queen sheba 53 | 648 ☆☆ Observer
Jan 29, 2012 | #1
Fraudulent dimwits always try to justify their fraudulent practices by claiming that their customers deserve to be defrauded because "they all cheat the system."
WRONG
The only hard evidence exists, in black and white, in the docket of the "Boston University v. The Paper Store (et al)" case of 1995-7. BU's attorneys obtained from the term paper sites, via subpoena, records of all students from BU that had bought papers in an attempt to establish direct damages sustained by the university. Of the eight (8) BU students found to have purchased papers, seven (7) of them referenced the sample papers properly. This was BU's own evidence that the victorious defendants ultimately used against BU!
Now, unless you cowardly dimwits have equally legitimate, relevant, trustworthy evidence, I invite you to shut your traps.(WB)
Before I systematically and emphatically dismantle WB's hollow and biased convictions that American students buy essays for reasons OTHER THAN cheating, I find it prudent to introduce myself:
I am an Ethiopian lecturer, 31 and teaching economics at a private university in Nairobi. I also teach two other UK universities via teleconferencing. The sole reason for joining this site is to consistently emphasize the need for students to be undertaking their own work instead of relying on 'genuine' companies or imposters.
When I was undertaking my graduate degree, I was horrified to discover that in a class of 37 students, at least half of the student used to buy essays from the numerous essay mills around and turned them in for grading.
The class had about 11 American students and 8 British students.
Turning to WB's deeply flawed argument, I want to state the following:
a) The 'evidence' she presents is based on flawed and 'outdated' data, much like using 1970s statistics on TV ownership in US to explain 2012 TV ownership patterns!
b) WB's skewed interpretation of the Boston University case is clearly based on insignificant data sample and, consequently, all her interpretations are rendered void and statistically misleading.
c) Her lack of understanding of the extent and magnitude of the lies and pretensions that drive the essay 'industry' is frightening; it defeats logic as to why American students would spend millions of dollars every year on essays and term papers only to use them as a 'guide' for writing their own essays. In fact if , for the sake of the argument, one assumes that the students indeed use the essays as guides, then one would be forced to conclude that the students are too lazy and lack the expertise needed to conduct academic research- a mass 'illness' that will soon flood the American corporate sector with disastrous consequences.
As a lecturer, I always go an extra mile in teaching students how to conduct their own research . If students can be equipped with the appropriate techniques, all essay companies would cease to exist. It'd be the best thing to happen across all academic institutions in the world.
Queen Sheba
WRONG
The only hard evidence exists, in black and white, in the docket of the "Boston University v. The Paper Store (et al)" case of 1995-7. BU's attorneys obtained from the term paper sites, via subpoena, records of all students from BU that had bought papers in an attempt to establish direct damages sustained by the university. Of the eight (8) BU students found to have purchased papers, seven (7) of them referenced the sample papers properly. This was BU's own evidence that the victorious defendants ultimately used against BU!
Now, unless you cowardly dimwits have equally legitimate, relevant, trustworthy evidence, I invite you to shut your traps.(WB)
Before I systematically and emphatically dismantle WB's hollow and biased convictions that American students buy essays for reasons OTHER THAN cheating, I find it prudent to introduce myself:I am an Ethiopian lecturer, 31 and teaching economics at a private university in Nairobi. I also teach two other UK universities via teleconferencing. The sole reason for joining this site is to consistently emphasize the need for students to be undertaking their own work instead of relying on 'genuine' companies or imposters.
When I was undertaking my graduate degree, I was horrified to discover that in a class of 37 students, at least half of the student used to buy essays from the numerous essay mills around and turned them in for grading.
The class had about 11 American students and 8 British students.
Turning to WB's deeply flawed argument, I want to state the following:
a) The 'evidence' she presents is based on flawed and 'outdated' data, much like using 1970s statistics on TV ownership in US to explain 2012 TV ownership patterns!
b) WB's skewed interpretation of the Boston University case is clearly based on insignificant data sample and, consequently, all her interpretations are rendered void and statistically misleading.
c) Her lack of understanding of the extent and magnitude of the lies and pretensions that drive the essay 'industry' is frightening; it defeats logic as to why American students would spend millions of dollars every year on essays and term papers only to use them as a 'guide' for writing their own essays. In fact if , for the sake of the argument, one assumes that the students indeed use the essays as guides, then one would be forced to conclude that the students are too lazy and lack the expertise needed to conduct academic research- a mass 'illness' that will soon flood the American corporate sector with disastrous consequences.
As a lecturer, I always go an extra mile in teaching students how to conduct their own research . If students can be equipped with the appropriate techniques, all essay companies would cease to exist. It'd be the best thing to happen across all academic institutions in the world.
Queen Sheba