The Columbus cheating scandal

[Skitzo]

ADC= Area Defense Council?????

[M2]

ktulu

Yes.

Toro

Good reply...did you sleep in a Holiday Inn last night?!?

Cheers! M2

[Guest ledbyexample]

You make some good points.

The culture by itself certainly wouldn't be reason enough for a reasonable person to cheat. I would argue that they didn't think they were cheating at all. What they have been saying is that they were given study materials that are very similar if not identical to materials that are widely available at UPT by an IP and encouraged to use them to keep their organization from looking bad.

Most of the students coming to UPT go through IFT and the only definition of cheating in the flying community they have is the part 61 FAR definition. This states in part that the only materials you can use during a test are materials specifically provided by a test administrator.

This definition isn't a blank check for cheating. It says you can't have copies of tests beforehand and while there are numerous tests available to students beforehand at UPT that's not what these particular students are being accused of having.

I know you are playing devil's advocate and you know that there is a lot of gray area at pilot training. Unfortunately, these studs had to figure it out the hard way. Based on the precedents set it seems that the consequence is disproportion to what occurred. You would think that if a cheating scandal happened every 18 months or so someone would take the time to define the cheating they don’t want to occur. I would at least make a distinction between what’s allowable under the FARs and what’s acceptable at UPT. I personally like the Virginia Tech Corps of Cadets definition of cheating:

3. CHEATING. The definition of cheating is to knowingly use unauthorized assistance in submitted work as one’s own efforts or to knowingly submit another’s works as one’s own ideas, thereby intending to gain an unfair advantage, or intending to deceive or mislead. Actions that assist another to do these things also constitute cheating.

The whole idea of gaining an unfair advantage and using unauthorized assistance is at the root of cheating. In this case if the whole class had access to the info then no one had an unfair advantage.

If you want to develop a culture of integrity don’t kick out the students who were forthright to their superiors.

As for a .mil email address I'll ask around and see what I can get.

[Guest Youngnita]

Wow, that sounds like you're saying if everyone is cheating then its not cheating. ????

[Guest ledbyexample]

If everyone uses the reference material during an open book test they are not cheating. Even if only one person uses the reference material they are not cheating. If an instructor stands up during a test and says "question number three is poorly written the answer is 'c'" the students who put c are not cheating.

The key is that each person has the same access to the information and the instructors not the students determine what is allowable reference material.

In this case an IP chose to provide the wrong material.

[Guest Youngnita]

You are really grasping now...open book, poorly written questions? But we all have our opinions and I can respect yours.

[Champ Kind]

Originally posted by ledbyexample:

The whole idea of gaining an unfair advantage and using unauthorized assistance is at the root of cheating. In this case if the whole class had access to the info then no one had an unfair advantage.

So what about the studs that came in classes before them (or, for that matter, the classes coming up)? They had to (or, are going to) bust their tails, most likely without the "materials" that this class had. Won't that mean that the class that allegedly cheated would have earned scores that, according to classes that came before that did not have access to those materials, they didn't deserve? Just wondering...

[JS]

Not to pour it on you, but I agree with Flylady that you are kind of grasping for excuses now - not knowing the definition of cheating? Only having the FAA definition? I think most military officers would agree that bringing in exam answers on post-it notes would constitute cheating. I mean, where will it end? Most of us hate having to sit through those CC calls where they drill into us what the definition of sexual harassment is. What next, a CC call to define cheating on a spouse, one on the definition of lying, and one on the exact definition of shoplifting?

Torro's point is right on - would you tell a judge that you were speeding "because the cars next to you were doing it?" And if you presented the judge with a long list of UPT studs who admitted to speeding on highway 45 in Columbus, the judge would take that list and issue all of them speeding citations too. Not to mention that it would make a great story in a major newspaper or on a major news network.

[Toro]

Originally posted by ledbyexample:

I would argue that they didn't think they were cheating at all. What they have been saying is that they were given study materials that are very similar if not identical to materials that are widely available at UPT by an IP.

BS.

