In chinese, copying and learning are the same word.

Also, "cheating" may be viewed as "not re-inventing the wheel" (someone already made the proof for this theorem, just copy paste it from your smartphone), "not doing the same work twice" (your neigboor just solved the equation, why re-solve it ? ), and "using the fastest, most reliable solution" (your neigboor is better than you in Maths, just take his answers). This is similar to taking a library (ex : deep-equal) or framework (nextjs) or service (carrds, netlify) instead of doing it yourselves.

I agree that, the issue is mostly not the student but the school (and society):

1. Does the student really need to remember historical dates, or Maths equations, when nowadays he can just google them in 10sec ? (Aka : unnecessary use of memory)

2. Does the student really need to understand the notion by himselves ? For example, I don't know how to use quaternion myself, buy I know how to work with, in Unity. I also don't care about Pythagore theorem proof, I know it works, that's all I need (all Maths lover will condemn me).

The thing is that we believe that school focus on teaching. They don't. They are called schools, but behave a lot more like evaluation (grading) centers. And mostly evaluate (grade) memorization and servitude btw, not actual understanding.

To be clear, evaluation (grading) is what you in job interview and for pilot, to make sure he knows how to fly the plane.

Is evaluation a part of learning ? It is. But not the same type of evaluation.

"I am able to make a small game like ping pong from scratch ?" - evaluate yourselves, test your skills. If you have success, it means learning phase is completed.
The main differences are that :
- You do it for yourselves, not for someone or something else (employer, school, teacher, parents, certification organism). If you cheat, you have 0 gain out of it. Cheating in a pure learning environnement make no sense. If students cheat, it means your environnment contains more than just learning.

Testing yourselves, to know for yourselves, if you have got an understanding of a notion. Is part of learning.

Without grading, a test become just a way to confirm to yourselves your knowledge. This is part of learning, and cheating on that make no sense, because you fool only yourselves.

School mix both learning and grading, it shouldn't.

In chinese, copying and learning are the same word.

Also, "cheating" may be viewed as "not re-inventing the wheel" (someone already made the proof for this theorem, just copy paste it from your smartphone), "not doing the same work twice" (your neigboor just solved the equation, why re-solve it ? ), and "using the fastest, most reliable solution" (your neigboor is better than you in Maths, just take his answers). This is similar to taking a library (ex : deep-equal) or framework (nextjs) or service (carrds, netlify) instead of doing it yourselves.

I agree that, the issue is mostly not the student but the school (and society):

1. Does the student really need to remember historical dates, or Maths equations, when nowadays he can just google them in 10sec ? (Aka : unnecessary use of memory)

2. Does the student really need to understand the notion by himselves ? For example, I don't know how to use quaternion myself, buy I know how to work with, in Unity. I also don't care about Pythagore theorem proof, I know it works, that's all I need (all Maths lover will condemn me).

The thing is that we believe that school focus on teaching. They don't. They are called schools, but behave a lot more like evaluation (grading) centers. And mostly evaluate (grade) memorization and servitude btw, not actual understanding.

To be clear, evaluation (grading) is what you in job interview and for pilot, to make sure he knows how to fly the plane.

Is evaluation a part of learning ? It is. But not the same type of evaluation.

"I am able to make a small game like ping pong from scratch ?" - evaluate yourselves, test your skills. If you have success, it means learning phase is completed.

When evaluation is part of learning:
- You do it for yourselves, not for someone or something else (employer, school, teacher, parents, certification organism). That is called intresic motivation (vs extrinsic).
- There may be or not be grading, but only you care about grading.

The employer doesn't care about how you grade to the tests he send to you, what he care about is that you've got the skills he need. And grading is just a means for that.

Everything the school does should be a means for making someone a good person for the society, a happy person, a person that can contribute to the society (a phrasing more large than employable).

What I have seen in my scolarity, is students and teacher focused on "passing exams", "getting good grades". But completly forgetting exams and grading "means to".

In a pure teaching environnement, grades and exams only purpose is to give a learning status indication to the student.

In school (in France national education), they also serve to give you right/priority on school entrances. And serve as social status indicator (the dumbs and the smarts).

Cheating in a pure learning environnement make no sense. If students cheat, it means your environnment contains more than just learning.

When you create extrinsic motivation (carrot and stick), it override intrinsic motivation. And you end up with student doing the homework ONLY if it is graded (carrot) or if not doing it is punishable (stick). And not because it give them a learning opportunity.

Schools (I am still referring to France national education) believe that humans dislike learning. This is false. Babies loves learning. School is teaching us that learning should be hard and painful.

If you do teaching, you don't need a carrot or a stick, because authentic learning is fun by itselves !

(I don't want to make this text longer, but this make me question if schools are just doing big mistakes, or if they have been designed in a way that favour something else than learning (eq : have there been malicious intention ?)).