With several courses on online platforms, teachers are often curious about how many students were cheating in the free online class in the absence of online exam proctoring.
To figure this out, some institutions created an exam that had many different answer keys and some 60,000 distinct ways to earn a perfect score. As the answer keys were unique, each of them could be tracked separately.
The system tracks the 6,000 students who took the test (of the 48,000 enrolled in the course) to see if they would share answers. According to the analysis, out of those 6,000 students, it is likely that 20 had cheated. The additional observation led to determine that the cheating had been pretty low tech.
An online chat program was used where ten students appeared to have collaborated on the exam, whereas 10 others appeared to have shared answers via e-mail. But some have taken the small number of cheaters as a good sign.
That’s surprisingly low if you think about it. The techniques, such as e-mailing the answer key or collectively completing the exam in a chat room, literally anyone could think of that. And there’s nothing, technically, that we could do to stop them from doing it, other than having great online proctoring services.
Higher-tech options on the table: a system of online proctoring, currently under development, in which students put their identification cards in front of their webcam and later take the exam, meanwhile a proctor proctors them via the internet.
Of course, all the cheating would not be stopped. Think, how to stop a candidate from mouthing answers to the test taker? Here, remote online exam proctoring could act as a deterrent.
There are 3 basic-level MOOCs, introduced by a renowned institute including English composition, psychology, and physics. There is also a consideration for incorporating high-tech online proctoring authentication processes, say facial recognition software. The world seems to be going toward test proctoring for a reason.
There is a worrisome thought circulating that designing courses with cheating in mind will cause MOOCs to lose too much of their openness. We can’t get too crazy about cheating.
We have to accept the fact that we can’t make this thing airtight, and if we try to make it more airtight, the worse it becomes an educational experience. Cheating is not something to eliminate, find ways to bring in online proctoring .
It is the time where brick-and-mortar teacher training programs are under scrutiny, remember, the online teacher training has the potential to either help or jeopardize efforts of refining public education.
With the advent of technology, internet classes could widen access to the profession and be a solution to teacher shortages. But if remote exam proctoring can’t ensure quality, they’ll instead just pump thousands of ill-prepared teachers into the system.
One can join teacher-hopefuls in a virtual course to explore how well the rapidly growing field is preparing individuals for the classroom.
There is a required course in the master’s program for teachers-to-be, which covers subjects of standardized testing, teaching in multicultural classrooms and, yes, the history of public schools in America.
According to some, they learned a lot about education but little about how to conduct themselves in a classroom. That was partly because this class, didn’t cover specific teaching strategies.
Some skeptics question whether the basic lack of human interaction during an online class can lead to problems down the road.
When teachers trained online regarding the proctored exam, they noticed problems maybe could have helped earlier,” such as the way a teacher answers student questions. What it says is we really have to start earlier in designing our online classes to be much more interactive.
Subscribe to AIProctor for the best test proctoring services, now!