who can.

Teaching students that cheating is okay and “effective workplace behavior” is directly damaging to the learning process even though it appears, on the surface, to be allowing the student to show more “knowledge” without spending any mental effort. Learning is hard because it is new. Avoiding that difficulty merely ensures that it will never occur.

It may seem more efficient and effective in the short run and certainly develops the person who can copy but fails at the long term goal of developing the person who can do the work.

If you give me the choice, I will always choose the method that develops the one who can tutor others, who can think and take responsibility, and who can be the source for all the lazy, stupid people, because that is how I define a successful and educated student, the “A” student: The kid you copy from.

Which worker would you pay?

Cheating on Tests Again

Joanne Jacobs has:

Aspiring teachers paid a Memphis school official to find substitutes to take a teacher certification exam, prosecutors charge. Clarence Mumford, 58, is accused of charging $1,500 to $3,000 per test. The scam involved at least 50 teachers and would-be teachers required to pass the PRAXIS in Tennessee, Mississippi, and Arkansas from 1995 to 2010, according to the indictment.

Really? The PRAXIS test is really easy.  The English one has simple grammar and a writing test that a chipmunk couldn't pass but only because the chipmunk can't type. The math test has decimal place-value questions and fractions. Every one of those teachers should be immediately fired.

After taking the test and passing it, they can take their place in the new-hires whirlwind.

The Math PRAXIS 2 is pre-calculus.  If you can't pass that, you shouldn't be teaching math ... and a case could be made for middle and elementary school, too.  Teachers shouldn't be the stupidest ones in the school.

Duh. Comment.

Some clown at Dissertation Help really needs to improve his "robot commenter."

Dissertation help said... This is a sort of blog we can have loads of information i would like to appreciate the intelligence of this blog's owner

If this is their idea of intelligent comment and correct grammar, who in their right mind would ever go to that website for help with a dissertation?

Okay, I'll bite.  Let's go look.

Nope, they suck.  Let the students go there, spend their money, pretend they actually wrote a paper.  Thank you for your time and we'll see you in this class again next year.

Cheating starts with The Administration

From the NYTimes

One day next month every student at Loyola Law School Los Angeles will awake to a higher grade point average. But it’s not because they are all working harder.
The school is retroactively inflating its grades, tacking on 0.333 to every grade recorded in the last few years. The goal is to make its students look more attractive in a competitive job market.

No. The goal is to make the school look more attractive. The student benefit is secondary.

Colleges have been playing this game for years: paying students to retake the SAT to raise the USNews rankings, gaming the enrollments to increase "diversity", fiddling with grading to improve student "satisfaction", and now they're out and out lying about GPA calculated from the inflated grades of watered down courses presented by professors who have lessened their requirements and overlooked more.

Changed to pass/fail so the pressure is reduced but "This new grading system also makes it harder for employers to distinguish the wheat from the chaff, which means more students can get a shot at a competitive interview." Total bullshit.

and we wonder why the students feel entitled?

And you thought teenagers' excuses were bad, part 2

from NYTimes, via SlashDot:

Helene Hegemann's first book ... what's interesting now is that she has been caught plagiarizing many passages in the book. Amazingly, she has not denied it, but instead claims there is nothing wrong with it. She claims that she is part of a new generation that has grown up with mixing and sampling in all media, including music and art, and this is legitimate in modern culture. 

Bullshit. "Sampling?" Please.

I like this Grade - FD for Failure, Dishonest

In this article explaining the new policy, Simon Fraser University announced a new grade: FD, meaning "Failed for Academic Dishonesty" intended to curb the growing trend of plagiarism using the Internet. They've also created a central system for recording academic issues like these, which remind me of the infamous "permanent record" of years past. Multiple offenders face suspension and even degree revocation.

I'm going to think about this one. I still have a bit of time before school starts and I may add this to the syllabus in the section explaining the grading, grade codes, and relative percentages. Now that we're going to Internet grade reporting, this might be a real eye-opener. I'm just not sure for whom.

Here's the whole article, if you wish:

New FD grade a student’s record of shame
April 30, 2009 - By Stuart Colcleugh

Is there a grade worse than F? There is now at SFU: It’s called FD–failed for academic dishonesty–and it’s the last thing you would ever want on your transcript.

