UNLV Cheating Scandal

[MoBro]

finally we agree on something -- everybody involved made a monumental mistake.

the fact is that 10 students participated in varying degrees of dishonesty and fraud and my opinion is that UNLV did not punish them severely enough.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Nevermind how ignorant it makes you look.

Maybe you also feel that people who exceed the speed limit, whether by 1mph or 70, should all have their licenses revoked and prohibited from ever operating a motor vehicle again. After all, each and ever one of them participated in varying degrees of violating the law, even that poor sucker that didn't realize the needle on the speedo just went from 65 to 66.

And you would honestly say that the individuals who were under the belief that the faculty login had been provided by the faculty member with permission are still guilty of "dishonesty" and "fraud"? They didn't think to check the information. Stupid, indeed. But dishonest and fraudulent? Really?

All I can say is that it is a good thing your opinion doesn't amount to much, and you are not the one making the decisions.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[syn_apse]

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Nevermind how ignorant it makes you look.

[insert bad analogy here]

All I can say is that it is a good thing your opinion doesn't amount to much, and you are not the one making the decisions.

likewise

 

[MoBro]

If I were to say "hey, all the tv's at bestbuy are free! the clerk told me so," what are the chances of this not being viewed as theft? ZERO Believing a password was liberally given ha! Remember, I sell bridges of allll sizes and colors too!

Oh, how on its face this may seem to be such a perfect analogy. Yet, anyone who is told that TVs at Best Buy are free would immediately think to question the information.

I can certainly see why people would not question that they were provided a login to use during chart audits considering the task at hand. Over 70 students, each with mountains of charts to sift through, each change requiring a faculty login to proceed as is dictated by the computer system we use, and at best a handful of faculty to actually help with the procedure, some of which aren't willing to participate anyhow because it's too big a pain in the rear end. It is not as if they believed they were allowed to grade themselves, authorize their own treatments, or evaluate their own competencies.

Yes, they should have questioned it. They should have asked and made sure. Failing to do so was dumb and because of that they deserve to be punished. But to take away degrees? Dictate that these people are unfit to be dentists? Gimme a break.

 

[ineeddds]

Oh, how on its face this may seem to be such a perfect analogy. Yet, anyone who is told that TVs at Best Buy are free would immediately think to question the information.

I can certainly see why people would not question that they were provided a login to use during chart audits considering the task at hand. Over 70 students, each with mountains of charts to sift through, each change requiring a faculty login to proceed as is dictated by the computer system we use, and at best a handful of faculty to actually help with the procedure, some of which aren't willing to participate anyhow because it's too big a pain in the rear end.

Yes, they should have questioned it. They should have asked and made sure. Failing to do so was dumb and because of that they deserve to be punished. But to take away degrees? Dictate that these people are unfit to be dentists? Gimme a break.

Hmmmmmm. You know the IRS collects millions of tax returns each year. Sure the auditor doesn't like having to sift through all the returns looking for potential cheating, but they still do. Why? It's their job! I admit that UNLV is a younger school and is still working out the kinks, but the reality is that they do have sufficient staff. Saying they don't, or that their is too much work, too much this and too much that is not a convincing argument. In fact, it's quite detrimental because it shows the propensity to commit ethical misconduct even more since the students "feel" they must do it.

Actually, no where in my post do I say what my own opinion is. Because it's not my place to make an opinion, as it wouldn't make any difference what I say. However, my posts merely say that depending on what the university decides will equal the right and fitting punishment. Whether you or anyone else agrees makes no difference. Hence if they decide they are unfit to be dentists, then you, me, and the whole board would not make a difference in saying that the punishment is way too severe. On the other hand, they could say, well this is their first mistake, we'll let it pass. Likewise, its a fitting punishment, and no amount of bickering will change it.

 

[NVDental]

MoBro, you said that I must be into politics, which is untrue. How does the public or anyone know what has happened unless they have firsthand information, because until an investigation is completed everything else is heresay.


Yeah, I used a quote refering that the punishment should fit the crime, however I gave no opinion as to what the punishment should be. I simply stated the 3rd party should investigate to determine exactly what happened, and if the punishment was appropriate. If the punished was too severe, then it should be changed appropriately or vice-versa.


If UNLV is operated in the same way as my school, then obtaining a password ( or in our case an swipe card) we could make a heck of a lot of changes to our patient records. I could even give myself credit for procedures I didn't do. So if I obtained a password/swipecard, I would know that it would not be appropriate to use it. So to say that the students had a mountain of documentation/charts to audit, is a poor excuse and a copout, to justify using the password.

 

[S Files]

MoBro, you said that I must be into politics, which is untrue. How does the public or anyone know what has happened unless they have firsthand information, because until an investigation is completed everything else is heresay.


Yeah, I used a quote refering that the punishment should fit the crime, however I gave no opinion as to what the punishment should be. I simply stated the 3rd party should investigate to determine exactly what happened, and if the punishment was appropriate. If the punished was too severe, then it should be changed appropriately or vice-versa.


If UNLV is operated in the same way as my school, then obtaining a password ( or in our case an swipe card) we could make a heck of a lot of changes to our patient records. I could even give myself credit for procedures I didn't do. So if I obtained a password/swipecard, I would know that it would not be appropriate to use it. So to say that the students had a mountain of documentation/charts to audit, is a poor excuse and a copout, to justify using the password.

Agreed. c'mon acting stupid barely worked in junior high.

 

[DIRTIE]

To sum it up, UNLV has a decision to make on whether it will sacrifice its integrity and ability to produce healthcare professionals that the public views as quality, or use the 10 accused students as an example that UNLV is very serious about its institution. If they decide a slap on the wrist is ok, then so be it. If they decide a deck in the face is ok, then so be it. Family and friends aside, these students chose to gamble, and they lost. Cut away all the rhetoric, and that's exactly the case

Their punishment is hardly a slap on the wrist!!! 9 months of dental related service over the next 5 years. What are you smoking? I think it is pretty harsh. And who are you or anybody else on this forum to start pointing fingers. You have never done something wrong or questionable? What they did is hardly portrayed in the articles. Scandal, cheaters, liars, forgerers. It has been blown way out of proportion and the only "public" that even gives a hoot about this is either the review journal who has always been critical towards the school, plus is dying for a story, and a bunch of dentists and oral surgeons who obviosly have vested interest in being negative toward this institution.(a little competition I guess)

 

[aphistis]

Not everyone supporting the school here is using it, but the whole "they didn't know that using a faculty computer account was wrong, so they shouldn't be punished" argument is garbage. It ranks right up there with suing McDonalds because nobody warned you your coffee would be hot.