First off, stop bringing the IP into this. His actions and motives are unexcusable, but that's an entire case in and of itself. If you're involved with this case then you know what I'm talking about.

If the students didn't think they were cheating then why didn't every single UPT student at Columbus have that same test? If they didn't think they were cheating then why didn't every single member of their class at least have that test? By your own oddball definition of cheating, they were in the wrong-

thereby intending to gain an unfair advantage

Some had the tests, some didn't. That's an unfair advantage. That's cheating, you just said it yourself.

You would think that if a cheating scandal happened every 18 months or so someone would take the time to define the cheating they don’t want to occur.

I can't believe you honestly feel that somebody needed to define cheating for you. I guarantee you that they won't need another scandal to define it. During their inbriefs, guys starting UPT from here on out will probably get a crystal clear explanation of what's acceptable and what's not.

[Guest buck]

anyone here that is not an air force pilot should be careful about sharing their opinions. i would not pass judgement on what is considered unfair preparation for the california bar exam because i am not a lawyer and have not been exposed to that culture.

with that said, what i can say, is that in our culture, we have sayings like "cooperate to graduate" and "if you ain't cheating you ain't trying". now if you're not a pilot you're probably saying "what the heck? this is the value system that our combat pilots are being trained through??" and i'll say "yes" and then i'll say "look at the history of our combat aviators and tell me if you'd want to change anything about the way they are trained and cultured."

trust me when i say that no one in this example or any other example of "cheating" at upt (that i've known about) has had the intentions of gaining an unfair advantage for themselves over their classmates. [if they did, then, toro, i'd be right next to you saying boot em out]. but that's just not the attitude that's taught. what is taught, is that if you come across something that could help your flight or your class you share it with them, no matter what. these studs are getting taught the importance of team cohesiveness and cooperation over all else.

all this has been going on for years and is completely normal. and the pilots that come out of upt each year are the same extremely capable, motivated and competent pilots as the year prior. our air force is truly second to none, not because of our aircraft or weapons (trust me, there's better stuff out there), but because of our pilots, mx troops and support personnel. and like it or not, this is the system that they've been trained under for years.

if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[ 07. February 2005, 16:06: Message edited by: buck ]

[Guest AirGuardian]

This "type" of issue happen to Columbus years ago and maybe they are trying to change the culture, make a point, or hanging some people out to dry - I don't know. I'm sure the current Commanders were briefed of that investigation and this seems far worse based only on the consequences, once again maybe it's being done to prove a point - whatever.

Years ago at CBM, the EPQ that the Check Flight guy found was purely because of the students mistake...of course. This particular student had the EPQ's in his DASH 1 Binder when he went to check during the ground eval. Gouge has been seen/found obviously by all, but this gouge was verbatum information down to the question number... Not, the normal(I say normal loosely) student type gouge that is based on students remembering the questions from the test and regurgitating them onto a master file listing for all the rest to see for years to come. These files are better than 50% accurate and mostly give the students a better idea on what to focus on. Normal gouge is distributed from class to class and many take advantage of it, except the photographic types and a few others like myself who really need to read the material to understand it... Gouge for many of us just steered us in the right direction on emphasis items and what the IP's were trying to foot-stomp into our heads and I thank them for that. Alot of information, but the highlights still remain useful to this day. Fine line, yes - but if you had the actual questions, word for word and can basically do the weekend civilian brain crunch course to memorize A,B,C, answers on short term memory to dump at a sooner rather than later date, well too bad - my opinion of course. I'm sure there are many levels to this "cheating" issue which I'll never be privy to, but once again who here does know all the facts!

By the way, in our case(not my flight, we barely held on with passing scores) they made all the affected flights concerned retake 17-22 former reworded EPQs every weekend(1 every Sat) for their remainder of their time at CBM. Better than a discharge, maybe there is a harder line drawn now, maybe it's totally different or was common sense the biggest factor and everyone claimed ignorant... Cooperate, graduate in moderation - it may build team work in a weird sense... is it worth it! And as Buck said, unfair advantage or not, most my guys were just trying to survive day to day unfortunately. Having the tests everytime may have helped in the short term, in the long term it never works out and I can pick out the ones who relied on it!!! Some people know their Sh*t, others don't...hmmmm!

