Students using smart drugs to pass exams

steddyeddy

Recently there seems to be a rise in the number of students using smart drugs in order to pass exams. These smart drugs or neuroenhancer are usually prescribed for people with ADD or similar conditions but it seems they are being used by college students during exam times as well. I have met a few people who took Ritalin in college many of whom were American but I don't think it's a wide scale issue yet. Has anyone any experience of taking these drugs in order to study (either prescribed or proscribed) and what's people's general opinion on them? Will we see a rise in neuroenhancer use amongst leaving cert students next? Article below is from the Guardian about the use of smart drugs in Cambridge college.

My opinion on this is that these drugs can have side effects for people not meant to take them (As well as people who are meant to) and shouldn't be messed with. The other issue is that the use of these drugs both invalidates the tests and sort of proves that university exams are becoming little more than glorified memory tests.

Universities told to consider dope tests as student use of 'smart drugs' soars

Cambridge scientist calls for ethical debate on drugs bought on internet that boost alertness and attention


Universities must investigate measures, including random dope testing, to tackle the increasing use of cognitive enhancment drugs by students for exams, a leading behavioural neuro­scientist warns.
Student use of drugs, such as Ritalin and modafinil, available over the internet and used to increase the brain's alertness, had "enormous implications for universities", said Barbara Sahakian, a professor of clinical neuropsychology at Cambridge University's psychiatry department.
Normally prescribed for neurological disorders including Alzheimer's disease, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and narcolepsy, such drugs boost acetylcholine in the brain, improving alertness and attention. Their use has prompted concerns that they could give students an unfair advantage. "This is something that universities really have to discuss. They should have some strategy, some kind of active policy," Sahakian said.
"The coercion aspect is a strong one. Some students say they feel it is cheating, and it puts pressure on them to feel they have to use these drugs when they don't really want to."
Sahakian, whose work is at the forefront of research on the effects of such drugs on healthy people, said urgent debate was now needed on the ethics of how society dealt with "smart drugs".
Though data on long-term effects on healthy users was not yet available, some scientists believe that pharmaceutical advancement and ­cultural acceptance could make ­"cosmetic neurology" as popular as beauty "enhancements".
"If a safe and effective drug is developed which enhances cognition, then I think it would be difficult not to allow access to it," Sahakian said. But if such drugs were then legal, many ethical issues had to be addressed.
Speaking before a lecture at the Royal Institution tomorrow on the ethical implications of smart drugs for universities and schools, she added: "The big question is, are we all going to be taking drugs in the next 10 years and boosting our cognition in that way?
"And if we are, will we use them to have a shorter working week, so we can go home, spend more time with our families and have a good work/life balance? Or, will we go headlong into a 24/7 society where we work all the time because we can work all the time?
"You have to consider there are things that could be beneficial about such drugs because we have an ageing population: people may have to work for longer, and their pensions may not be performing. It may be, as you get older, that people may want to take a cognitive enhancement drug."
Surveys in the United States indicate that 16% of university students are using "smart drugs". There are global websites and chatrooms devoted to how to best use drugs to aid study.
Most buy the drugs over the internet. "That is a real concern, because they are not aware of what they are ­getting, or how it could affect them," Sahakian said.
A Nature magazine poll of 1,400 respondents – mostly scientists and researchers – indicated that one in five had used "smart drugs". Questioned about their attitude towards use, the majority frowned on their use in competitive situations, such as university entrance exams. However, some admitted that they would feel under pressure to give their child a "smart" drug if other children were using them.
"If these drugs become, essentially, legal, it will be difficult to say you can't use them for a competitive exam," Sahakian said. "Students who don't use them feel this is cheating. This is something that universities should at least discuss. Should there be urine testing? These questions have to be looked at."

suicide_circus

Gonna need to ban caffeine so!

steddyeddy

suicide_circus wrote: »

Gonna need to ban caffeine so!

I think they need to change the nature of the tests. Yes caffeine is certainly a neuroenhancer.

El_Dangeroso

I think it's an indictment of the examination system and the university system in general that it's possible to get a degree through rote learning and cramming.

A project based continuous-assessment style system with a Phd-like viva (where you answer questions about your thesis from a panel of your peers) would weed out these sorts of problems.

steddyeddy

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

I think it's an indictment of the examination system and the university system in general that it's possible to get a degree through rote learning and cramming.

A project based continuous-assessment style system with a Phd-like viva (where you answer questions about your thesis from a panel of your peers) would weed out these sorts of problems.

