Slashdot Mirror
Preventing Networked Gizmo Use During Exams?
bcrowell writes "I'm a college physics professor. My students all want to use calculators during exams, and some of them whose native language isn't English also want to use electronic dictionaries. I had a Korean student who was upset and dropped the course when I told her she couldn't use her iPod during an exam — she said she used it as a dictionary. It gets tough for me to distinguish networked devices (iPhone? iTouch?) from non-networked ones (calculator? electronic dictionary? iPod?). I give open-notes exams, so it's not memory that's an issue, it's networking. Currently our classrooms have poor wireless receptivity (no Wi-Fi, possible cell, depending on your carrier), but as of spring 2011 we will have Wi-Fi everywhere. What's the best way to handle this? I'd prefer not to make them all buy the same overpriced graphing calculator. I'm thinking of buying 30 el-cheapo four-function calculators out of my pocket, but I'm afraid that less-adaptable students will be unable to handle the switch from the calculator they know to an unfamiliar (but simpler) one."
First off -- I applaud your use of open-note exams. That is the ONLY real-world way to learn and demonstrate knowledge. There is almost never a situation in the professional world where one must solve a problem with absolutely no references (and it would be stupid to do so on a production system -- when solving a critical problem, why risk everything based on what you *think* is right, when you can verify against documentation; at least if something breaks, you can point to the incorrect docs...)
Some people can simply memorize anything they look at, while others struggle at this. A proper exam should be designed to test one's ability to demonstrate processes: exams should give you all the information you need, but the questions should be designed such that only someone who has invested prior effort in practice and learning will be able to solve the questions in the allotted time.
For less-concrete subjects such as the arts, I'm not so sure how this can be accomplished. However this is a trivial design decision for exams in maths, sciences, programming, and engineering.
Furthermore, I think any physics or math exam that requires a complex calculator really has a wrong approach. Assuming everyone at this level has already demonstrated their ability to perform arithmetic several times over, the calculator should only be there to free them from making mistakes on the menial number crunching (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, squares, squareroots, proper value of e,Pi, etc...). The exam should test for core concepts: ideas where you simply must understand the knowledge through prior practice and learning.
Sadly, I think many professors fall back on rote-memorization exams just because they can't be bothered to design proper exams each semester. These types often teach straight from the textbook-provided lesson plans, and then wonder why students cheat...
But honestly -- an exam is but one facet of demonstrating proficiency in a subject. Personally, I think projects & labs the best way: sure one can cheat, but it's easy to determine who has spent time polishing a proper unique lab report. In this respect, open-ended projects are the best, as the room for creativity limits the possibility for undetectable cheating, and lets the students show their enthusiasm for the subject. If you're really worried about cheating, a lab-practical may even be a legitimate tool: it's pretty damn hard to make stuff up as you go while you've got a one-person audience of the professor.
Short answer: let them use basic scientific calculators, the textbook, their notes, and a dictionary; design your tests so that students have all the resources they need, but don't have enough time to learn-as-they-go during the exam.
"Never memorize something that you can look up." --Albert Einstein
What the hell did these students do 10 years ago? AFAIK two semesters of English and perhaps 1 semester of literature are the norm at every reputable college in the U.S. If their English is too poor for your physics exam, they probably have no hope of graduating.
If an officer ever threatens to taze you, say you have a pacemaker.
I think he's worried that you could IM a friend during an exam to work the answers out for you, as if you're a thin client, with all that computing power over in the cloud.
I once had a signature.
two words - SLIDE RULE
When I took undergraduate physics, there were no calculators allowed... there were no numbers on the exams. Problems were like "If you throw a rock horizontally off a bridge at (v) m/s and it hits the ground after (t) seconds, how far away from the base of the bridge did the rock hit the ground, and how tall is the bridge?" And then the student has to understand that this problem requires the use of the projectile motion equations, and they to know what the question is actually asking and solve for it:
w = v t
h = g t^2
One particularly sadistic (but awesome) professor asked a question like this "Suppose you're stuck in the middle of a frozen pond with a perfectly smooth (frictionless) surface. Propose a way to escape the pond." My (correctly marked) proposal was throw away a shoe. Of course, I could show equations for conservation of momentum, but the point was to see if students understood what it meant to be a frictionless surface and to simply be aware of conservation of momentum.