 

[DIRTIE]

Not everyone supporting the school here is using it, but the whole "they didn't know that using a faculty computer account was wrong, so they shouldn't be punished" argument is garbage. It ranks right up there with suing McDonalds because nobody warned you your coffee would be hot.

Of course they should be punished, but everyone here thinks that they should be banned from the field of dentistry and have their right hand cut off.

By the way the Mcdonalds case wasn't just that the coffee was scolding hot, so hot it burned her femine parts, probably a little bit hot to drink don't you think, but also that the lid popped off, not a very good lid for a 200 degree cup of coffee. That is probably why she won the case, oh wait you are probably smarter than the jury and the judge that was on the case, sorry

 

[NVDental]

Of course they should be punished, but everyone here thinks that they should be banned from the field of dentistry and have their right hand cut off.

By the way the Mcdonalds case wasn't just that the coffee was scolding hot, so hot it burned her femine parts, probably a little bit hot to drink don't you think, but also that the lid popped off, not a very good lid for a 200 degree cup of coffee. That is probably why she won the case, oh wait you are probably smarter than the jury and the judge that was on the case, sorry

This is off topic but, I am sure that he is smarter than both the judge and the jury. We know that lawyers are just pre-meds that couldn't hack it. HA!

However, I am serious about the fact the he is smarter than the jury. Lawyers often have strategies of picking the least educated members out of jury pools, because they often don't want independent thinkers. Besides, the members of the jury pools who are the smartest and have the most successful careers, are the ones who try to get out or avoid jury duty the most.

 

[aphistis]

oh wait you are probably smarter than the jury and the judge that was on the case, sorry

If you look, you'll notice I never said anything like this, and there's no telling whether it's true or not. I do appreciate the compliment, though. And from now on I'll always make sure to have the server at McDonalds arc-weld the lid onto my coffee cup.

 

[sweetgemini]

I've been contacted by the mods, not to release the names here as they might sue SDN. I don't want any harm to SDN or the SDN community, but 'the truth will set you free!'

 

[nvpremolar]

This is UNLV's first graduating class and the general public and the dental community need to be assured that this is not what the school stands for.

As for the comments about the punishment being too harsh--many don't realize that the entire student body is being punished for what a select few did. The media has had a hayday with this and now letters to the editor are ridiculing all UNLV students and graduates. Those involved will indeed pay for this for a long time, but why shouldn't they? When they decided to forge faculty approvals, not only did they not think about the consequences it would have on them but also on the approximately 280 other dental students that attend UNLV. As a UNLV dental student, I now put my school identification away when I'm out in public after school. It is crap that we should be ashamed to be a part of a program that we all worked so hard to get into. I do have sympathy for them for making such a stupid mistake but the punishment is not too harsh considering what the entire school is now experiencing.

 

[ineeddds]

Their punishment is hardly a slap on the wrist!!! 9 months of dental related service over the next 5 years. What are you smoking? I think it is pretty harsh. And who are you or anybody else on this forum to start pointing fingers. You have never done something wrong or questionable? What they did is hardly portrayed in the articles. Scandal, cheaters, liars, forgerers. It has been blown way out of proportion and the only "public" that even gives a hoot about this is either the review journal who has always been critical towards the school, plus is dying for a story, and a bunch of dentists and oral surgeons who obviosly have vested interest in being negative toward this institution.(a little competition I guess)

Hahaha, ok ok I've had my fun in this thread and have said my piece. Fin! The thread now is moving towards a my ethics versus your ethics thread, and that rarely makes any good sense. Things are moot, well, at least until the committee renders a new decision. Those students involved, whether anyone likes it or not, will suffer consequences most likely in excess of the misconduct committed. There is no doubt that the image of the dental school at UNLV has been damaged. Added with the fact that one of the your state senators would like to see the dental school closed is not a good thing. UNLV will likely use these students as examples to show that the university is a serious institution worthy of respect, and not to be known as a school that produces health professionals with questionable ethics.

And just for clarification, the woman in the McDonald's coffee incident won the case, not because of the reasons you listed, but because of the way she was treated by McDonalds afterwards. You'll find that all she really wanted was an apology and the cost of medical treatment. But when she was laughed at, ridiculed, and told to blow off after being hurt, jurors were more than gracious enough to punish good ol' Mickey D's.

 

[qwopty99]

Not everyone supporting the school here is using it, but the whole "they didn't know that using a faculty computer account was wrong, so they shouldn't be punished" argument is garbage. It ranks right up there with suing McDonalds because nobody warned you your coffee would be hot.

add aphistis to the list of the grossly ignorant.

that mcdonald's case was a SLAM-DUNK case for the prosecution.

the burning occurred to an 81-year old lady who was the PASSENGER in a car, two minutes after going through the drive-through to pick up her drink. she had the drink between her legs because the cup was too hot to hold. she subsequently got severe 3rd degree burns all over her legs (requiring skin grafts and a lengthy hospital stay - the photos grossed out the jury) due to the temperature of the coffee. this occurred with the car STOPPED at a red light.

in the subsequent lawsuit, certain McD's business practices regarding their drinks was revealed. all this info was presented by McD white collar whistleblowers who couldn't care less since though they were asked to testify, it was the corporation that was going to take the fall. certain McDonald's policies were revealed as follows:

it was revealed that mcdonalds wanted a way to discourage people from asking for "refills" on their hot tea/coffee. as such, the decision was made to serve the beverages at 200 F (as opposed to the common 140-175 F in other eateries) since the water would take longer to cool, and give patrons less of an opportunity to request a refill.

internal memos at McDs showed they were aware that the coffee/tea was too hot since it caused handling problems among their own employees. there was also a reported 700 "minor" cases of burns, some of which were settled outside of court previously.

"Company documents showed that in the past decade McDonald's had received at least 700 reports of coffee burns ranging from mild to third degree, and had settled claims arising from scalding injuries for more than $500,000."

the decision to continue to serve coffee at 200 F for merely economic purposes and in complete disregard for obvious safety concerns and common practice is what lost the case for McDs.

since the lawsuit, coffee/tea at McDs is now served at around 160 F.

