Students Are Easily Cheating 'State-of-the-Art' Test Proctoring Tech (vice.com) 122
Students are using HDMI cables and hidden phones to cheat on exams administered through invasive proctoring software like Proctorio. From a report: "I've taken online exams cheating and not cheating and they are just about as stressful anyways so fuck it, am I right?" That's what one French student who had cheated on multiple remote exams administered through the popular digital proctoring software Proctorio told Motherboard in a voice message. With the COVID-19 pandemic continuing to rage around the globe and no quick end to remote learning in sight, many students have found themselves taking exams under the watch of proctoring software like Proctorio, which surveils students through algorithmic systems that, among other things, detect eye movements, track keyboard strokes, and monitor audio inputs. Universities sometimes shell out thousands of dollars per exam for Proctorio, which helps at least give the impression that academic integrity is being maintained during remote learning. But for some students using Proctorio and other online proctoring services is invasive and anxiety-inducing, subjecting them and their surroundings to unwarranted surveillance that is difficult to refuse without their studies being negatively affected.
Yet, despite the fact that popular online proctoring platforms like Proctorio claim that they use "state-of-the-art technology" and "ensure the total learning integrity of every assessment, every time," students are cheating on their exams anyway. Motherboard spoke to 10 university students from various countries who claimed to have cheated on exams where Proctorio was in place. While their motivations and techniques varied, there was one common denominator: none of them got caught. The relative ease with which the students cheated, and the fact that each student could point to multiple peers who had done the same (one American student estimated that 90 percent of her class had cheated), raises the question of how effective online proctoring software like Proctorio actually is -- and whether it is worth the hefty price tag or the invasion of privacy. "With Proctorio obviously you need to show yourself and your room with the computer's webcam," one Dutch student who had helped a friend cheat on a multiple choice exam told Motherboard. "My friend put a phone on a stand on his keyboard so it couldn't be seen during the room and desk sweep. Then we FaceTimed with me at the other end," she continued. "The phone was at a slant so he could see me and I could see the exam. Then I would just hold up a flashcard with a, b, c, or d." Another French student used a 10-meter HDMI cable that ran from his laptop to a TV screen in another room that mirrored his screen. His friend would then look up the exam answers and send it via WhatsApp to his phone, which was also on the keyboard and out of sight of the webcam. "Worked perfectly and got a good grade," he said.
Yet, despite the fact that popular online proctoring platforms like Proctorio claim that they use "state-of-the-art technology" and "ensure the total learning integrity of every assessment, every time," students are cheating on their exams anyway. Motherboard spoke to 10 university students from various countries who claimed to have cheated on exams where Proctorio was in place. While their motivations and techniques varied, there was one common denominator: none of them got caught. The relative ease with which the students cheated, and the fact that each student could point to multiple peers who had done the same (one American student estimated that 90 percent of her class had cheated), raises the question of how effective online proctoring software like Proctorio actually is -- and whether it is worth the hefty price tag or the invasion of privacy. "With Proctorio obviously you need to show yourself and your room with the computer's webcam," one Dutch student who had helped a friend cheat on a multiple choice exam told Motherboard. "My friend put a phone on a stand on his keyboard so it couldn't be seen during the room and desk sweep. Then we FaceTimed with me at the other end," she continued. "The phone was at a slant so he could see me and I could see the exam. Then I would just hold up a flashcard with a, b, c, or d." Another French student used a 10-meter HDMI cable that ran from his laptop to a TV screen in another room that mirrored his screen. His friend would then look up the exam answers and send it via WhatsApp to his phone, which was also on the keyboard and out of sight of the webcam. "Worked perfectly and got a good grade," he said.
time to add HDCP to this and maybe video cards (Score:2)
time to add HDCP to this and maybe there own video cards. But to due miners that video costs $200+ (laptop users need to buy an pci-e dock) but we worked out an deal to add it your student loan.
Re: (Score:2)
Proctorio...lol (Score:2)
Re: Proctorio...lol (Score:3)
Re: Proctorio...lol (Score:5, Informative)
Or a medical device used for a colonoscopy.
Re: Proctorio...lol (Score:5, Funny)
Or a super mario villain that also specializes in colonoscopies.
