Criteria1. Clear, logical, assertive topic sentence (first o.docx

Criteria
1. Clear, logical, assertive topic sentence (first of each
paragraph) that directly responds to the question.
2. Paragraph focuses on only topic sentence claim – NO
TOPIC DRIFT.
3. Adequate, accurate and specific evidence that strongly
supports topic sentence claim without plagiarizing.
4. Thorough analysis that flows logically, without redundancy,
from the chosen evidence and demonstrates an understanding of
the source material.
5. Balance of relevant evidence and student analysis to
support the topic sentence claim.
6. Writing is clear and understandable.
7. Uses correct grammar and punctuation, considering
handwritten exam format.
8. Language is active and concise, and uses business style.
Topic Sentence Requirements
Important Note: Creating Effective Topic Claim Sentences
(Note: you will not have access to this reminder and
accompanying examples during the exam.)
Remember, topic sentences need to be assertive claims. In this
regard, they need to include both evidence and a reason why.
Example of a good topic sentence has three parts:
(A.)Netflix CEO Reed Hastings’ memo is effective in appeasing
upset customers (B.) because the memo uses conversational,
emotional language (C.) that connects with customers on a
human level.
Example of a bad topic sentence:
Netflix CEO Reed Hastings’ memo is effective in appeasing
upset customers.

What’s the problem?
A vague claim like this can’t act as a viable and specific map to
the paragraph, a map that can help you avoid topic drift.
So make sure your topic sentences include the reason why or
answer the question - so what?
points and tips
Each paragraph is a "pass/fail."
READINGS FOR THE STUDENTS.
When you arrive for the exam I will give you the blue books
and questions. Students will write one-paragraph responses to
three (3) of the five questions. I don’t have any preference as to
which three questions each individual student answers.
At the end of the two-hour exam, I will collect EVERYTHING –
blue books (obviously), printouts of the readings that students
have brought, and all copies of the exam questions and any
notes the students have made during the exam.
When I start grading the exams, I will grade them against the
final exam rubric. Each paragraph is a pass/fail paragraph. So
each student can get one of four possible grades on the final
exam:
· 0 (zero; none of the three paragraphs meet the rubric criteria)
· 34 (one paragraph meets all rubric criteria, two do not)
· 67 (two paragraphs meet all rubric criteria, one does not)
· 100 (all three paragraphs meet the rubric criteria)
REMEMBER
· When you paraphrase you must change vocabulary, change
organization, but keep the length and keep the meaning. You
also must cite the information or it is plagiarism.
· Analyze - this is you explaining fully, even if you feel the
information was implied.
· If the company makes a statement, try to tell the
reader where/when and how it was made. (on Youtube? In an
interview with the NYTimes….and on what date? )

· Use month, day and year when you give a date
· One – nine = words 10 -1000000000 = numbers ( except in
time, dates and millions)
· First time = Timothy Coombs, crisis communication expert, or
Christina Owings, CEO of Google …..second time
use Coombs or Owings ( family name )
· Review all elements of Business Writing Style ( concise,
specific, Active voice, No weak, hard to measure words (very),
No sentences starting with "it is" constructions...)
NetFlix Memo
Sample Question:
Review Netflix CEO Reed Hastings’ 2011 memo to Netflix
customers upset by Netflix’s change in services, and argue in
one concise, direct, assertive paragraph your response to the
following question: Was Hastings’ communication EITHER
effective OR ineffective in appeasing his audience, and why? To
support your argument, use specific details from the provided
text and your own logic and knowledge.
Netflix CEO Reed Hastings’ 2011 Memo
Dear ___,
I messed up. I owe you an explanation.
It is clear from the feedback over the past two months that many
members felt we lacked respect and humility in the way we
announced the separation of DVD and streaming and the price
changes. That was certainly not our intent, and I offer my
sincere apology. Let me explain what we are doing.
For the past five years, my greatest fear at Netflix has been that
we wouldn't make the leap from success in DVDs to success in
streaming. Most companies that are great at something – like
AOL dialup or Borders bookstores – do not become great at new
things people want (streaming for us). So we moved quickly
into streaming, but I should have personally given you a full
explanation of why we are splitting the services and thereby
increasing prices. It wouldn’t have changed the price increase,
but it would have been the right thing to do.
So here is what we are doing and why.

Many members love our DVD service, as I do, because nearly
every movie ever made is published on DVD. DVD is a great
option for those who want the huge and comprehensive
selection of movies.
I also love our streaming service because it is integrated into
my TV, and I can watch anytime I want. The benefits of our
streaming service are really quite different from the benefits of
DVD by mail. We need to focus on rapid improvement as
streaming technology and the market evolves, without
maintaining compatibility with our DVD by mail service.
So we realized that streaming and DVD by mail are really
becoming two different businesses, with very different cost
structures, that need to be marketed differently, and we need to
let each grow and operate independently.
It’s hard to write this after over 10 years of mailing DVDs with
pride, but we think it is necessary: In a few weeks, we will
rename our DVD by mail service to “Qwikster”. We chose the
name Qwikster because it refers to quick delivery. We will keep
the name “Netflix” for streaming.
Qwikster will be the same website and DVD service that
everyone is used to. It is just a new name, and DVD members
will go to qwikster.com to access their DVD queues and choose
movies. One improvement we will make at launch is to add a
video games upgrade option, similar to our upgrade option for
Blu-ray, for those who want to rent Wii, PS3 and Xbox 360
games. Members have been asking for video games for many
years, but now that DVD by mail has its own team, we are
finally getting it done. Other improvements will follow. A
negative of the renaming and separation is that the
Qwikster.com and Netflix.com websites will not be integrated.
There are no pricing changes (we’re done with that!). If you
subscribe to both services you will have two entries on your
credit card statement, one for Qwikster and one for Netflix. The
total will be the same as your current charges. We will let you
know in a few weeks when the Qwikster.com website is up and
ready.

For me the Netflix red envelope has always been a source of
joy. The new envelope is still that lovely red, but now it will
have a Qwikster logo. I know that logo will grow on me over
time, but still, it is hard. I imagine it will be similar for many of
you.
I want to acknowledge and thank you for sticking with us, and
to apologize again to those members, both current and former,
who felt we treated them thoughtlessly.
Both the Qwikster and Netflix teams will work hard to regain
your trust. We know it will not be overnight. Actions speak
louder than words. But words help people to understand actions.
Respectfully yours,
-Reed Hastings, Co-Founder and CEO, Netflix
p.s. I have a slightly longer explanation along with a video
posted on our blog, where you can also post comments
NOW OPEN THE QUESTION RESPONSES AND COMPARE
Netflix Good and Bad examples
Good Example Response #1
(1)Nexflix CEO Reed Hastings memo is ineffective in
appeasing upset customers,(2) because he spends the early part
of the memo justifying and explaining his own experience,(3)
failing to address customers’ primary concern about cost until
the last third of the document. For example, Hastings states
toward the beginning of his memo that he “should have”
preemptively explained to customers why Netflix is splitting its
services and increasing prices. He explains that “it wouldn’t
have changed the price increase, but it would have been the
right thing to do.” Hastings ruminates on his own feelings about
Netflix’s changed service, discussing his love of Netflix’s
streaming service and justifying his rationale for separating that
service from the DVD by mail one. His own experiences, both
as a Netflix viewer and as company CEO, inform the bulk of the
memo, making it seem out of touch with consumer concerns.
Had Hastings based his communication with consumers around
their collective concerns rather than around his unique
experiences, he would have appeared more relatable and less

self-righteous. Although Hastings does rescind Netflix’s price
increase for current customers later in the document, his memo
is ineffective in appeasing his audience because it is likely that
many would have stopped reading by then due to the self-
centered and out-of-touch rhetoric throughout the early part of
the memo.
Good Example Response #2
(1)Netflix CEO Reed Hastings’ memo is effective in appeasing
upset customers (2) because the memo uses conversational,
emotional language (3) that connects with customers on a
human level. For example, Hastings explains that he “love[s]”
both the DVD and streaming services for different reasons; that,
for him, “the Netflix red envelope has always been a source of
joy;” and that he knows the new Qwikster logo will grow on
him over time but that “it is hard.” By using words like “love”
and “joy” and by making clear that the Netflix CEO, like his
customers, uses and enjoys Netflix’s present services and
experiences feelings of sadness during the transition to a new
business model, Hastings relates to customers on a person-to-
person level. He shows that he feels the same as his customers
while allowing those customers insight into—and ultimately,
empathy for—how he must feel as CEO. With its appeal to
customers’ feelings, Hastings’ memo is effective in repairing
Netflix’s reputation with its customers.
Bad Example Response #1
Netflix CEO Reed Hastings’ memo is effective in appeasing
upset customers because the memo uses conversational,
emotional language that connects with customers on a human
level. Hastings talks to the customers like they are people he
knows, not like they are just people that he makes money from.
His words make it clear that he really cares about them as
people. He makes them care about him, too, by showing that the
Netflix changes hurt him just like they hurt the customers.