The new grade is one of several significant and extensive changes recently approved by senate and the board of governors to toughen the university’s policies on academic dishonesty and student misconduct. The changes are the result of a university-wide, three-year investigation by SCAISLE—the Senate Committee on Academic Integrity in Student Learning and Evaluation. SCAISLE was created in the fall of 2005 following the release of a report by a university task force on academic dishonesty and integrity issues, which was prompted by a series of incidents in different faculties involving academic dishonesty.

"The idea was to create a fair, consistent, and effective policy on academic integrity matters across the university that would be enthusiastically embraced by students, faculty and administrators alike and that mirrored a zero-tolerance approach both in theory and in practice," says SCAISLE chair Rob Gordon, who directs the School of Criminology. "And we believe the combination of policies, procedures and strategies we’ve come up with will do that."

"We now have a single student code of conduct that covers both academic integrity and good-conduct issues," says Gordon. "We also have a network of faculty-member academic integrity advisors across all academic units, and an academic integrity coordinator who is an assistant registrar. And we’ve created a reporting system with a central record keeping mechanism so we can better detect multiple offenders across campuses and departments.

"The FD grade will be available to department chairs who feel that a student’s behavior warrants a severe penalty, usually because they are repeat violators, A chair may also request the imposition of more severe penalties through the University Board on Student Discipline such as suspension and the rescinding of a degree."

Clueless on Cheating

from eSchoolNews:

"A recent report commissioned by Common Sense Media about the use of cell phones and the Internet for cheating (see story) is representative of how students and adults can look at the same behavior or activity and have very different perceptions of technology's impact."

This should not surprise anyone. Teenagers are fundamentally different in how they perceive the world, assess needs and risks, and how they apportion time and manage their resources. They have always been different from the adults. Adults have always had to be the responsible ones, though the roles do sometimes get mixed. (I have no intention of talking about those parents at this time.)

Not everyone seems to understand this, however, and they are increasingly making excuses for teenagers and basing these excuses on "digital nativism."

This is a joke. I am just as capable as my students in using all these digital tools and I started on a PDP-8 with a punch-tape reader, for criss-sakes. Digital familiarity is not a psychological difference nearly as large as that driven by age and experience. I can use all of it. I just don't want to.

Call me old-fashioned. Call me old.

Tech toys are not an excuse for cheating and the availability of technology is not an excuse for not thinking. Students still need to think. As Dan Willingham put it in his terrific book Why Don't Students Like School: A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions About How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom, schools ask students to think and thinking is HARD. This fact is never going to change. Pretending that wikipedia copy-and-paste is ethical and desirable simply because technology makes it easy is itself a simplistic and ultimately incorrect argument.

Claiming that students who text each other for the answers to a test or quiz are somehow being digitally masterful is missing the obvious insight that 40 years ago it was a high-tech Bic pen and a piece of paper.

eSchoolNews:
At the root of this digital disconnect is a fundamental difference of perception. Our students, who are not only digitally native, but increasingly mobile, view the world through a new lens that has been framed by a myriad of emerging technology devices and the use of such tools for increased communication, collaboration, content development, and connectedness. Their parents, teachers, and many other digital "immigrants" in education policy and media spheres are startled by the speed with which students are not only adopting these new tools, but adapting them to new, previously unforeseen uses. And quite often, the context of this adaptation is misunderstood by the adults whose lenses are not quite as digitally focused.

Context, my foot. New lens, my eyeball. "Previously unforeseen uses?" 99% of what kids use technology for is chatting. Just as we oldtimers used the high-technology of our time, the telephone, so much that our parents had to install a second line? How many of you had a sister? How many parents had to scream daily "Get off the phone, I need to make a call!"

Nothing new is really new, it's just packaged differently. The technological icing on the cake is sweet and not too sustaining. We'll adapt to different ways of doing things but we'll also come to understand how desperately wrong folks like eSchoolNews and the Techno-philiacs really are.

Cheating is wrong not because of my hurt feelings. Cheating is wrong because it's easy and doesn't lead to anything meaningful. Not every kid understands this but I've never let a kid decide things for me. I'm still the adult in the room, I hope.

