Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Princeton mandates proctoring for in-person exams, upending 133 year precedent

dailyprincetonian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 662 posts

Re: Princeton mandates proctoring for in-person exams, upending 133 year precedent

#221

Post by MyHonestOpinon »

neilv wrote: post #166
wps wrote: post #27

I've sat in classes where people at my table genuinely took pictures of the exam while the professor's back was turned (being kind to us and giving us useful information on the board) and uploaded the entire exam to the Gemini app. Cheating is all around disheartening and is now incredibly easy with all the free multi-modal models around. Real active proctoring is needed and devices need to be confiscated during exam…

I'm very interested in how this cheating is perceived by other students. There is no peer pressure not to cheat? Students aren't considered sketchy or jerky for cheating? Being seen cheating has no adverse affect on their ability to date, to join group projects, to join student startups, etc.?

Covid and Chatgpt are no the only changes in society in the recent years.

If you are an all around liar and cheater you can even be president!!

Re: Princeton mandates proctoring for in-person exams, upending 133 year precedent

#222

Post by traderj0e »

pickleRick243 wrote: post #169
godsinhisheaven wrote: post #161

Maybe I haven't scrolled down far enough, but gut feeling is telling me that a lot of the rise in cheating is coming from international (read: chinese) students. Plenty of stories and personal experience of cheating rings. I tried to get into one just to see what was going on, but even though I looked the part I couldn't talk the talk.

The numbers don't play out because international chinese students only make up 5-7% (maybe less) of the undergraduate student body. Self-reported cheating frequencies are much higher.

That's kind of a large number. Honor system is a solidarity thing. There can be 0% cheating cause nobody wants to be that person, but if 5% come in and egregiously cheat anyway, it can poison more. Most people don't want to cheat, but they may feel disadvantaged not to.

Re: Princeton mandates proctoring for in-person exams, upending 133 year precedent

#223

Post by impendia »

throwup238 wrote: post #59
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What on earth could be the objection to proctoring? There is a unique pride in being part of a community built around honor. You see this on the Swiss metro and in small-town vegetable stalls. Unproctored exams force every student to weigh the value of their honor against a better grade. That's a personal moral reckoning that might be worth the entire degree.

That’s just the propaganda they sell during college visits. When I was at Caltech the honor code didn’t inspire any pride, because the only way anyone got through that course load was by “cheating”*. No one had any time for pride (GO BEAVERS!) An honor code is an admission that your curriculum is so sadistic, not even cheating will help. Princeton just isn’t prestigious enough to keep up that charade. * At Caltech th…

I went to Rice which had a similarly strong honor code, and it absolutely inspired pride. In me, and from what I could tell in many of my classmates.

Is it propaganda? In some sense, yes, the only way to maintain such a culture is to repeatedly insist on its importance to prospective and current students. But if so, then it is self-fulfilling propaganda, and in my opinion the honor code made my experience richer.

Re: Princeton mandates proctoring for in-person exams, upending 133 year precedent

#224

Post by triceratops »

remarkEon wrote: post #63
applfanboysbgon wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in some left-wing corners of the commentariat, is out; flagrant disregard of the social contract is in. Interesting that this is posed as the American left disregarding the social contract. I think you could make a pretty good case that the American right disregarded the social contract first in electing an extremely destructive pedophile who starts wars for reasons that can't even be articulated, pardons war crimi…

I can assure you with 100% certainty that the American Right did not elect Bill Clinton.

Statistically maybe half the people who voted for Bill Clinton are already dead.

Re: Princeton mandates proctoring for in-person exams, upending 133 year precedent

#225

Post by pests »

Lucasoato wrote: post #165
jiqiren wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't at Princeton, but I remember blatant cheating going on and 'study groups' in CS classes that were mere passing around of completed code. (1997-2001) I'd asked them what they expected would happen when they tried to get jobs or landed one. Like how do you fake work? They just said all jobs are group-based like their study group. (Keep in mind they were soliciting my code as their group was struggling to find…

Maybe he's happier managing a bagel store rather than dealing with Kubernetes.

Honestly. I do more with my hands and spend more time outside post-degree, post-reality, than I ever did when in school.

