Academic Dishonesty Mini Simulation

During a major exam, you notice one of your top-performing students glancing at another student's screen multiple times. Upon closer observation, you confirm that they are copying answers. This student has never been caught cheating before and has always been an exemplary student. When confronted, they break down and explain that they have been under extreme pressure from their parents and feared disappointing them. The school's policy is strict: a zero on the exam and an official report to the administration.

Trade-offs to Consider:

• Policy Enforcement vs. Compassion: Enforcing a strict zero and administrative report ensures consistency but may ignore a student’s emotional and mental health needs.

• Equity vs. Individualization: Treating everyone equally (same consequence for all who cheat) maintains fairness, but individualized responses may offer more effective learning and behavioral outcomes.

  Reflection: How do we define fairness—equal treatment or equitable support?

• Short-Term Accountability vs. Long-Term Growth: Immediate consequences reinforce rules, while restorative approaches may better support long-term ethical development.

  Reflection: What helps a student grow more—punishment or a chance to reflect and recover

• Maintaining Authority vs. Building Trust: Following policy strictly reinforces authority and structure, but showing understanding may build deeper student trust and rapport.

  Reflection: How does a teacher’s response shape their relationship with students?

• Reputation Management vs. Quiet Resolution: Reporting the incident protects your reputation for upholding standards but may stigmatize the student; handling it quietly might raise concerns if discovered.

  Reflection: How do you balance what’s right for the student with protecting your professional integrity?

• Policy Enforcement vs. Compassion: Enforcing a strict zero and administrative report ensures consistency but may ignore a student’s emotional and mental health needs.

  Reflection: Is strict discipline always the best teaching tool, or should context matter?

• Equity vs. Individualization: Treating everyone equally (same consequence for all who cheat) maintains fairness, but individualized responses may offer more effective learning and behavioral outcomes.

  Reflection: How do we define fairness—equal treatment or equitable support?

• Short-Term Accountability vs. Long-Term Growth: Immediate consequences reinforce rules, while restorative approaches may better support long-term ethical development.

  Reflection: What helps a student grow more—punishment or a chance to reflect and recover?

• Maintaining Authority vs. Building Trust: Following policy strictly reinforces authority and structure, but showing understanding may build deeper student trust and rapport.

  Reflection: How does a teacher’s response shape their relationship with students?

• Reputation Management vs. Quiet Resolution: Reporting the incident protects your reputation for upholding standards but may stigmatize the student; handling it quietly might raise concerns if discovered.

  Reflection: How do you balance what’s right for the student with protecting your professional integrity?

Download Simulation Overviews