Slashdot Mirror


New Smartwatches Allow Students To Cheat On Exams

HughPickens.com writes: The Independent reports that smartwatches that allow students to cheat on exams are being openly sold on Amazon. An advert for one such watch, called a "New 2016 Student 8GB cheating watch," is offered on Amazon for $51.68. "This watch is specifically designed for cheating on exams with a special programmed software. It is perfect for covertly viewing exam notes directly on your wrist, by storing text and pictures in the 8GB memory storage. It supports various file formats, such as: TXT, MP3, JPG, GIF, WAV, WMV, AVI, etc. It has an emergency button, so when you press it — the watch's screen display changes from text to a regular clock, and blocks all other buttons." The watch has garnered good reviews. "this is amazing. it helps me cheat on my test and it is smart and i never got caught," writes one reviewer. Joe Sidders, the deputy head at Monkton Combe senior school, in Bath, told BBC News that such devices were making exams a "nightmare to administer". "I expect the hidden market for these sorts of devices is significant, and this offering on Amazon is just the tip of the iceberg." A spokesman for Amazon said the company did not want to comment on the sale of the cheating watches. But professors are striking back. "My microbiology professor does a watch check every time we have a test," says Abigail Lauze. "If it's not an old school analog it has to come off and go in the cell phone bin."

284 of 394 comments (clear)

  1. Ok, so... by mrsam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... New exam rule: no wearing of wristwatches, of any kind, while taking an exam. You want to know the time left? See this big clock on the wall. This solution seems too obvious. Am I missing something?

    1. Re:Ok, so... by SirSlud · · Score: 1, Informative

      Yes, you're missing reading the summary.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    2. Re:Ok, so... by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nope. Looks like you got it. Even from the summary:

      But professors are striking back. "My microbiology professor does a watch check every time we have a test," says Abigail Lauze. "If it's not an old school analog it has to come off and go in the cell phone bin."

      Sounds good. Every student gets a bag. Puts his/her name on it. Then puts ALL of his/her electronics into the bag. They can be reclaimed AFTER the test ON THEIR WAY OUT OF THE CLASSROOM.

    3. Re:Ok, so... by gurps_npc · · Score: 1
      Yeah, a lot.

      1)A respect for privacy and personal rights.

      2) The incredible stupid belief that the problem is wrist watches and phones, rather than all technology.

      3) Any understanding of the prevalence of electronic media and communication techniques as used by the people that cheat casinos.

      Your basic problem is that you think you can eliminate cheating by outlawing specific methods. People can come up with more ideas on how to cheat quicker than you can outlaw them.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    4. Re:Ok, so... by SumDog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That was in that move Paper Planes ...in reality, parents would lose their collective shift if a teach went around taking up everyone $200 ~ $500 smartphones.

    5. Re:Ok, so... by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      ... New exam rule: no wearing of wristwatches, of any kind, while taking an exam.

      This is a subject matter screen. If having the answers on your wrist gets you an A on the test, the subject matter is trivial and unnecessary or you made an awful test. After getting through general electives, every single course I took was open book, open computer, open neighbor (if you wanted to dick the curve) and were still so damned hard people left in tears.

    6. Re:Ok, so... by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This solution seems too obvious.

      Yes the solution is obvious. How about not judging people on the ability to remember useless facts in a 90 minute window of opportunity under conditions they will never experience in real life, and then giving them a mark that will affect them in real life.

      I've been in industry for 20 years now. No one has asked me to perform long division on paper. No one has asked me to solve a laplace transform without a calculator. No one has asked me to sit in silence for 20 minutes reciting things from memory. No one has forced me to solve some kind of hard problem without the ability to go get some reference material.

      All of that is quite good since I really didn't perform well on exams, and found myself lucky to be at a university and do courses where you're merits are determined on work output rather than rote memorisation and a 90minute stress test.

    7. Re:Ok, so... by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      Standard procedure at my sons school, phones go into the basket on way into class.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    8. Re:Ok, so... by SirSlud · · Score: 1

      The GP was asking if "his" solution seemed too obvious. Indeed, it is so obvious, it's noted in the summary itself.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    9. Re:Ok, so... by zlives · · Score: 1

      if the answer is not in the book, or computer or neighbor... then your teacher is just a sadistic asshole.

    10. Re:Ok, so... by tnk1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This solution seems too obvious.

      No one has asked me to sit in silence for 20 minutes reciting things from memory. No one has forced me to solve some kind of hard problem without the ability to go get some reference material.

      You got off pretty easily in your interviews, I guess. Every third interview, I get some dipshit who thinks that they need to have me write code under a time deadline without reference materials or adequate tools. I get it, there are some geniuses out there who can do that. And I can't blame them for wanting to hire such people, but I'd consider that to be an escalation challenge, not the first question.

      Mind you, I can pull it off sometimes. I always was good at test taking. What I hate is that people actually use that method and waste people's time. It's a weed out method, and a bad one at that. I've never worked with someone who needs to win a speed coding contest to do their job.