 

[MoBro]

MoBro, you said that I must be into politics, which is untrue. How does the public or anyone know what has happened unless they have firsthand information, because until an investigation is completed everything else is heresay.


Yeah, I used a quote refering that the punishment should fit the crime, however I gave no opinion as to what the punishment should be. I simply stated the 3rd party should investigate to determine exactly what happened, and if the punishment was appropriate. If the punished was too severe, then it should be changed appropriately or vice-versa.


If UNLV is operated in the same way as my school, then obtaining a password ( or in our case an swipe card) we could make a heck of a lot of changes to our patient records. I could even give myself credit for procedures I didn't do. So if I obtained a password/swipecard, I would know that it would not be appropriate to use it. So to say that the students had a mountain of documentation/charts to audit, is a poor excuse and a copout, to justify using the password.

First of all, you are quoting someone else. I made no mention of you and politics.

As for the students being able to use a faculty login to give themselves credit for procedures they didn't do, sure they could. But WHY would they? They were graduating fourth years. They'd already completed the required treatments and competencies. What possible purpose would there be for making up treatments when you've already met the requirements? So yes, I still see how it could make sense to some of these individuals that they were allowed to use the login information for chart audits. Yet, I have not tried to EXCUSE it. I never said that because I can understand how they might have believed that, that they are right or free from wrongdoing. You are right, it is a poor excuse. They were overwhelmed, and didn't THINK. Definitely deserving of some form of punishment. But for all you to throw around these accusations of cheating, fraudulence, ethical misconduct, and the like, that may well be far from fitting for many of those involved is irresponsible, particularly since it seems few if any of you have any facts about the incidents.

As for the other UNLV student who posted saying how unfair it is to now have to face this as a student, yeah it sucks. Deal with it. It's a big stupid mess right now because the media got their hands on it, and in time, it will disappear just like everything else. In case you haven't seen our waiting rooms recently, perhaps you should have a look. There is no lack of people that want to receive dental care at the school. So stop acting like a victim. Aside from the occasional question from patients about what happened, things haven't changed for me or anyone else I know.

 

[MoBro]

add aphistis to the list of the grossly ignorant.

that mcdonald's case was a SLAM-DUNK case for the prosecution.

the burning occurred to an 81-year old lady who was the PASSENGER in a car, two minutes after going through the drive-through to pick up her drink. she had the drink between her legs because the cup was too hot to hold. she subsequently got severe 3rd degree burns all over her legs due to the temperature of the coffee. this occurred with the car STOPPED at a red light.

in the subsequent lawsuit, certain McD's business practices regarding their drinks was revealed. all this info was presented by McD white collar whistleblowers who couldn't care less since though they were asked to testify, it was the corporation that was going to take the fall. certain McDonald's policies were revealed as follows:

it was revealed that mcdonalds wanted a way to discourage people from asking for "refills" on their hot tea/coffee. as such, the decision was made to serve the beverages at 200 F (as opposed to the common 140-175 F in other eateries) since the water would take longer to cool, and give patrons less of an opportunity to request a refill.

internal memos at McDs showed they were aware that the coffee/tea was too hot since it caused handling problems among their own employees. there was also a reported 700 "minor" cases of burns, some of which were settled outside of court previously.

"Company documents showed that in the past decade McDonald's had received at least 700 reports of coffee burns ranging from mild to third degree, and had settled claims arising from scalding injuries for more than $500,000."

the decision to continue to serve coffee at 200 F for merely economic purposes and in complete disregard for obvious safety concerns and common practice is what lost the case for McDs.

since the lawsuit, coffee/tea at McDs is now served at around 160 F.

A perfect example of how this "dental scandal" (oooh, SCANDAL, let's scare old people) will slip by the wayside as soon as there is some other more interesting news. In a matter of a couple pages of posts and replies, we've already completely derailed to the topic of McDonalds coffee.

 

[qwopty99]

A perfect example of how this "dental scandal" (oooh, SCANDAL, let's scare old people) will slip by the wayside as soon as there is some other more interesting news. In a matter of a couple pages of posts and replies, we've already completely derailed to the topic of McDonalds coffee.

better yet, doesn't my post serve as a perfect example to illustrate your point? that a "story" can be taken to far-reaches when people just speculate and don't know all the facts?

i thought u were here to try to tell everyone the UNLV dental student side of the story? and now you harp on me for elucidating an improper analogy?

 

[qwopty99]

MoBro - i'd like your opinion on this:

the original post states,

"One faculty member said the students involved were talented, but sheer laziness had prompted them to self-approve their work rather than seek out the proper faculty for a signature."

the above is far different than the picture you paint, when u suggested the students were doing something they thought they might have permission to do.

so which is it? if it's as the quote described above, then I say the punishment was too lenient. if it's as you say, then i agree that it was too harsh.

however, i went through a professional school myself. we had to have supervisors sign off on the patients we saw. i find it extremely unlikely, that anyone would "mistaken" that a professor's logon/ID was available for them to use, particularly on days when that person wasn't even there. further, legally - the profs who had their signatures used, they would subsequently be legally responsible for the care of the patient - so those students put in jeopardy, the license to practice of the absent professor.

i'm sorry - i don't really buy the ignorance defense. those students knew what they were doing: who, in what professional school, doesn't get the concept of mandatory supervising signatures?

 

[syn_apse]

I've been contacted by the mods, not to release the names here as they might sue SDN.

i think it's a bad idea to release the names on SDN too. but it's a moot point anyways because the info is already public knowledge. heck, i'm a first year on the east coast and even i know the names of everybody involved.

 

[MoBro]

better yet, doesn't my post serve as a perfect example to illustrate your point? that a "story" can be taken to far-reaches when people just speculate and don't know all the facts?

i thought u were here to try to tell everyone the UNLV dental student side of the story? and now you harp on me for elucidating an improper analogy?

I wasn't harping on you at all. Nor was my post directed at you, particularly not in any manner that was intended to be insulting. I'm sorry that it was interpreted that way.

I was just making the observation of how quickly we went from talking about the dental school to talking about McDonald's. I have a feeling that this whole thing will be screamed about until something more newsworthy comes along, and then forgotten by the masses.