If only I can get this damn blog thing working.

(Exit, muttering.)

Cheating

The science teacher caught two students cheating - they had photocopied part of the lab report. She going to try and give them a zero for part of the lab.

I'm waiting to see how quickly she gets called in to defend her decision. "Did you write it in the syllabus?' "Is it spelled out exactly what would happen?" "Did you give them a zero fairly?" "Did anyone else get a zero for cheating?" "When?" "Do you have complete evidence that they cheated?" "You need to make three copies of the lab report notebook and the syllabus and the paragraph where you explicitly stated the number of points you would dock the student ..." "They claim they were allowed to copy the graph. Why did you consider that cheating?" "Their parents want to discuss this with you. Let's meet and talk about it after school next week." "Can we talk about an alternative punishment because the transcripts are going out to colleges and this is going to affect their ability to get financial aid and might keep them from attending the college they've dreamed of going to." "Joe will not be able to participate in the basketball tournament because of this and we need him on the court."

Makes you want to reconsider sometimes.

Students cheat, you know.

Yup, almost 64 percent of them claim to have done it at least once last year. A few manage to hack into the grading system. The truly unique don't get caught. Everyone else gets on NBC.

There are so many life lessons here, it's difficult to know where to start. Like the Bronx, NY admin who got caught changing 1000s of test answers, these kids got caught because they ignored the fundamental rules of getting away with it. They did too much, too often, too suddenly and too loud.

Richmond County high school students caught changing grades
By NBC Augusta Staff
AUGUSTA, Ga. - Nearly 30 students at Glenn Hills High School are in hot water for cheating. Richmond County's executive director of high schools, says one student swiped a teacher's password and offered it to other students over the summer. The director said the student's score changed to 100 within minutes of receiving a failing grade. In one case a student was given a passing grade to a test she never took. The students were suspended for up to 10 days and lost credit for the online class they took. The student who stole the password has been withdrawn from the school.

Too much: if you are a bad student who has never gotten better than a 60 when a grade of 100 appears for a test, "You might be a Redneck Cheater." It doesn't take much to skim a list of numbers. Raise the grade 10% and I'll miss it. Raise it to 100% and I won't.

Too often: do something too often and the teacher is bound to notice and start checking against the paper gradebook. Do it just once and the single good grade stands out as an anomaly. You need to find the happy medium.

Too suddenly: don't change the grade the teacher just entered! (within minutes, no less!) It's still fresh in his mind. Change the something from three tests ago when you came in for a retest. The retest is the anomaly, so look to change a few grades AROUND it. A rising tide lifts all boats.

Too loud: The quiet ones are never suspect. The ones who brag to friends are always caught. Students don't realize that teachers LISTEN. Shut up and smile and shrug your shoulders.
Also follow these handy guidelines - Don't be ...

Too brash: Don't come out looking like the best kid in the class when you've been the loser all along. Give everyone a random 10-15% bump. Play Santa. Get into the Spirit of the Season.

Too weird: Don't just bump up your one bad grade. Why on Earth would you suddenly be a star in math after all this time? Raise all of your grades a little bit.

Too personal: Really throw them for a loop - reduce everyone's grades but your own and have a faked grade report sheet ready, proving you should have had a better grade. Then let the teacher feel guilty about your grades along with everyone else's and helpfully let him have a photocopy of the faked grade report.

To teachers who complain that I'm giving them ideas - I'm really showing you the ways to notice when someone is scamming you. #1 way to prevent that is to use Curmudgeon's Concerted Cheating Cancellation Cards. For three easy payments of a photocopier, you can prevent cheating too. Call now.

Monthly, either print out a hardcopy of your electronic gradebook or photocopy the sheets of your paper one. Notify the students that you do this and leave it at home. At any time you think something might have happened, take a cursory look at the two and you'll see the changes easily. You'll know.

Don't you just love the "The student who stole the password has been withdrawn from the school" line? Really? You don't say.

Cheating - Followup

I said I'd get back to you on this Ethics Survey. Here's a preliminary look at the press releases. (I'm still trying to get the breakdowns from earlier years)

"Cheating in school continues to be rampant and it's getting worse. A substantial majority (64 percent) cheated on a test during the past year (38 percent two or more times), up from 60 percent and 35 percent, respectively, in 2006."