Proctorio, a hero, not a villain? (Score:2)
Colonoscopies can prevent cancers from happening by detecting and removing polyps -- they are a life saver.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Proctorio...lol (Score:2)
Wait until they release their next project, Blue Oyster. ;)
This and porn filters are useless (Score:5, Informative)
Re: This and porn filters are useless (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
What do they "win", really?
Re: (Score:2)
I think most universities would do a lot better at education if they actually cared about their students' learning (as opposed to the PR & marketing messages their student recruitment agencies churn out). Courses are rarely, if ever, evaluated on the basis of effect sizes (how much students have actually learned) & faculty receive little support & fewer incentives to improve the quality of their teaching. In many cases, at least that I've heard of, some faculty are actively hostile (I mean shout
Re: This and porn filters are useless (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:A lot more than 30 years (Score:5, Informative)
October 29, 1929
That was Black Tuesday, the first ARPAnet connection was on 29/30 (depending on time zone) October 1969.
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
January 1, 1983 was a protocol flag day, but it didn't really change the fundamental character of the Internet.
Eternal September (when AOL obtained connectivity to the Internet) began 1993. Many mark this as the turning point for mainstream Internet adoption and it changed the character of the network in ways that a mere protocol switch never could.
Good to know (Score:2, Interesting)
one American student estimated that 90 percent of her class had cheated
Our HR department will be putting an asterisk next to the names of any job applicants that graduated during the pandemic. It'll suck to be among the 10% who did the work honestly. Too bad.
Re:Good to know (Score:5, Insightful)
I can almost guarantee the quality of candidates who graduated during the pandemic won't differ from those before ( or after ).
I'll leave the "why" as an exercise for the reader.
Re: (Score:2)
I can almost guarantee the quality of candidates who graduated during the pandemic won't differ from those before ( or after ).
I'll leave the "why" as an exercise for the reader.
Yeah. The problem is not the lack of test integrity. The problem is bulls**t tests that only test rote knowledge instead of comprehension. Ask anyone sane which matters more — the date of the Battle of Gettysburg or understanding why the Civil War happened in the first place — and nobody sane will answer "the date". Yet the former is easy to test with a multiple-choice test, and multiple-choice tests are easy to grade, so teachers fill their tests with that sort of noise. The pressure for g
Re: (Score:2)
What will differ is the ability to trust external measures of a candidate's capability.
Re: (Score:2)
Our HR department will be putting an asterisk next to the names of any job applicants that graduated during the pandemic.
That quite irrelevant. Most jobs are obtained by indication, bypassing HR and completely ignoring any metric. Whatever jobs are left afterward, in the off-chance they weren't filled by indications, are then filled by HR. By that point it's all mostly random chance anyways, so *shrugs*.
Re: (Score:2)
We caught an employee plagiarising an article for our company, and when we finally harangued HR into doing a check, he had completely faked his resume. Nothing on it was true.
So, HR ain't going to do shit about this.
Re: (Score:2)
It's also a violation of various guidelines concerning age bias.
Analog Hole (Score:4, Insightful)
This is the analog hole all over again. As long as 100% of the content is not managed and controlled in an environment - people will find a way to cheat.
What the proctoring service is attempting to do is to give a reasonable expectation that people didn't cheat. The ways I have seen people cheat on tests is amazing. Hearing aids, camera glasses, phones, etc. You cannot stop a dedicated person who has the intent from cheating but you can have about a 99% assurance that they are not cheating.
Re: Analog Hole (Score:1)
Good luck with that analog hole called the brain!
Unless you want to install a TPM chip in everyone's brain... and I mean literally everyone, there always have to be moving air molecules and colorful lights at the end.
And yes, I would not be surprised if there were Content Mafia cokeheads going "we already thought of that, but now got a plan that is even more dystopic and evil" upon reading this.
Maybe, just maybe, the entire idea of controling information is wrong from the start and literally incompatible wi
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck with that analog hole called the brain!
This is easy to solve. Just have every student answer an oram exam. Two questions per student, both requiring knowing the subject matter for real. Let them search Google if they want, that won't help. Grade on the thought process that went into solving it, not so much on the end result. And done, analog hole not only closed, but in fact taken full advantage of.
Re: (Score:2)
This is easy to solve. Just have every student answer an oram exam. Two questions per student, both requiring knowing the subject matter for real. Let them search Google if they want, that won't help. Grade on the thought process that went into solving it, not so much on the end result. And done, analog hole not only closed, but in fact taken full advantage of.