As for the quote that came from faculty, I would bet that any faculty with real first hand knowledge had the sense not to talk about this to the newspapers. And keep in mind that whatever was said could have been as simple as "They were talented students, but they were just being lazy." They may never have mentioned WHAT it is they did. You know how newspapers are. They already have their idea of what the students did.

 

[Yah-E]

Alright, I'm sick of reading this UNLV scandal crap. Whatever will happen to the students after this new investigation, it will happen. What has been done to UNLV dental school's image, it has been done. We can sit here all day and debate our views, but the bottom line is that we're not the students involved nor are we the UNLV administration.

Lets switch to another school and talk about UMDNJ's scandal:

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/newjersey/story/6367300p-6223446c.html

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-3/114827540664330.xml&coll=1

 

[syn_apse]

too bad UNLV doesn't adopt the same mentality of UMDNJ's dean:

"For anyone walking into an office with a New Jersey Dental School doctor of dental medicine degree on the wall, they should have no doubt that the individual named is a dentist with whom they can have the fullest confidence," [Dean Cecile Feldman] said. "Never, ever can that confidence or trust be lost."

of course it is debatable how much confidence anybody has in UMDNJ anymore:

"This is the latest in revelations about UMDNJ, where inside deals, political corruption, millions in questionable spending and outright fraud have dogged the school, which is now under the oversight of a federal monitor and is the focus of an ongoing federal criminal investigation."

 

[Yah-E]

what is wrong with these students?!

You know, the sad thing is "some" level of dishonesty happens at ALL of the schools, dental, medical, or law! It's just when a large of amount of students get caught, then it's a big deal and makes it into the media.

At NSU, we had a minor cheating scandal with the Endodontic department last year where some 2nd year students were suspended and some are redoing their 2nd year. Fortunately enough for NSU, the cheating involved only pertained to one single event, an endodontic practical exam and only limited number of students were involved.

I believe when cheating scandals involving 4th year graduating seniors where the students are in the verge of getting their degrees and send into the real world, that's where schools tend to escalate matters and punishments.

 

[germ]

Hmm, Well its sounds like they just used the electronic signatures for housekeeping of charts. Just some chart auditing...entering info from the old blue form to the updated yellow form. This had nothing to due with thier grades and it does not seem any actual "cheating" was involved.

Once the press gets a hold of it and sensationalizes it..it becomes to late for rational argument. So instead of giving the students the appropriate punishment and redoing the audit...they have to make the punishment to suit public perceptions.

I think the punishment is way too harsh and it should never had made the news.

 

[groundhog]

Ethics is important. I attended the recent UW Law School graduation ceremony. Bill Gates Sr (father of Microsoft Bill Gates) gave the commencment address. Gates Sr. is a partner in a prominent Seattle law firm and sits on the UW Board of Regents. He got into ethical behavior. He cited some examples of very talented attorneys he had known who had taken both the high road and the low road regarding ethical issues. Those who got caught taking the low road took fatal blows to their careers. Those who took the high road did not receive any special recognition for their efforts but went on to have successful rewarding careers. He then related how he had once stood up and walked out (in a very conspicuous manner) during a speech given by a big mucky-muck bank CEO who attempted to warm up the audience with a few "lawyer jokes." Gates Sr. then turned directly towards the graduates and said "just becasue others disrespect your profession does not give you license to do so." I think that statement had two meanings. #1: Don't go along with others who show disrepect towards your profession and #2: don't bring disrepect on your profession by your own actions.

I also recall my daughter relating what an adcom said to her when she was asked a few "what would you do as a dentist" hypotheticals during her admittance interview. After she was told that she had not given ideal but very acceptable answers the adcom said " I just want you to know that dental ethics is an area in which I do a bit of research. I have interviewed a good number of folks in this profession who have ended up in prison due to ethical lapses. Those are all sad cases."

So, what is the big deal? Well one answer is that certain professions (medical, dental, legal etc) are granted special rights by the government for the benefit of the general public. In return, folks in those professions are held to higher standard of ethics by that same government.

 

[embig]

My sources indicate that 9/10 of those accused at UNLV are Mormon. The Mormons have the reputation, at least at the UNLV SDM, of being cheaters. They openly cheat in exams and on projects, yet nothing is done. ALL of these ten students have stolen passwords before and were placed on acedemic probation. When you are on probation and you do something else wrong, you are expelled, yet the school does not follow through on its word/threats/promises.

**This isn't a story of students cheating. This is a story of no limitations being put on the students, no discipline being enforced, and no ethical behavior expected or demanded by the administration of the school.**

In fact, one case where several Mormons cheated, the professor removed the curve from that exam, saying that the students instituted their own curve. Who did this hurt? All of the students that DIDN'T CHEAT!!! UTTERLY APPALLING!!

The UNLV SDM has a history of "looking the other way" when students cheat, and they punish the students that are trying to get through honestly. Why should we expect different results this time?

 

[jrd29]

My sources indicate that 9/10 of those accused at UNLV are Mormon. The Mormons have the reputation, at least at the UNLV SDM, of being cheaters. They openly cheat in exams and on projects, yet nothing is done. ALL of these ten students have stolen passwords before and were placed on acedemic probation. When you are on probation and you do something else wrong, you are expelled, yet the school does not follow through on its word/threats/promises.

**This isn't a story of students cheating. This is a story of no limitations being put on the students, no discipline being enforced, and no ethical behavior expected or demanded by the administration of the school.**

In fact, one case where several Mormons cheated, the professor removed the curve from that exam, saying that the students instituted their own curve. Who did this hurt? All of the students that DIDN'T CHEAT!!! UTTERLY APPALLING!!

The UNLV SDM has a history of "looking the other way" when students cheat, and they punish the students that are trying to get through honestly. Why should we expect different results this time?

There are so many untruths in this post I don't even know where to start. It sounds like you are passing on rumors that you have no first hand knowledge of, which is pretty easy when your identity is hidden

 

[Col Sanders]

My sources indicate that 9/10 of those accused at UNLV are Mormon. The Mormons have the reputation, at least at the UNLV SDM, of being cheaters. They openly cheat in exams and on projects, yet nothing is done. ALL of these ten students have stolen passwords before and were placed on acedemic probation. When you are on probation and you do something else wrong, you are expelled, yet the school does not follow through on its word/threats/promises.