Appealing to customers’ feelings makes this memo effective in
making sure people feel positively toward Netflix after this
crisis.
Bad Example Response #2 (TOPIC DRIFT)
Netflix CEO Reed Hastings’ memo is effective in
appeasing upset customers because the memo uses
conversational, emotional language that connects with
customers on a human level. For example, Hastings explains
that he “love[s]” both the DVD and streaming services for
different reasons; that, for him, “the Netflix red envelope has
always been a source of joy;” and that he knows the new
Qwikster logo will grow on him over time but that “it is hard.”
A mass memo can seem like a cold document, but the fact that
this memo is long enough to address all the issues that
customers are worried about in a detailed and heartfelt way
makes customers feel cared for. In addition to relating to
customers emotionally, Hastings’ memo appeases customers’
primary financial concern by assuring current customers that,
for them, the switch in business model will not involve a price
increase. The many references Hastings makes to the future also
make them feel reassured, because they understand that the
business will actually offer them greater benefits in the end.
Sample Question: Read the attached excerpt from "Lessons
Learned from the Tylenol Tragedy,” and argue—in one concise,
direct, assertive paragraph—your response to the following
question: Which single PR strategy was most powerful in
Johnson & Johnson's reputation repair, and why? To support
your argument, use specific details from the provided text and
your own logic and knowledge.
______________________________ ______________________
________ __________________
Sample responses, with color-coding to emphasize analysis: (

you need equal amounts )
Factual evidence support (from the reading)
Interpretive analysis support
Sample Response “A”:
Open, active communication with the public, through
Chairman James Burke’s TV interviews and a toll-free hotline,
was Johnson & Johnson’s most powerful reputation repair
strategy because, with this strategy, the company took
advantage of 1982’s limited media channels to update the public
on new developments.
(or : Johnson & Johnson's most powerful reputation repair
strategy was its open, active communication with the public,
through Chairman James Burke's TV interviews and a toll free
hotline, which took advantage of the 1982's limited media
channels to update the public on new developments. )
First, Chairman James Burke appeared “on TV interview shows”
to explain how Johnson & Johnson was controlling the
situation. In that way, Burke cooperated with the TV news
media, providing a sense of active transparency and complying
with W. Timothy Coombs’ recommendation that companies use
the news media to quickly reach a large pool of stakeholders.
Since, in 1982, TV had fewer competing media, because the
Internet was not yet the competing influence that it is today,
Burke using TV to disseminate key response messages was a
powerful choice. Second, Johnson & Johnson used a toll-free
hotline to answer questions, which enabled the company to
communicate one-on-one with members of the public. The
hotline was a way to personally explain the situation to anyone
seeking information, demonstrating Coombs’ advice that
companies should use all available channels to communicate to
the public after a crisis. Through TV and telephone, two
powerful modes of communication in 1982, Johnson & Johnson

spoke to the public using widely disseminated messages to fill
what otherwise may have been an information vacuum, which
could have led to more public mistrust of the company.
Sample Response “B”:
The most powerful PR strategy that Johnson & Johnson
used to repair its reputation was strategically coordinating with
the medical community because the people within this
community could become “force multipliers” advocating for the
company. For example, according to “Lessons learned from the
Tylenol tragedy on surviving a corporate crisis,” J&J “made
intensive efforts to communicate with physicians through all
media” to encourage these physicians to reassure their patients
of Tylenol’s safety. The article specifically mentions that J&J
sent 450,000 electronic messages to people in medical and
pharmaceutical industries and dispersed more than 2,000 sales
reps to make in-person presentations to doctors and health-care
workers. By coordinating with the medical community in these
ways, J&J gained what Leslie Gaines-Ross calls “force
multipliers”: “a network of independent third parties willing to
take your side.” In this case, J&J recognized that the support of
the medical community would have reinforced the power of the
company’s message, that Tylenol is safe, by channeling that
message through trusted, authoritative, and seemingly unbiased
sources: doctors and other health-care professionals. Had J&J
not involved medical community representatives as third-party
advocates in these ways, taking advantage of their positions of
influence to endorse Tylenol, consumers may have remained
more skeptical of Tylenol’s safety and taken more time to trust
the product again.
1. Read the Yelp review, written by a customer at Brigantessa,
and the public response, written by one of the owners of
Briganessa, and argue in one concise, direct, assertive

paragraph your response to the following: is the business
owner’s public response effective or ineffective, and why? To
support your argument, use specific details from the provided
text and your own logic and knowledge.
2. Read former Temple University President Neil Theobald’s
2016 appropriation request letter to the following: which one of
the Theobald’s justifications for funding is most persuasive, and
why? To support your argument, use specific details from the
provided text and your own logic and knowledge.
3. Read the internal memos, each of which makes an
announcement regarding company layoffs, and argue in one
concise, direct, assertive paragraph your response to the
following: Which one of the memos most appropriately delivers
its “ bad new” message to employees, and why? To support your
argument, use specific details from the provided text and your
own logic and knowledge.
Reading
for
Question
1
Yelp
review
of
the
restaurant
Brigantessa
by
customer
“James

G.,”
posted
on
2/26/15
“2
stars”
Just
a
quick
update:
Having
received
several
(obnoxious)
private
messages
from
the
owner,
Francis
Cratil
Cretarola,
apparently,
if
you
don't
like
the
food
at
Brigantessa,

the
problem
is
you
and
your
ignorance.
Quite
a
way
to
run
a
business.
Uneven.
At
the
start,
I
have
to
say
the
Jamón
ibérico
was
indeed,
the
finest

ham
on
earth
and
well
worth
the
$20
price
tag.
That
being
said:
Service:
Good,
not
great,
a
little
on
the
slow
side,
not
enough
to
reduce
the
overall
grade.
Atmosphere:

A
nice
couple
of
rooms,
not
over
crowded,
nicely
appointed.
Food:
Beet
Salad
and
Pheasant
tureen
were
pleasant.
Not,
in
and
of
themselves
a
reason
to
visit,
but
decent.
Pizza:
I

knew
in
advance
this
was
a
Neapolitan
pizza
and
was
ready
for
it.
It
would
be
completely
unfair
to
compare
this
to
American
pizza,
and
I
would
never
do
that.
However,
the
pie
was

relentlessly
bland.
Essentially
a
middling
quality
dough,
lightly
baked,
and
sparsely
topped
with
an
excruciatingly
flavorless
tomato
sauce
and
flavorless
ricotta.
I'd
compare
it
to
Wonder
Bread
with
ketchup
and
some
Kraft
Parmesan
sprinkled

(sparingly)
on
top.
This
is
not
a
good
interpretation
of
Neapolitan
pizza,
at
least
the
way
it
was
executed
this
evening.
Admittedly,
it
was
restaurant
week,
but
we
arrived
quite
early
and
didn't

order
off
the
restaurant
week
menu.
Long
and
short,
there
are
simply
too
many
other
very
good
Italian
restaurants
on
Passyunk
(Virtu,
Birra,
Paradissio,
etc.)
to
spend
an
evening
and
$150
at

Brigantessa.
Life
is
short,
don't
settle
for
average.
_____________________________________________________
_________________________
Brigantessa
owner
response,
posted
to
Yelp
on
2/27/15
James
G,
this
is
Francis
Cratil
Cretarola,
one
of
the
owners

of
Brigantessa.
I'd
like
to
quickly
address
some
of
your
comments.
There
is
no
"sauce"
on
real
pizza
napoletana.
By
Neapolitan
regulations,
which
we
follow
to
the
letter,
tomatoes
must

be
raw
and
from
the
slopes
of
Vesuvius.
We
use
DOP
San
Marzano
or
the
even
rare
DOP
piennolo
variety,
which
grow
closer
to
the
sea
and
have
more
salinity.
Any
ricotta
you

consumed
was
imported
from
Italy
(though
its
inclusion
in
your
description
confuses
me).
The
"middling
dough"
was
made
with
flour
milled
in
Napoli
and
did,
indeed,
get
a
"light"
baking.
By
Neapolitan

regulations,
it
must
be
cooked
in
a
wood-‐fired
900+
degree
oven
for
60
to
90
seconds.
No
more,
no
less.
We
don't
do
the
crackery
crusts
you
obviously
prefer.
We
do
pizza
napoletana,
which

must
be
"umida
e
soffice,"
moist
and
soft.
It's
not
for
everyone.
I
admit
to
being
confused
about
just
what
pizza
you
had.
The
Calabrese
has
ricotta,
but
its
accompanying
ingredients
are
calabrese

chili
oil,
roasted
peppers
and
sausage.
The
Margherita
has
raw
San
Marzano
tomatoes,
fior
di
latte
mozzarella
and
basil,
but
no
ricotta.
The
Regina
is
dressed
with
Piennolo
tomatoes
(or
San
Marzano,
depending
on

their
availability),
mozzarella
di
bufala
from
Caserta,
Campania
and
basil
(no
ricotta).
The
Marinara
has
San
Marzano
tomatoes,
garlic,
oregano
and
extra
virgin
olive
oil
(it
has
no
cheese
of
any
kind).
The
Sorrentina

has
yellow
piennolo
tomatoes
and
Meyer
lemons.
No
ricotta
however.
The
other
pies
include
components
(lamb
sausage,
potato
croquettes,
pancetta
...
)
you
fail
to
mention.
So,
which
pie
did
you
have?

We
follow
the
rules
as
we're
applying
for
Neapolitan
certification
from
the
AVPN,
a
body
in
Napoli
that
determines
the
standards
for
pizza
napoletana.
We
would
be
the
first
pizzeria
in
Philly
to

receive
certification.
If
you
prefer
pizzas
with
"sauce"
that
are
more
crackery,
the
world
is
your
oyster.
We
don't
disparage
such
pizzas;
they
were
the
pizzas
we
grew
up
with.
We
are
doing

something
different,
rooted
in
tradition,
that
it
seems
you
actually
weren't
"ready
for."
I
happily
post
this
video
we've
made
explaining
the
traditions
we
follow:
youtube.com/watch?v=kXLH….
It's
fun,
so
please
watch
it
...

it's
not
"excruciating."
We
support
and
take
pride
in
the
work
of
all
of
our
neighbors
(including
the
establishments
you
name
...
they
all
have
their
virtues),
please
do
encourage
others
to
visit

them.
East
Passyunk
is
a
community.
Reading
for
Question
2
Below
is
former
Temple
University
President
Neil
Theobald’s
letter
to
the
Pennsylvania
State
Legislature
requesting
funding
for
the
2016-‐17

school
year.
Public
universities
such
as
Temple
get
state
funding
annually,
and
while
Temple’s
funding
(like
all
state
universities
in
Pennsylvania)
has
been
decreasing
in
recent
years,
Theobald
is
asking
for
a
21.63%
($33

million)
increase
over
2015-‐16
funding.
Introduction
I
am
greatly
honored
to
bring
you
Temple
University’s
annual
request.
This
is
my
third
year
submitting
a
request
as
Temple’s
President.