[Champ Kind]

Originally posted by buck:

anyone here that is not an air force pilot should be careful about sharing their opinions. i would not pass judgement on what is considered unfair preparation for the california bar exam because i am not a lawyer and have not been exposed to that culture.

Not really sure if that was directed towards my comment, in some passive-aggressive sorta way...

Whether it was or not, I'll say this (get pissed if you want). No, I'm not an AF pilot. Hell, I won't even be a stud for about another 6 weeks. I'm all about working as a team. I know that if you want something badly enough, there are ALWAYS going to be hoops to jump through, and you might as well accept that the answer will be "Because we said so (etc.)" if you ask why some things are the way they are (Trust me, that becomes painfully clear after four years at a military college).

The only reason this thread even got a response from me is that someone brought in the definition of "cheating" from the VT Corps of Cadets. I lived under a rigid honor code for four years at school, and served on the peer-elected honor committee for three out of those four years. Have I ever had to face the notion of cheating in a UPT environment? No. Have I ever seen people try to gain an advantage by using unauthorized "study aids" (or whatever you want to call it in this context), get caught, and then try to BS their way out of it? Yes, on many occasions. I know... That was college, and now this is the active duty Air Force. But, I would hope that I don't need to check my integrity and anything I learned about honor at the door when I start UPT. It seems to me that maybe theses guys' perception of right and wrong got a little distorted. I mean, that's what integrity is, right? "Doing the right thing when no one's watching." Being able to look at yourself in the mirror? I don't know, maybe I'm idealistic and my morals will also become distorted when begin pilot training.

I've also heard the argument that "sometimes you will have to break the rules in combat (or when you're operational) in order to get the job done (or survive)." Well, I don't see how anyone's lives or the success of a mission were on the line if they would have failed an EPQ. I would think that you play by the rules while you're in training, and when the time comes to do what you need to do when operational, that will just come naturally based on your training, etc.

Not trying to sound like a tool or an individual or anything, because I'm not, and can't stand those who are. But that's my take on this... I will now be step off and observe the dialog between the experienced aviators on this thread.

[ 07. February 2005, 17:44: Message edited by: PhlashNU04 ]

[HerkDerka]

Guys lets stop kicking this dead horse. Face the facts:

1) Some students have been accused of cheating.

2) You ain't one of them.

Let it go and quit fighting with people about it.

HD

[Baseops.Net]

Also:

1. The students that have been accused of cheating may claim that they did not know what the standards were, what the definition of cheating is, and what type of permissive atmosphere existed.

2. No matter what you think or wish, nothing can change this. The authorities will decide what to do with these students and there isn't a damn thing we can do about it on this message board (or in real life).

3. After this incident -- Does everyone now know what cheating is and what you will be punished for during UPT?

If you answer #3 a "NO" then proceed below:

4. Perform the boldface for being a knucklehead. As soon as practicable: disenroll / SIE / DOR / ring the bell / resign your commission.

[ 07. February 2005, 18:39: Message edited by: Baseops.Net ]

[Guest pilotselect]

Sorry to act stupid here, but what exactly happened at Columbus???

[Guest fosterbeer]

Originally posted by pilotselect:

Sorry to act stupid here, but what exactly happened at Columbus???

Some students, who formerly got in trouble for making some kind of Gold Bond movie, had strippers at a wing ceremony of some sort. CBS was doing a tv series about it, but cancelled it when someone suggested that all piloted aircraft would be replaced by UAVs. The wing ceremony was almost interrupted by a cropduster flying along without radios who thought the AFB didn't exist anymore due to Base Realignment and Closure, but ultimately the defenseive egg of the base saved the day.

or something like that...

[Guest dumaisj]

That could be the funniest post I've ever seen on this Board...you are the MAN!!! Buy him a

[ 08. February 2005, 12:27: Message edited by: dumaisj ]

[Toro]

Fosterbeer,

Quite possible the most creative and funniest post I've seen here in a long time. Outstanding!

