Talk:Course Hero

Features
Is it really appropriate for a product to have a "features" section that seems only to serve as the advertisement for the product in question? I looked at pages for similar products (like Chegg), and only this page has a "features" section. a.s. hershel &#91;&#91;User:Ashershel&#124;Ashershel&#93;&#93; (talk) 04:26, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Some mention about how Course Hero harvests dissertations and essays is worth putting up.

Education platform or flagrant copyright violation?
Publishing material created by colleges and instructors for students taking their classes sounds just like a flagrant copyright violation, as it's unlikely the students have rights to distribute material/exams they did not create. Otherwise, Why doesn't Course Hero approach colleges and instructors to get the material directly from them?

In summary, Course Hero is not an education platform but a source for cheating and getting good grades with the minimun effort. How would you feel if the doctor that is about to do surgery on you passed his/her classes by looking at material from Course Hero?
 * Some of my teaching materials, which had required student password access, are up there and I was never asked for permission.--Wikiain (talk) 01:47, 24 November 2013 (UTC)


 * My work from undergrad years (original writing, not using any forms/prompts/documents from the instructor) has been uploaded with neither my permission nor that of the instructor. I was never asked, notified, or paid, and these works had never been online before, to my knowledge. I can link these and verify. Another instructor from my university, St. Edward's in Austin, found her dissertation there but had not given her permission either. We are all disputing the copyright issues but have encountered repeated hurdles, confirming the issue discussed under "controversy" that sounds speculative. Roughly half of the user comments on their Facebook page as of 23:50 14 December 2013 have to do with copyright infringement, mostly complaints from original authors and publishers: :: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.68.188.225 (talk) 05:52, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Cheating subsection appears to contain opinions and is unfair on "faculty"
The second sentence in the cheating subsection appears to have been written by someone voicing an opinion and is not aware of the facts.

The sentence essentially and unfairly infers that all 'faculty' (i.e. lecturers) who reuse questions are to blame if students use Course Hero to cheat. This ignores the reality that in many subjects, it is either extremely or difficult to have variety in the questions, types of questions, structure of questions, etc. that are posed to students in assignments.

For example, I am a researcher/tutor in mathematics and statistics, and in that field there is little room for variety in assignment/test questions. In some higher maths and stats units, the only questions that can be asked are to prove certain facts, theorems, etc. and there are few such proofs that students can be asked to do. In all maths and stats units with applications, proving certain knowledge can only be done with a certain type or style of question. Changing the numbers/facts in the question is therefore the only form of variety available, but even then variety can be restricted. It is possible but sadly not always the case that the numbers/facts can be changed in such a way that the student has different issues in the problem to get around (e.g. a quadratic equation may have 0, 1 or 2 real-valued solutions depending on the values of the coefficients).

As such, mathematics and statistics units, more so higher level ones, tend to be restricted in the range and variety of questions they can ask in assignments, tests and exams. I understand from colleagues around the campus that this is a common situation - especially with higher level units where the content is more restricted and specialised.

In short, lecturers may well have little alternative but to use the same or similar questions each time they run a unit. The second sentence of this subsection is grossly unfair to such lecturers because it is not their fault or choice at all that this happens. It is crucial for such units that solutions are not made available on Course Hero or similar websites, because that allows students to cheat.

I will admit that some lecturers are to blame when the scope of their units allows for a variety of questions and types of questions in assignments, but they choose to reuse questions or make few changes out of not willing to devote time to the job or not seeing the need for change. This is a valid point that this subsection should mention - but, it does need to be rewritten to make it clear that it is not always possible for lecturers to change assignments, exams, other assessments, much if at all, and that therefore they cannot be blamed for Course Hero creating this opportunity for cheating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.95.16.17 (talk) 02:17, 22 December 2016 (UTC) While it may have started with good intentions, it seems to mostly be a site for cheating. I have students attempting to submit papers that match papers submitted by previous student in the class 100% except for the title page. Students get unlocks by submitting their papers, and then use them to download "samples" and then just change the name, and sometimes a few other details.Vettrock (talk) 04:08, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

The answer to the above question is 'flagrant copyright violations'
One of the tutors on this site posted material copied from WP. It showed up as a copyright violation on the detector, of course, but was clearly a backwards copyright vio since the material posted here was written in 2012 and the tutor at Course Hero posted theirs this year. Here is the discussion at [Persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire]:. Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:40, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

english
My suggestion is concern to my self in learning in english 124.107.46.170 (talk) 04:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Course Hero apparently does not check for text or complete articles copied of Wikipedia
Is Course Hero known for containing copies of Wikipedia articles or derivatives?

When I was trying to find out whether passages from Algae had been copied from other sources I found several "papers" on Course Hero which seem to be copies of our article. Some of them appear to be mere screenshots:
 * https://www.coursehero.com/file/160995447/history-of-algae-and-its-origindocx/
 * https://www.coursehero.com/file/192393667/Algaepdf/
 * https://www.coursehero.com/file/113639508/Algaepdf/
 * https://www.coursehero.com/file/168526511/Algaepdf/
 * https://www.coursehero.com/file/158298444/Algaedocx/
 * https://www.coursehero.com/file/177848060/Algae-summarize-WPS-Officedocx/

KaiKemmann (talk) 11:51, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I've run across this dozens of times. It's a simple open upload platform - students blatantly copy Wikipedia articles for assignments, then upload them to the site. They do not, apparently, check for copyright or copied material in any way. Frankly, I was surprised to just see that they're being used as a source on about 127 articles and drafts. There's not much discussion on RSN - just this on-target mention four years ago from . I'm going to run through the list today and remove as many of those as makes sense. Sam Kuru (talk) 13:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your comment. I suppose it is to early to include them in the Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources list?
 * Btw, for a non native speaker it might be useful to include a short definition of the term "perennial" to the introduction of this list page. I had only come across the term in the context of "perennial plants" (= living for more than one year) before. But here is apparently meant to mean "reoccurring" or "frequently used"?
 * Would it maybe make sense to change the first sentence of the perennial sources list page to something like

The following presents a non-exhaustive list of sources whose reliability and use on Wikipedia are frequently discussed (i.e. perennial as in re-occurring in discussions).
 * .. or at least bolden the relevant term .. ?

The following presents a non-exhaustive list of sources whose reliability and use on Wikipedia are frequently discussed.
 * KaiKemmann (talk) 12:50, 25 November 2023 (UTC)