**This isn't a story of students cheating. This is a story of no limitations being put on the students, no discipline being enforced, and no ethical behavior expected or demanded by the administration of the school.**

In fact, one case where several Mormons cheated, the professor removed the curve from that exam, saying that the students instituted their own curve. Who did this hurt? All of the students that DIDN'T CHEAT!!! UTTERLY APPALLING!!

The UNLV SDM has a history of "looking the other way" when students cheat, and they punish the students that are trying to get through honestly. Why should we expect different results this time?

This thread was full of positive debate up until now but is sinking fast with this post.

 

[Col Sanders]

My sources indicate that 9/10 of those accused at UNLV are Mormon. The Mormons have the reputation, at least at the UNLV SDM, of being cheaters. They openly cheat in exams and on projects, yet nothing is done. ALL of these ten students have stolen passwords before and were placed on acedemic probation. When you are on probation and you do something else wrong, you are expelled, yet the school does not follow through on its word/threats/promises.

**This isn't a story of students cheating. This is a story of no limitations being put on the students, no discipline being enforced, and no ethical behavior expected or demanded by the administration of the school.**

In fact, one case where several Mormons cheated, the professor removed the curve from that exam, saying that the students instituted their own curve. Who did this hurt? All of the students that DIDN'T CHEAT!!! UTTERLY APPALLING!!

The UNLV SDM has a history of "looking the other way" when students cheat, and they punish the students that are trying to get through honestly. Why should we expect different results this time?

"Those people!" Seinfeld

"Those people??, You sir, are an antidentite!! The next thing you will be saying is they should have their own schools!!!" Kramer

"They do have their own schools!" Seinfeld

 

[embig]

This thread was full of positive debate up until now but is sinking fast with this post.

I'm just saying the school doesn't have the balls to enforce many of its regulations. IMHO, that's why a new set of bylaws is handed out almost every semester.

Again... Why should we expect a change now?

I feel that the school's desire for accreditation played a big role in this decision. Since this is the first graduating class, they have a need to graduate a certain percentage of the students in order to gain permanent accreditation.

 

[sweetgemini]

i think it's a bad idea to release the names on SDN too. but it's a moot point anyways because the info is already public knowledge. heck, i'm a first year on the east coast and even i know the names of everybody involved.

Then why censor information? If I post the wrong names you can edit it out!

 

[ElDienteLoco]

My sources indicate that 9/10 of those accused at UNLV are Mormon. The Mormons have the reputation, at least at the UNLV SDM, of being cheaters. They openly cheat in exams and on projects, yet nothing is done. ALL of these ten students have stolen passwords before and were placed on acedemic probation. When you are on probation and you do something else wrong, you are expelled, yet the school does not follow through on its word/threats/promises.

**This isn't a story of students cheating. This is a story of no limitations being put on the students, no discipline being enforced, and no ethical behavior expected or demanded by the administration of the school.**

In fact, one case where several Mormons cheated, the professor removed the curve from that exam, saying that the students instituted their own curve. Who did this hurt? All of the students that DIDN'T CHEAT!!! UTTERLY APPALLING!!

The UNLV SDM has a history of "looking the other way" when students cheat, and they punish the students that are trying to get through honestly. Why should we expect different results this time?

You've got to be kidding me...the only UTTERLY APPALLING thing in your post is your obvious prejudice.

So...we shouldn't be releasing any names in the forum but it's perfectly alright to deride their (alleged) religious preferences? Some people from every group (religious, ethnic, you name it...) do stupid things, but that is no reason to ignorantly slander that whole group based on your "sources" who have an obvious chip on their shoulder about LDS students.

Bad form.

 

[MoBro]

My sources indicate that 9/10 of those accused at UNLV are Mormon. The Mormons have the reputation, at least at the UNLV SDM, of being cheaters. They openly cheat in exams and on projects, yet nothing is done. ALL of these ten students have stolen passwords before and were placed on acedemic probation. When you are on probation and you do something else wrong, you are expelled, yet the school does not follow through on its word/threats/promises.

**This isn't a story of students cheating. This is a story of no limitations being put on the students, no discipline being enforced, and no ethical behavior expected or demanded by the administration of the school.**

In fact, one case where several Mormons cheated, the professor removed the curve from that exam, saying that the students instituted their own curve. Who did this hurt? All of the students that DIDN'T CHEAT!!! UTTERLY APPALLING!!

The UNLV SDM has a history of "looking the other way" when students cheat, and they punish the students that are trying to get through honestly. Why should we expect different results this time?

Being a Mormon myself, I take issue with this post, but I'm not the most uptight of Mormons and can easily let this go as just more misguided, misinformed, and misrepresented information from someone who enjoys stirring the pot and luckily can therefore avoid much personal offense on my part.

My question is, who exactly is your source? Michael Moore?

I happen to know that MY sources are much closer to the incidents than many (perhaps most?), and even MY knowledge is limited (though obviously less limited than some).

But to say that Mormon's are notorious for cheating is at best an immature statement, and at worst bigoted. Most of my fellow Mormon's are among the most studious and devoted in the school (though unfortunately I can't count myself among them, I could certainly be called a slacker in certain regards). You could as easily say that students in general, in any field of study, across the nation are notorious for cheating in some form or another, and you'd probably be closer to the mark. Seeing as I live in Las Vegas currently, perhaps you could call me a gambling man, and I'd make the gamble that most of you have done something in your student career that you are ashamed of, and count your lucky stars that it hasn't been discovered and made newspapers.

People say this sort of thing cheapens our profession, gives us a black eye (the school and students of this school anyway), and we, as fellow students and members of the "public" deserve to know what happened. The fact of the matter is, you may think you DESERVE to know, but whether you know it or not you probably prefer NOT knowing the details of the incident. Why? Imagine if you were privvy to information regarding any blemish in the past of every dental practitioner you would ever consider seeking treatment from. If those amongst you are REALLY as morally disgusted by this incident, God help you in finding a dentist you feel suited to your personal emotional and moral needs for a dentist who's past is entirely devoid of "ethically questionable" actions. Good luck! We've ALL done stuff in the past that was stupid, and that we regret. And if you believe there are those out there that haven't, then, well, I guess ignorance is bliss. Each of us was born sinners and will die likewise. The difference between the truly wicked, and the rest, is that the truly wicked do not learn from their mistakes and continue to make them knowingly. I doubt there is a student among those involved that hasn't learned a valuable lesson from their mistakes.