    11. Re:Ok, so... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      The problem is that phones/watches can be used to communicate. So snap a photo of the test, transmit it to your paid accomplice, who completes the exam and sends the answers back. You get an A+ while having no understanding of the subject matter. So the only difference in grades will depend on how much you can afford to spend on your test taker.

    12. Re: Ok, so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A doctor's note? If you don't have one you can't use your gear. Duh.

    13. Re:Ok, so... by danbert8 · · Score: 2

      Remember that HR people and recruiters are the ones who didn't pass the tests and want to take it out on you. If they knew how to do that shit they'd be too valuable to waste time on hiring.

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    14. Re:Ok, so... by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      Why the hell do you need to cheat to know all the I.P. tables? It goes from 0.0.0.0 all the way up to 255.255.255.255, it's not that hard.

    15. Re:Ok, so... by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      If you're smart enough to modify your pacemaker to feed you the answers I'd say you're smart enough to deserve a pass.

      Even if the subject is Mesopotamian languages.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    16. Re:Ok, so... by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      and is the school willing to pay for any damage / theft costs?

    17. Re:Ok, so... by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Funny

      ... New exam rule: no wearing of wristwatches, of any kind, while taking an exam.

      Think of the failed terrorist attacks: the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber, and the tampon bomber . . .

      At the PolygamousRanch University, all our students are required to wear no clothes at all when taking exams.

      In the buff, or no credit, is our motto.

      Our University charges no tuition. We just sell videos of exams, to cover our costs.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    18. Re:Ok, so... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's what happens in my son's middle school. Kids are allowed to have smartphones, but can't have them out during school. If they are caught with a smartphone out, it's confiscated and the parent needs to come to collect it. The reason for requiring the parent to collect it is to make it a bigger offense than just "oh well, I got caught texting in class. I'll just get it before I leave." The students recognize that Offense Requiring Parental Involvement is much more serious and are therefore much more likely to stay within the rules.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    19. Re:Ok, so... by Radish03 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are hearing aids that support bluetooth streaming because you can't use headphones while wearing them. Those spring to mind as an example of a legitmate medical equipment that could also have nefarious uses.

    20. Re:Ok, so... by MitchDev · · Score: 1

      Thanks to "Zero Tolerance" idiocy, there is no room for details....

    21. Re:Ok, so... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Yup, you're "missing" that everyone wants to over-engineer a solution and instead bike-shed every last detail.

      Silly you for having a simple, practical solution! :-)

    22. Re:Ok, so... by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      Sounds good. Every student gets a bag. Puts his/her name on it. Then puts ALL of his/her electronics into the bag. They can be reclaimed AFTER the test ON THEIR WAY OUT OF THE CLASSROOM.

      It's not a standard procedure?

    23. Re:Ok, so... by fropenn · · Score: 1

      Rigorous testing centers have banned all watches for a long time (although, without your watch, how would you know?). Smartwatches just make it easier to explain to people why they are banned.

    24. Re:Ok, so... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Alternative solution for asshole parents; make the kids leave their $500 smartphone at home on exam days.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    25. Re:Ok, so... by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      It's hardly a new problem with watches either. I had to take off my calculator watch for math tests in elementary school in the 80s.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    26. Re:Ok, so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your stupendous intellect, which was being stifled by all those silly tests, shows through in your use of "... you're merits". It's a miracle, with all the schooling the people go through, that there are airplanes and computers and things that do anything other than catch fire. Simply amazing.

    27. Re:Ok, so... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      If the kid is willing to take that risk by taking the device to school during an exam knowing it will have to be put aside during the exam , then "no" is the correct answer.

      Personal responsibility is a lesson that should have be taught by parents far before costly smartphones/-watches ever become an issue.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    28. Re:Ok, so... by clong83 · · Score: 1

      My solution if I am a professor is to simply to allow open book, or at least open note. That reduces the incentive to use a smartwatch or other 'banned' resource, as it doesn't provide an advantage, since other students will have pretty much the same tools at hand.

      It's absolutely possible to design an open-book test that will still be challenging or impossible to those who are unprepared. If you are only testing student's ability to memorize rote facts and formulae that can easily be looked up, then your test is bad and people will find ways to cheat.

      From years of TA'ing and proctoring university tests, I quickly learned to always have the bathrooms checked by someone shortly after the test began. Students would sometimes stash a bookbag of texts in the stalls if it was a closed book test.

    29. Re:Ok, so... by I4ko · · Score: 1

      This is not hard at all.
      There was one exam in my college that the professor knew we are going to cheat. What was his solution - give us 30 small question instead of 2 big ones.
      Small details that can be answered and written down in 30 seconds and that is how much time we had. There ain't no time looking for the cheat in 30 seconds. He instructed us how to fold the sheet of paper after each question, so it was not easily possible to go back and add stuff to the questions. And the whole exam lasted 20 easy minutes after which we went to drink beer in the lobby bar, not two effing staggering hours when you are trying to find the right cheat and copy it, and so on.