Each
year
I
do
so,
I
am
deeply
humbled
by
the
thoughtful
and
enthusiastic
response
I
receive
from
state
leaders,
especially
for
initiatives
designed
to
keep
Temple
affordable
and
accessible.
The
partnership
between
Temple

and
the
Commonwealth
of
Pennsylvania
is
a
long
and
proud
one
that
has
generated
tremendous
benefits
for
Commonwealth
residents.
I
look
forward
to
strengthening
and
sustaining
that
relationship
in
the
years
to
come.

I
am
pleased
to
share
with
you
the
impact
Temple
has
on
the
Commonwealth.
In
the
discussion
that
follows,
I
will
describe
how
Temple
creates
value
for
the
Commonwealth
through
our

unprecedented
efforts
to
provide
a
high-‐quality
education
to
Commonwealth
residents;
create
life-‐changing
research;
and
remain
affordable
and
accessible
while
maintaining
our
excellence.
I
would
be
remiss
if
I
did
not
note

that
Temple
is
surging
in
quality.
Our
new
class
of
freshmen
and
transfer
students
is
the
largest
and
most
academically
qualified
class
we’ve
ever
had.
Their
average
high
school
GPA
of

3.51
is
the
best
of
any
incoming
class
in
Temple
history.
They
also
represent
a
20
percent
rise
in
African-‐American
freshmen
and
26
percent
rise
in
Latino
freshmen,
adding
to
the
more
than
45

percent
of
all
Temple
students
who
identify
themselves
as
non-‐white.
Most
importantly,
the
new
students
come
from
throughout
the
Commonwealth;
we
now
have
registered
students
from
63
Pennsylvania
counties.
Temple
reflects

this
state—
talented
and
diverse.
We
are
able
to
educate
so
many
high-‐achieving
Commonwealth
students
in
part
because
we
have
increased
financial
aid
to
ensure
talented
students
of
all
backgrounds
have
access
to

our
high-‐quality
education.
At
the
same
time,
we
have
had
three
consecutive
years
of
record
fundraising,
and
we
recently
moved
into
the
top
100
of
the
National
Science
Foundation’s
research
expenditure
rankings.

Given
our
value
to
the
Commonwealth,
it
is
not
surprising
that
Temple
rose
six
spots
this
year
to
achieve
its
highest-‐ever
ranking
in
U.S.
News
&
World
Report’s
Best
Colleges—
No.
115
among

national
universities.
Our
rise
was
a
sign
of
our
incredible
momentum:
Over
the
past
five
years,
Temple
has
ascended
an
unprecedented
17
spots
in
the
U.S.
News
rankings,
making
us
the
No.
1
gainer

in
the
Commonwealth
over
that
time.
Alumni
who
power
Pennsylvania
The
impact
our
university
has
on
the
Commonwealth
is
immense.
Go
into
virtually
any
boardroom,
newsroom,
classroom,
rehearsal

room
or
operating
room
in
the
Commonwealth
of
Pennsylvania,
and
you
are
likely
to
find
a
Temple
graduate.
Temple
is
the
number
one
provider
of
professional
practitioners
in
Pennsylvania,
including
graduates

of
our
medical
school,
dental
school
and
law
school.
More
than
80
percent
of
our
students
come
from
the
Commonwealth.
Just
as
important:
those
who
come
from
out
of
state
elect
to
stay
and

work
here
after
they
receive
their
degrees.
There
are
more
than
167,000
Temple
alumni
living
in
Pennsylvania—equivalent
to
the
Commonwealth’s
third-‐largest
city.
Because
of
Temple,
the
Commonwealth
has
an
influx
of
talented,

highly
qualified
college
graduates
entering
the
work
force
every
year.
Numerous
state
elected
officials
are
Temple
graduates.
With
your
continued
support,
we
will
be
able
to
keep
producing
the
future
leaders
of
this

state.
Temple’s
benefit
to
Pennsylvania
is
clear.
Temple
supports
71,000
jobs
in
the
Commonwealth.
Every
$1
the
Commonwealth
appropriates
for
Temple
generates
$43
in
state
impact.
Fly

in
4
Since
I
arrived
at
Temple,
I
have
been
emphasizing
the
crucial
importance
of
graduating
in
four
years
to
reduce
student
debt.
Today,
I
am
proud
to
report
that
Temple
has

made
major
strides
in
this
area.
This
year,
about
93
percent
of
our
freshmen
signed
up
for
Fly
in
4,
Temple’s
innovative
plan
to
help
them
graduate
on
time

and
limit
their
debt.
To
briefly
review,
here's
how
Fly
in
4
works:
students
agree
to
meet
with
their
advisors
regularly
and
take
classes
when
they’re
offered.
They
commit
to
sticking
to
their
academic

plan
and
graduating
on
time.
For
its
part,
Temple
has
invested
heavily
in
advising.
We’ve
also
ensured
that
courses
are
taught
when
students
need
them.
If
students
meet
all
of
their
requirements

under
Fly
in
4
but
still
can’t
graduate
on
time,
Temple
will
pick
up
their
remaining
tuition
bill.
This
year’s
incredible
93
percent
participation
rate
in
Fly
in
4
follows
last
year’s

impressive
rate
of
88
percent.
These
students
are
making
a
commitment
that
will
limit
their
loan
debt
and
put
them
on
the
path
to
success
in
their
careers
and
lives.
As

I
have
discussed
with
many
of
you
in
the
last
year,
we
want
our
students
to
graduate
in
four
years
because
taking
longer
delays
their
entry
into
the
higher-‐paid,
college-‐educated
segment
of
the
work

force.
It
also
adds
significantly
to
their
debt:
Students
who
stay
in
college
for
more
than
four
years
often
have
to
take
out
riskier
loans
or—even
worse—use
their
credit
cards
to
pay
for
college

expenses.
In
recent
years,
Temple
has
made
tremendous
progress
in
raising
our
four-‐year
graduation
rate.
With
Fly
in
4,
we
expect
that
rate
to
rise
even
higher.
Fly
in
4
also
positions

us
as
an
innovative
leader
for
other
institutions
in
the
Commonwealth
and
the
nation
to
follow.
Research
that
improves
lives
Temple’s
research
is
focused
on
real-‐world
results.
For

example,
our
researchers
helped
lead
an
international
study
that
found
that
providing
HIV
patients
with
drug
therapy
immediately
after
they’re
diagnosed
significantly
lowers
their
risk
of
developing
AIDS.
That
discovery
follows
the
pioneering

announcement
last
year
that
our
researchers
successfully
eliminated
the
HIV
virus
from
cultured
human
cells—an
incredible
first
step
on
the
path
toward
a
permanent
cure
for
AIDS.
At
Temple,
we
produce

research
that
changes
peoples’
lives.
The
breakthroughs
and
technologies
we
produce
in
labs
are
being
transferred
to
the
marketplace
faster
than
ever
before.
And
our
research
is
especially
beneficial
right
here
in
the
Commonwealth.

Just
recently,
a
study
supported
by
Temple’s
Center
on
Regional
Politics
found
that
closing
Pennsylvania’s
student
achievement
gaps
could
generate
billions
of
dollars
in
state
impact.
Our
researchers
are
also
working

on
projects
to
improve
language
development
among
impoverished
youth;
reverse
the
effects
of
heart
failure;
and
develop
new
treatments
for
chronic
obstructive
pulmonary
disease
(COPD).
Temple’s
research
has
been
helped
tremendously

by
our
new
Science
Education
and
Research
Center
(SERC),
which
opened
last
fall.
This
state-‐of-‐the-‐art
facility
allows
faculty,
researchers
and
students
to
collaborate
across
disciplines
and
meld
learning
in
the
classroom
with
discoveries

in
the
lab.
SERC
was
funded
in
part
by
generous
support
from
the
Commonwealth.
I
cannot
begin
to
express
how
grateful
I
am
for
the
Commonwealth’s
investment
in
our
research
enterprise.

We
look
forward
to
providing
a
return
on
that
investment
by
producing
even
more
transformative
research
for
Commonwealth
residents.
SERC—and
all
of
the
life-‐
changing
research
produced
at
Temple—perfectly
demonstrates
the

impact
that
is
possible
when
the
Commonwealth
partners
with
Temple
University.
The
Temple
Option
Farid
Abdelrahman
is
a
Temple
freshman
who
plans
to
become
a
neurosurgeon
and

open
up
hospitals.
He
attended
public
school
in
Philadelphia,
graduated
high
school
with
a
3.88
GPA
and
participated
in
a
variety
of
extracurricular
activities.
But
he
did
not
do
as
well
on
his
SATs

as
he
had
hoped.
Students
like
Farid
are
why
we
created
the
Temple
Option,
an
alternative
admissions
path
for
students
who
show
great
potential
but
don’t
perform
well
on
standardized
tests.

With
the
Temple
Option,
students
can
apply
to
Temple
without
submitting
a
standardized
test
score,
such
as
the
SAT
or
ACT.
Students
who
do
perform
well
on
standardized
tests
are
encouraged
to
choose
the

traditional
route
and
supply
their
scores.
The
Temple
Option
is
our
response
to
the
growing
body
of
research
evidence
that
shows
high-‐school
GPA,
class
rank
and
“noncognitive”
factors
are
more
reliable
predictors

of
college
success.
If
students
choose
not
to
submit
test
scores,
they
must
answer
specially
designed,
self-‐reflective
short-‐answer
questions.
When
evaluated
by
trained
readers,
the
answers
to
these
questions
provide
evidence
of
noncognitive

motivational
and
developmental
traits
that
are
better
predictors
of
future
success
than
are
standardized
test
scores.
Temple
was
the
first
state-‐related
school
in
Pennsylvania
to
offer
such
an
admissions
path
for

talented
students.
But
we
are
hardly
alone.
Hundreds
of
other
colleges
and
universities
have
moved
to
test-‐optional
admissions
in
recent
years,
including
George
Washington
University,
Wake
Forest
University,
Brandeis
University,
Kansas
State
University
and

the
University
of
Arizona.
We
want
our
students
to
know
that
at
Temple,
they
are
more
than
a
test
score.
This
year,
about
18
percent
of
our
freshmen
enrolled
at
Temple

via
the
Temple
Option.
They
included
students
like
Farid,
who
can
go
on
to
change
the
world—thanks
to
this
new
admissions
path.
An
affordable,
high-‐value
institution
In

this
era
of
great
change
in
higher
education,
Temple
stands
for
accessibility,
maximum
affordability
and
excellence
of
many
kinds—all
at
once.
Many
colleges
see
those
factors
as
a
choice;
they
pick
just
one
to

emphasize.
We
see
them
as
inseparable.
That
is
the
unique
Temple
value
proposition.
Because
of
our
commitment
to
creating
value
for
the
Commonwealth,
we
have
kept
base
tuition
increases
to
an

average
of
2.4
percent
over
three
years.
That
is
an
unprecedented
effort
at
tuition
control
that
is
unlikely
to
be
found
at
many
other
schools—
public
or
private—
in
the
Commonwealth
or
the
nation.