Re: Princeton mandates proctoring for in-person exams, upending 133 year precedent

#226

Post by neilv »

kerkeslager wrote: post #155
john_strinlai wrote: post #5

huh, i had no idea princeton specifically disallowed proctors, and instead relied on an honor system. seems... like a poorly thought out system, especially given: " 29.9 percent of respondents reported that they had cheated on an assignment or exam during their time at Princeton. 44.6 percent of senior respondents reported knowledge of Honor Code violations that they chose not to report. " crazier is the people prote…

I think it really depends on how you view our high education system. As a middle-aged man returning to school to switch careers, my entire reason for going to school is to learn, and I'd never cheat because that would undermine my own goals. To me the purpose of school isn't the degree--I made an entire career already without one--it's to learn. Students are at school for a lot of poorly-thought-out reasons: inertia,…

> if you view higher education as gatekeeping for further life options (i.e. a career) then proctored exams make sense. But if higher education is just for learning, it's stupid to put all this gatekeeping around it [...] Let the cheaters cheat--they're only hurting their own learning

I wouldn't reduce student motivations to career vs. learning.

College can also be about aspiring to a better society, with the university as microcosm.

For example, a society in which people are honest, and have integrity.

Re: Princeton mandates proctoring for in-person exams, upending 133 year precedent

#227

Post by dylan604 »

Aurornis wrote: post #163
john_strinlai wrote: post #5

huh, i had no idea princeton specifically disallowed proctors, and instead relied on an honor system. seems... like a poorly thought out system, especially given: " 29.9 percent of respondents reported that they had cheated on an assignment or exam during their time at Princeton. 44.6 percent of senior respondents reported knowledge of Honor Code violations that they chose not to report. " crazier is the people prote…

A couple of my friends teach university classes. Mostly undergrad. I get to hear some of their interesting stories when we game together. My impression is that there was a sharp shift around COVID. Doing classes over Zoom with a talking head broke the connection they had with their professors and other students. College felt closer to a video game operated through your screen than a community. When I was in college n…

> Now students have ChatGPT to write their papers and they've been practicing how to use cell phones without the teacher noticing for 10 years before getting to college.

Colleges will need to remodel the rooms where these tests are given to become large SCIF type rooms so that wireless communication is not possible. Let the students go back to writing on their arms, wearing eye patches, or shoving notes up their casts. Yeah, I've probably seen Spies Like Us a couple of times:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaSUOFleNRU

Re: Princeton mandates proctoring for in-person exams, upending 133 year precedent

#229

Post by MyHonestOpinon »

kiba wrote: post #140
lll-o-lll wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fish rots from the head. The old adage that the people elect the governance they deserve; comes to mind. The concepts of Virtue, Honour, Duty, and Justice have been declining in the West over a very long period (this is not a US specific thing). The rotting head reflects the rotting society. > It's a sucker's game to aspire to selflessly serve the greater good when the most powerful people in the land are braze…

You don't need "virtue", "honour", and "duty" to have NOT have voted the way people did. It is plain to see which chosen leader will torch the nation and which will not, regardless of people's distaste for the establishment politicians. It is worse than self interest. It is brazen ignorance.

I am seeing this phenomenon in my country. Once people discover that their beloved leader is corrupt, they just justify with "all politicians are the same". Society becomes so cynic that it very hard to bring change. Politicians are considered corrupt by default, I don't know how that ends.

Re: Princeton mandates proctoring for in-person exams, upending 133 year precedent

#230

Post by valleyer »

saalweachter wrote: post #114
Barbing wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“But what about the argument that if everyone just starts stealing wantonly,” Spiegelman replies, “Whole Foods will eventually raise the prices?” “Yeah, chaos,” Piker says. “Full chaos. Let’s go.” “I kind of am inclined toward this,” Tolentino adds. “Everyone, try it. See what happens.” Personal shoppers for everyone! Point at what you want or add it on an app. Eventually would take force/fraud/violence to shoplift (…

Isn't that how stores used to work, before store owners decided it'd be cheaper to just let shoppers bring up a basket of goods? You'd go up to the shopkeeper behind the counter with a list, they'd get it all for you?

Yup, and that requires extra labor to fulfill, which will cost money. Luckily, I haven't heard anyone complain about high prices of groceries lately, so I'm sure everyone would be fine with that.
Post reply on HN