Sounds like a great idea & probably very effective. Not unlike the "viva voce" exam which is nowadays mostly reserved for Ph.D candidates. However, how long do you suppose it would take to examine a 1,000 students in this way, what levels of knowledge, skills, & attitudes* would the examiners need (i.e. How much would you have to pay them & train them), & what examiner:candidate ratio would make the exam process feasibly quick? (i.e. How much would an exam cost per candidate?)
*An inappropria
Re: (Score:3)
Oh great. Perpetuate and enhance the existing sexist bias in the system that penalises boys by making the entire result subjective and based on the prejudices of the teachers.
No.
Re: (Score:2)
Perpetuate and enhance the existing sexist bias in the system that penalises boys by making the entire result subjective and based on the prejudices of the teachers.
The real world is like that already, including for people working in Academic tracks. The net difference for all the involved would be effectively none. But if you'd like to avoid that, set grading on a curve for men and a separate curve for women. This way it's guaranteed an equal number of boys and girls will pass and fail, irrespective of whether a group knows more or less than the other in any absolute way.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather sack the sexist shits that are damaging society.
There is no excuse for giving girls better grades than boys. None.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no excuse for giving girls better grades than boys. None.
True, there isn't. But you're operating under the illusion the world is just. It isn't. Or, to be more precise, every kind of justice invariably causes a different set of injustices, so irrespective of the axis you chose, someone else will suffer.
Until the early 20th century, colleges didn't use grading to accept entrants. They used your family name. If you were well connected, you were allowed entrance. If you were poorly connected, or from any of the groups there was social prejudice against (Jewish, blac
Re: (Score:2)
I think Proctorio specializes in installing hardware in the other end.
Re: (Score:2)
It really would take a lot to be certain of that last 1%. [youtu.be] Not like it can't be done, though, especially with a practical portion as well.
why not have an test center? IT cert test use them (Score:3)
why not have an test center? IT cert test use them and I think for sometime like the BAR test you should be on an test center system with an local live person keep an look out for cheats.
On the one hand (Score:2)
On the one hand I see this expectation that you will utterly surrender the privacy of your own home and the integrity of what is in most cases your personal computer equipment so you can take exams as not far short of abusive.
I mean sure you can walk away I guess; but if 2020 was anything other than your freshmen year you'd had a lot invested when they 'altered the deal' already.
On the other hand academic integrity is a real concern. I am not at all impressed with what I have seen in the K-12 world and what
Re:On the one hand (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, it is a real problem.
As an educator (I teach CS in college and graduate school) I saw no good way to maintain integrity on tests and I saw how intrusive the proctoring tools were, I refuse to play the game and enrich these proctoring companies. I told my student I would not have test, just regular homework and I would not do more to check academic integrity than I would normally do. And if they wanted to waste their education it was their choice.
Did it work? I don't know, but trying to offload a conscious to a proctoring tool that is super expensive would not work anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't given tests in my college programming courses in 26 years. Everything is some sort of small project; mostly individual work, but some good group projects as well (it's very important to have them work with each other, even if evaluation of group projects leaves something to be desired). Mind you, I'm not teaching classes of 1000, or even 100, at a time. You may find that you have no desire to ever go back to using tests as an evaluation tool.
It's got nothing to do with COVID (Score:2)
This is about firing teachers. Nobody likes teachers.
If your test is cheatable, it is testing the wrong (Score:4, Interesting)
You cannot fake understanding how something works. Because cheating would require grasping it.
You can cheat on those test, because instead, they test for the answers to questions.
In other words, they check if you got the same results, instead of if you did the work.
On people's own computers, to make matters worse. Showing a complete lack of understanding for how computers work.
But being unable to distinguish the result of work from the work itself already told us that. However... hey, that makes them perfect candidates for media industry executives. ;)
... thing. (Stupit subject length limitation!) (Score:1)
And people wonder why people continue the subject in the body...
Re: (Score:2)
You can get someone who understands it better than you talk you through it while you do the work.
Re: (Score:2)
Please tell me how to test that is cheating proof and does not require me to produce a different exam for each student or to interview students in person.
If each student have the same exam and you grade their production then just sharing their answers is likely a good way to cheat. Even if the answer is not multiple choice strongly getting inspired by an other solution would be a problem.