We
have
also
taken
several
other
steps
to
help
our
students.
This
year,
we
increased
financial
aid
by
$6
million,
raising
the
total
amount
of
available
financial
aid
to
more
than

$100
million.
But
we
are
not
resting
on
our
laurels.
Recently,
Temple
engaged
Gallup,
Inc.,
the
well-‐known
polling
company,
to
conduct
a
survey
that
will
help
us
learn
more
about
how

our
alumni
are
doing
post-‐college.
This
survey
will
provide
invaluable
data
on
the
value
we
create
in
our
students’
lives
and
how
we
can
continue
to
benefit
students
for
years
to
come.

Conclusion
At
Temple,
our
mission
is
clear.
We
are
committed
to
transforming
lives
through
our
research;
growing
the
Commonwealth’s
economy;
and
providing
talented
and
motivated
students
of
all
backgrounds

with
access
to
a
high-‐quality
college
degree.
Because
of
our
unique
value
proposition,
it
should
be
clear
that
Temple
generates
value
for
the
Commonwealth
at
an
effective
cost.
I
am
proud

to
be
the
leader
of
one
of
Pennsylvania’s
great
urban
research
institutions.
If
there
is
anything
I
can
do
to
help
you
learn
more
about
Temple
University,
please
do
not
hesitate
to
contact
me

at
[email protected]
Thank
you
for
your
consideration,
Neil
D.
Theobald
President
Reading
for
Question
3
U.S.
News
ranking
categories,
subfactors,
and
weights
Category

Subfactors
U.S.
News
weighting
(%)
Peer
assessment
survey
Undergraduate
academic
reputation
High
school
counselor’s
rating
22.5
Acceptance
rate
High
school
standing
in
top
10%
Student

selectivity
Critical
reading
and
math
portions
of
the
SAT
and
the
composite
ACT
score
12.5
Faculty
compensation
Percent
faculty
with
top
terminal
degree
Percent
faculty
that

is
full-‐time
Student/faculty
ratio
Class
size
under
20
Faculty
resources
Class
size
over
50
20.0
Average
graduation
rate
Graduation
and
retention
rate
Average
freshman
retention

rate
22.5
Financial
resources
Financial
resources
per
student
10.0
Alumni
giving
Average
alumni
giving
rate
5.0
Graduation
rate
performance
Graduation
rate
performance
7.5

How
U.S.
News
Calculated
the
2016
Best
Colleges
Rankings
Here's
a
breakdown
of
the
key
college
data
that
go
into
the
annual
rankings.
Sept.
8,
2015
By
Robert
Morse,

Eric
Brooks
and
Matt
Mason
The
host
of
intangibles
that
makes
up
the
college
experience
can't
be
measured
by
a
series
of
data
points.
But
for
families
concerned
with
finding
the
best
academic

value
for
their
money,
the
U.S.
News
Best
Colleges
rankings
provide
an
excellent
starting
point
for
the
search.
They
allow
you
to
compare
at
a
glance
the
relative
quality
of
institutions.

The
measures,
their
weights
in
the
ranking
formula
and
an
explanation
of
each
follow.
Undergraduate
academic
reputation
(22.5
percent):
The
U.S.
News
ranking
formula
gives
significant
weight
to
the
opinions

of
those
in
a
position
to
judge
a
school's
undergraduate
academic
excellence.
The
academic
peer
assessment
survey
allows
top
academics
–
presidents,
provosts
and
deans
of
admissions
–
to
account
for
intangibles
at
peer

institutions,
such
as
faculty
dedication
to
teaching.
To
get
another
set
of
important
opinions
on
National
Universities
and
National
Liberal
Arts
Colleges,
we
also
surveyed
2,200
counselors
at
public
high
schools,

each
of
which
was
a
gold,
silver
or
bronze
medal
winner
in
a
recent
edition
of
the
U.S.
News
Best
High
Schools
rankings,
as
well
as
400
college
counselors
at
the
largest
independent
schools.

The
counselors
represent
nearly
every
state
and
the
District
of
Columbia.
Each
academic
and
counselor
surveyed
was
asked
to
rate
schools'
academic
programs
on
a
scale
from
1
(marginal)
to
5

(distinguished).
Those
who
didn't
know
enough
about
a
school
to
evaluate
it
fairly
were
asked
to
mark
"don't
know."
The
score
used
in
the
rankings
is
the
average
score
of
those
who

rated
the
school
on
the
5-‐
point
scale;
"don't
knows"
are
not
counted
as
part
of
the
average.
In
order
to
reduce
the
impact
of
strategic
voting
by
respondents,
we
eliminated
the
two
highest
and

two
lowest
scores
each
school
received
before
calculating
the
average
score.
The
academic
peer
assessment
score
in
this
year's
rankings
is
based
on
the
results
from
surveys
in
spring
2014
and

spring
2015.
Previously,
only
the
most
recent
year's
results
were
used.
The
results
from
the
three
most
recent
years
of
counselor
surveys,
from
spring
2013,
spring
2014
and
spring
2015,
were
averaged

to
compute
the
high
school
counselor
reputation
score.
This
was
done
to
increase
the
number
of
ratings
each
college
received
from
the
high
school
counselors
and
to
reduce
the
year-‐to-‐year
volatility
in
the
average

counselor
score.
Ipsos
Public
Affairs
collected
the
data
in
spring
2015.
Of
the
4,530
academics
who
were
sent
questionnaires,
40
percent
responded.
This
response
rate
is
down
very
slightly
from
the
42

percent
response
rate
to
the
surveys
conducted
in
spring
2014
and
spring
2013.
The
counselors'
one-‐year
response
rate
was
7
percent
for
the
spring
2015
surveys.
Retention
(22.5
percent):
The
higher
the

proportion
of
first-‐year
students
who
return
to
campus
for
sophomore
year
and
eventually
graduate,
the
better
a
school
is
apt
to
be
at
offering
the
classes
and
services
that
students
need
to
succeed.

This
measure
has
two
components:
six-‐year
graduation
rate
(80
percent
of
the
retention
score)
and
first-‐year
retention
rate
(20
percent).
The
graduation
rate
indicates
the
average
proportion
of
a
graduating
class
earning

a
degree
in
six
years
or
less;
we
consider
first-‐year
student
classes
that
started
from
fall
2005
through
fall
2008.
First-‐year
retention
indicates
the
average
proportion
of
first-‐year
students
who
entered
the
school
in

the
fall
of
2010
through
the
fall
of
2013
and
returned
the
following
fall.
Faculty
resources
(20
percent):
Research
shows
that
the
more
satisfied
students
are
about
their
contact
with
professors,
the

more
they
will
learn
and
the
more
likely
they
are
to
graduate.
We
use
six
factors
from
the
2014-‐2015
academic
year
to
assess
a
school's
commitment
to
instruction.
Class
size

has
two
components:
the
proportion
of
classes
with
fewer
than
20
students
(30
percent
of
the
faculty
resources
score)
and
the
proportion
with
50
or
more
students
(10
percent
of
the
score).

Faculty
salary
(35
percent)
is
the
average
faculty
pay,
plus
benefits,
during
the
2013-‐2014
and
2014-‐2015
academic
years,
adjusted
for
regional
differences
in
the
cost
of
living
using
indexes
from
the
consulting
firm

Runzheimer
International.
We
also
weigh
the
proportion
of
professors
with
the
highest
degree
in
their
fields
(15
percent),
the
student-‐faculty
ratio
(5
percent)
and
the
proportion
of
faculty
who
are
full
time
(5
percent).

Student
selectivity
(12.5
percent):
A
school's
academic
atmosphere
is
determined
in
part
by
the
abilities
and
ambitions
of
the
students.
This
measure
has
three
components.
We
factor
in
the

admissions
test
scores
for
all
enrollees
who
took
the
critical
reading
and
math
portions
of
the
SAT
and
the
composite
ACT
score
(65
percent
of
the
selectivity
score).
We
also
consider
the
proportion
of

enrolled
first-‐year
students
at
National
Universities
and
National
Liberal
Arts
Colleges
who
graduated
in
the
top
10
percent
of
their
high
school
classes
or
the
proportion
of
enrolled
first-‐year
students
at
Regional
Universities

and
Regional
Colleges
who
graduated
in
the
top
quarter
of
their
classes
(25
percent).
The
third
component
is
the
acceptance
rate,
or
the
ratio
of
students
admitted
to
applicants
(10
percent).

