Over the decades I have given hundreds of tests. Many of them were take home exams. By definition they were open book. In a graduate course it is relatively easy to see if one student copied from another. If the problem was well crafted then the student had to show details on the derivation and almost always the work is unique.
I recall in the recess in December 1970 I gave a take home that had one problem where the student was asked to show a certain inequality was correct. When types the inequality was reversed and thus the mathematical inequality was false. Of my twenty five students only one recognized the error. 24 "proved" the wrong thing. My mistake and also theirs.
So what is the point? The NY Times reports on quiz taking during the pandemic. They note:
An unusual school year has started in earnest, and with it has come the return of digital proctoring programs. This is software that can lock down students’ computers, record their faces and scan their rooms, all with the intention to thwart cheating. These programs, with names like ProctorU and Proctorio, first raised alarms about privacy as they were adopted by schools. Now many students are finding that the programs they’re required to use may not have been well-designed to consider race, class or disability — and in some cases, simply don’t work. Many are organizing on and across campuses for alternatives or for their eradication. The rigidity of online proctoring has exacerbated an already difficult year, students say, further marginalizing them at the very moments they’re trying to prove themselves. Here are some things that can go wrong with testing and digital surveillance.
Indeed, all of this online education, as we noted yesterday, is a kluge. Why not open book exams? I can give one example. One hopes your surgeon knows anatomy well. You do not want an "open book" surgery. On the other-hand, most of research and professional life is by definition open book.
The question is honesty. The answer is having questions as I had prepared decades ago that were not multiple choice but required a line of thinking that demonstrated a students understanding. After-all term papers are open book. The reason in my opinion is that instructors are lazy and that the education system is predicated upon standard exams. In contrast real life is not multiple choice and there are no standard exams, unless you were a toll taker on the Jersey Turnpike.
Watching students on video is definitely not the answer. Better and more involved instructors is.
Posts