And as a student of UNLV dental, I have seen no evidence of "looking the other way." My class alone started at 75, and i believe it is now down to 67 (forced expulsions and mandatory repeating of an entire year of study, for various reasons and offenses). That's a lot of students to lose if our institution is turning the other cheek.

 

[embig]

I happen to know that MY sources are much closer to the incidents than many.

But to say that Mormon's are notorious for cheating is at best an immature statement, and at worst bigoted... You could as easily say that students in general, in any field of study, across the nation are notorious for cheating in some form or another, and you'd probably be closer to the mark.

The fact of the matter is, you may think you DESERVE to know, but whether you know it or not you probably prefer NOT knowing the details of the incident.... We've ALL done stuff in the past that was stupid, and that we regret. And if you believe there are those out there that haven't, then, well, I guess ignorance is bliss. Each of us was born sinners and will die likewise...

And as a student of UNLV dental, I have seen no evidence of "looking the other way." My class alone started at 75, and i believe it is now down to 67 (forced expulsions and mandatory repeating of an entire year of study, for various reasons and offenses). That's a lot of students to lose if our institution is turning the other cheek.

Well written. I may have written some things more general than I should have. I tried to avoid that. However, my comments... My source is pretty close, but you are right in that few people probably know "everything" about this situation.

This is true that most college/professional students have "cut corners" at one point. I didn't say that Mormons are notorious, or even that every single Mormon has cheated. Yet, they do have that reputation in the school among the non-Mormons. No matter what the truth is, that reputation still exists.

I agree that this issue should be handled more internally. The public doesn't NEED to know as much as they do. I still maintain that the school should have followed through with their own policies.

My point was not against the Mormon sub-group, but simply an example of the school's inability to curb this behavior. There have been non-Mormons cheating! There have been Mormons who didn't cheat! (I am told that no one has ever been disciplined for cheating since the school started 4 years ago. I am told the code against cheating was only put into place this past December.) If cheating had been addressed over the last four years and students had been disciplined then there wouldn't be ANY student sub-groups with this type of reputation. It wouldn't have been allowed to fester and grow to the level it has.

I will ignore the comment regarding the fact that only 67/75 of your class remain as this could bring the debate back to bigotry as none of those 8 were Mormon and some of those 8 were actually kicked out or held back for similar acts (incomplete/inaccurate patient records, not cheating).

Overall, a good post, MoBro.

 

[ItsGavinC]

I find that being in Dental school is like being in highschool all over.

Same class for 4 years, constant rumors, bullies againist the dorks, who is having sex with who...its endless!!!!

So true, so true. Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[DRJIC]

MoBro - i'd like your opinion on this:

the original post states,

"One faculty member said the students involved were talented, but sheer laziness had prompted them to self-approve their work rather than seek out the proper faculty for a signature."

the above is far different than the picture you paint, when u suggested the students were doing something they thought they might have permission to do.

so which is it? if it's as the quote described above, then I say the punishment was too lenient. if it's as you say, then i agree that it was too harsh.

however, i went through a professional school myself. we had to have supervisors sign off on the patients we saw. i find it extremely unlikely, that anyone would "mistaken" that a professor's logon/ID was available for them to use, particularly on days when that person wasn't even there. further, legally - the profs who had their signatures used, they would subsequently be legally responsible for the care of the patient - so those students put in jeopardy, the license to practice of the absent professor.

i'm sorry - i don't really buy the ignorance defense. those students knew what they were doing: who, in what professional school, doesn't get the concept of mandatory supervising signatures?

I've read this thread with great interest. I've also been amused by the amount of credibility that has been given to quotes from the newspaper supplied by unnamed sources. Like the quote you list above;

"One faculty member said the students involved were talented, but sheer laziness had prompted them to self-approve their work rather than seek out the proper faculty for a signature."

Who is this unnamed faculty member? Is it a faculty member of the Dental School, is it a faculty member of UNLV main campus, is it a faculty member of a local grade school, or perhaps it's a convenient quote made up by a reporter to make the story more gritty. (Oh I know, reporters don't make up sources, YEAH RIGHT!) Does the name Jason Blaire mean anything to you?

"Jayson Thomas Blair (born 23 March 1976) is a former New York Times reporter disgraced for committing repeated journalistic fraud."

So I am always very careful as to just how much credibility I am willing to give these unnamed sources, or "anonymous sources close to the incident."

Now in the same newspaper article that you quote, we have this, "I have been assured that there has been no compromise of, or issues regarding, the actual care given to patients by supervised dental students at the UNLV School of Dental Medicine," Linstrom said in a written statement.

Oh my, a "written statement" with an actual name attached to it so we know who to hold accountable for the veracity of the statement.

So let me ask you this, how could there be no compromise of the actual care given to patients, if the students authorized their own procedures as has been alleged here? I don't think that is possible. If you authorize your own work, without supervision, aren't you compromising patient's actual care?

My oh my, what a dilemma, who shall we give more credibility to; an unnamed "faculty member", or someone who puts a statement in writing with his named attached?

As it stands now, no one here knows all of the facts, yet that doesn't seem to prevent any of you from jumping to conclusions, and forming opinions, passing judgment, and making assumptions. You know, like assuming you had the authority to use a password of an instructor to audit charts, when there were approximately 2700 charts to audit, and you were in your last 6 weeks of school, and the password of the instructor was the instructor's name, which might lead a reasonable person to believe that the instructor had used his name as a password to set up a separate account to facilitate a timely chart audit, because what person uses his name as a password? As the students know every transaction is logged by the computer and that it would show they logged in with this instructor's password, even when he wasn't there, and the administration would easily be able to tell they logged in, what's the deal? Either these are the 10 most stupid people on planet earth, because they knew they would get caught, or they had an "expulsion death wish", or, they may have just thought they were authorized to use the password. 2700 charts, Do you all have instructors that are willing to sit and look over your shoulders while you enter codes on 2700 charts and make sure all the boxes are checked?

Which brings up the question, why did 2700 charts have to be audited in the first place?