The
data
are
all
for
the
fall
2014
entering
class.
While
the
ranking
calculation
takes
account
of
both
the
SAT
and
ACT
scores
of
all
entering
students,
the
ranking
tables
on
usnews.com
display
the

score
range
for
whichever
test
was
taken
by
most
students.
We
use
footnotes
on
usnews.com
to
indicate
schools
that
did
not
report
to
U.S.
News
the
fall
2014
SAT
and
ACT
scores
for

all
first-‐time,
first-‐year,
degree-‐seeking
students
for
whom
the
schools
had
data.
Schools
sometimes
fail
to
report
SAT
and
ACT
scores
for
students
in
these
specific
categories:
athletes,
international
students,
minority
students,
legacies,
those
admitted

by
special
arrangement
and
those
who
started
in
the
summer
of
2014.
We
also
use
footnotes
to
indicate
schools
that
declined
to
tell
U.S.
News
whether
all
students
with
SAT
and
ACT
test

scores
were
represented.
For
schools
that
did
not
report
all
scores
or
that
declined
to
say
whether
all
scores
were
reported,
we
reduced
the
value
of
their
SAT
and
ACT
scores

in
the
Best
Colleges
ranking
model.
This
practice
is
not
new;
since
the
1997
rankings,
we
have
discounted
the
value
of
such
schools'
reported
scores
in
the
ranking
model,
because
the
effect
of
leaving

students
out
could
be
that
lower
scores
are
omitted.
If
a
school
told
U.S.
News
that
it
included
all
students
with
scores
in
its
reported
SAT
and
ACT
scores,
then
those
scores
were
counted

fully
in
the
rankings
and
were
not
footnoted.
If
less
than
75
percent
of
the
fall
2014
entering
class
submitted
SAT
and
ACT
scores,
their
test
scores
were
discounted
in
the
ranking

calculations.
This
policy
was
also
used
in
the
2015
edition
of
the
rankings.
Financial
resources
(10
percent):
Generous
per-‐student
spending
indicates
that
a
college
can
offer
a
wide
variety
of
programs
and

services.
U.S.
News
measures
financial
resources
by
using
the
average
spending
per
student
on
instruction,
research,
student
services
and
related
educational
expenditures
in
the
2013
and
2014
fiscal
years.
Spending
on

sports,
dorms
and
hospitals
doesn't
count.
Graduation
rate
performance
(7.5
percent):
This
indicator
of
added
value
compares
expected
graduation
rates
with
actual
ones.
It
shows
the
effect
of
the
college's

programs
and
policies
on
the
graduation
rate
of
students
after
controlling
for
spending
and
student
characteristics,
such
as
test
scores
and
the
proportion
receiving
Pell
Grants.
We
measure
the
difference
between
a
school's

six-‐year
graduation
rate
for
the
class
that
entered
in
2008
and
the
rate
we
predicted
for
the
class.
If
the
school's
actual
graduation
rate
for
the
2008
entering
class
is
higher
than
the

rate
U.S.
News
predicted
for
that
same
class,
then
the
college
is
enhancing
achievement,
or
overperforming.
If
a
school's
actual
graduation
rate
is
lower
than
the
U.S.
News
prediction,
then
it
is
underperforming.

Alumni
giving
rate
(5
percent):
This
reflects
the
average
percentage
of
living
alumni
with
bachelor's
degrees
who
gave
to
their
school
during
2012-‐2013
and
2013-‐2014,
which
is
an
indirect
measure
of
student

satisfaction.
To
arrive
at
a
school's
rank,
we
first
calculated
the
weighted
sum
of
its
standardized
scores.
The
final
scores
were
rescaled
so
that
the
top
school
in
each
category
received
a
value

of
100,
and
the
other
schools'
weighted
scores
were
calculated
as
a
proportion
of
that
top
score.
Final
scores
were
rounded
to
the
nearest
whole
number
and
ranked
in
descending
order.

Readings
for
Question
4
Memo
from
Yahoo
CEO
Carol
Bartz
on
Dec.
14,
2010:
Yahoos,
I
want
to
share
some
tough
news
with
you.
Today,
we
began
notifying

some
Yahoos
that
they
will
lose
their
jobs.
Most
of
the
reductions
will
come
from
the
Products
org
and,
when
completed,
will
affect
about
4%
of
the
company.
I
know
this
has

been
rumored
for
some
time.
It’s
disappointing
when
things
like
this
leak,
and
it
certainly
doesn’t
make
it
any
easier
for
anyone
involved.
This
was
a
tough
call,
but
a
necessary
one.
We
need

to
make
these
changes
now
to
ensure
that
Products
is
structured
and
running
the
way
we
want
as
2011
begins.
And
that
means
we
need
fewer
Yahoos
in
some
areas,
and
different
types
of

Yahoos
in
others.
There
are
several
reasons
for
this.
First,
we’ve
found
a
lot
of
duplication
in
work
between
Products
and
the
regions.
Second,
it’s
no
secret
that
we’re
cutting
investment
in

underperforming
and
non-‐core
products
so
we
can
focus
on
our
strengths
(like
email,
the
homepage,
search,
mobile,
advertising,
content
and
more).
And
lastly,
we
need
to
get
the
Products
cost-‐structure
in
order
so
it

aligns
with
our
development
plans
for
next
year
and
beyond.
You’ve
heard
me
say
before
that
I
didn’t
come
to
cut
Yahoo!
to
greatness.
That’s
still
true.
This
decision
is
about
more

than
cost
savings.
The
changes
are
meant
to
get
us
into
a
position
so
we
can
invest
more
in
the
kind
of
products
and
technology
we
know
we
need
to
be
successful.
The
process

that
begins
today
–
along
with
Blake’s
past
org
changes
and
new
Products
operational
plan
–
helps
to
get
us
there.
It’s
never
easy
to
say
goodbye
to
Yahoos
we
know
and
work

with,
especially
before
the
holidays.
Please
know
that
we’re
helping
those
affected
with
severance
pay
and
benefits,
plus
services
to
help
them
find
other
jobs.
One
last
thing
before
I
go:
It’s

important
to
put
this
in
perspective,
and
remember
that
we’re
making
good
progress
on
our
turnaround.
Margins
have
expanded.
Revenue
growth
has
stabilized
after
a
long
period
of
decelerating
trends.
Product
rollouts
are
accelerating

as
we
modernize
our
infrastructure.
Our
Search
alliance
with
Microsoft
continues
on
schedule,
and
more.
We’ve
got
a
lot
of
potential,
but
there
is
still
a
lot
of
work
to
be
done.

Let’s
stay
focused
and
not
lose
sight
of
that.
Carol
_____________________________________________________
________________________
Warner
Bros.
CEO
Kevin
Tsujihara’s
memo
to
staff
in

September
2014
There
is
no
easy
way
to
deliver
today’s
message.
As
you
know,
we
at
Warner
Bros.
have
committed
to
reducing
costs
across
the
company
in
order
to
meet
our
long-‐term
financial

targets,
and
that
includes
cutting
staff.
These
changes
are
challenging,
but
we
believe
they
will
allow
us
to
reallocate
resources
and
position
the
company
for
growth
and
stability
in
the
years
ahead.

We’ve
now
completed
much
of
our
company-‐wide
review,
and
most
business
groups
will
be
announcing
staff
changes
this
week,
beginning
today.
However,
some
groups,
including
Finance,
MIS
and
Technical
Operations,
have
been
engaged
in

more
complex
reorganizations;
they
will
make
some
staff
changes
now,
with
most
coming
in
the
first
quarter
of
next
year.
Similarly,
international
territories
will
proceed
according
to
local
policies
and
protocol,
and
most

of
their
changes
will
be
announced
in
the
early
part
of
next
year.
I
know
that
every
employee
around
the
world
is
a
part
of
Warner
Bros.’
success,
and
it’s
difficult
to
lose

colleagues
who
have
helped
make
the
Studio
the
global
industry
leader
it
is
today.
As
always,
we
are
committed
to
taking
care
of
our
employees,
and
we
will
be
as
generous
as
possible
with

those
who
are
impacted
by
these
cuts.
These
are
difficult
decisions,
and
we
don’t
take
them
lightly.
We
examined
every
aspect
of
our
businesses
to
ensure
that
we
were
restructuring
in
a
way

that
would
allow
us
to
minimize
the
impact
on
our
employees,
while
continuing
to
adapt
to
the
changing
global
marketplace.
With
your
continued
help
and
support,
I
am
confident
that
Warner
Bros.
will
remain

the
best
studio
in
the
world,
while
preserving
the
culture
that
has
made
this
company
so
special.
_____________________________________________________
________________________
EA
executive
chairperson
Larry
Probst,
April
2013
As
we
begin
the

new
fiscal
year,
I
want
to
provide
you
with
a
brief
update
on
some
important
changes
to
our
organization.
As
Executive
Chairman,
my
focus
is
to
ensure
EA
is
delivering
high
quality
games
and

services
to
our
consumers,
while
helping
the
executive
team
develop
a
FY14
operating
plan
that
drives
growth,
rationalizes
headcount
and
controls
costs.
In
recent
weeks,
the
executive
team
has
been
tasked
with
evaluating

every
area
of
our
business
to
establish
a
clear
set
of
priorities,
and
a
more
efficient
organizational
structure.
This
process
has
led
to
some
difficult
decisions
about
the
number
of
people
and
locations
needed

to
achieve
our
goals.
The
workforce
reductions
which
we
communicated
in
the
last
two
weeks
represent
the
majority
of
our
planned
personnel
actions.
We
are
extremely
grateful
for
the
contributions
made

by
each
of
these
individuals
–
they
will
be
missed
by
their
colleagues
and
friends
at
EA.
We
are
also
taking
action
to
streamline
our
organization,
including
changes
in
two
key
areas:
• Core

marketing
functions
have
been
consolidated
under
our
COO,
Peter
Moore.
The
combined
group
will
bring
together
our
Label
marketing
teams,
Global
Acquisition
Marketing
and
Marketing
Analytics
into
one
multi-‐talented
team
under
Todd
Sitrin’s

leadership.
The
development
and
marketing
teams
will
continue
to
work
as
cohesive
units,
driving
clear
and
consistent
messaging
and
consumer
engagement
for
each
of
our
franchises.
• Origin
will

move
into
Frank
Gibeau’s
Labels
organization.
Andrew
Wilson
will
take
on
the
leadership
of
Origin,
working
with
CJ
Prober
and
the
team
to
create
more
value
and
an
enhanced
entertainment
experience
for
our
consumers.