    30. Re:Ok, so... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Disallowing people equipped with electronics for legitimate health reasons, some of which may not even be removable without surgery, would be such a huge contravention of human rights that any institution which tried to practice it would be sued into bankruptcy if they did as you suggest.

      This notion is so self-evident that I can only conclude you must be trying to troll.

    31. Re:Ok, so... by thegarbz · · Score: 3

      I'm not in programming. I've been asked to solve some engineering problems in interviews but most of them have been breadth of knowledge / innovative solutions type of exercises. And heck most of the time the best answer is not necessarily replying by memory.

      In my current job at the interview I got asked a question about severe service valves for oil and gas. The questions was what valve to select for a really high pressure differential service to avoid cavitation. My answer? "Don't know. It has something to do with the trim. I wasn't the one who specified them in my last job. But if I had to select one there's a few places I can find out for example the Fischer control valve engineering handbook, existing valves throughout similar services, or ask a more experienced engineer."

      I was told that was the "right" answer even though I had no idea how to answer the question. So some questions may look like rote learning type questions on the face of it but actually have some deeper thought in it.

      I've also heard of colleagues of mine who set design questions in their interviews. The correct answer has nothing to do with the design that ends up on paper, but the order in which the person draws or starts scribbling on the paper, looking at method rather than the result.

    32. Re:Ok, so... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      HR people and recruiters

      These are not typically the people setting the questions. You know you're sitting an exam a HR person set when you're type tested for personality as part of your interview.

    33. Re:Ok, so... by unrtst · · Score: 1

      I believe he's referring to the CIDR values and their corresponding range sizes. They're easy to calculate, but a table can be helpful for quick reference - there's only 32 of them.

    34. Re:Ok, so... by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      And that's why we're not moving to IPv6. The addresses go from : to 8787:24f8:b208::7:c2872f::::::bv2o87g2f8bqe:i72o87b24v2:4v8b. Or something like that. :^)

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    35. Re:Ok, so... by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

      And clearly a corollary is that if mommy and daddy have enough money to buy such cheats for you then you deserve to pass too, even if you are a borderline idiot and you are taking exams in critical areas like medicine or civil engineering.

      --
      I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    36. Re:Ok, so... by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Or design an exam that can't be cheated on.... it's quite possible. Ever had an "open book" exam? They tend to be the hardest exams because they require thought instead of memorizing facts and notes. But they're hard to prepare, and teachers are lazy.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    37. Re:Ok, so... by Triklyn · · Score: 2

      nah, everybody has a book bag, phones, watches electronics go into your book bag. if i see a phone out and you haven't turned in your test yet, you lose all the points.

    38. Re:Ok, so... by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

      Viola!, the answer was there!

      It was a music exam?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    39. Re:Ok, so... by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      There's always one. Sigh. Try cheating on your math test with your hearing aid or your brain implant.

      How do you tell the difference? Using something called a brain. I know they're in short supply but...

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    40. Re:Ok, so... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Well that's how it should be. What are you, one of them there cormorants?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    41. Re:Ok, so... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      My point is not that I believe that cheating should be tolerated... my point is that a zero-tolerance policy on electronics has a very high chance of running afoul of human rights violations, and it can often be difficult to impossible for an outsider to distinguish between a device whose sole purpose is for legitimate health reasons and one that may be superficially designed to appear as such, but has additional functionality that may enable cheating.

      Reasonably, the issue needs to be addressed with considerably more finesse than just "ban all electronics".

      Heck, the brain itself operates on electricity too.

    42. Re:Ok, so... by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      To be fair, I don't want to say that problem solving questions are an issue.

      I even have some interviewees write code on a board, but it is almost always short, to the point, and to demonstrate that they have actually seen the language they are purporting to have been working with for the last two years.

      Having said that, I don't know if my problem solving for coding is well tested in an interview situation. My success is generally through knowing where to look, finding the best tool for the job, and building a consistent and optimized product. None of that works without me "cheating" and looking things up.

      For that, I might sit and stare at books or web pages for hours before I write a single line of code and make a plan for how I think it should be structured, perhaps with pseudocode and such. Once the plan is in place, writing the code is fairly trivial, but the lead up to it is slow and deliberate and in an hour, I'd have little code to show for it. A speed coder, I am not. I have been pretty pleased with my output professionally, and no one has said otherwise in my earshot.

      Anyway, problem solving is good, but it should be tailored to the time limits, or even better, if you want a real problem solving solution, find a way to send them home with homework before the interview, and review it during the interview and during their leisure. It's true that they can "cheat" by downloading answers, but anyone who writes their own code should be able to explain the reasoning behind the selection of what they picked. Plagarizers will have code, but be unable to explain what they "wrote" to you.

    43. Re:Ok, so... by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      but that kid is a minor and may not even be the legal owner of the phone. Also does the school have a court order to take a minors phone?

    44. Re:Ok, so... by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      ... New exam rule: no wearing of wristwatches, of any kind, while taking an exam. You want to know the time left? See this big clock on the wall. This solution seems too obvious. Am I missing something?

