To me, there are so many issues involved that I have no idea how to pull them together. I guess I’ll start with the honor code. I think that if you sign the honor code, and you have agreed to identify cheaters to the teacher, then you should fulfill that agreement. You gave your word.
Your honor code didn’t say you had any obligation to help enforce the code—the implication being that it’s up to the teacher to figure out what is going on. This is a morally ambiguous area, and it kind of depends on what you think is wrong with this particular kind of cheating and what impact the cheating has on you, the class, and on society. It also depends on the goal of testing.
Which brings me to testing. Testing is supposed to help you figure out how you are doing. What testing actually does is give teachers a way to show what they are doing. If you use tests as evaluation mechanisms, then you are always teaching to the test, and this, I believe, perverts the goal of education. Education, I believe, should be about learning, not passing tests. They are often not the same thing. Even worse they often turn people off of learning because they aren’t natural.
The natural way to teach is to give people real experiences with whatever it is you are teaching. When people get hands-on involved, they tend to be more effective later on in life, and isn’t that really the goal of teaching? We want people to do well and to be more effective, and we can’t know what will happen until much later in life.
The best evaluation system I know of is written evaluations. Not grading. Not test scores. But a personal assessment by a teacher which goes into depth about each student. Depth.
When teachers have thirty students or more in a class, this isn’t really possible. So they go to the fallback position—testing—and things go downhill from there. Teachers have to hand in grades so they test. Grades are needed so the the school can certify you, so they grade. School certification is needed so employers or further education can decide whether you would be appropriate. It’s all built on a house of cards, and while it may seem to “work,” we have no idea how well it really works. We don’t know all the people who are cut off from opportunities because, for whatever reason, they performed poorly on a test despite knowing the material backwards and forwards. Nor do we know how many people there are that are tracked one way because of tests, when they should have gone another.
If the testing system is bogus, then is cheating really cheating? Where do we owe our allegiance? To the testing system or to the world at large? What if these girls could do great things but are turned off into some side street and we lose their talent which might have cured some disease or something?
As if that isn’t enough, there is also the issue of collaboration—a skill needed for most of our lives, but that is forbidden, in most cases, during our educational lives. These girls are practicing problem solving in a way they will need the rest of their lives. Being an individual answering a test is a skill that is rarely, if ever, used in the working world.
As @ChazMaz says, cheating is a useful life skill. It helps you get around bureaucracy, and any of you who have worked with or had any contact with a bureaucracy probably knows that cheating is the only way you can get things done in a timely way. Many rules in life just don’t make sense. Are you going to try and get involved in politics so you can raise the speed limit, or are you going to just go as fast as you think appropriate? It’s a time vs benefit analysis. Most people don’t think the time it takes to change a bad law is worth it. They just ignore the law.
Personally, I don’t buy into the testing system. I don’t think it works effectively. I think it teaches the wrong things. So I wouldn’t report those people. I have better things to do with my time. If the teacher is worried about it, he or she can be more vigilant. After all, isn’t that their job?