Exactly my thinking on it. Vivas for the undergraduates would be excellent although some programmes already use them I think,

_Redzer_

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

I think it's an indictment of the examination system and the university system in general that it's possible to get a degree through rote learning and cramming.

A project based continuous-assessment style system with a Phd-like viva (where you answer questions about your thesis from a panel of your peers) would weed out these sorts of problems.

Many university courses employ a continuous assessment system. In fact, all my modules this year had continuous assessments in them, to varying degrees.

You actually can't get by well in college by just regurgitating information. They often present you with questions that make you apply your knowledge to solve it, not just a standard question picked from the book.

I think both an exam and continuous assessment is the way to go, instead of either one or the other.
I've had continuous assessment heavy modules last semester and they were an absolute pain in the hole and ate up so much of my time, by the time I had other exams I wasn't able to study them as well because I hadn't the time, I'd projects and presentations due all the time.

The kind of people who panic about exams were also the ones panicking about their thesis proposal and pulling an all-nighter beforehand along with several weeks 15 hours a day in the library before the thesis. And constant whimpering before their viva. And in at 6am the morning that any big-ish assignment was due.

Panickers are gonna panic and fuss whatever the system is.

TimeToShine

Smart drugs?

They improve concentration - not enhance cognitive ability. A lot of people I know in my year used them and they would not have been the best of the bunch to start with. They also make you very dependent on them so once your supply runs out you'll struggle to knuckle down.

They are big in the US though - making a bit of an appearance here lately but not quite an issue yet.

ebjarrell

I take Ritalin for ADD. I can assure that it does not make me smarter. What it does is allows me to concentrate without getting distracted as easily as I use to.

In that sense, it's invaluable.

Bipolar Joe

TimeToShine wrote: »

Smart drugs?

They improve concentration - not enhance cognitive ability.

This. It's not like you take a pill and suddenly are fantastic at your chosen subject.

Montroseee

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

I think it's an indictment of the examination system and the university system in general that it's possible to get a degree through rote learning and cramming.

A project based continuous-assessment style system with a Phd-like viva (where you answer questions about your thesis from a panel of your peers) would weed out these sorts of problems.

I don't like comments like this, ignorant and largely incorrect. Most courses in UCD and Trinity, where I went to, have a continuous-assessment style system, from talking to students from other colleges it's similar. College exams are certainly not straight forward enough to just learn off material for. As always, whether it be the LC/College Exams/Professional Exams etc. it all comes down to hard work, the hardest workers will do the best in general, like life as well actually. I don't like you passing it off as rote learning or cramming.

El_Dangeroso

Montroseee wrote: »

I don't like comments like this, ignorant and largely incorrect. Most courses in UCD and Trinity, where I went to, have a continuous-assessment style system, from talking to students from other colleges it's similar. College exams are certainly not straight forward enough to just learn off material for. As always, whether it be the LC/College Exams/Professional Exams etc. it all comes down to hard work, the hardest workers will do the best in general, like life as well actually. I don't like you passing it off as rote learning or cramming.

Well considering that I've worked in the university system for four years, I'd say my comment is well informed, not ignorant as you presume (irony!).

There is some continuous assessment, but even in very technical courses (of which both my degree and masters were) there's far too much cramming for end of year exams going on.

I know people who got degrees (even from trinners!) who just learnt what the exam required and remained largely ignorant of the wider context of what they were learning.

You can't do that in a Phd, which is the system that I would prefer to see emulated at undergrad level.

Montroseee

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Well considering that I've worked in the university system for four years, I'd say my comment is well informed, not ignorant as you presume (irony!).

There is some continuous assessment, but even in very technical courses (of which both my degree and masters were) there's far too much cramming for end of year exams going on.

I know people who got degrees (even from trinners!) who just learnt what the exam required and remained largely ignorant of the wider context of what they were learning.

You can't do that in a Phd, which is the system that I would prefer to see emulated at undergrad level.

I don't agree with this or see how it could work to be honest.

scamalert

that article sounds like taken from sun newspaper or written by idiot.
Since nootropics is the right term for such drugs-they dont make people smarter,thus if one is stupid no matter what they take they still gonna be stupid.

Most nootropics only enhance alertness and add a bit of sharpness,nothing that one couldn't achieve with good rest day before exams.As someone said before only hard work and studying get you there.not some pills-as article sounds more like movie limitless script.