So that leave two options. Neither scale to large classes. For reference I was teaching 70 "algorithms and data structure
Re: If your test is cheatable, it is testing the w (Score:2)
I still donâ(TM)t understand why they didnâ(TM)t just switch to some project or paper students have to hand in to get a grade during the lockdown. Not so much need to check cheating for that if you assign everyone a semester project.
Show your work (Score:2)
In university courses, just as in high-school math courses, if the instructor wanted to know if the student understood what they were doing, the instructions said "show your work".
Work it out in a standard test-notebook, show the page to the camera after each question, and mail the notebook in at the end of the exam.
It almost seems like (Score:2)
It almost seems like wrote memorization isn't the best way to measure learning.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a very useful, very specific indicator. If you lack the background facts on the subject, your tasks in the field will not only take longer but may have lethal flaws which you do not recognize.
The problem is lazy examiners (Score:5, Insightful)
If you do exams that are multiple-choice or can easily be answered give the lecture materials or a Google search, then the problem is you, not the students. I let students use all materials from the lecture and a self-written summary of the lecture (can include a summary of other materials if they so chose) in the exams. This means to pass the exam, you have to actually understand things, knowing facts is pretty meaningless. And that means cheating becomes basically a non-issue, because that assistant in the next room becomes mostly worthless.
True, writing and grading such exams takes more time. But the results are a far better reflection of the student's skills and insights.
Re:The problem is lazy examiners (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Um, that's how "real" exams work. You're given a small set of topics to prepare for and then asked questions about it. The "looking up other work" part comes before the exam and is usually called "studying". Many teachers don't like "open book" exams because students usually do much worse on them because they, like you, don't think they need to study. They'll just "look it up". But they didn't prepare so they actually can't do that in the allotted time.
And sure, if someone is wiling to pay for the ex
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think teachers don't like open book because the students get overconfident, but instead, particularly for introductory classes, it is really hard to make a meaningful test that would stand up to being able to research.
Meanwhile, the type of preparation you would do for closed book (memorizing useless specifics) emphasizes the wrong sort of way to operate in a world where the specifics are always at your fingertips, as long as you understand the broad concepts enough to know how to look for them.
This
Re: (Score:2)
I had a math professor who gave exams with three to five questions, none of which you were likely to answer correctly. You were graded entirely on how you approached the problem. It works just as well for both introductory and advanced classes, and has the side benefit of emphasizing that real problems aren't something you solve in a few seconds.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not why instructors hate open-book exams. Instr
Re: (Score:2)
Um, that's how "real" exams work. You're given a small set of topics to prepare for and then asked questions about it. The "looking up other work" part comes before the exam and is usually called "studying". Many teachers don't like "open book" exams because students usually do much worse on them because they, like you, don't think they need to study. They'll just "look it up". But they didn't prepare so they actually can't do that in the allotted time.
That is not my experience, at least not with the version I do. What I do is not strictly "open book". It is lecture slides (rather sparse in my case) and whatever notes, summaries and additions they wrote themselves. They are not allowed to copy other texts verbatim and if they work in groups, everybody has to do their own write-up. What they universally commented on positively was that writing the summary was an excellent way to review the material and its context.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately a lot of shitty job interviews do expect you to answer a bunch of random questions off the top of your head.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately a lot of shitty job interviews do expect you to answer a bunch of random questions off the top of your head.
Well, maybe. I never had one of those. But maybe if the interview is crap, the job will be too?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's usually a sign that they are incompetent and you should withdraw.
Re: (Score:2)
Question about your new .sig: With the old one, "SJW" was nicely descriptive and, since I do use that term I knew when to be offended by it. But I am having trouble finding a good definition of "woke". Which one do you use?
Re: (Score:2)
So you are trying to fight a specific use of language, not a specific idea? Where does that leave the idea?
Re: (Score:2)
Your way of giving exams seems to be more in line of what "the real world" is like. In my professional experience, nobody expects that i will not resort to looking up the answers.
That is the idea. Of course, I am not a professor, just an external lecturer teaching one course (software security) and I do real-world work most of my time. I think in this day and age it is a complete waste of their time to have students memorize tons of facts.
Re: (Score:2)
If you do exams that are multiple-choice or can easily be answered give the lecture materials or a Google search, then the problem is you, not the students.
Yes but what do we do when people post without doing so much as reading TFS? Can we say those people are the problem as well? Like I just today saw some idiot on Slashdot talking about googling exam results on a story which has nothing to do cheating using google. He somehow scored a modpoint, but hey that's Slashdot these days.