Watch your big mouth son:
Contact the FCC for permit applications and waivers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone_jammer
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
First remember that foreign students pay FAR more than we do to go to US schools. Compound that with the fact that many come from poor countries. The pressure to succeed is EXTREME. Furthermore, not all cultures despise cheating as much as Western culture. The results are predictable.
Personal anecdote: I was invited to the Indian CS students' "study session" once while on a group project. I was AMAZED. They had a library of homework and test questions and answers. They passed them around casually. They also begged me for graded solutions from my previous courses to add to their collection. They were all cheating their way through and thought it was normal.
They also kept asking me how I could come up with working algorithms to programming assignments on my own (without copying from something). It was as if actually being able to program was wizardry to them. I wonder why.......
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
Look toward standardized testing practices for how to conduct tests in a rigorous and fair manner. Quite simply, the rules and expectations for the course should be clearly stated at the outset. Don't wait until the exams come around to drop the bomb. Tell them that you expect them to use a calculator that is on an approved list. No other electronic devices will be permitted. All other possessions not explicitly allowed must be placed at the front of the room, and any mobile devices must be turned OFF. No "vibrate." Watches are permitted but cannot have an alarm function. If they need translation, that's too bad; the ETS does not offer to administer mathematics tests in the language of the examinee's choosing. This is a college level course, with lectures in English. You don't provide lecture notes in twenty languages. It is the student's responsibility to become sufficiently proficient in the English language in order to continue their studies. That may put them at a disadvantage, but we don't try to equalize the playing field for someone who hasn't learned calculus.
Education necessarily requires that some students have to work harder--sometimes, much harder--than others to achieve the same proficiency level as others. That is not being unfair, that is just the way life is.
You can make WiFi unusable, however.
Technically possible but not practical for economic reasons.
Or you could alter the classroom so RF cannot enter through the walls or ceiling.
VERY expensive. Colleges don't really have the funds to justify that, especially when just banning the offending devices is free.
I suppose convincing the university to alter the classroom in this manner could be difficult, but they could also see the value in having some exam rooms that are essentially faraday cages
Why not just take the figurative bullets out of the gun (no networked devices allowed) instead of building an expensive figurative bullet proof vest. If they don't need the networked device for the test, there is no reason to allow it in the room in the first place.
I hold a PHD in physics.
-A pen is enough. In physics exams students should prove they can transform formulas symbolically. Typing in number can be done by people at the cashier desk. Graphing calculators are a disease.
-Everybody who wants, can take in a standalone mp3-player - these are cheap.
-Regarding the dictionary - these exist in paper and are cheap - and faster than an ipod.
Most important: who uses sophistication to cheat and i caught should be removed from the studies immediately.
If you can't hack using a standard 4 function calculator, than you can't hack physics either.
I also hate to be rude, but most universities require that students speak and read english. While I can appreciate the fact that a Korean may not have the best grasp of written English, I also think it that individual's responsibility to learn the language or work outside of class to create notes in his or her native language. I sat through a number of situations in school where I was struggling with difficult material while foreign students were either talking during exams in their language, "sharing calculators" or similar, blatant examples of cheating that went unchallenged due to the political situation at the university.
After being written up in the campus newspaper, one professor "took a stand" by curving everyone's grade up one letter grade, essentially bribing the class into submission.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
EMP. That'll show 'em.
perhaps you haven't heard of ad hoc networks.... even inside a faraday cage, as long as one student is willing to help others cheat, all students are capable of cheating.
You're all looking at the problem the wrong way around. It should be simple enough to design a test that doesn't need a calculator. The devices are great if you need numeric "answers" to a given problem, but in any kind of assessment there's no need for this. The students can leave their result as an expression, which is actually more meaningful in that it makes it clearer to the examiner as to how the student arrived at it.
The student shouldn't need to show that he can substitute values in an expression to arrive at a numeric answer. Any idiot can push a few buttons to do that, so it's just wasting time.