Change
is
sometimes
difficult,
but
essential.
The
adjustments
we
are
making
will
put
us
in
the
best
position
to
build
great
games
and
services,
deliver
them
more
efficiently
to
consumers,
and
demonstrate

to
players
around
the
world
why
they
should
spend
their
time
with
us.
EA
is
a
great
company,
with
talented
and
hard-‐working
teams,
a
strong
portfolio
of
products
and
an
extremely
bright
future.

Thank
you
all
for
your
dedication
and
commitment
to
our
long
term
success!
Reading
for
Question
5
The
New
Cheating
Economy
The
Chronicle
of

Higher
Education
By
Brad
Wolverton
August
28,
2016
Fifteen
credits
were
all
he
needed.
That’s
what
the
school
district
in
California
where
Adam
Sambrano
works

as
a
career-‐guidance
specialist
required
for
a
bump
in
pay.
But
when
he
saw
the
syllabus
for
a
graduate
course
he’d
enrolled
in
last
year
at
Arizona
State
University,
he
knew
he
was
in

trouble.
Among
the
assignments
was
a
19-‐page
paper,
longer
than
anything
he’d
ever
written.
The
idea
of
that
much
research
worried
Mr.
Sambrano,
who
also
spends
time
serving
in
the
Army
National

Guard.
Before
the
class
started,
he
went
on
Craigslist
and
enlisted
the
service
of
a
professional
cheater.
For
$1,000
—
less
than
the
monthly
housing
allowance
he
was
receiving
through
the
GI
Bill,

he
says
—
Mr.
Sambrano
hired
a
stranger
to
take
his
entire
course.
He
transferred
$500
upfront,
"From
Adam
for
ASU,"
according
to
a
receipt
obtained
by
The
Chronicle.
Then
he
just

waited
for
the
cheater
to
do
his
work.
On
any
given
day,
thousands
of
students
go
online
seeking
academic
relief.
They
are
first-‐years
and
transfers
overwhelmed
by
the
curriculum,
international
students
with
poor

English
skills,
lazy
undergrads
with
easy
access
to
a
credit
card.
They
are
nurses,
teachers,
and
government
workers
too
busy
to
pursue
the
advanced
degrees
they’ve
decided
they
need.
The
Chronicle
spoke

with
people
who
run
cheating
companies
and
those
who
do
the
cheating.
The
demand
has
been
around
for
decades.
But
the
industry
is
in
rapid
transition.
Just
as
higher
education
is
changing,
embracing

a
revolution
in
online
learning,
the
cheating
business
is
transforming
as
well,
finding
new
and
more
insidious
ways
to
undermine
academic
integrity.
A
decade
ago,
cheating
consisted
largely
of
students’
buying
papers

off
the
internet.
That’s
still
where
much
of
the
money
is.
But
in
recent
years,
a
new
underground
economy
has
emerged,
offering
any
academic
service
a
student
could
want.
Now
it’s
not
just
a

paper
or
one-‐off
assignment.
It’s
the
quiz
next
week,
the
assignment
after
that,
the
answers
served
up
on
the
final.
Increasingly,
it’s
the
whole
class.
And
if
students
are
paying
someone
to
take
one

course,
what’s
stopping
them
from
buying
their
entire
degree?
The
whole-‐class
market
is
maturing
fast.
More
than
a
dozen
websites
now
specialize
in
taking
entire
online
courses,
including
BoostMyGrade.com,
OnlineClassHelp.com,
and

TakeYourClass.com.
One
of
them,
NoNeedtoStudy.com,
advertises
that
it
has
completed
courses
for
more
than
11,000
students
at
such
colleges
as
Duke,
Michigan
State,
even
Harvard.
As
cheating
companies
expand
their

reach,
colleges
have
little
incentive
to
slow
their
growth.
There’s
no
money
in
catching
the
cheaters.
But
there’s
a
lot
of
money
in
upping
enrollment.
Two
professors
at
Western
Carolina
University
were
so

concerned
about
the
encroachment
of
cheating
that
they
set
up
a
fake
online
class
to
learn
more
about
the
industry’s
tactics,
and
see
what
they
could
detect.
About
a
dozen
students
agreed

to
enroll
in
the
introductory
psychology
course,
including
John
Baley,
then
a
graduate
student
in
clinical
psychology.
They
were
provided
with
fake
names,
email
addresses,
and
ID
numbers,
plus
a
pot
of
money
for

cheating
services.
Half
were
asked
to
cheat,
and
they
did
so
in
a
variety
of
ways,
collaborating
inappropriately
with
classmates,
buying
papers,
and
paying
others
to
take
tests.
Mr.
Baley
went
looking

for
a
company
to
take
the
whole
class
for
him.
He
typed
a
few
words
into
his
browser
—
"cheat
for
me
in
my
online
class"
—
and
turned
up
dozens
of
results.
Many

sites
seemed
untrustworthy:
Their
content
was
misspelled
or
grammatically
incorrect,
or
their
customer-‐service
reps
had
trouble
with
basic
English.
Some
requested
confidential
banking
information
or
asked
him
to
enter
it
into
a
website
with

no
security
protection.
But
one
company
impressed
him.
Its
representatives
responded
promptly,
explained
how
their
colleagues
would
complete
the
course,
and
guaranteed
a
B
or
better
—
or
his
money
back.
He

agreed
to
pay
the
company
$900,
half
upfront,
and
handed
over
his
course
username
and
password.
Over
the
next
10
weeks,
the
company,
which
Mr.
Baley
declined
to
name,
to
protect
any

further
research,
passed
him
from
the
customer-‐service
staff
to
the
management
team
to
the
person
who
took
his
course.
At
each
stage,
he
says,
he
dealt
with
people
who
were
efficient,
responsive,
and
reliable.

In
fact,
the
cheaters
performed
better
than
he
thought
they
would.
They
completed
every
assignment
without
prompting,
at
one
point
providing
a
written
script
for
a
video
presentation
with
less
than
36
hours’
notice.

The
instructors,
Alvin
Malesky,
an
associate
professor
of
psychology,
and
Robert
Crow,
an
assistant
professor
of
educational
research,
used
Turnitin
and
Google
to
check
students’
work
for
plagiarism
and
monitored
them
to

see
if
groups
were
taking
exams
at
the
same
time.
The
professors
caught
several
students
plagiarizing
material.
But
they
didn’t
spot
the
paid
test
takers,
purchased
papers,
or
coordinated
assignments.
And
they
had

no
clue
that
a
person
in
New
York
to
whom
Mr.
Baley
had
mailed
his
books
was
behind
the
A’s
they
were
giving.
Even
when
professors
knew
that
students
were
cheating,
and
were

trying
to
catch
them,
they
came
up
short.
Mr.
Baley’s
only
frustration
was
with
the
barrage
of
marketing
he
got.
His
Facebook
and
Instagram
feeds
were
saturated
with
ads
for
cheating
companies,

he
says.
That
didn’t
let
up
for
months.
Two
years
after
the
company
took
his
class,
its
representatives
are
still
trying
to
enlist
him
to
refer
other
students
as
clients.

Like
any
underground
industry,
academic
cheating
has
its
share
of
sloppy
opportunists
and
savvy
operators.
Most
work
in
the
shadows.
Click
on
a
website
that
offers
academic
work
for
hire,
and
you’ll

probably
find
little
information
about
the
people
or
company
behind
it.
The
owners
often
use
aliases
and
mislead
prospective
customers
with
fake
addresses
and
exaggerated
claims.
No
Need
to
Study
LLC
lists

its
corporate
address
as
19
East
52nd
Street,
in
New
York,,
but
complaints
filed
with
the
Better
Business
Bureau
say
that
address
does
not
exist.
A
representative
for
the
company
said
in
an
email

that
it
is
a
virtual
business
offering
services
exclusively
online
and
does
not
have
an
office
open
to
the
public.
A
dissertation-‐writing
service
that
claims
to
be
based
in
Chicago
seems
to
operate
out

of
Pakistan.
"In
order
to
create
a
best
academic
assignment
that
rank
#1
among
other
assignments,"
its
website
says,
"then
you
will
seek
for
a
dedicated
and
experienced
writer’s
help."
Even
more-‐established

companies
can
be
difficult
to
track
down.
The
headquarters
of
one,
Student
Network
Resources,
appears
to
be
in
the
middle
of
a
New
Jersey
cornfield.
A
half-‐mile
away,
in
a
generic
strip
mall,
it

maintains
a
post-‐office
box
in
a
packing-‐and-‐shipping
store.
The
owner
of
the
store
says
he
forwards
the
mail
to
Florida.
It
goes
to
the
company’s
founder
and
president,
Mark
DeGaeta.
Mr.
DeGaeta

got
the
idea
for
Student
Network
Resources
in
the
late
1990s,
when
he
was
still
in
high
school,
he
says
in
an
email
to
The
Chronicle.
Over
the
years,
he
has
registered
more
than
a

dozen
domains,
including
PaperDue.com
and
HelpMyEssay.com,
which
funnel
work
to
his
company,
whose
name
is
relatively
unknown.
When
students
place
a
request
through
one
of
the
sites,
they
enter
their
name,
email

address,
and
as
much
information
about
the
assignment
as
possible,
including
due
date
and
level
(undergraduate,
master’s,
or
doctoral).
That
information
goes
into
Student
Network’s
system,
where
a
price
is
set
based
on

the
difficulty
of
the
assignment.
The
job
is
posted
to
a
private
board
for
writers,
stripped
of
any
personal
details
about
the
student.
From
there,
a
willing
writer
picks
up
the
order
and
corresponds

with
the
client
through
a
private
channel
in
which
students
often
disclose
personal
information
about
themselves
and
their
courses.
Then
the
writer
delivers
the
completed
assignment.
Mr.
DeGaeta
is
mum
about
the

revenue
he
has
brought
in,
but
the
business
appears
to
be
lucrative.
Two
longtime
writers
say
they’ve
earned
as
much
as
$10,000
a
month.
At
peak
times,
the
company
says
on
its
website,
most

of
its
150
writers
earn
more
than
$1,800
a
week.
Writers
typically
pocket
half
the
price
of
an
order;
the
company
gets
the
rest.
If
those
numbers
are
accurate,
annual
revenue
for
Student
Network

Resources
would
be
in
the
millions.
The
company
has
only
two
employees.
The
founder
has
made
a
good
living,
according
to
public
records.
He
owns
an
apartment
in
a
tony
neighborhood
of

New
York,
near
the
United
Nations
building,
and
seems
to
reside
near
Miami
Beach.
But
his
business
has
fallen
off
in
recent
years,
he
says,
as
the
industry
has
expanded
overseas.

