Is there a distinct line between cheating and collaboration? Why do we place so much emphasis on group work/projects/networking within the "learning" phase of a course, then completely remove these skills/relationships for the students when it comes time to (in many cases) assess the largest component of their grade, a 'final exam'? Could this final exam be both individual and collaborative? Could (through creative exam design and logistics) students be provided a secure cloud space to look for help during an exam? Could this be another assessment metric?
Couldn't agree more; if students are encouraged to collaborate during the learning process, they should be able to also do so during the final assessment. However, regarding assignning marks, it is difficult to evaluate the individual contribution to collaborative submissions. Therefore, some kind of indication of the individual student's input needs to be in place. But this is a question of the design of the exam, as well as its purpose, e.g. why do instructors want their students to take exams, what is the overall aim?
Looking up something in Wikipedia is cheating in a closed book exam. It is useful in a working situation
It depends on how you use the information you have looked up; if you take it and utilize it as your own input, that's definitely not something to aspire to, as it undermines academic ethics.
Cheating in a University requires shared values and a code of conduct (?)
First, a clear definition of "cheating" would be needed, though, (1) so that everyone has the same understanding and (2) to discard the existing connotation of the term