WHY? Because the supervising Dentist signed off on them the first time and didn't bother to make sure that all the i's were dotted and the t's were crossed. This boiled down to things as simple as making sure each chart had a box checked that indicated the patient was to be notified in 6 months to return for a follow up examination. If that box wasn't checked, it needed to be; hence the audit. The audit procedure was spelled out in a multiple page document, telling the students they must audit every chart and make sure that they did A, then B, then C, etc. Paperwork housekeeping, after patients had already received treatment, not during.

Based on the comments I have reviewed here there are several forum members that are willing to draw conclusions based on assumptions. So that makes me wonder whether "YOU" individuals are suited for the profession of dentistry. You see I am not willing to allow someone to work on my teeth that might make assumptions without knowing all of the facts. Seems to me like you may be the type of person that "ASSUMES" I may need to have a tooth drilled without first knowing all of the facts; like having the benefit of an x-ray.

Seems to me like we actually need to have facts to reach logical conclusions, and as of now, one thing this UNLV incident lacks is a serious lack of verifiable facts that we can depend on as being accurate.

Dang good thing this group wasn't around when Mary Magdalene was about to be stoned, she would have been one dead dog. "I don't care about the facts, just hand me another rock!"

"A rational process is a moral process. You may make an error at any step of it, with nothing to protect you but your own severity, or you may try to cheat, to fake the evidence and evade the effort of the quest - but if devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality, then there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking." - Ayn Rand

Take care!

DRJIC

 

[DRJIC]

Well written. I may have written some things more general than I should have. I tried to avoid that. However, my comments... My source is pretty close, but you are right in that few people probably know "everything" about this situation.

This is true that most college/professional students have "cut corners" at one point. I didn't say that Mormons are notorious, or even that every single Mormon has cheated. Yet, they do have that reputation in the school among the non-Mormons. No matter what the truth is, that reputation still exists.

I agree that this issue should be handled more internally. The public doesn't NEED to know as much as they do. I still maintain that the school should have followed through with their own policies.

My point was not against the Mormon sub-group, but simply an example of the school's inability to curb this behavior. There have been non-Mormons cheating! There have been Mormons who didn't cheat! (I am told that no one has ever been disciplined for cheating since the school started 4 years ago. I am told the code against cheating was only put into place this past December.) If cheating had been addressed over the last four years and students had been disciplined then there wouldn't be ANY student sub-groups with this type of reputation. It wouldn't have been allowed to fester and grow to the level it has.

I will ignore the comment regarding the fact that only 67/75 of your class remain as this could bring the debate back to bigotry as none of those 8 were Mormon and some of those 8 were actually kicked out or held back for similar acts (incomplete/inaccurate patient records, not cheating).

Overall, a good post, MoBro.

I have now officially quit watching Comedy Central on cable television and now use this thread as my sole source of comedic entertainment.

These posts by EMBIG actually qualify him/her for best stand up comedian on this forum.

"The Mormons have the reputation, at least at the UNLV SDM, of being cheaters."

Please, please don't stop, surely you have some more insights into the composition of the student population at the UNLV Dental School.

What about those Jews? Are they charging money under the table for extra shots of Lidocaine? And the Asians, sure they are smart, but haven't you noticed the ones at the Dental School are sneaky? I hear they are terrible drivers too. Come on, don't you have any insights on the Black students? And what about the fat students that want to be dentists? Is it true that UNLV SODM doesn't schedule anyone under age 17 to be seen by the fat student dentists for fear the patient will be crushed in the chair?

Then we have the hysterical comedic art of self contradiction. In EMBIG's first post we have this quote.

"ALL of these ten students have stolen passwords before and were placed on acedemic(sic) probation. "

Now in his latest installment we have this quote:

"I am told that not one has ever been disciplined for cheating since the school started 4 years ago."

Oh please, you have to stop, I am laughing so hard I am crying, my side hurts so bad I may have given myself a spontaneous pneumothorax.

So let me see if I understand this; all the students stole passwords before and were put on academic probation, and yet no one at the school has ever been disciplined for cheating since the school started.

Apparently EMBIG does not consider being placed on academic probation, discipline.

The real truth of the matter is that none of the 10 were ever caught stealing passwords before, nor were any of the 10 ever placed on academic probation. That statement is a complete and total figment of someone's overactive imagination. Sort of in line with the, (Mormons at UNLV Dental School have the reputation of being cheaters), comment.

But please, don't let the limited amount of facts or truth stand in the way, just make up stuff as you go along, it is much more entertaining that way.

Don't you have an O'Chem test to study for or something?

DRJIC

 

[MoBro]

Based on the comments I have reviewed here there are several forum members that are willing to draw conclusions based on assumptions. So that makes me wonder whether "YOU" individuals are suited for the profession of dentistry. You see I am not willing to allow someone to work on my teeth that might make assumptions without knowing all of the facts. Seems to me like you may be the type of person that "ASSUMES" I may need to have a tooth drilled without first knowing all of the facts; like having the benefit of an x-ray.

Here here! I can see it now, these same people who claim moral authority based on rumors and assumptions, may be the same people that start a cavity prep and continue drilling because they see dark nastiness inside the tooth. They are so determined to rid the tooth of said dark nastiness that they drill, and drill, and drill until they expose the pulp. Little did they realize the dark nastiness was merely stain as opposed to carious, infected dentin. Why? They ASSUMED it was carious, because it LOOKED BAD. Too bad they never checked it with an explorer or caries indicator to actually VERIFY that what they were drilling needed to be drilled. Now we have a dead tooth, and necessary root canal therapy, instead of a simple class 1 restoration as it should have been.

Some of you hear of this problem and you continue to make accusations, and spout rhetoric about how these students should be drawn and quartered, and offered up to the public to be drug through the streets to appease the minds of the concerned masses, and return legitimacy to the school (and lets be honest, there are those who would claim the school has no legitimacy regardless of this incident or any other; the school has enemies merely because it exists). Yet it seems most of you only know what you've read in the newspapers. You ASSUMED these students are all morally corrupt and unfit to practice dentistry, because it SOUNDED BAD when you heard about it. Too bad you never checked the real facts to VERIFY that the thoughts and ideas you are propagating are factual. Now we have a publicly known mess, external investigation and the like, instead of an internally handled matter as it should have been.

