Proctors Watchful of Cheaters; Nearly Ten Expelled Annually

"I don't feel our role here is to intimidate cheaters," Jay Halfond, head of the Classrooms and Examinations Office that deals with every cheating case, said yesterday. "We just want to create an atmosphere so that it will be difficult to cheat."

For most students who might be tempted to cheat on a final examination, this atmosphere is too forbidding, and the risk of getting caught is too great. But for others who take the chance and do so unsuccessfully--an estimated 10 undergraduates each year--consequences are grim.

"If a student is suspected of cheating and the Administrative Board finds him guilty, and he confesses his guilt, he is required to withdraw from the University for a year," John Marquard, senior tutor of Dudley House, said yesterday.

"But if someone has lied about his cheating and is found guilty," he continued," it is a much more serious offense. He is dismissed from the University and can be readmitted only by a unanimous vote of the faculty of Arts and Sciences."

Halfond and his squad of 60-70 proctors are specially trained to deal with cheating cases, and with each new case they become more familiar with students' practices.

"We try not to intimidate students caught cheating, and we allow them to complete the exam on the chance that they are proven 'not guilty,'" Halfond said. "Cheating is such a serious offense, I wouldn't want to jeopardize anyone's case."

Halfond said that in his experience, most of the students caught cheating have left crib sheets in bathrooms. accidentally leaving their names on them or leaving identification nearby.

"Their intention is to check notes during the midway break," Halfond said. "We are now aware of this, and we check all the bathrooms in an examination building right at the start of an exam."

Marquand, however, says that in his years of experience dealing with cheating cases, the most common method employed has been verbal or written exchange in the exam room while the examination itself was in progress.

"In highly competitive courses such as Organic Chemistry, where cheating is anticipated," Halfond said, "We are overly conscious of students attempting to cheat, and we seat them further part than usual."

In most courses, students are required to sit in every row, every third seat.

Marquand disagreed that there is a greater chance of cheating incidents in pre-med courses than in any other type of course. "Pre-med students probably realize that by cheating, they are taking a bigger risk than most other students. As a reuslt," he said, "they have higher standards of propriety."

Each case of suspected cheating is handled individually, but the procedure of reporting never varies. A proctor who witnesses the cheating reports the case to Halfond, who writes up a report and submits it to the suspect's senior tutor. The tutor decides whether or not the case should go before the Administrative Board, and if so, acts as a student's defender.

Marion Belliveau, registrar to the college and a member of the Ad Board, said yesterday that the Board is very careful to treat each case fairly, and that they require concrete evidence before they find anyone "guilty."

She said she even refuses to use the work "cheating" when discussing a case that has not yet been voted upon.

"Proctors report instances of 'discrepancies with the rules,'" she said. "They can't report a cheater until they prove that a student is guilty. I think that the Administrative Board is very fair."

The number of cheating incidents remains nearly the same every year, Halfond reported.

He attributed the lack of an increase to change in exam format. Teachers now usually ask for essays, instead of the kind of "objective data" that can be stuffed in a shirtsleeve