Protect student privacy: ban eproctoring
baneproctoring.com
Protect student privacy: ban eproctoring
1–10 of 324 posts
Re: Protect student privacy: ban eproctoring
#2We employed the method of mixing the order of questions, not giving question titles, and having a pool of subtly different questions (a negation or a different constant slipped in) in order to vastly increase the amount of necessary communication to collaborate.
We had the students turn on their webcams just to discourage them sitting in the same room, which basically would negate our former efforts. Neither did we flag any behavior nor did we record anything or used some automatic software.
I believe that worked quite nicely. A few cheaters were easily spotted when they had the wrong constants in their answer.
I understand that not every course and exam style is suitable for that. But for our databases course, it was applicable.
I think that this was not much more invasive than a traditional exam. Anything more, like watching the screen, or having audio, would make me feel uncomfortable.
Re: Protect student privacy: ban eproctoring
#3[deleted]
Re: Protect student privacy: ban eproctoring
#4I may not be neurotypical, but surely I'm not the only one having a hard time not parsing the domain name as "Bane Proctoring", which admittedly sounds rather ominous.
Re: Protect student privacy: ban eproctoring
#5I may not be neurotypical, but surely I'm not the only one having a hard time not parsing the domain name as "Bane Proctoring", which admittedly sounds rather ominous.
I also read it that way.
One would think that after the issues with whorepresents.com and expertsexchange.com (and dozens of other popular examples) from at least a decade ago, people would be somewhat more careful as to how their domain name could be misread.
Re: Protect student privacy: ban eproctoring
#6I can see why universities want to use a system like this.
A friend of mine is a University lecturer for physics and one of his students gave him an invite to the discord channel where half his students are in there sharing all the answers during the final exam.
He basically told me there is nothing he can do about it.
He talked to the head of department and they basically said if you have proof of specific people cheating then they can escalate it for those people but short of that, nothing can be done.
Not that I’m saying these systems are great either. But I really don’t know how exams in the current form can be conducted remotely without endemic cheating.
Re: Protect student privacy: ban eproctoring
#7We tested a couple eproctoring products last year while we geared up to move every exam online.
We disliked them on ethical grounds, but also as ultimately unpractical.
I had also a bad feeling about the vendors, there was a strong whiff of "bad used car salesmanship" in the whole interaction.
I also felt there was a correlation between the push for these tools and bad or antiquated teaching methods.
Then to our relief the education authorities in our region straight banned the practice so we just drew up a document with various ideas about how to go about online assessment in a humane and reasonable way and we went through thousands of online exams with very few incidents.
Re: Protect student privacy: ban eproctoring
#8I took a course recently and the final exam had this kind of eproctoring setup where I would have to install proprietary software, show the examiner around my room, under my desk and so on.
I did not take the exam.
Re: Protect student privacy: ban eproctoring
#9For anyone unfamiliar with the term (like me!), Wikipedia says Eproctoring is:
[...] a form of exam proctoring which involves monitoring student behaviour during exams administered electronically [...]
Re: Protect student privacy: ban eproctoring
#10We employed the method of mixing the order of questions, not giving question titles, and having a pool of subtly different questions (a negation or a different constant slipped in) in order to vastly increase the amount of necessary communication to collaborate. We had the students turn on their webcams just to discourage them sitting in the same room, which basically would negate our former efforts. Neither did we f…
>We employed the method of mixing the order of questions, not giving question titles, and having a pool of subtly different questions (a negation or a different constant slipped in)
What an awful burden to put on the shoulders of the already overworked and underpaid professors.