This past week, Forbes magazine published a feature article authored by its senior education editor, Susan Adams, concerning a $12 billion company that’s benefited mightily from the distance learning measures hastily put in place for secondary and college-level students in the wave of the coronavirus pandemic lockdowns.
The company in question is Chegg, an education technology firm which offers a $14.95 monthly subscription that provides a lifeline for students who are looking for answers to exam questions.
Headquartered in California, Chegg actually looks more like a company based in India, where it accesses a stable of more than 70,000 people with advanced science, math, engineering and IT degrees. These freelancers are available online continuously, supplying subscribers from around the world with step-by-step answers to their test-related questions. And the answers are typically provided in a matter of mere minutes.
Reportedly, Chegg’s database contains answers on some 46 million textbook and exam question topics, and it’s the driving force behind the company’s Chegg Study subscription service.
Chegg Study is also the main revenue stream of the company — by far. Other services such as resources for improving writing and math skills as well as bibliography-creation software seem more like window-dressing.
It brings to mind certain video shops of yesteryear which would display a small selection of benign movie “standards” for sale at the front of the premises, fig-leafing the store’s true purpose.
The Forbes article interviewed more than 50 college students who are subscribers to Chegg Study. The students interviewed represent a cross-section of institutions ranging from small state schools to top private universities.
Nearly every one of the students interviewed admitted that they use Chegg Study to cheat on tests.
To view Chegg’s financial numbers is to notice a direct correlation between the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic — when education went virtual practically overnight — and a spike in revenue growth at the company. Quarterly revenues over 2019 have leapt 70% or more, and Chegg’s shares are up nearly 350% since the education lockdowns began in mid-March.
The company is now valued at a cool $12 billion.
Corporate spokespeople deny that Chegg is taking advantage of the current situation to juice its sales and profits. Company president Dan Rosensweig contends that Chegg is the equivalent of an “asynchronous, always-on tutor,” ready to help students with detailed answers to problems.
On-demand education, if you will. Or a student version of the GE Answer Center.
But the “new reality” of virtual education and Chegg’s role within it brings up a number of concerns. As cheating becomes easier to do and hence more prevalent (human nature being what it is), what happens to the value of a high school or college degree? Can degree credentials mean as much as they did before?
It depends. For some jobs where the ability to find accurate information quickly is important, finding someone who mastered the function of “chegging” while as a student might actually be the better candidate for the position. On the other hand, if the position requires a person who will uphold the highest ethical standards at all times, that same candidate would be the wrong one for the job.
Ultimately, it’s the students themselves who will likely be the victims long-term, because if they “skated on through” during their school years and didn’t actually learn the material, that will soon become evident when they go into the workforce. “Find out now … or find out later,” one might say.
Looking at the other side of the coin, how can schools make sure that they’re monitoring and mitigating cheating effectively, such that employers can be confident of the comparative value of a degree from one school versus that of another?
There are a variety of “remote proctoring” surveillance tools like Examity and Honorlock that can lock students’ web browsers and observe them visually through their laptop cameras. While on paper these look like effective (albeit costly) ways to crack down on online cheating, the degree of their actual success is debatable.
Some respondents in the Forbes student interviews reported that they “chegg” their online tests regardless of whether or not they’re being proctored, citing the belief that if they aren’t using the school’s own Wi-Fi connection, it’s impossible to detect the cheating activity.
Furthermore, anecdotal reports from teachers in my home state of Maryland state that on test-taking days, often there are large spikes in the number of students who mysteriously run into “problems” with their Zoom connections – and hence are unable to be observed while taking their tests.
But the issue goes even further – to the very heart of the notion of virtual learning itself and whether distance learning is ill-serving young people. Some students have found it hugely challenging to be skillful learners in the “virtual” world. A business colleague of mine shared one such example with me:
“Someone who I respect greatly and consider to be an honorable man has accepted his son’s cheating, since he went from being an ‘A’-student to failing because he couldn’t handle online learning. He was a visual and auditory learner and without those two things, the information wouldn’t stick.
The student and his dad talked about the 12 consecutive chapters he was supposed to be reading. When the father was satisfied with his son’s understanding of the material, he allowed his son to do whatever was necessary to get through the tests.”
When the situation gets to the point that students’ own parents are going along with the cheating, it means that we have an issue that goes way beyond one particular company that’s taking advantage of the dislocations in the educational arena while laughing all the way to the bank. At its root, the problem is virtual learning and the way it’s being structured.
Of course, the coronavirus crisis built quickly and took many colleges and school systems by surprise — so the fact that jury-rigged ways to deal with the virtual learning have fallen well-short expectations is completely understandable. But the shortcomings have become so glaringly obvious so quickly, new creative thinking is obviously needed – and fast.
If you have thoughts or ideas about steps the educational field could be taking to solve this dilemma, please share them with other readers here.
2 thoughts on “Education alert: The unintended consequences of schools’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic.”
Virtual learning fails because it’s the equivalent of having your teacher face the blackboard oblivious of what goes on in class. It’s boring and essentially unsupervised. Students take the path of least resistance under the circumstances. Cheating simply becomes an obvious way around the tedium. That’s the “learning” taking place.
A teacher who can normally silence whispering in the back row with a glance, spot test answers inked onto little Johnny’s palm during a test or notice the slightest flutter in attention span in a roomful of students is now quite helpless to exercise crowd control. Good classroom learning is like being in an orchestra under the eye of an all-seeing and all-hearing conductor. That’s now taken away, and if the trombonist is reading a comic book, nobody notices …
We’d do much better with learning in person — even if the teacher has to wear a hazmat suit and visor.
I spent my first three years of college at the University of Virginia (UVA), which has an Honor System founded in 1842 – nearly 180 years ago. This institution aims to create a university-wide community of trust in which each student, having formally committed not to lie, cheat or steal at the time of enrollment, is “trusted by peers, faculty members, administrators, and community residents alike. Students conduct themselves with integrity and are presumed honorable until proven otherwise,” as the school’s website puts it.
What sets UVA’s Honor System apart from others, beyond its longevity, is that it is student-run and student-enforced. Permanent dismissal is the only remedy for an Honor offense.
The Honor System requires students to write and then sign the statement, “On my honor, I pledge that I have neither given nor received help on this assignment” at the bottom of each submission. Any submission missing this pledge is immediately rejected. I well remember performing this ritual for all my quizzes and exams, and believe that it cemented in me the fundamental principles it embodies firmly enough to resist and weather a lifetime of challenges and temptations.
“Chegging” for the purpose of receiving help on a test would represent at least two clear-cut and significant Honor offenses at UVA — one for the cheating itself and the other for making a false pledge. Students who could comfortably rationalize cheating on grounds they find online learning too challenging to handle are nonetheless forced to make a conscious decision to lie about it, which in my view is a much more powerful deterrent than the fear of detection by remote proctoring surveillance tools.
Chegg is not the villain here. In the end, it’s students who decide to pay for and use Chegg’s services, and at UVA those same students must also decide whether to abide by the Honor System or face the consequence of expulsion by their peers.
I would expect UVA’s “chegging” rate to be significantly lower than at other schools where faculty and administrators — not students — are responsible for enforcing honor codes, and I would be quite surprised if objective evidence were to reveal otherwise.