      Bingo. This isn't a hard problem to solve.

      All watches, smartphones, MP3 players, everything electronic goes in a bag with the student's name on it, returned after the exam. All students to be watched carefully during the exam. Video record the room and do a scan afterwards for anything that looks odd, then take appropriate action.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    45. Re:Ok, so... by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      if the answer is not in the book, or computer or neighbor... then your teacher is just a sadistic asshole.

      Or he's trying to get you to take the concepts that are in the book and extend them to new situations to demonstrate that you have mastery. It used to be such teachers were called "good" and "creative" and "inspiring". Now they are "sadistic assholes".

    46. Re:Ok, so... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Could you clarify exactly why you think that the notion is ridiculous?

    47. Re:Ok, so... by bickerdyke · · Score: 2

      And what cracks me up is sellers advertising these things as if no teacher in the known universe uses Amazon...

      They don't care.

      They are already going for the market of students so stupid they need someone to give them the idea to cheat with a smartwatch!

      --
      bickerdyke
    48. Re:Ok, so... by slashping · · Score: 1

      Even better idea: let the students use the watches. Let them use books, notes and google, just like in the real world. Now, since everybody's got their notes, ask some real questions.

    49. Re:Ok, so... by khallow · · Score: 1

      You are the one who made the ridiculous assertion that one cannot identify a legitimate medical device.

      I have to agree with mark-t. There's nothing ridiculous about it at all. Professors aren't automatically experts in what legitimate medical devices look like.

    50. Re:Ok, so... by sh00z · · Score: 1

      4) That instructors and Proctors are dumb enough to fall for this. Did anyone look at the Amazon link? That thing is freaking huge! Makes an Apple Watch look like a Swatch.

    51. Re:Ok, so... by kellymcdonald78 · · Score: 1

      The school may not have a court order to take the phone, but they are well within their rights to give the student a 0 on the exam if they refuse to hand it over

    52. Re:Ok, so... by khallow · · Score: 1

      Where's the device that's streaming the information to the hearing aid? O right, either outside the room & thus too far for BT to be of use OR off & at the front of the class in the 'cell phone bin'...

      The obvious rebuttal? Better antennas, Bluetooth repeaters, more power, etc. A foot wide parabolic antenna might be a bit obvious in the classroom attached to your hearing aid, but not so obvious from a hidden position well outside a classroom or nested above a dropped ceiling.

      nd of course, unless you're taking an oral/auditory exam there's no point in the kid needing the hearing aid.

      "I need to hear the professor's instructions."

    53. Re:Ok, so... by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      Why the hell would you risk getting caught cheating for something silly and simple?

      It's been a long time since my CCNA. But when I took it, you got to use this silly plastic sheet w/ dry-erase pens as "scratch paper". And the first thing I did, as recommended by my Cisco instructor during our test prep class, was write out a CIDR table for fast reference during the rest of the exam. (It does help quickly answering some of the easier questions, freeing up time to concentrate on the simulator problems.)

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    54. Re: Ok, so... by jd · · Score: 1

      Let's say DARPA gets their brain implant to work, or that those who have experimented with implants devise one that allows such information to be conveyed. Even a medical expert won't be able to categorize such systems.

      The only viable method is to examine understanding and not memorization. If understanding is examined, all the notes in the world won't help.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    55. Re:Ok, so... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Let them use books, notes and google, just like in the real world.

      Yes brilliant idea, but if you're going to allow access to arbitrary websites, how do you stop them getting someone to do the exam for them?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    56. Re:Ok, so... by CSMoran · · Score: 1

      And clearly a corollary is that if mommy and daddy have enough money to buy such cheats for you then you deserve to pass too, even if you are a borderline idiot and you are taking exams in critical areas like medicine or civil engineering.

      Right, use corner cases of corner cases to figure out works-in-most-cases solutions.

      --
      Every end has half a stick.
    57. Re:Ok, so... by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      ... New exam rule: no wearing of wristwatches, of any kind, while taking an exam. You want to know the time left? See this big clock on the wall. This solution seems too obvious. Am I missing something?

      Yep. That closed book exams are stupid. I haven't noticed that when doing my day job, my employer requires that I do it without reference to documentation or textbooks, or web sites or references.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    58. Re:Ok, so... by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

      Right. Rich kids don't cheat and the watch doesn't even really exist.

      --
      I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    59. Re:Ok, so... by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Under every desk put a small plastic container with a lid. All your devices go in your container, only to be removed when you're done with the test.

      You're welcome to put devices in your backpack instead, but any kind of device in sight other than the school-sanctioned TI-83 is grounds for dismissal.

      To what end? How is anyone or anything helped by preventing access to information during an exam?

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    60. Re:Ok, so... by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

      Take a ten buck yagi directional antenna and you'll be amazed how far you can extend that BT range. Wouldn't be hard at all to reach it from outside the test room.

      --
      I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    61. Re:Ok, so... by shawn2772 · · Score: 1

      if the answer is not in the book, or computer or neighbor... then your teacher is just a sadistic asshole.

