Premise: Teenagers need to pass deadly tests in order to have good lives. The stakes are high enough that an extensive cheating ring has developed, and it looks more like a fighting anime than a school one.
As for the anime, there is nothing too specific to say about it. Animation, voice acting, music track is all below mediocre. It is about some students doing and cheating at exams. The comedy is pretty situational. You will get a chuckle or two from it.
Please dont watch this piece of junk. Dont even waste your time reading this review, just watch something else. If you're here like me thinking you can find a method for cheating in exams in real life , then no you wont find anything here. It was a little funny i would give that, but wth does this even have a plot A story Whats that Can we use it to cheat
In the world where education is everything, if you manage to pass exams with your academic ability, you will start your successful life. Those who fail the exam will start cruel life. The world is capable of only developing the gifted from a young age with exams, and there are some people who cannot accept the destiny if they unable to pass the exam, and would do anything to pass it. This includes cheating and interfering with the exam. The examination hall has become a battlefield because people cannot do exams anymore. L (learning) type and C (Cheating) type students prevent each other from interfering with the exam, so that they can aim for high scores. In order to prevent the L-types from getting the high scores, C-type students would battle against them. This battle also involves the examiners who do not allow cheating, making the examination hall became more chaotic! The heated battle between Mumei, who is an C-type student, and Koui, who is an L-type person, begins! Can Koui outsmart Mumei and her tricks
I do not know what I was expecting, but I definitely was not expecting this; the thought that this anime series, simply stripped down, is about cheating on exams is laughable. Laughable as it is, though, I do believe that there are some truths told in this anime series. These truths are especially applicable to the Japanese approach and attitude towards education. The education system in the US and the UK, as opposed to the Japanese system, is less intensive and more lenient. From my own (admittedly limited) understanding, the level of study in Japan is a great degree higher and more advanced. Thus students are expected to put in more hours of personal study in order to keep up.
Yes, even that last line has appeal, if you want to see it as a boost to the spirit or a toast to new possibilities rather than a gesture of despair. The narrator has reflected on her craft and has decided to stick with it.
The depth of the art of cheating in the twentieth-century educational system taxes the fainthearted. Many students receive tuition waivers, book allowances and housing grants (not to mention food stamps) from the state or federal government. Their classmates collect reduced interest or free student loans, most of which are never repaid. Tuition defrays but a slight share of the cost of modern teaching; the remainder emanates from a variety of federal, state and local subsidies. Professors procure a plethora of tax monies by way of research grants, often employed in the most abysmal, wasteful or shocking endeavors. Schools intercept other forms of public funding to facilitate compliance with various entitlement and social policy programs mandated by government. In short, an endless litany of perversions, diversions and boondoggles blemish the once-fair visage of the grand old dame of education.
Thus, a perceptive observer can chart issues on a continuum: (1) What should be done about overt cheating in public education (2) Should some students be permitted a degree for attendance upon courses without intellectual content (3) If nonchallenging courses exist, should public funds be employed in any manner in that endeavor (4) To what extent should state social policy derive enforcement from the public school arena (5) Should the government control education in the purely private and voluntary realm (6) What constitutes the proper role of the state in the teaching process
Furthermore, formal education does not serve as the sole or even the highest means of personal development. All of us know of wonderful people who mastered a craft or imparted great virtue and knowledge without a degree or, indeed, with very little schoolhouse training. Each person or family should choose the type and extent of nurture from an ever- widening shelf of illuminating choice. Society, and the individuals in society, benefit the most from the vast creativity fostered by such a reign of freedom.
Rampant cheating and chicanery in the academy serve not only to betray proper morality but also to disclose a greater malevolence within. Public education induces such wickedness simply because it is constructed on wrong principles: force, not freedom. In a free society, the sting abates and true wisdom flourishes. 
Months before, I had written an item on my blog about the existence of online cheating videos, created by high school and college students, that demonstrate elaborate techniques designed to boost examination scores. The videos show, step by step, how to create fake drink bottle labels in Photoshop to hide formulae, how to stuff pen shafts with answer scrolls, and how to write detailed foreign-language conjugations on stretched-out rubber bands. Most of the videos had low production values and were shot in informal domestic settings, but at least one Japanese video borrowed the actual form of commercial distance learning, with distinct chapters on the subject of cheating; the lessons were elaborated with slick information graphics and computer-generated animation to enhance the instructional content.
I thought the cheating videos were interesting because they demonstrated an argument that I had been developing over the course of the past decade. First, with regard to everyday practices and long-term goals, formal institutions of codified pedagogy, represented by universities, were increasingly in conflict with individuals who were informally self-taught. Second, access to and use of computational media frequently seemed to exacerbate this tension. I thought this situation was particularly unfortunate in the era of socially networked computing, when one would hope that academic and popular forms of instruction would be converging to work in concert, thereby supporting a life-long culture of inquiry, collective intelligence, and distributed research practices. Certainly, the students in the videos were sharing tips and performing online knowledge-networking activities that constituted of a form of real learning, even if such learning would be considered objectionable by their professors who would, understandably, regard the content of the videos as being fundamentally in violation of the scholarly social contract.
Prior to the release of this report, Mia Consalvo had argued that cheating in video games is expected behavior among players and that cheaters perform important epistemological work by sharing information about easy solutions on message boards, forums, and other venues for collaborations. Consalvo also builds on the work of literacy theorist James Paul Gee, who asserts that video game narratives often require transgression to gain knowledge and that, just as passive obedience rarely produces insight in real classrooms, testing boundaries by disobeying the instructions of authority figures can be the best way to learn. Because procedural culture is ubiquitous, however, Ian Bogost has insisted that defying rules and confronting the persuasive powers of certain architectures of control only brings other kinds of rules into play, since we can never really get outside of ideology and act as truly free agents, even when supposedly gaming the system.
The kind of learning associated with cheating, modding, and hacking also raises provocative questions about the set expectations of everyday life for those in more privileged groups. For example, my own son, who was nine years old at the time that I began writing this book, was playing a sequel to The Sims, which is a video game where players build houses, spend money, and do a number of everyday adult activities in the pursuit of wealth and happiness. Some versions of the game also give players god- like powers to design an entire world in which points are accrued based on the sustainable homeostasis of their model of utopia and the interactions between competing interests that the player has constructed. The Sims is a computer simulation that is often praised by educators who promote digital media and learning because the game requires a lot of problem solving. Although created by the famed libertarian Will Wright, The Sims launched a franchise in which players can participate in the social engineering of everything from the acquisition of consumer goods in an individual household to building large-scale urban infrastructures that include power grids and transportation policies intended to support the health of complex, globalized economies.
Students somehow believe that if they have the equations in front of them, or a bunch of facts to cheat from they will benefit during an exam. NOW, where exactly did they get that idea They got that idea by realizing that it sometimes works!! Why does it work It works when we in the professorate write exams that test simple facts or the ability to just plug in numbers, we make it easy to cheat. But, when we make exams that are more challenging, ones that required students to apply equations/facts to completely novel solutions, then this method of cheating would go extinct.
At least one person who posted a response to the Chronicle article complained that this shortsighted behavior on the part of both test-takers and test-givers could be traced to the emphasis on multiple-choice testing during the administration of George W. Bush after the passage of the No Child Left Behind law in Congress. At the time that the cheating videos were being debated in the Chronicle of Higher Education, academics focusing on research in higher education were also discussing the so-called Spellings Report from the then-Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings, who argued for more multiple-choice testing examinations in college to create more quantifiable measures of success. 59ce067264