Re:The problem is lazy examiners (Score:5, Informative)
The big problem from the instructor perspective is verifying who is taking the exam. All the best exam design doesn't help if students are paying a professional cheater to take the exam on their behalf. This is called contract cheating and is more common than you might think.
I require Respondus Monitor even though my exams are open book, open note. It isn't perfect, but it's the best I have to verify identity. Ironically, I have caught students who had their contract cheater sitting right next to them telling them what to answer. I guess they thought I would never look at the video.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If that assistant passed your class last year with high grades presumably he's pretty useful.
Re: (Score:2)
If you do exams that are multiple-choice or can easily be answered give the lecture materials or a Google search, then the problem is you, not the students.
Different types of test test different types of abilities. The problem lies in treating them all the same.
And, for the record, if you want to use multiple choice questions in an exam, and furthermore make it less susceptible to the cheating described here, give more questions than can be answered within the time limit you allow. Someone who knows the answer, or knows how to work it out, will answer more questions than those who have to look it up, or those that have someone else looking it up for them.
Of co
The problem is there is no solution (Score:5, Insightful)
If you do exams that are multiple-choice or can easily be answered give the lecture materials or a Google search, then the problem is you, not the students.
That is simply not true. I teach a first-year university course and while it would be trivially easy for me to write an exam that cannot be looked up or solved with the lecture materials first-year students are not at the level where they can handle those sorts of questions. Go look up Bloom's Taxonomy [wikipedia.org]. Introductory courses are, by necessity, focussed on the lower tiers of that pyramid.
In a quantitive subject like physics, this results in questions that have quantitively correct answers and those answers are going to be easy to copy regardless of the question format. In higher-level courses you absolutely can ask more qualitative and open-ended questions but, while I do that a little on my exams in first-year these will be the hardest parts of the exam because those questions tend to be evaluative.
Setting all that aside though this does nothing to prevent cheating via contract cheating sites or via communication with other students. Ensuring the integrity of online exams is basically impossible. The best you can do is to take reasonable and sensible precautions to deter cheating as much as possible and then trust in the honesty and integrity of your students for the rest.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the usual method is to have the numbers be derived from a student-specific seed. I've seen plenty of accounting and physics classes use your student ID number as the seed to a PRNG to generate the exam.
The format of the question is the same, but the actual numbers vary.
You can generate multiple choice tests this way as w
Re: (Score:3)
In a quantitive subject like physics, this results in questions that have quantitively correct answers and those answers are going to be easy to copy regardless of the question format.
Wow. The US tests seem to totally corrupt the mind.
Back in my days students were supposed to turn in full solutions to the problems, hand-written in coherent Russian language (well, I had studed in Russia). The actual answer at the end was almost inconsequential, it was common to receive full marks for a problem even if you made a small arithmetic mistake at the end.
Re: (Score:1)
The problem is Universities that operate like for-profit businesses (even though they are not supposed to be).
You see, the less money the school spends on professors, TA's, graders, tutors, and other educational positions, the more it can spend on sports, advertising and marketing, and consulting fees to game the US News rankings.
Social distancing and exams (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The 2m rule only works for spending short amounts of time in an enclosed space near other people. Wouldn't work for exams.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Doubling the distance in class after forcing some people to use public transport at a time of mandated/recommended lockdown is a bad approach IMHO.
Cheating is bad, right? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If I provide obviously wrong information to my customer, I will have a problem from all of the fallout. Teachers not so much. I wish there would be more accountabili
Re: (Score:2)
You're absolutely right. But... I find long-term that those folks are somewhat limited in their abilities to truly function productively. I saw this in a job following college where a number of classmates (who cheated) were unable to perform the technical aspects of the job without significant delays or assistance from others.
I was canned shortly afterwards for threatening to report safety issues there, but I was able to get into a top-tier high tech company shortly afterwards, despite a grueling intervie
Honor Code (Score:2)
The only really effective way of keeping students from cheating is an honor code. With attempts at proctoring, students see cheating as a challenge, and devote all their energy to figuring out how to overcome it. With an honor code, students see not cheating as a challenge and spend their time and energy on succeeding without cheating.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that with an honor code, only dishonorable cheats will cheat.
Oh, wait. That's all cheaters, by definition.