      Heh. My favorite math prof used to give "open anything inanimate", take-home exams. Each consisted of exactly eight problems, all of the form "Prove or disprove <statement>", and they were handed out on Monday of finals week, and due on Friday (some people asked for more time, but he said he didn't want to ruin our weekends). They were awesome, requiring deep understanding of the material but all of them were actually within the grasp of a good student. I never found any of them in any book; he created them all himself, I think. Most students only managed about 50%, but a few from each class managed 100% -- with 10+ hours of work.

      I don't think he was a sadist at all and definitely not an asshole. Those exams not only really showed who did and didn't understand the material, but they did an extraordinary job of cementing and combining the course's key elements in the minds of the students. Not as a replacement for homework, mind. If you hadn't been doing your homework there was no way you'd pass the exam unless you were a Ramanujan or something.

      I thought they were also great fun. I remember endless hours of staring at the ceiling while rotating the pieces around in my head, until finally they clicked and I saw how to prove the statement or construct a counterexample. My wife (just recently married) was startled the first few times I shouted "YES!" and started jumping up and down after hours of staring and aimless pacing, interspersed with occasional scribbling. She got used to it, though. Thinking back makes me want to go take some more classes from him (we remain friends today, some 25 years later).

    62. Re:Ok, so... by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 1

      What about bionic eyes or ears, do I have to leave those at the door too?

    63. Re:Ok, so... by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      The professor is teaching really bad exam habits. Exam with essay question, best method. During the note taking period and question reading, do a preliminary draft of the essay question. As you work through the rest of the exam, always go through the paper and answer the questions you can quickly answer. Then work back through from start to finish for the harder questions. This enables to mull over the harder questions for an extended period and also often questions asked will provide hints for answers to other questions (also gets you in the rhythm and builds confidence, well at least for some ;D). Than do the longer pass through for the harder questions. Then onto the essay question for which you have an initial draft plus a recent store of informative questions and answers, to add to the rough draft as you rewrite it. After the rewrite of the essay, go back and review, you should have time left. That is the best method by which to tackle a tough exam.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    64. Re:Ok, so... by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      Possibly an example will make you see the logic failure in you statement. "The grade 10 teacher will fail any female student who won't sleep with him."

    65. Re:Ok, so... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      You forgot to blame political correctness and SJWs.

    66. Re:Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Just wait until augmented reality hits in undetectable wearables such as contacts that have network capacity and OCR.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    67. Re:Ok, so... by kurkosdr · · Score: 1

      The University of Southampton is already doing this. Had to take my completely analog, ultra-basic watch out of my wrist and put it in a plastic transparent bag next to me.

    68. Re:Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Of course you are and of course you will, snowflake.

      No, you'll pitch a fit when you're shit is taken and your parents have to come deal with your irresponsible behavior. *snip* (That part was too mean.)

      Remember, you're unique, just like everybody else. You're gonna be in for a rude awakening when you enter the adult world. If you learn it now, practice it now, then you'll find it's a hell of a lot easier to cope when you've no other choice but to accept that yes, yes that other person *IS* "the boss of you."

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    69. Re:Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      No, those are assumed and are there by extension of the "Zero Tolerance" policies. They didn't forget, you're just not up with your jargon. It's like "Those People." No need to be specific, we know who "Those People" are.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    70. Re:Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure you should be speaking about logic. The term you should realize after looking at what you wrote is a non-sequitur. It does not follow that making a student do something that is not unlawful is akin to making a student do something that is unlawful. In other words, coercing them to give up their phone is not the same as coercing them to have unlawful sex.

      You didn't actually take any formal courses on critical thinking, did you?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    71. Re:Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I had to scroll back up. This comment bugged me. You're looking for an absolute, or I'm misreading your text.

      But, it comes down to something more philosophical. So, as is often the case with me, that leads to a novella. However, you've been pretty good lately so I'll spare you the novella.

      If we skip the middle of my intended response, we end up with: That entirely depends on the goal. What is your goal? Is it education, to what level, in preparation of, and to what ends? Pardon anything not covered within that scope, add to it as you wish. It's largely rhetoric but I'm certainly open to answer(s).

      Is the goal to teach? If so, at some point, where is it worth giving instruction? Is the goal preparation for the future? If so, then for what reason do we impose restrictions - in today's society?

      Those mostly come out of my original question, the one that I skipped, which is; "Who has the motivation to do their exam for them and where did they get that motivation?"

      If the answer is the more obvious, which is for money, then is it not a lesson to teach the kids to bargain for services? The wealthier are far more likely to be able to afford competent aid. In the future, they'll very likely to be in a position where they're employing someone in some capacity.

      I promised to keep this short, and I will... However, this isn't just so much a question for this moment in time but for the future and our future needs as a society. Let us keep in mind what the scholastic process is actually geared for and let us also keep in mind that the needs of the days of its creation (or even our time of passage) are quite different than what they are now and what they might be in just a short while.