[Toro]

Front page story of the Air Force times is this story. The only real new news is that the instructor in the 'scandal', Capt. Richard Brimer, will be charged with an Article 32. Since you may not be able to view the story, I've cut and pasted the first couple paragraphs below.

One instructor charged, 11 punished for cheating at Columbus AFB

COLUMBUS, Miss. — An instructor pilot at Columbus Air Force Base has been formally charged for his role in a test-cheating scheme, officials said.

Eleven other officers have been have been removed from pilot training as a result of their involvement in the scheme last fall, according to a CAFB statement released Monday.

The statement said Capt. Richard Brimer, of the 41st Flying Training Squadron, has been charged with failure to obey a lawful regulation, making a false official statement and conduct unbecoming an officer by distributing controlled test answers.

The CAFB statement said the 11 officers, varying in rank from second lieutenant to captain, have received non-judicial punishment for cheating on weekly emergency procedure quizzes, known as EPQs, during the T-37 phase of Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training.

The 11 will not be reinstated and punishment will include forfeitures of pay ranging from $250 to $1,675 per month for two months, officials said.

Additionally, the officers have been reprimanded for unacceptable conduct offenses including conduct unbecoming an officer, dereliction of duty and making a false statement, according to the CAFB statement.

The next step for Brimer is an Article 32 investigation expected to occur in August, the military equivalent of a civilian grand jury.

[Guest Jetjock19]

These guys aren't going to be allowed back to pilot training are they?

[Guest C17AFPilot]

Yeah, but this case lies much "deeper" than the IP just giving a stud the test... and thats what the real issue should be

[Guest hockeymv]

Yea, from what I understand there were some 'cultural' issues down in that particular flight in the squadron.

CH makes a good point, while in Tweets my USEM was ragging on my flight until we finally 'figured it out' and got some decent gouge on the EPQ's.

It's too bad he had to do something like this (allegedly), he was a good IP (Yes, I DID fly with him) and pretty decent to work with too (Casual time in skeds). But, if it's all true, then it seems the AF is doing the right thing. Let the Article 32 sort it all out. Everyone deserves their day in court.

[herkbum]

I also flew with this instructor and feel he is one of the best "hands" guys I flew with. Flew many of my formation rides with him and felt he was a great at getting his instructional points across without being condescending, but he was a hammer as the USEM. Would sit you down in a heartbeat, especially when one of the students wants to "hover his Tweet at Marble". Also thought he was a stand-up guy and I still believe it. I don't know the particulars of the case and I don't want to know. It sounds like a mistake was made, and unfortunately, he is going to pay for it. Best of luck Brimestar!

[AFCS_Actuator]

Were all of the studs and the IP in question from the Academy? Is this the "cultural" issue you guys are talking about? I heard they were all from the zoo, but I want to know if I got fed a BS line.

[Hacker]

Originally posted by herkbum:

It sounds like a mistake was made, and unfortunately, he is going to pay for it.

The accusation was never made that he wasn't a skilled aviator or instructor. He may have been, I don't know. Unfortunately, that has no bearing on the actions he is being accused of.

The issue, as I understand it, had to do with his conduct regarding test material and his motives for distributing that material selectively to students. There is actually more to the story that people are talking about, too, and I'm surprised that hasn't been brought to light (although it appears nothing illegal transpired in that realm).

Judging from what I see from many Tweet FAIPs that go through IFF, I think he had a skewed view of what "cooperate and graduate" and "if you ain't cheatin, you ain't tryin'" is supposed to mean. It certainly does not mean to act how the IP and students acted in this scenario.

Unfortunately, the students in UPT have to look to the IPs as mentors for guidance on things like this. Since they don't have any experience in this area, they have to trust that when an IP says something is 'okay' that it really is. In this case, it wasn't.

So, IMHO, we had an IP with some poor judgment and a group of students who had some really poor mentorship.

Back on the original topic of HerkBum's post, I have seen many pilots who are very skilled and knowledgable in the airplane have some appallingly poor judgement while on the ground.