This has been eluded to by a few other comments already, but I think it's worth stressing: Maybe the problem is that our definition of "cheating" doesn't make sense anymore.
Our methods of teaching come from a worldview in which the information stored in your head is your only resource. That wasn't true in the past where you could consult colleagues, look things up in books or call experts - and it's certainly not true now that everyone carries the entire knowledge of humankind around in their pocket.
So what is the point in artificially creating a test situation where the student is isolated from resources she'll have at her disposal in real life? How about instead, we create (whatever the plural of curriculum is) that teach you how to use these resources efficiently and test you on how well you perform using all the tools that will be at your disposal in your actual job as well?
Our methods of teaching come from a worldview in which the information stored in your head is your only resource. That wasn't true in the past where you could consult colleagues, look things up in books or call experts - and it's certainly not true now that everyone carries the entire knowledge of humankind around in their pocket.
So what is the point in artificially creating a test situation where the student is isolated from resources she'll have at her disposal in real life? How about instead, we create (whatever the plural of curriculum is) that teach you how to use these resources efficiently and test you on how well you perform using all the tools that will be at your disposal in your actual job as well?