Re:Honor Code (Score:4, Insightful)
Do you think we could ask citizens to follow a similar code so we can abolish the IRS. I mean no one would think about tax evasion if the IRS didn't exist.
Re: (Score:2)
Is that like a chastity pledge?
Any test you can cheat on is a bad test. (Score:3)
If you can cheat on a test, then it is a bad and worthless test. Any test worth anything at all will test students using questions and methods that would be impossible to cheat on. It's very possible to make such a test, they just don't tend to look like the traditional standardized tests.
Oh, and traditional standardized tests are and have always been dumb and worthless
Re: (Score:2)
If you can cheat on a test, then it is a bad and worthless test. Any test worth anything at all will test students using questions and methods that would be impossible to cheat on. It's very possible to make such a test, they just don't tend to look like the traditional standardized tests.
I agree with you you can prevent cheating-by-google with good question design. However, no amount of cunning questions will stop students helping each other during the exam and/or flat out paying a professional cheater to
Re: (Score:2)
You are thinking about it wrong. Test SHOULD be group activities. You SHOULD be able to help each other during the exam. Can you name any other aspect of life where you are presented a problem and ordered "You can't ask anyone for help!" Of course not. That's dumb and it teaches kids a very negative lesson.
Re: (Score:2)
That's what projects are for.
The goal of the exam is to test if the student has knowledge and understanding, because people want to know. While in the real world you might be able to ask someone for help, if you don't have the knowledge and understanding then you have to ask for help on literally everything and you're a useless drain on your company. And if you're in a small company, small team or working on a project without local expertise, then there might not be anyone to ask who can help you. Maybe you
Re: (Score:2)
So how do you know which person in the group did the work? Supposing the test had groups of 5 people, then the test will be 20% accurate - 4 cheaters and 1 skilled person. Tests need to be individual for this reason.
Came here for the proctology jokes... (Score:5, Funny)
...I feel cheated.
Maybe we're testing for the wrong thing? (Score:1)
I've always though multiple choice tests were a lazy way to teach. We don't need to memorize anything anymore either. If you can Google it, why do we need to prove we memorized it for 3 months or whatever a class length is?
Exposure to ideas? Sure. How to solve a problem? Please. But wrote memorization? Use a computer for that.
Re: (Score:2)
Exposure to ideas? Sure. How to solve a problem? Please. But wrote memorization? Use a computer for that.
I believe you mean rote, not wrote. Seeing as wrote would mean that someone wrote the word memorization, whereas rote means mechanical or habitual repetition in order to "learn" it.
Re: (Score:2)
Multiple choice tests are easy to mark. Most of them go the lots-of-easy-to-answer questions route, but they don't have to. If you ever sit down to a multiple choice exam with only a couple of questions, and lots and lots of scrap paper provided, you know your teacher is a sadistic bastard.
Gotta wonder (Score:5, Insightful)
Software like Proctorio sets a level of expectation. I wonder how many students are living down to expectations. If you tell someone they're a no good cheat that deserves a rectal exam before they're allowed to take a test, you don't get to be surprised when they respond by cheating.
You're making them do the time, so it's not too surprising that many of them think they might as well do the crime.
strip search next step to stop cheaters? (Score:2)
strip search next step to stop cheaters?
Good, most important lesson learned (Score:2)
"Teamwork - we're in this together."
In view of world wide economic cryses, protests on the brink of civil war, division and intimidation, climate change etc, the teachers couldn teach such a valuable leason to a fresh generation in a better way even if they tried to.
Sold to computer-illiterate adults, used by kids (Score:2)
The buyers of these software systems are probably not the most computer-savvy adults. The salespeople talk about the techie things the software does, wowing the buyers. Students are pretty clever, they can definitely find ways around systems that their adult supervisors don't expect.
Equally crappy in the âoeprofessionalâ w (Score:2)
I remember taking some industry certification with online proctoring which subjected me to invasive surveillance like that, however the exam platform itself turned out to send all questions including answers and markers for correct answers to the browser upon starting the exam... since it was security related, I feel like it wasnâ(TM)t technically cheating.
Prove it (Score:2)
If they're happy to say they're cheats then they're probably happy to pretend to be cheats to get attention.
None of the stuff claimed here would work IME unless the proctoring was set up by an idiot.
Re: (Score:1)
FFS Why are you replying to the spamtroll? It only encourages them.
Re: (Score:1)
because he is one.