This surely qualifies as not only "markets in everything," but inside markets in everything.
It truly was no problem. In the past year, I've written roughly 5,000 pages of scholarly literature, most on very tight deadlines. But you won't find my name on a single paper.
I've written toward a master's degree in cognitive psychology, a Ph.D. in sociology, and a handful of postgraduate credits in international diplomacy. I've worked on bachelor's degrees in hospitality, business administration, and accounting. I've written for courses in history, cinema, labor relations, pharmacology, theology, sports management, maritime security, airline services, sustainability, municipal budgeting, marketing, philosophy, ethics, Eastern religion, postmodern architecture, anthropology, literature, and public administration. I've attended three dozen online universities. I've completed 12 graduate theses of 50 pages or more. All for someone else.
You've never heard of me, but there's a good chance that you've read some of my work. I'm a hired gun, a doctor of everything, an academic mercenary. My customers are your students. I promise you that. Somebody in your classroom uses a service that you can't detect, that you can't defend against, that you may not even know exists.
The writer will earn about $66,000 this year, which is not bad for a professional writer.
I have a few quick reactions. First, it's an interesting anecdote, but it doesn't tell me how much this sort of stuff happens in higher education.
Second, much of what the writer does appears to be on the qualitative side (the writer specifically says "no math"). I have no reason to doubt that similar things happen in the quantitative fields, but it would be fairly difficult - at leat I hope it is difficult - to fake a statistical study, for example, where the student has to find or create, crunch, and interpret his own data. Is it easier to cheat in qualitative disciplines all else equal?
Third, the writer implies that some professors aren't doing their jobs. But there is other FAIL to go around. How can someone who can't write a coherent sentence get admitted into a graduate program, let alone get an undergraduate degree, in the first place? That's an administrative FAIL.
Fourth, the seminary students who cheat have a lot of 'splainin' to do. But whenever benefits exceed costs at the margin...
Fifth, what about degrees that require oral defenses of one's submitted thesis/dissertation? Surely that has to limit the opportunities for ghost writers to some degree.
All that said, it's an interesting, but somewhat lengthy read. Here are Tyler Cowen's comments. The comments there are good. Thanks to Chris Steinbach.