The
company
emphatically
denies
that
it
is
a
cheating
service.
It
says
it
tells
customers
that
they
may
not
use
its
material
for
academic
credit
—
and
requires
them
to
acknowledge
as
much

before
purchasing
papers,
during
the
research
process,
and
before
receiving
the
work.
"We
vehemently
protect
our
copyright,"
Mr.
DeGaeta
said
in
a
written
statement.
"If
the
customer
decides
to
use
our
material
as
a

reference
they
must
cite
Student
Network
Resources
Inc."
Several
current
and
former
writers
told
The
Chronicle
that
they
had
believed
that.
Amelia
Albanese,
a
former
community-‐college
tutor
who
worked
for
the
company
in

2010,
says
she
thought
she
was
writing
sample
papers
for
tutors
and
teachers.
When
she
realized
she
was
doing
students’
work,
she
quit.
"I
worked
at
a
college,"
she
says,
"and
if

the
students
I
worked
with
had
cheated,
I
would
have
been
furious."
The
company’s
business
depends
on
covering
its
tracks.
A
memo
it
sent
to
writers
last
year
gives
step-‐by-‐step
instructions
for

wiping
the
metadata
from
documents
they
produce.
"Every
document
that
you
submit
must
have
100%
blank
‘Summary’
properties,"
the
memo
says.
"You
can
make
the
‘Author’
field
(and
other
fields)
blank
by
default

for
all
new
documents
by
going
to
‘Preferences’
-‐-‐>
‘User
Information’
and
replacing
the
content
of
the
‘First:’
and
‘Last:’
fields
with
a
blank
space."
According
to
Mr.
DeGaeta,
the
memo
was

aimed
at
preventing
writers
from
poaching
clients.
But
if
there’s
no
trace
of
a
cheater
on
a
document,
a
college
has
no
way
of
knowing
—
or
if
an
instructor
suspects
something,
no
proof

—
that
the
student
didn’t
do
the
work.
Cheating
has
become
second
nature
to
many
students.
In
studies,
more
than
two-‐thirds
of
college
students
say
they’ve
cheated
on
an
assignment.
As
many
as

half
say
they’d
be
willing
to
purchase
one.
To
them,
higher
education
is
just
another
transaction,
less
about
learning
than
about
obtaining
a
credential.
The
market,
which
includes
hundreds
of
websites
and

apps,
offers
a
slippery
slope
of
options.
Students
looking
for
class
notes
and
sample
tests
can
find
years’
worth
on
Koofers.com,
which
archives
exams
from
dozens
of
colleges.
And
a
growing
number
of
companies,

including
Course
Hero
and
Chegg,
offer
online
tutoring
that
attempts
to
stay
above
the
fray
(one
expert
calls
such
services
a
"gateway
drug").
Many
students
turn
to
websites
like
Yahoo
Answers
or

Reddit
to
find
solutions
to
homework
problems.
And
every
month,
hundreds
of
students
put
assignments
up
for
bid
on
Freelancer.com
and
Upwork,
where
they
might
get
a
paper
written
for
the
cost
of
a

few
lattes.
It’s
not
uncommon
for
students
to
disclose
personal
details
in
their
orders,
which
anyone
online
can
see.
This
spring
a
student
from
the
University
of
North
Carolina
at
Charlotte
included
an

attachment
to
his
Upwork
order
that
identified
his
institution
and
the
introductory
philosophy
class
he
was
looking
for
help
in.
A
few
days
later,
a
Ph.D.
candidate
in
Britain
went
on
the
same

site
to
solicit
help
with
his
dissertation.
A
document
he
attached
to
his
order
included
his
name
and
his
adviser’s.
Some
of
the
most
explicit
exchanges
happen
on
Craigslist,
which
has
become
a

hub
of
cheating
activity.
Over
two
days
in
April,
The
Chronicle
analyzed
Craigslist
posts
in
seven
cities
in
which
a
cheater
or
cheating
service
offered
to
complete
whole
courses
for
students.

The
search
turned
up
more
than
200
ads.
In
many
cases,
the
same
ads
ran
in
multiple
cities,
suggesting
a
coordinated
marketing
effort.
Craigslist
posters
appealed
to
students
by
acknowledging
how
little

time
they
had
for
busywork.
"Online
classes
are
a
pain
in
the
ass,"
said
one
Chicago-‐area
ad.
Others
outright
asked
students
to
hand
over
their
online
credentials.
"You
can
trust
us
with
your
login

and
password
information,"
said
a
Phoenix
post.
"We
will
do
every
section
of
your
online
class
including
discussion
boards,
tests,
assignments,
and
quizzes."
The
Chronicle
exchanged
messages
with
several
Craigslist
posters
to

inquire
about
the
cost
of
their
service
and
how
it
worked.
One
person
who
has
posted
regularly
in
the
Los
Angeles
area
said
he
had
been
in
business
for
10
years
and
had
a

staff
of
"over
20
experts."
His
prices,
he
said,
depended
on
the
number
of
hours
it
would
take
to
complete
a
class,
not
how
well
a
student
wanted
to
do.
"We
always

get
A’s
and
B’s,"
he
said
in
a
text
message.
"Calculation
based
classes
are
$750.
All
others
are
$600.
Anyone
quoting
different
is
not
a
pro
and
doesn’t
know
what
they
are
doing.
Cheap

quotes
=
F
grades.
"Oh,"
he
added,
"and
you
can
split
up
the
payments."
Another
poster
said
his
prices
depended
on
the
institution.
"A
course
from
Penn
State
World
Campus
requires

more
effort
than
a
course
from
Post
University,"
he
said
in
an
email.
"Previously,
I
completed
a
remedial
English
course
for
a
client
at
Kaplan
University.
This
person
requested
a
‘B’
for
$90/week
for

eight
weeks.
Another
client
at
a
Cal
State
University
required
an
‘A’
in
a
four
week
upper
division
Asian
Studies
course
for
$300/week."
The
most
common
way
students
cheat
is
through
a
simple

web
search
—
typing,
for
example,
"essay,"
"essay
help,"
or
"write
my
essay."
As
many
as
half
of
the
visits
to
some
sites
used
for
cheating
come
through
search
engines,
The
Chronicle
found.

The
companies
that
have
made
the
biggest
strides
in
the
business
have
mastered
the
search
game.
Search-‐engine
optimization
efforts
have
helped
Ultius,
founded
in
2011,
grow
fast.
The
Delaware-‐based
company,
with
a

call
center
in
Las
Vegas,
has
hired
more
than
40
employees,
including
engineers
and
customer-‐service
representatives,
according
to
job
ads.
It
has
contracted
with
more
than
1,400
writers.
That
growth
has
coincided

with
a
surge
in
traffic.
Over
a
recent
three-‐month
stretch,
the
site
drew
about
520,000
visits,
according
to
a
Chronicle
analysis
of
data
compiled
by
SimilarWeb.
Thirty
to
40
percent
of
Ultius’s
traffic
comes

from
students’
web
searches,
according
to
estimates
on
Alexa,
which
measures
internet
usage.
Ultius
is
the
No.
1
or
No.
2
search
result
that
pops
up
when
someone
Googles
"buy
a
term
paper,"
"buy

a
research
paper,"
or
about
a
dozen
other
phrases
that
indicate
an
intent
to
purchase
a
completed
assignment,
according
to
a
Chronicle
analysis
of
search
data
compiled
by
Spyfu,
a
search-‐engine
optimization
tool.

Boban
Dedovic,
27,
the
company’s
chairman,
helped
start
it
after
three
semesters
as
a
student
at
the
University
of
Maryland
at
College
Park,
during
which
he
worked
as
a
tutor.
To
him,
Ultius

is
a
technology
company
that
connects
customers
to
writers,
he
says
via
email.
He
denies
that
Ultius
is
part
of
the
cheating
industry,
referring
to
it
as
a
"doc
prep
service."
In

a
written
statement,
the
company
says
it
works
hard
to
ensure
that
its
customers
don’t
misuse
its
services,
informing
them
of
its
fair-‐use
policy
(that
its
work
is
meant
for
reference
only
and

must
be
properly
cited)
at
least
three
times
and
requiring
them
to
accept
it.
When
the
company
suspects
a
problem,
it
conducts
an
investigation,
drafts
an
internal
report,
and,
if
it
finds
a
violation,

disables
the
customer’s
account.
However,
the
company
says,
it
cannot
individually
monitor
every
one
of
its
orders.
Ultius
protects
its
business
by
keeping
those
orders
private.
When
a
student
posts
an
assignment

on
Craigslist
or
other
sites,
looking
for
someone
to
pick
it
up,
Google
indexes
that
text,
making
it
visible
in
searches.
But
the
customer
experience
at
Ultius
occurs
behind
a
wall,
in
the
same

way
a
bank
keeps
its
clients’
information
private.
Because
Google
can’t
create
a
record
of
those
pages,
professors
wouldn’t
be
able
to
find
them.
The
company’s
dealings
with
one
Ph.D.
candidate
illustrate
the

increasingly
complex
work
that
students
are
outsourcing,
while
faculty
members
remain
in
the
dark.
Last
year,
Ultius
contracted
with
a
student
who
described
herself
as
a
"single
active
duty
parent"
to
help
write
a

concept
paper
for
her
doctoral
program,
records
show.
The
job
included
revisions
requested
by
the
chair
of
her
dissertation
committee.
The
Ph.D.
student
requested
that
Ultius
complete
a
literature
review
and
produce

a
theoretical
framework
for
her
dissertation.
The
order
required
the
company
to
find
data
on
migration
patterns
and
economic
growth
in
Jamaica,
and
to
apply
advanced
economic
theory.
The
company
did
the
work,

but
the
customer
was
so
displeased
with
it
that
she
filed
a
complaint
with
the
Better
Business
Bureau.
Ultius
considers
customer
service
a
top
priority,
and
despite
19
complaints
in
the
past
three

years,
mainly
minor
beefs
over
papers
and
assignments,
it
maintains
an
A+
rating
from
the
BBB.
The
Ph.D.
student
threatened
to
go
public
with
her
story,
but
more
often
it’s
the
paid
cheaters

who
make
threats.
After
Mr.
Sambrano,
the
high-‐school
guidance
specialist,
transferred
$500
to
have
the
whole
course
at
Arizona
State
done
for
him,
he
stopped
hearing
from
his
Craigslist
cheater
and
filed
a