      Would we not be better served, and more robust a people, if we taught to a level (the lines of which are open to interpretation) if we actually enabled the kids by teaching them how to not just learn but how to get the results they need?

      Having communicated with you enough, I can presume this isn't a subject to be overly biased about. I'd made it to the bottom of the thread before returning to answer/respond. Indeed, I do not even know the answers to my own questions. I can speculate. I imagine that all you can do is speculate and point to whichever bits of history defend your view - whatever that view may be.

      It is not meant as a pejorative when I say that you're usually rather "progressive" in nature and you're very consistent in those regards. Thus, I'm kind of surprised by your response and wonder if you've given it any thought. It seems, shall we say, rushed and almost diametrically opposed to some of what you say but, at the same time, it's still consistent with other views you've shared.

      I'm thinking that this message is as clear as mud but I'll send it along anyhow. It's some food for thought. I can elaborate if needed, I'm mostly just curious.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    72. Re:Ok, so... by xvan · · Score: 1

      It's not because it's a bigger offence. It's because it's because going to the school is pain in the ass for the parents. They are punishing the parents hoping they'll make their children share the pain.

    73. Re:Ok, so... by dgatwood · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, the best method is an exam with all essay questions or, for science/math, all questions that require you to apply your knowledge. If a watch helps you cheat in any meaningful way, that means the exam is based on pure rote memorization of facts, which pretty much means you've missed the entire point of teaching the material in the first place.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    74. Re:Ok, so... by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      ...do you not know what an exam is?

      Of course I do. UK school exams, O level exams, A Level exams, university exams.

      But testing for memorization is stupid, since in any normal job, you are free to consult references and use computers to do your job more efficiently.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    75. Re:Ok, so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Doctor, there is a patient here complaining about severe pain in his abdomen."

      "Hmm, the abdomen you say? Well let me just do a little research... hm, Google says it could be indigestion. Or perhaps appendicitis. Oh look at that, that looks really painful."

    76. Re:Ok, so... by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      They're hardly discrete. if they just looked like a regular watch then that would be ok. But it seems like anyone wanting to use one has probably already missed the boat.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    77. Re:Ok, so... by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Disallowing people equipped with electronics for legitimate health reasons, some of which may not even be removable without surgery, would be such a huge contravention of human rights that any institution which tried to practice it would be sued into bankruptcy if they did as you suggest.

      This notion is so self-evident that I can only conclude you must be trying to troll.

      Here's the ideal solution. You apply a bit of common sense. You don't take all electronics to include literally all electronics. If someone has a critical bit of kit they need to stay alive then the examiners should already be well aware of that in advance. Obviously it doesn't include pacemakers and other things while technically electronic are basically a part of your body. Hurr hurr wut if dis guy haz da elektrik hand....Nothing with a screen, no phones, watches no speaking slide rules, nothing you can interact with. Special cases will be made for legitimate medical conditions.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    78. Re:Ok, so... by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      You are the one who made the ridiculous assertion that one cannot identify a legitimate medical device.

      I have to agree with mark-t. There's nothing ridiculous about it at all. Professors aren't automatically experts in what legitimate medical devices look like.

      Which is why they are made aware in advance. Say you have a big box sticking to the back of your head that, I dunno, keeps your brain from gushing out your ears, you have an exam and are worried it might be confused for a cheating device. If the exam isn't being held at a familiar place where staff are aware of your condition anyway would you not get in touch in advance and say, yo, I have this big box on my head, it's for this, this is what it does and here is something from my doctor saying how it's critical and cant be removed even for two hours.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    79. Re:Ok, so... by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Of course you are and of course you will, snowflake.

      Looked for where the person you're replying to said they were anything or intended anything. Can't see it.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    80. Re:Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      You completely missed their first sentence? They only wrote *TWO* sentences! Not sure if serious.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    81. Re:Ok, so... by Maritz · · Score: 1

      lol. All I can say is earlier there was no (#51662741) only (#51660775). Do you believe me? I wouldn't. ;)

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    82. Re:Ok, so... by scarboni888 · · Score: 1

      But I AM merits. And you could be merits too, if only you'd apply you'reself rather than getting you're jollies off pointing out other peoples mistakes with you're smug superiourity complex.

    83. Re:Ok, so... by Syberz · · Score: 1

      Another option would be to make all tests open book.

      You can then build the test to actually test comprehension of the material instead of people's ability to memorize stuff and then you totally screw over those who need to search their notes for every answer.

      --
      ~Syberz
    84. Re:Ok, so... by shortscruffydave · · Score: 1

      ...do you not know what an exam is?

      Of course I do. UK school exams, O level exams, A Level exams, university exams.

      You do realise that the question asked what an exam is, not what an exam was? The UK 'O' level hasn't been a thing for a quarter of a century

    85. Re:Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      You probably forgot to hit the show all comments button. I've done it myself. Well, more accurately, I've lost my own posts that way.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    86. Re:Ok, so... by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      ...do you not know what an exam is?

      Of course I do. UK school exams, O level exams, A Level exams, university exams.

