Princeton mandates proctoring for in-person exams, upending 133 year precedent • Hacker News Board

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

#31

Post by paulryanrogers » Wed, May 13, 2026, 8:44 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #21

kibwen wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fish rots from the head. It's a sucker's game to aspire to selflessly serve the greater good when the most powerful people in the land are brazenly corrupt pedophiles. In other words: monkey see, monkey do.

> fish rots from the head Does it? Did it? We elected the "brazenly corrupt pedophiles." This question seems complex and important enough to not be resolved with a truism.

Hard to say for certain. Though I do think it goes both ways. People at the bottom influence culture from bottom up, folks at the top from the top down.

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

#32

Post by bdangubic » Wed, May 13, 2026, 8:44 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #15

hcurtiss wrote: post #2

Princeton is a strange place. What on earth could be the objection to proctoring? I'd much rather have a proctor than have to narc on a classmate. And even then, the proctor just reports the matter to a student-run body? Wild.

> 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.

> There is a unique pride in being part of a community built around honor.

It has been 100(s) of years since community like this existed, now this is utopia

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

#33

Post by echelon » Wed, May 13, 2026, 8:44 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #10

Combined with the increasing acceptance of shoplifting [1] and unprecedented corruption and criminality among our national leaders, it's hard not to read this as a moral page turning on American culture. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/04/hasan-piker-jia-to...

> Combined with the increasing acceptance of shoplifting

It's the K-shaped economy. Those not participating in the upsides are electing to either not participate in the system at all or to destroy it. Most people think Luigi Mangione is a hero.

We had a good post-WWII run. We had factories, then globalization. Massive growth for all economic backgrounds for several generations. But the world caught up. Now the average worker has to compete against their increasingly competent and economically enabled peers around the globe. Costs for everything are rising.

We used to have a super sized Big Mac economy propped up by the fact that America was (relatively) peerless. The worker saw so much upside. Now they don't even get free refills, so to speak.

I'm hoping the AI boom helps bring down the cost of goods without putting people out of work. If it goes the other way, I think we might be heading for 1790's France.

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

#34

Post by JumpCrisscross » Wed, May 13, 2026, 8:45 PM UTC

echelon wrote: post #33

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #10

Combined with the increasing acceptance of shoplifting [1] and unprecedented corruption and criminality among our national leaders, it's hard not to read this as a moral page turning on American culture. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/04/hasan-piker-jia-to...

> Combined with the increasing acceptance of shoplifting It's the K-shaped economy. Those not participating in the upsides are electing to either not participate in the system at all or to destroy it. Most people think Luigi Mangione is a hero. We had a good post-WWII run. We had factories, then globalization. Massive growth for all economic backgrounds for several generations. But the world caught up. Now the averag…

> It's the K-shaped economy

Which side of the K-shaped economy do you think Princeton alumni are predominantly on?

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

#35

Post by lll-o-lll » Wed, May 13, 2026, 8:45 PM UTC

hcurtiss wrote: post #2

Princeton is a strange place. What on earth could be the objection to proctoring? I'd much rather have a proctor than have to narc on a classmate. And even then, the proctor just reports the matter to a student-run body? Wild.

Right, but there’s really only two directions you can go.

1. Install a culture of honour/virtue/accountability. Rely on duty and moral justice to keep the majority in-line.

2. An arms race to prevent ever more sophisticated methods of cheating, and the reduction in human dignity this implies. (E.g. the proctor must follow you into the toilet).

We all want the systems to be fair and just; but we also all want to be treated with dignity. No easy answers.

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

#36

Post by redsocksfan45 » Wed, May 13, 2026, 8:45 PM UTC

analogpixel wrote: post #6

> If a suspected Honor Code violation occurs, proctors will document their observations and submit a report to the student-run Honor Committee, where they may later testify under the same standards used for other witnesses. is this so the rich kids that have parents who pay for parts of the school can still get a pass?

[dead]

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

#37

Post by elmomle » Wed, May 13, 2026, 8:46 PM UTC

kibwen wrote: post #20

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #10

Combined with the increasing acceptance of shoplifting [1] and unprecedented corruption and criminality among our national leaders, it's hard not to read this as a moral page turning on American culture. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/04/hasan-piker-jia-to...

The fish rots from the head. It's a sucker's game to aspire to selflessly serve the greater good when the most powerful people in the land are brazenly corrupt pedophiles. In other words: monkey see, monkey do.

Yes, and: the rot started long ago, this is just what it looks like when it goes unchecked. To quote Mencius:

Mencius went to see King Hui of Liang. The king said, “Venerable sir, since you have not counted it far to come here, may I presume that you are provided with counsels to profit my kingdom?”

Mencius replied, “Why must Your Majesty use that word ‘profit’? What I am provided with are counsels to benevolence and righteousness, and these are my only topics.

If Your Majesty say, ‘What is to be done to profit my kingdom?’ the great officers will say, ‘What is to be done to profit our families?’ and the inferior officers and common people will say, ‘What is to be done to profit our persons?’ Superiors and inferiors will try to snatch this profit one from another, and the kingdom will be endangered.”

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

#38

Post by [deleted] » Wed, May 13, 2026, 8:46 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #16

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…

> 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 What is it at other universities? I went to a big public school, and remember cheating being halfway rampant. The penalty, moreover, was never expulsion.

[deleted]

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

#39

Post by alephnerd » Wed, May 13, 2026, 8:47 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #28

alephnerd wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd hope, but humans are humans - even if they attend an Ivy. Some individuals have heady thoughts and morals like you mentioned. Others are using it as a checkbox.

> humans are humans - even if they attend an Ivy I specifically called out two non-Ivy examples. Humans are humans. And one of those capacities is for behaving with honor. The enemy of honor, it turns out, isn't dishonor, but cynicism. (It isn't surprising that the dominant emotion on a Silicon Valley board towards an honor system is scorn.)

No argument there. Tbf given my professional and personal background, I automatically assume the worst in all people so even though I never abused honor codes (and honestly never had the need to anyhow because I liked the classes I took with one as they tend to be the kinds of classes where professors and teacher staff are the most engaged) I think it is almost impossible to enforce one in classes beyond 30 students, because anonymity does beget some amount of bad behavior.

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

#40

Post by at-fates-hands » Wed, May 13, 2026, 8:47 PM UTC

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…

The interesting thing is that cheating is much easier when done online. When I was a TA and we were in the process of moving quite a bit of the classes to online, we still mandated in person testing.

It was eye opening to find cheat sheets and other cheating materials obviously left behind by students. The majority of the stuff we'd find we either inaccurate and completely wrong. Like a half awake student copied something they thought was the right equation or solution, when in fact, it was for something completely different that wasn't on the test.

So I agree with your notion, but its one thing to try and cheat. Its a completely different one to do so successfully.