Online Test-Takers Feel Anti-Cheating Software's Uneasy Glare - The New York Times - 11 views
-
-
asuarez1 on 16 Jul 15What do you think of the use of web-based services like 'Proctortrack' to monitor remote students during tests? Is there a better way to discourage (or minimize) cheating in online courses? Can using this kind of software be justified?
-
- ...4 more annotations...
-
I think this particular tool Proctortrack is excessive. I understand that an online program limits the ability to watch students but I think the program that rates your integrity based on looks, lighting and body moves is too much. I could see the stress of this effecting the outcome of a test. Through the article there were other systems that were discussed that seem to be a bit more fair to both the student and the instructor. As an online student I would be comfortable with the accountability piece but with some limits. I do think as a university they have the right and decision to make on if they put something in place to prevent cheating and what that could be. I know with an increase in online learning that there does need to be something in place to keep students honest.
- ...11 more comments...
-
I think that some sort of monitoring is needed, however, Proctortrack seems a bit excessive. I personally have never had to use a service like this. I do have colleagues that have been monitored during online testing through a webcam, they had to show the room was empty by moving the webcam, and their eyes couldn't stray from the screen. That was just over webcam, no monitoring software was used like Proctortrack. I also think it depends on the course and the professor. I definitely see the need to monitor what someone is looking at and accessing during an online exam, and feel that it is necessary to monitor. I don't know if their is another fair way to monitor online testing. Any one taking an online test without monitoring can easily have access to the internet to search for answers, notes, or even have someone else taking the exam for them. I think a software is needed to monitor otherwise how would you hold a person accountable? We can rely on the persons word, but not everyone is truthful. It is definitely justifiable. Online programs are trying to maintain the integrity of the course and program. By monitoring cheating they are discouraging it and catching any that are cheating. Just like in person testing, we are monitoring students taking the test to ensure they do not cheat. In person, we the teachers are the software monitoring student activity, online test also need a monitor.
-
bhanak> I agree. Some modifications are fine, but it is excessive. Showing the entire room before the test does not mean that someone can not walk it. Nothing is guaranteed 100% and overdoing it doesn't make it better. It would make me very nervous to not be able to move or I would get "flagged." Then, as the teacher of the course, I would worry that the results of the test would get negative effect! I get nervous during tests without all of that, so imagine what would happen with that camera on?
-
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQLdprp2P0Q The link above is a news report about these Anti-cheating software programs. How do you think our program at UT is avoiding this issue all together? What can your online program do to verify student learning and not have to worry about students cheating on a test?
-
It is very controversial, because universities want to ensure that their graduates do have what it is needed for the job market in order to have a better reputation. In the other hand, having someone view the inside of your home could be a security problem, especially if they have your address. In addition, some test take hours, and you need to go to the bathroom, scratch your foot, or stretch. All test centers are aware that the people taking test do this without cheating. My solutions would be to have test centers. A place where you can pay to go and use one of their computers to do the test. Of course, how many students want to pay extra fees or services? One way to ensure that the person taking the test doesn't cheat (at some degree) is by using the software they mentioned that it won't allow the person to open browsers or applications while during the test, but I would add that at any moment the person taking the test could receive a verification code in their phone. This way, you verify that the person is at the place they are saying they are. This would work because in online courses, usually you don't have classmates living close by.
-
Online learning is driving the need for project based learning rather than testing as an assessment. If it is important to assess skills such as math, perhaps thinking about using a tool such as collaborate to interact with students and having students produce work in session (like going up to the chalkboard and working out a problem) may provide a better solution than a boxed quiz requiring supervision!
-
I have taken courses online where I had to be "watched" by someone, and felt extremely nervous because someone I did not know was in a sense spying on me. I know that online programs are trying to ensure that their programs are remaining rigorous and that students are being held accountable for the material, but I also don't think that this has to be done with exams. In our program most of the course have a PBL model, like Mrs. Evans has discussed, and I find that to be much more realistic for how you will function in the workplace. I think this is a fundamental question of how educators assess students. Does a quiz/exam really assess a student's knowledge accurately?
-
Juan, it is my opinion that test centers defeat the purpose of online learning. I believe that the degree I am getting proves what I have learned more through the products! It is direct proof of my learning to show that I am capable to think critically and create a product that proves my knowledge. There is no way to cheat on that and it is reliable. I remember clearly in high school that students who had a great memory to retrieve information would do fantastic on tests but this did not mean that they learned, could analyze, and apply the material they learned. As teachers, it is this critical thinking that we want our learners to leave with and I think we need to start moving away from "teaching to the test." What do you think?
-
Personally I feel that this is a great idea even though it goes in to the privacy life of the test takers. As a fully integrated multi factor bio-metrics behavioral application, Proctor-track provides automated remote proctoring for distance learners taking tests online. This combined solution fulfills the Department of Education's federal mandated standards for identity verification and authentication requirements for distributing Title IV funds. Proctor-track replicates the security of traditional testing centers, while giving students the flexibility to take proctored tests online, anytime, anywhere on demand, with the ease of automation and complete scale ability.
-
Lauren, as you said, PBL and models like it take the learning and apply it. What could be better than that. Besides, isn't that what we want from our learners? I do not think that a quiz or test adequately proves that a student has learned. Here is a great article about "teaching to the test." It talks about test taking skills not being bad independently, however it talks about the importance of alignment. How do you think PBL aligns with the standards we teach and how can it be better than a test? http://www.greatschools.org/gk/articles/teaching-to-the-test/
-
I believe now with so much digital technology around us, it has made it easier to retrieve answers for those tests or questions. If students rely on this technology, they essentially "cheat" themselves out of their own education. I do strongly believe that students need to understand the consequences of their actions. As educators, we are responsible to engage them in their learning to understand what they are learning and that cheating is never an alternative.
-
I believe the use of this web-based service to be invading privacy and unreliable. Schools that offer online courses cannot always rely on technology to asses if a student is cheating. Just as Mr. Carlton stated, if you are going to offer online learning, you need to find ways to ensure the integrity of the course including test taking. There are other web-based services that offer checking for plagiarism. There are definitely other ways to discourage cheating in online courses. All my online instructors have been doing a great job in informing of the consequences for cheating. The use of that type of software cannot be justified specially when the student feels uncomfortable.
-
Hi Ana, very interesting article. Being new to online courses, I have to say this is the first I hear of such software or services. I see how it may be justified, but to a certain degree. This particular software is quite excessive I must say. Ms. Choa (first student mentioned in the article) was given the option paying for the software, which she was against (and I would be too if I found myself in that situation) or paying proctor fees. I see how Juan's suggestion of having a testing center available would be another solution for that particular case. You asked if there is a better way to discourage (or minimize) cheating in online courses? It was also stated in the article how other software are being used to prevent students from opening apps or browsers during online exams. I think that would be a better method of monitoring/preventing cheating rather than having Proctotrack labeling/flagging me as a cheater for my poor posture.