I have problems with that kind of a blanket statement when it's based on a self-reported survey handed out in classes across the nation. I also notice that the sensationalistic statement "and it's getting worse" seems more appropriate to a consultant driving his business in professional development seminars than a true scientist whose own data seem to undermine his thunder.
Sure, the self-reported cheating is up, but only because the Institute was very careful to pick the right goal posts. 2008 is up, but lower than much of the last decade. Is this a blip or a long-term upward motion? Are we still within the margin of error (3% for many questions because of the breakdowns)?
Also, in reading the past press releases, it seems as though the main focus of the Institute is the Character Flaw of the Year, whatever it is.
I remain unconvinced, however, with the basic premise of these surveys. Kids exaggerate boldly and humorously. I don't think they are any better or any worse than we were at that age. Maybe only more willing to say so, but even that is debatable.
I am sure that it will be a "standard" we'll have to meet at some point - develop their character with this curriculum and DVD and there'll be a multiple-choice state-developed test to show progress and to enable our student directed action plan agenda item to be eliminated from the forefront of the establishment and it's mission statement. We test, therefore we are good.

Cheating on the Rise? I'll get back to you on that.

As I read this story (below), I couldn't help the immediate reaction. "Really? Morals have declined that much, huh?"

And then I started to think about the mechanics of this. They sent out a survey to enough schools and to a broad enough sample that I feel comfortable with the averages and numbers. They didn't include any of the questions in the survey but they were probably straightforward - the results summary seems to indicate that. The only reservation I have is that the survey is self-reported data.

Is cheating really getting worse or are the students more willing to admit it now or are the students more willing to lie to pollsters now?

It seems to me that cheating has always been around. Passing notes, looking over at the next student's paper, scrabbling through the trash can next to the copier. This is nothing new. Texting is passing notes. Photographing a question is like the "wandering eye."

E.g., just a few days ago, I found a notebook in my classroom. It had belonged to a student three years graduated and held all of her chemistry notes, quizzes and returned tests. I dropped it off in the Chem lab and we figured out who knew the girl and "Lo and behold," he had been doing surprisingly well these last few months until he had gotten to a part of the course that wasn't in the notebook. Must have been a coincidence. You could see the wheels turning in the Chem teacher's head. I wish I could be there when he finds out she has his cheatbook.

I'm going to go look up the survey and read the original. Should be interesting.




Here's the article itself.

Survey Finds Growing Deceit Among Teens
64 Percent Admit Cheating on Test In High School
By David Crary / Associated Press via the Washington Post
December 1, 2008; A06

NEW YORK, Nov. 30 -- In the past year, 30 percent of U.S. high school students have stolen from a store and 64 percent have cheated on a test, according to a new, large-scale survey suggesting that Americans are apathetic about ethical standards.

Educators reacting to the findings questioned any suggestion that today's young people are less honest than previous generations, but several agreed that intensified pressures are prompting many students to cut corners.

"The competition is greater, the pressures on kids have increased dramatically," said Mel Riddle of the National Association of Secondary School Principals. "They have opportunities their predecessors didn't have [to cheat]. The temptation is greater."

The Josephson Institute, a Los Angeles-based ethics institute, surveyed 29,760 students at 100 randomly selected high schools nationwide, both public and private. All students in the selected schools were given the survey in class; their anonymity was assured.

Michael Josephson, the institute's founder and president, said he was most dismayed by the findings about theft. The survey found that 35 percent of boys and 26 percent of girls -- 30 percent overall -- acknowledged stealing from a store within the past year. One-fifth said they stole something from a friend; 23 percent said they stole something from a parent or other relative.

"What is the social cost of that -- not to mention the implication for the next generation of mortgage brokers?" Josephson remarked in an interview. "In a society drenched with cynicism, young people can look at it and say, 'Why shouldn't we? Everyone else does it.' "

Other findings from the survey:

· Cheating in school is rampant and getting worse. Sixty-four percent of students cheated on a test in the past year and 38 percent did so two or more times, up from 60 percent and 35 percent in a 2006 survey.

