Students have to jump through absurd hoops to use exam monitoring software

I'm currently taking online classes at a program which has had entirely online offerings for over a decade. Out of the 10+ classes I've taken so far, I'm currently enrolled in the only one that has required a lockdown browser (I haven't taken any tests yet, so I'm not sure what that will be like). Up until now, all the classes just had me sign something saying I didn't cheat. Also, usually the test was designed in such a way as to make it more difficult to cheat. About half of the classes, the tests are open-note. They combat the effectiveness of cheating by making the time of the test short enough to where if you don't know the information, you won't b able to look up more than 25% of the questions before time runs out. I can see how that wouldn't work for all classes, and admittedly I haven't taken any Math or Science courses so it may be different in that arena, but it seems like they have decided to take a different route than the schools mentioned in the article, and presumably haven't had any issues.

Re: Students have to jump through absurd hoops to use exam monitoring software

#5

Post by 5mk » Mon, Nov 09, 2020, 7:44 PM UTC

eben-ezer wrote: post #4

908B64B197 wrote: post #2

Folks are doing take-home exam wrong. Caltech had tremendous success with a culture of honesty and take-home exams.

I'm currently taking online classes at a program which has had entirely online offerings for over a decade. Out of the 10+ classes I've taken so far, I'm currently enrolled in the only one that has required a lockdown browser (I haven't taken any tests yet, so I'm not sure what that will be like). Up until now, all the classes just had me sign something saying I didn't cheat. Also, usually the test was designed in su…

I'm an undergrad studying biochem, and my professors have also made their exams open-notes but timed. There are more short free-response questions than previous years. Also, the questions are focused on synthesizing the material rather than recalling minutiae. I think it's a good compromise, especially since you can't rely on Ctrl+F when you have to reason beyond the material in your own words.

Re: Students have to jump through absurd hoops to use exam monitoring software

#6

Post by _8091149529 » Mon, Nov 09, 2020, 8:04 PM UTC

908B64B197 wrote: post #2

Folks are doing take-home exam wrong. Caltech had tremendous success with a culture of honesty and take-home exams.

I spent a few years at Caltech in an academic role (not as a student). I never understood the rationale behind the unsupervised take-home exams. Could you elaborate what is it that makes it a 'success', in your opinion?

The shortcomings that seem obvious to me are: - Penalizes honesty - Implied notion that Caltech students are "honourable" and honest. How is this achieved in practice?

Re: Students have to jump through absurd hoops to use exam monitoring software

#7

Post by bitwize » Mon, Nov 09, 2020, 8:17 PM UTC

Makes me glad for things like the Stevens Honor System, which was how exams were administered at Stevens Institute of Technology.

Basically, all work submitted, whether tests or homework, require a pledge with a signature that the work is your own and you didn't cheat. Violations of the honor system -- cheating, plagiarism, etc. could be reported by students or faculty and would be investigated by the Honor Board with disciplinary sanctions for violators.

One upside to this was unproctored exams -- although if cheating became widespread, the Honor Board would threaten to bring proctors back! The idea in general was that students were expected to become professional engineers, who are expected to have integrity enough when working in the field not to deliver/sign off on stolen or slipshod work. Proctored exams keep everybody honest while the proctor is watching, but do not address the concerns of personal integrity when you might believe you can get away with cheating.

Re: Students have to jump through absurd hoops to use exam monitoring software

#8

Post by aaplok » Mon, Nov 09, 2020, 8:44 PM UTC

bitwize wrote: post #7

Makes me glad for things like the Stevens Honor System, which was how exams were administered at Stevens Institute of Technology. Basically, all work submitted, whether tests or homework, require a pledge with a signature that the work is your own and you didn't cheat. Violations of the honor system -- cheating, plagiarism, etc. could be reported by students or faculty and would be investigated by the Honor Board wit…

People are doing that at my institution. The average GPA increased by several points.

The thing is, if it's perceived that it's easier to cheat than to learn, people will do that, honor system or not.

I admit that there is a difference between an institutionalised honor system, designed with respect toward and in collaboration with students, and a last-minute arrangement by an unprepared organisation.

Students have been putting up with a lot of nonsense from universities this year. Their trust might have eroded. If universities are not perceived as honorable themselves, a honors system is not the answer here unfortunately.

Re: Students have to jump through absurd hoops to use exam monitoring software

#9

Post by cosmie » Mon, Nov 09, 2020, 8:48 PM UTC

Back in the good ol' days, you could just take the exam inside of a VM. The VM is locked down, but the host isn't.

Looks like from ProctorU's docs[1] that they got around to probing for the (blatantly obvious[2]) signatures of a VM and stopped that trick.

I wonder if those signatures exist in a Windows Sandbox[3] instance, or if you can detect/block the Enhanced RDP Session Windows leverages when running a Sandbox...

[1] Under "Not Supported" at https://support.proctoru.com/hc/en-us/articles/115011772748-...

[2] https://bannedit.github.io/Virtual-Machine-Detection-In-The-...

[3] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/threat-pro...

Re: Students have to jump through absurd hoops to use exam monitoring software

#10

Post by beisner » Mon, Nov 09, 2020, 8:49 PM UTC

_8091149529 wrote: post #6

908B64B197 wrote: post #2

Folks are doing take-home exam wrong. Caltech had tremendous success with a culture of honesty and take-home exams.

I spent a few years at Caltech in an academic role (not as a student). I never understood the rationale behind the unsupervised take-home exams. Could you elaborate what is it that makes it a 'success', in your opinion? The shortcomings that seem obvious to me are: - Penalizes honesty - Implied notion that Caltech students are "honourable" and honest. How is this achieved in practice?

The idea is that you create questions that are ungoogleable. Most of my upper-level CS courses had take-homes that were open-book, open-internet, and the professor basically said “good luck finding the answer to this problem online; you will not”.

This is harder for professors to do, and maybe fails in intro courses, but generally is quite effective.