      You do realise that the question asked what an exam is, not what an exam was? The UK 'O' level hasn't been a thing for a quarter of a century

      Yup. I haven't done O levels in the last quarter century. Do you think the basic idea has changed since then? I don't.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    87. Re:Ok, so... by khallow · · Score: 1

      Which I think was the point all along. Recall the thread got exciting when some AC claimed that all electronics, including the brain box with note from doctor should go "in the bag".

    88. Re: Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 2

      And eventually you'll figure out what authority means. The sooner you learn, the easier your life will be. Why learn? Well, not everyone who deems themselves an authority figure is actually an authority. Some folks you can tell to go pound sand - and get away with it. Others? Not so much. That depends on the situation, of course.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    89. Re:Ok, so... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Euch.

      OK testing students is HARD. Exams suck and are really REALLY hard to write well. They suck because the "real world" is obviously not like an exam.

      Now, there's people complaining you have to memorise lots stuff. I actually disagree a bit: if you're working a full time job on $TOPIC and don't soon memorise almost all of the relevant facts then you're probably completely useless at it. That said it silly to penalise students for a temporary memory lapse especially under pressure.

      Open book exams are better in this regard, but of course they are still harder to write well.

      The main problem with exams is that they're under massive time pressure. That's even further from the real world, I feel. People with slow but powerful minds who can flatten the toughest problems like a bulldozer suck at exams, because exams require speed.

      I know too many really good people who suck at exams.

      The problem with open communication is cheating. In that some students will simply pay someone to solve the problems for them.

      If the answer is the more obvious, which is for money, then is it not a lesson to teach the kids to bargain for services? The wealthier are far more likely to be able to afford competent aid. In the future, they'll very likely to be in a position where they're employing someone in some capacity.

      What's the purpose of the qualification? If it's to say the person has basic knowledge of engineering then this should not be part of the degree. Perhaps a management degree, but not an engineering one. The other problem is that this means that the rich students can simply afford to pass the degree by paying someone more to pass it for them. You could skip the middleman and simply have the students bid on their grade.

      I don't think that would make it an especially useful qualification though.

      Some thoughts but I don't have time for afull reply right now.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    90. Re:Ok, so... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Obviously... but then that still leaves an avenue open for cheating then.... a medical device could at some point in the future very easily hold onto a wireless network connection. Such devices could further do their job so well and be so innocuously hidden that other parties, including their teachers, would not ever be aware of their existence. Imagine technology look Google glass embedded completely inconspicuously in otherwise normal lookuing glasses... or even contact lenses. In practice it is simply not possible to stop cheating by simply banning non-essential electronics.because the teacher will a) not be necessarily aware they even exist; and b) may not always be able to identify whether a so-called medical device that they may know about or be able to see does not have any additional functionality such as network connectivity.

      Another poster had the right idea.... exams should be written to test understanding, not route memorization. Students should be graded based on whether the work that they've done shows that they have learned something, and that they are capable of inventing their own solutions to new problems. which is usually not something that they may can simply copy from somewhere (the latter of which can often be discovered anyways).

    91. Re:Ok, so... by kellymcdonald78 · · Score: 1

      Ahh, yet if we extend your logic, no teacher can fail any student for any reason what so ever. Don't show up, pass. Don't do homework. pass, 2+2=5, pass. Murder your teacher, pass.

    92. Re:Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      > You could skip the middleman and simply have the students bid on their grade.

      Perhaps something not far off from that might actually be more beneficial than we're thinking. Assuming, of course, there's a basic level of understanding and education - at what point is rote valuable? At what point is it no longer valuable? When does efforts at complete understanding stop being productive and become an academic pursuit instead of a means to an end, and end that is some sort of product?

      That said, I'm not smart. Not at all. I test very well. I learn really quickly and retain it for only a short time. That's true for the vast majority of things. I keep it until I no longer need it and it gets flushed out of RAM, so to speak. On paper, it looks like I'm brilliant. Actually, I have a hard time learning anything. That is to say, until it 'clicks' I do not get it and it's pure rote.

      You needn't respond, of course, but I like picking your brain. Sometimes interesting things pop out. 'Snot my fault. I want to add two things, I think I mentioned them elsewhere in this thread but I ate a handful of sinus pills last night and smoked a joint. So, I'll be damned if I remember what I wrote. I really needed to get some sleep.

      I'm a full on, honest-to-goodness, one-of-them-there, full-fledged, dyed-in-the-wool mathematician. I hold a Ph.D in Applied Mathematics. I hated maths. I didn't understand it - but I knew the rote. Then, I had an instructor who showed me the simplest little thing - and then it clicked. After that, the concepts all fell into place. It was easy and simple. The area of a triangle is just half the area of what it would be if it were squared off. That's it. That was enough. Yup... That's when my brain said, "Oh, ha! Duh..."