PayPal
claim
against
him.
The
cheater
advised
him
to
drop
the
claim
or
he’d
hand
over
evidence
of
the
arrangement
to
the
university.
Mr.
Sambrano,
afraid
he’d
be
expelled,
dropped
the
charge.
He
says

he
ended
up
doing
the
class
himself.
In
another
case,
if
not
for
a
cheater
turning
a
student
in,
a
college
may
never
have
known
that
the
student
was
paying
someone
else
to

log
in
to
the
course
and
complete
the
work.
In
May
an
undergraduate
at
Colorado
State
University-‐Global
Campus,
dissatisfied
with
the
quality
of
the
work
done
for
him,
filed
a
PayPal
claim.
Angered,
the

cheater
gave
the
student’s
name
to
the
instructor,
along
with
text
messages,
screen
shots
of
the
student’s
portal,
and
payment
records
detailing
how
the
student
had
arranged
to
have
the
entire
course
done
for

him,
says
Jon
M.
Bellum,
the
provost.
CSU-‐Global,
an
online
institution
with
about
15,000
students,
had
its
information-‐technology
department
look
at
the
IP
addresses
used
for
the
student’s
coursework
and
found
more

than
one.
Mr.
Bellum
would
not
disclose
the
penalty
the
student
faced,
citing
privacy
law,
but
says
such
abuses
can
result
in
expulsion.
Often,
though,
the
university
is
not
aware

of
the
violation.
Colleges
have
tried
technology
to
combat
cheating.
Several
thousand
institutions
around
the
world
use
the
anti-‐plagiarism
software
Turnitin,
which
says
it
has
a
database
of
some
600
million
papers.

But
a
recent
study
found
that
custom
work
is
"virtually
undetectable."
Coursera,
an
online
education
platform
employed
by
dozens
of
prominent
colleges,
uses
webcams
and
"keyboard
dynamics,"
which
attempt
to
verify
students’
identities

on
the
basis
of
their
typing
patterns.
But
that
doesn’t
do
much
good
if
the
cheater
is
always
typing.
CSU-‐Global
says
it
spends
about
$60,000
a
year
administering
random
identity
checks
on
its

students.
The
tests
require
them
to
provide
answers
to
personal
questions
like
what
banks
service
their
loans
or
what
streets
they’ve
lived
on.
If
they
don’t
answer
accurately,
they
can’t
log
in
to

their
classes.
About
2
percent
of
identity
checks
result
in
students’
getting
locked
out
of
the
CSU
system.
Other
institutions
have
blocked
access
to
sites
that
help
students
cheat.
Victor
Valley
College,
in

California,
has
prevented
anyone
on
a
campus
computer
from
accessing
the
website
of
Student
Network
Resources.
But
students
can
turn
to
their
own
laptops
or
other
devices.
The
biggest
key
to
fighting

the
problem
is
faculty
engagement,
says
Tricia
Bertram
Gallant,
a
former
president
of
the
International
Center
for
Academic
Integrity.
She
often
speaks
with
professors
about
the
business,
she
says,
and
finds
them
surprised
that

someone
else
could
be
doing
students’
work.
"When
I
tell
them
about
contract
cheating,
they’re
shocked,"
she
says.
"They
basically
say,
‘What?
That
goes
on?’ "
Others
are
in
denial
that

it
could
happen
in
their
classes.
And
even
those
who
know
about
it
and
want
to
stop
it
say
they’re
too
busy,
or
feel
that
the
fight
is
futile,
with
new
cheating
companies
popping

up
all
the
time.
But
some
professors
are
catching
on.
Last
fall,
Megan
Elwood
Madden,
an
associate
professor
in
the
School
of
Geology
and
Geophysics
at
the
University
of
Oklahoma,
spotted
a
suspicious

passage
in
a
student’s
paper.
She
ran
it
through
Turnitin,
finding
several
plagiarized
sources
but
no
match
for
the
bulk
of
the
text.
So
she
Googled
the
student’s
research
topic
and
found
the

assignment
posted
on
Course
Hero
with
the
student’s
request
for
help.
A
web
search
did
not
turn
up
the
text
the
student
had
handed
in,
because
it
was
hidden
in
Course
Hero’s
system.

But
once
Ms.
Elwood
Madden
had
logged
in
to
the
site,
she
could
see
communication
between
the
student
and
a
contractor
suggesting
that
the
student
had
had
the
work
completed
for
him,
the
professor

said
in
an
email.
She
discovered
that
the
student
had
used
Course
Hero
to
arrange
work
in
at
least
four
other
classes
as
well.
The
revelations
led
the
university
to
expel
the
student.

Such
stories
are
rare,
academic-‐integrity
officers
say,
because
there
are
so
few
would-‐be
enforcers
in
pursuit.
After
The
Chronicle
published
an
article
about
the
Western
Carolina
experiment,
two
federal

law-‐enforcement
officials
contacted
the
professors,
eager
to
hear
more
about
the
business.
William
Josephson,
a
former
assistant
attorney
general
in
New
York
who
has
investigated
fraud,
says
companies
that
assume
false
identities

violate
federal
laws
governing
interstate
commerce.
Laws
in
at
least
17
states
prohibit
students
from
using
cheating
services
to
complete
their
assignments.
But
prosecutors
aren’t
enforcing
them.
Faculty
members
on
the
front

lines
are
no
more
active.
That’s
also
true
in
other
countries
where
the
cheating
industry
has
developed.
This
spring,
Marcus
J.
Ball,
a
higher-‐education
reformer
in
Britain,
came
across
an
advertisement
for
academic
cheating

services
on
the
wall
of
a
London
subway
station.
The
ad
offended
Mr.
Ball,
who
began
emailing
college
administrators
and
professors,
trying
to
persuade
them
to
sign
a
petition
for
the
British

government
to
debate
the
issue
of
contract
cheating.
His
goal
was
to
create
a
"unified
block"
of
people
willing
to
stand
up
to
the
cheating
companies,
with
hopes
of
taking
the
fight
to
Canada,

the
United
States,
and
elsewhere.
In
May,
Mr.
Ball
contacted
more
than
250
college
officials,
including
leaders
in
several
countries.
Only
five
responded.
"Academics
are
constantly
complaining
about
the
essay-‐mill

problem,"
he
said
in
the
email.
But
when
presented
with
a
"practical
way
forward
to
potentially
solve
the
problem,
they
don’t
engage."
Last
year,
Ms.
Bertram
Gallant,
who
is
director
of
the

office
at
the
University
of
California
at
San
Diego,
organized
a
dozen
international
experts
to
study
the
growth
of
contract
cheating
and
how
to
stop
it.
The
group
laid
out
a

series
of
big
goals.
Chief
among
them:
Mobilize
faculty
members
and
students
to
demand
laws
making
it
more
difficult
for
cheating
companies
to
operate.
It
is
creating
a
tool
kit
to
help
professors
detect

and
prevent
cheating.
And
it
is
organizing
an
international
awareness
day
to
bring
more
attention
to
the
problem.
But
the
group
can
only
muster
so
much
fight.
"There’s
just
not
enough
of
us

who
care,"
says
Ms.
Bertram
Gallant.
"It’s
a
very
small
cadre
internationally
who
really
dedicate
our
lives
to
working
on
this
issue,
and
that’s
just
not
enough
people."
College
leaders
haven’t
helped,

she
says.
Many
have
failed
to
make
the
issue
a
priority.
Few
colleges
have
offices,
she
says,
or
devote
dollars
to
the
problem.
"There
is
a
lot
of
money
to
support
these

companies,
but
not
a
lot
of
money
to
support
our
research,"
she
says.
"All
the
money
is
going
to
the
illegal
part
of
the
industry,
and
none
of
it
is
going
to
combat
the

industry."
Colleges
also
might
need
to
rethink
their
approach,
says
Ms.
Bertram
Gallant.
As
online
education
continues
to
grow,
and
cheating
companies
have
more
opportunities
to
infiltrate
classes,
institutions
would
do
well

to
enlist
people
with
the
skills
to
ferret
out
violations,
she
says.
While
educators
may
be
equipped
to
catch
plagiarism,
they
don’t
have
the
tools
to
track
a
paid
cheater
who
is
assuming
someone

else’s
identity.
Instead,
colleges
continue
to
rely
on
proud
traditions
to
fight
the
scourge
of
cheating.
This
fall,
as
students
return
to
campus,
some
colleges
will
require
them
to
sign
an

honor
code.
Others
will
spell
out
for
them
the
potential
consequences
of
academic
dishonesty.
In
October,
officials
at
the
University
of
Oklahoma
plan
to
hold
a
session
to
warn
new
students

about
paper
mills.
The
tool
they're
using
to
combat
cheating?
Tea
bags.
To
remind
the
students
of
the
importance
of
ethics,
the
university
is
encouraging
them
have
a
cup
of
"integri-‐tea."
Dan

Bauman
and
Ben
Myers
contributed
reporting
to
this
article.

Criteria1. Clear, logical, assertive topic sentence (first o.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Criteria1. Clear, logical, assertive topic sentence (first o.docx

Similar to Criteria1. Clear, logical, assertive topic sentence (first o.docx (20)

More from annettsparrow

More from annettsparrow (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Criteria1. Clear, logical, assertive topic sentence (first o.docx