· Thirty-six percent said they used the Internet to plagiarize an assignment, up from 33 percent in 2004.

· Forty-two percent said they sometimes lie to save money -- 49 percent of the boys and 36 percent of the girls.

Despite such responses, 93 percent of the students said they were satisfied with their personal ethics and character, and 77 percent affirmed that "when it comes to doing what is right, I am better than most people I know."

Nijmie Dzurinko, executive director of the Philadelphia Student Union, said the findings were not at all reflective of the inner-city students she works with as an advocate for better curriculum and school funding.

"A lot of people like to blame society's problems on young people, without recognizing that young people aren't making the decisions about what's happening in society," said Dzurinko, 32. "They're very easy to scapegoat."

Peter Anderson, principal of Andover High School in Andover, Mass., said he and his colleagues had detected very little cheating on tests or Internet-based plagiarism. He has, however, noticed an uptick in students sharing homework in unauthorized ways.

"This generation is leading incredibly busy lives -- involved in athletics, clubs, so many with part-time jobs, and, for seniors, an incredibly demanding and anxiety-producing college search," he offered as an explanation.

Riddle, who for four decades was a high school teacher and principal in Northern Virginia, agreed that more pressure could lead to more cheating, yet spoke in defense of today's students.

"I would take these students over other generations," he said. "I found them to be more responsive, more rewarding to work with, more appreciative of support that adults give them.

"We have to create situations where it's easy for kids to do the right things," he added. "We need to create classrooms where learning takes on more importance than having the right answer."

On Long Island, an alliance of school superintendents and college presidents recently embarked on a campaign to draw attention to academic integrity problems and to crack down on plagiarism and cheating.

Roberta Gerold, superintendent of the Middle Country School District and a leader of the campaign, said parents and school officials need to be more diligent -- for example, emphasizing to students the distinctions between original and borrowed work.

"You can reinforce the character trait of integrity," she said. "We overload kids these days, and they look for ways to survive. . . . It's a flaw in our system that whatever we are doing as educators allows this to continue."

Josephson contended that most Americans are too apathetic about ethical shortcomings among young people and in society at large.

"Adults are not taking this very seriously," he said. "The schools are not doing even the most moderate thing. . . . They don't want to know. There's a pervasive apathy."

Josephson also addressed the argument that today's youth are no less honest than their predecessors.

"In the end, the question is not whether things are worse, but whether they are bad enough to mobilize concern and concerted action," he said.

"What we need to learn from these survey results is that our moral infrastructure is unsound and in serious need of repair. This is not a time to lament and whine but to take thoughtful, positive actions."

More Cheating in the News

You can pay them more, but they still have the same reactions to incentives and punishments - if you can't win by trying, cheat.

The gist of the matter is that an assistant principal altered thousands of MC answers of the Regents Integrated Algebra test given this past June so more students would get a passing grade.

"What a maroon," as Bugs would say.

Essentially, the State made a correlation between the erasures and the answers - too many erasures to correct answers, not enough to incorrect ones. The red flags went up as well when students' answers on individual questions didn't match his ability levels on other similar questions or match his overall score. Very hard to spot individually, but the discrepancies show up in the large numbers.

When will people learn?

On a similar topic, but unrelated to this story:

If you're the numbers type, the raw-score to scaled score conversions are interesting.

------------
The whole thing (includes a video):

City Finds Bronx H.S. Cheated On Regents Exam
By: NY1 News

An investigation into a Bronx high school has determined there was tampering with a Regents exam given this past June.

A report released by the city's Special Commissioner of Investigation on Wednesday says the assistant principal at the High School of Contemporary Arts altered multiple choice answers to the Integrated Algebra Regents exam so more students would get a passing grade.

The report says there are irregularities on answer sheets such as thousands of erasures and changes in 94 percent of the passing exams.

Department of Education officials said in a statement, "We have reassigned Assistant Principal Ruth Ralston and we are seeking her termination."

Ralston has been at the school since 2006.

Gee, ya think?

Rochester school board asks why kids saw social studies exam questions early
David Andreatta • Rochester (NY) Democrat and Chronicle Staff writer
July 22, 2008

Backpedaling under pressure from its board, the Rochester School District announced Monday that it would investigate why thousands of seventh- and eighth-grade students were prepped for their final social studies exams last month with dozens of questions that appeared on the actual tests.