I would personally seek treatment from many of those individuals involved, and I would know I was getting some of the best dental treatment I'd ever find anywhere.

As for those of you who are so ready and willing to cast stones, how about YOUR names, so I can place you on my "do NOT refer patients to ______" list.

 

[MoBro]

Then why censor information? If I post the wrong names you can edit it out!

Think of it this way. You are an anonymous poster on an internet forum. You may know full well the 10 names, but as far as anyone else on this forum would know, you're just some person listing 10 random names. You could post 10 names, and someone else could come back and say "What are you talking about, those aren't the real 10! I know who was involved!" and proceed to post 10 different names. It doesn't matter who has the right names, now names are out in the open and associated with this incident, and that is not a good thing. If names are to ever be released, leave it up to those in charge of making such decisions.

And let's not forget my original point that to reveal any names now would condemn everyone involved to every RUMOR and ASSUMPTION that is floating around now, and that would simply serve no good purpose. I posed the question to you before without an answer, and that is: Would YOU want your name publicly associated with things you didn't do? The masses won't take the time to dig for the real facts. They never do. They take media drivel at face value. Would you want everyone around you to believe something about you that you know in your heart is at best a misinformed exaggeration, and at worst a malicious lie?

The mods were right to advise you not to release the names, though their motivation was self serving (not that I blame them for wanting to protect their forum).

 

[Blackstars]

Think of it this way. You are an anonymous poster on an internet forum. You may know full well the 10 names, but as far as anyone else on this forum would know, you're just some person listing 10 random names. You could post 10 names, and someone else could come back and say "What are you talking about, those aren't the real 10! I know who was involved!" and proceed to post 10 different names. It doesn't matter who has the right names, now names are out in the open and associated with this incident, and that is not a good thing. If names are to ever be released, leave it up to those in charge of making such decisions.

And let's not forget my original point that to reveal any names now would condemn everyone involved to every RUMOR and ASSUMPTION that is floating around now, and that would simply serve no good purpose. I posed the question to you before without an answer, and that is: Would YOU want your name publicly associated with things you didn't do? The masses won't take the time to dig for the real facts. They never do. They take media drivel at face value. Would you want everyone around you to believe something about you that you know in your heart is at best a misinformed exaggeration, and at worst a malicious lie?

The mods were right to advise you not to release the names, though their motivation was self serving (not that I blame them for wanting to protect their forum).

Mobro, are you sure you're not involved in this? based on everything you written so far, it leads to to believe you might be involved in this, which would explain your adamant defense of these students.

 

[MoBro]

Considering I wasn't in the graduating class, yeah, I'm pretty sure I'm not involved in this. But let me check again and make sure. I'll have to get back to you.

I simply happen to know some of those involved quite well. I know what they are going through because I see it first hand.

Perhaps my adamant defense of the students stems from the fact that I care about them and their futures, and know personally that they are great dentists, some of whom were the most skilled and talented in the school. I've seen the work that some of these people have done while students, and it would put to shame what some other established practitioners would call their best work. I speak without exaggeration either as I've seen what some of the dentists in this town (and others) call dental work, because I treat their patients, and see up close and personal the kind of crap they try to pass off as acceptable (I'll avoid naming names though, as is dictated by my conscience). As far as those involved with this incident, I'd go so far as to say the skill and natural abilities of some of them may even rival my own.

Is the idea of someone feeling genuine empathy and concern for another person or persons lost on you?

However, if you insist on believing that I was involved simply because I refuse to join the angry mob, go right ahead. I promise I won't lose sleep over it.

 

[MoBro]

I will ignore the comment regarding the fact that only 67/75 of your class remain as this could bring the debate back to bigotry as none of those 8 were Mormon and some of those 8 were actually kicked out or held back for similar acts (incomplete/inaccurate patient records, not cheating).

Again, I'm wondering your sources here. None of the people removed from my class for incomplete or inaccurate patient records.

All those held back were held back for reasons of poor academic performance, save for one who was simply on medical leave far too long to return to our class. Only one case led to outright expulsion, and lets just say it had nothing to do with academic performance (and no, I won't explain the incident here).

As for none of the people held back being Mormon, and thus concluding some form of bigotry amongst the administration, well that is poor logic. Did you know that police officers NEVER give traffic tickets to gorillas? That must mean that they are bigoted towards us humans, nevermind the fact that there aren't any gorillas that have committed traffic offenses (though if I'm wrong here, please let me know, as I'm sure reading about such an incident would give me a much needed laugh). Perhaps none of those held back were Mormon because there were no Mormon's who needed to be held back.

Though, the point itself is moot, because there is another flaw in your information. One of the individuals held back from my class just this year IS in fact Mormon.

 

[sweetgemini]

[edit]

 

[sweetgemini]

Mods, I am going to publish the names and link it here.

MoBro, being a LDS yourself, you are clouding your judgement. The fact is that a majority of the people caught ARE mormon. And from your posts I do think you are related to one of them. Stop your charade of caring for the truth when you are infact hiding the truth your self.


*edited by DrMom to remove personal information*

 

[sweetgemini]

Mobro, are you sure you're not involved in this? based on everything you written so far, it leads to to believe you might be involved in this, which would explain your adamant defense of these students.

I think so too, or either its a troll? Who knows? The login in new and the user has been posting here in this thread actively. I personally think its one of the cheathers pretending to be a DS3. The web is full loonies like these.

 

[ObviousGuy]

linky please

 

[MoBro]

you are infact hiding the truth your self.

How 'bout some sources on that? Clearly you are just another one to make fact out of assumptions. YOU and those like you are the REAL problem in all this.

 

[unlvdmd]

*post removed by DrMom because it contained identifiable information*

 

[CorneliusFudge]

I still don't really understand what happened at UNLV. From what it sounds like the administration made some mistakes and put the burden of correcting those mistakes on the students via these chart audits.

The students made some errors in protocol and now the administration is throwing these students under the bus to minimize any fallout that would affect the administration personally or endanger the schools accreditation. Sounds pretty typical of dental schools across the country to me.

I don't see how so many of you are so quick to jump on the bandwagon and nail these guys to the wall (except for the guy who obviously has some personal vendetta against mormons. of all the prejudices to have why mormons? ).

I don't have all the information but it really sounds like it could be an innocent mistake.