How AI Can Spot Exam Cheats and Raise Standards (ft.com) 47
AI is being deployed by those who set and mark exams to reduce fraud -- which remains overall a small problem -- and to create far greater efficiencies in preparation and marking, and to help improve teaching and studying. From a report, which may be paywalled: From traditional paper-based exam and textbook producers such as Pearson, to digital-native companies such as Coursera, online tools and artificial intelligence are being developed to reduce costs and enhance learning. For years, multiple-choice tests have allowed scanners to score results without human intervention. Now technology is coming directly into the exam hall. Coursera has patented a system to take images of students and verify their identity against scanned documents. There are plagiarism detectors that can scan essay answers and search the web -- or the work of other students -- to identify copying. Webcams can monitor exam locations to spot malpractice. Even when students are working, they provide clues that can be used to clamp down on cheats. They leave electronic "fingerprints" such as keyboard pressure, speed and even writing style. Emily Glassberg Sands, Cousera's head of data science, says: "We can validate their keystroke signatures. It's difficult to prepare for someone hell-bent on cheating, but we are trying every way possible."
False Flag (Score:1)
School: Student, you are expelled permanently because our AI says you cheated.
Student: I didn't!
School: You have no recourse, we keep your money, you are gone, your life is ruined, goodbye!
Student: 'Tis a fair court!
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. When a person's whole future life is on the scales, the weight needed can't just be "upon preponderance of evidence" or "beyond reasonable doubt". Even a 100,000:1 risk of a false positive, when combined with the data that around 3.8 million Americans will obtain a university degree this year, that means that dozens of them will trigger false positives and risk their degree taken away from them by machines and the machine-like humans who operate them.
When faced with science that says it's only a
Re: (Score:3)
Well, if I were on such a review board, I would likely find that the "educators" were so incompetent, that I cannot actually judge the performance of the student.
Re: (Score:2)
At least with technology we may have accountability.
How, exactly? Can we send the machine to jail so it can ponder its mistakes, and so other machines will have less desire to do bad deeds?
Re: (Score:2)
It can be subjected to code audits.
they don't really expelled people that much any mo (Score:2)
they don't really expelled people that much any more some times they just pass them to keep that loan $$$$ coming it.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a general problem of simultaneously people who trust computers too much and not enough.
The same person who would expel a student for cheating from an AI Algorithm report would be the same person who manually counts the number of rows in a database to make sure the computer has it right.
AI tool are not fool proof, but they are good at reducing the workflow. Other then manually checking 1000 papers for cheaters, you will only have a dozen to review. Then you will need to use human judgement to see i
AI (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Yes.
Any other questions?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You know, when the fraudsters feel they have to inject a minimal bit of honesty, they call it "weak AI", which is the AI without "I". The whole terminology is a big, fat, bald-faced lie. There is no AI at this time and it still is completely unclear whether it is even possible. No, the demented physicalist argument "but humans do it" does not count, as we have absolutely no clue how humans do it. At this time, even "magic" is a scientifically possible explanation. (What, you thought Science rules out magic?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much the same as any longer-term hype. Always the same stupidity.
Re: (Score:2)
As I pointed out several times on /. ... it is not you who defines what AI is.
Just pick a random university and check what they teach in their 'AI classes'.
You make the common mistake mixing up SF movie 'thinking machines' with what scientists call AI.
Re: (Score:2)
As I happen to be a scientist, it actually is me who defines what AI is. (Along with a few million other people though.) I am sure that goes way beyond what you can grasp, though.
Re: (Score:2)
As long as you are not a computer scientist: no you are not the one defining what AI is.
And as most of your posts about AI are simply misleading or uninformed or simple to lay men, I'm pretty sure you are not a computer scientist, and if you probably are: you most certainly never worked in the AI sector.
Perhaps you want to start reading here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
(Hint: I'm a computer scientist)
No, it cannot (Score:1)
What can raise standards is a competent, dedicated examiner, nothing else. No amount of stupid statistics and pattern-matching will help, unless the examiner is really incompetent. And stop with the "AI" nonsense. There is no "AI" in existence, the term is just a marketing-lie.
Re: (Score:2)
This is going to be like the TSA bullshit. A 95% accuracy rate. 600 million passengers. 30 million false positives. Zero actual terrorists. But God help you if you're one of those 30 million false positives.
Yes, lawmakers and voters not understanding even basic mathematics and statistics is a big problem. They look at the accuracy rate for positives and praise a high one, but not the ratio of false positives, which makes the high accuracy rate completely irrelevant. You don't hear them present it like "if someone is flagged, chances are better than 99.999% that he or she is not a terrorist".
It's easy to create a method with 100% positive accuracy rate. Just flag everyone.
Why bother after the test? (Score:2)
If you don't secure the actual test taking, why does anything else matter?
FIRST you must verify that the person taking the test is the person who's supposed to be taking the test.
SECOND you must verify that the person taking the test has only the equipment and materials allowed by the test.
THIRD, you must monitor the actual test taking to verify the rules are being followed and there isn't any communication between test takers going on.
After that, mark the tests as they are and let the rest of this just
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You cannot "automate" physical security activities.
You may be able to automate checking ID's are valid, but *somebody* is going to have to look at the pictures or you are going to have to collect biometrics (again, which takes actual people to do).
Inspecting what a person has in their possession is again not something you can automate (just ask the TSA).
How you monitor test taking to catch rule breaking using automation? (Asking for a friend who runs a casino in Los Vegas.) It takes eyes in human he
preston vue testing can do that for $50-$100 a pop (Score:2)
preston vue testing can do that for $50-$100 a pop. Click hear for student loan ez-pay.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't do any of those things. I teach a large (300 person) humanities lecture, and I give all my tests unproctored, online. Students have a window of three days in which they can take the weekly quiz, and a window of five days for the midterm and final, so that they can schedule them for a time and place convenient for them--at home eating cookies, at the coffee shop, with friends, whatever. I know that I have no way of keeping students from taking quizzes together, or letting someone else take the quiz
Nope (Score:1)
I don't think this is a great idea. I mean, all that money to make sure students that pay tens of thousends of dollars aren't cheating mostly themselves.... it's fucking stupid and it says more about the whole idea of modern capitalism, the illusion of meritocracy and the doubtful relevance of superior education, that about the students that would cheat themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
ncaa student athlete don't have time for class 40+ (Score:2)
ncaa student athlete don't have time for class when the team needs 40+ hours a week and when travel time makes them miss class as well.
SATS anywone? (Score:2)