District officials had initially defended the practice of sharing exam questions with students in advance, calling it a legitimate form of test preparation. But that prompted Board of Education members and the teachers union to call for an investigation of the matter and the district's testing review protocol.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. You will never have 100% of your students succeed at anything. Threats, money, bribes, "rewards", 2014 be damned. If any school shows dramatic and sudden improvement then you have one of three things:

1. School cheated.
2. Students cheated.
3. Test is too easy.

People generally don't cheat on tests that don't count to them. That means students don't bother but teachers might. "A legitimate form of test preparation," my butt. Not even a good CYA.

Rochester school board asks why kids saw social studies exam questions early

David Andreatta • Rochester (NY) Democrat and Chronicle Staff writer with lots of reader comments
July 22, 2008

Backpedaling under pressure from its board, the Rochester School District announced Monday that it would investigate why thousands of seventh- and eighth-grade students were prepped for their final social studies exams last month with dozens of questions that appeared on the actual tests.

District officials had initially defended the practice of sharing exam questions with students in advance, calling it a legitimate form of test preparation. But that prompted Board of Education members and the teachers union to call for an investigation of the matter and the district's testing review protocol.

Marilynn Patterson-Grant, the deputy superintendent for instruction, acknowledged in a statement Monday that the matter warranted examination.

"This issue illustrates the need for a critical examination of our current practices and policies around student assessments, and for a system of accountability at all levels and across all subject areas," Patterson-Grant said.

"The (district) will launch an immediate investigation of the development and administration of the seventh- and eighth-grade social studies assessments and review materials, and take appropriate action."

The investigation came after the controversial test-prep method and the district's defense were first reported in the Democrat and Chronicle on Sunday and as Board of Education commissioners demanded action.

"I obviously want to get the full story on exactly what went down," said school board President Malik Evans, who called for an investigation earlier in the day.

"The Board of Education takes the integrity of student assessments and protocols very seriously."

Superintendent Jean-Claude Brizard is on his honeymoon and could not be reached for comment. He is expected to return at the end of the month.

The disclosed multiple-choice questions and their answers were printed in review materials produced by Paul Lampe, the district's director of social studies, who also approved the exams.

The reviews included all 40 multiple-choice questions on the eighth-grade exam and 24 of the 40 on the seventh-grade test. The questions were each worth one point, and the exams were each worth 100 points. The exams accounted for 25 percent of the students' final grades in the courses.

Lampe previously said he had intended to scramble the review questions and their answers, which appeared in the same sequence in the reviews as on the tests, but he defended introducing students to the questions beforehand.

His response did not satisfy school board Vice President Van Henri White, who called the stance "a mistake at best, and at worst a serious error in academic judgment."

"The problem with that response is that even the scrambling of questions and answers doesn't ensure that our children are anything but good memorizers," White said. "I want reassurances going forward that everyone views these tests, high-stakes or low-stakes, as being honest."

District officials could not say how many of the 4,329 students who took the exams were prepped with the review materials, which were intended to be presented in class by teachers using a slide show produced with PowerPoint software.

The study guides were not meant to be taken home by students, and it is unclear how many students, if any, were given hard copies of the slide show.

Some board members expressed concern that the district's initial apparent indifference to the matter suggested that similar forms of test preparation are ubiquitous.

"My concern is whether this is more widespread and what it says about the cultural malaise that the district suffers from," said board member Thomas Brennan.

"If it is more widespread, I think people should lose their jobs over this."

The district requires seventh- and eighth-graders to take exams in four subject areas: English, math, science and social studies.

Because only the English and math exams are used to determine whether students should be promoted to the next grade, invalidating the social studies exams wouldn't affect students.

The passing rate for the social studies exam was 50 percent in the seventh grade, up 6 percentage points from last year, and 56 percent in the eighth grade, an increase of 5 percentage points from a year ago.

"The district has to get to the bottom of this, determine what happened, and announce what measure they have taken to ensure that it won't happen again," said Rochester Teachers Association President Adam Urbanski. "I think the credibility of the district is at stake."