The epitome of rationalization.
Academic honesty is taken seriously, and there are third parties that evaluate the situation objectively. If you simply say, "I didn't do anything that I thought of as cheating, but today on test day I realized that I had an advantage that I wanted to inform you about," there is zero chance of permanent consequences.
"So instead somebody did it anonymously."
Why didn't everyone then? Maybe those few people are honest, or some approximation thereof. But what about the other ~190 that didn't?
>... there is zero chance of permanent consequences.
Bull. Faculty are just as petty and lazy (ie: human) as any other person. There are plenty of instances of teachers saving their own asses by lying enough to get away with it, and with them wielding their mighty tenure in unethical ways.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't, if you don't know the teacher very well. Odds are certainly on your side, heavily even, but it's far from "zero".
Defensive suggests he acts like he thinks he did something wrong. He clearly thinks his students did something wrong.
What is it with this thread and using words to mean things other than their plain meaning in normal conversation? It's getting very Clintonian in here.
You could say the students that used this test to practice should have informed the professor when they noticed that the test was identical to the one they practiced with. However, if you look at how defensive this prof is, that would have been quite risky for that student. You would risk being accused of cheating. So instead somebody did it anonymously.