new tool to prevent on-line cheating on tests

[Peter Campbell <campbellp@mail.montclair.edu>]

Here's an excerpt from a story on a new proctoring system designed to  
thwart efforts to cheat on on-line exams:
(full story at http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/06/02/proctor)

--snip--

A fingerprint sensor is built into the base of the remote proctor,  
and professors can choose when and how often they want students to  
identify themselves during the test, Johnson said. In the prototype,  
a small camera with 360-degree-view capabilities is attached to the  
base of the unit. Real-time audio and video is taken from the test  
taker’s room, and any unusual activity — another person walking into  
the room, an unfamiliar voice speaking — leads to a red-flag message  
that something might be awry.

Professors need not watch students taking the test live; they can  
view the streaming audio or video at any time.

“We can see them and hear them, periodically do a thumb print and  
have voice verification,” Johnson said. “This allows faculty members  
to have total control over their exams.”

--end snip--

Question: how many faculty members are going to watch hours and hours  
of video or listen to hours and hours of audio of students after they  
have taken a test with the possibility in mind that the students  
might have cheated? I can only imagine how scintillating it would be  
to watch hundreds of students, one at a time, sitting in front of  
their computers, staring at their displays. It would almost certainly  
rival the cinematic quality of security tapes at ATM's, banks, or  
after-hours parking lots.

I'm curious to know how a "red-flag message that something might be  
awry" actually works. If the student decides to play music while  
taking the test (perhaps to relax), would this be considered "an  
unfamiliar voice speaking"? And if the student's cat suddenly jumps  
up on the student's lap, would this be considered "another person  
walking into the room"?

I'd bet there's a tipping point with something like this. After  
you've been alerted for the 17th time that "something might be awry"  
is actually yet another lap-happy cat (or some variation of this),  
you'd likely disregard these cries of wolf and get back to good ol'  
fashioned face-to-face proctoring.

I have some other thoughts on the whole notion of on-line assessment  
and cheating at

http://tinyurl.com/8gg2n

Note - it's about 55 minutes long, and it's optimized for use on a  
Windows machine using Internet Explorer, but it will work with a Mac  
or a Windows machine with any web browser.

Peter Campbell