      I had a professor who gave us open book, out-of-class, exams. We were encouraged to use questions from previous years, to work with our peers, to use any resources available to us. None of us had the same exam questions and, as near as we can tell, he never repeated any exam questions - ever. We had access to the questions and answers from previous year's classes. We had each other's questions and answers. We had some semblance of an internet (not really the world wide web). We had all the resources we had and could use any of them. There was no time alloted to take the exams in class. Ever. It was some of the best instruction that I ever got.

      But, at some point... We have different goals in life. We have varied reasons for getting an education. Beyond a certain level, does it matter more if they know how or if they know how to find the answers? This is not meant to limit choices but to provide other choices - perhaps even more beneficial choices. There is a finite value in learning for learning sake - in a world where production is the expectation. Is a materials engineer better of knowing the tensile strength of a specific type of steel than he is knowing how to find that information? Barring that information being present, is he better served knowing how to get that information?

      I think, from what I know, the UK system is fairly good in these regards - as is much of the EU. They seem inclined to give a decent base and then make allowances for varied tracks. Even there, I suspect there's room for improvement. At some level, it's probably actually better that people know how (and when) to find information rather than rely on figuring it out for themselves. Obviously they should probably still know some of that and there's a line to be drawn somewhere. I am not generally an all-or-nothing, binary, black-and-white kind of person (as I'm sure you know).

      I'm not suggesting we keep them idiots and just teach them how to use Google. I am saying that sometimes, given the ubiquity of information and connectivity to that information, we might be better served by teaching them how to use Google and then spending the "extra" time doing something a bit more functional/beneficial. I'm not even saying that we should, I'm saying that we should probably give it

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    93. Re:Ok, so... by mattventura · · Score: 1

      The problem is that it is theoretically possible to cheat without the phone being "out". I've always had an idea to make a smartphone app that uses the accelerometer and vibrator to make a crude telegraph, so that you could communicate by tapping on your leg. You wouldn't even need to use morse code, you could just develop a simple code like 2 taps+5 taps+3 taps means "the answer to 25 is the third option". I'm surprised it doesn't exist with how easy it would be to code (if it does, I can't find it).

    94. Re:Ok, so... by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      The summary mentions a check that allows old school analog watches to be worn. But somebody will surely making a cheating watch that mimics one of those. It's much easier to just ban watch wearing completely.

    95. Re:Ok, so... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      We're trying to teach the students how to add value to the world. We're also trying to gauge how well we're doing.

      If I pay money for someone else to do my work, I'm not adding value, but rather shifting it around. I'm also spending money, and if I can't do something useful to get paid later, I'm likely to run out of money. By hiring someone to do my exam for me, I'm setting myself up for later failure. Arguably, we should allow people to screw themselves over, but I think we're better off cutting off some of the more tempting avenues.

      We're also using these exams to create credentials. I have a college degree that theoretically tells people that I at least was very good at learning things, primarily math, and that was useful in developing my career to a point (currently, I've got enough of a track record that the degree doesn't say much additional). If we give diplomas to both people who are good at learning and people who spend money to fake it, the diplomas lose lots of their meaning.

      Now, there's a lot about this system that doesn't work well. Some people just are better at taking exams than others (I always regarded a pre-employment test as a competitive advantage to me), the exams often don't do a lot of good at measuring how well something has been learned, and there's no good way to measure how hard different disciplines are. That doesn't mean we should degrade it further.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    96. Re:Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      > We're trying to teach the students how to add value to the world. We're also trying to gauge how well we're doing.

      Are we? Are we really trying or is that what we're telling them?

      > If I pay money for someone else to do my work, I'm not adding value, but rather shifting it around.

      If it was work that would be undone otherwise then, I'd argue that they're both adding value and shifting money around - a value in and of itself.

      > We're also using these exams to create credentials.

      For whom? I'll note your next sentence handily includes the word "theoretically."

      > Now, there's a lot about this system that doesn't work well.

      Correct. Let's come up with some ideas as to how to make it better but, in order to do that, I think we'll need to be honest with ourselves as to what our goals really are in this day and age. Public eduction was, at one point, geared to bring the kids in from the farm and get them ready for the factory. What are the goals now?

      Obviously, I'm not advocating we drop the whole thing and let people buy a degree. Of course not. Hell, I'm not even sure what I'm advocating except that we might want to rethink it. There's some point, perhaps, where we need to be more pragmatic. I'm not sure what all of the comments you read, but I mentioned in another that I'm thinking the UK (and parts of Europe) are on an interesting track - where they stop at 16 and put them into more specific educational tracks and preparation for those tracks starts even sooner.

      But, in order to figure that out, we'll have to be honest with ourselves and figure out what the goal really is, what we're willing to invest to reach that goal, and how to measure our mileposts in reaching that goal. Today, there are a lot of things that can just be "Googled" so to speak. I guess it's (to my way of thinking) time to start being honest about expectations and goals. They're ripping the kids off for a piece of paper right now that, by all accounts, is largely just people buying their degrees. Where does this end? How far are we going to let this go before we say, "Alright, this is stupid. There's got to be a better way?"

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    97. Re:Ok, so... by lars_stefan_axelsson · · Score: 1

      Which makes it a bigger offence. Which was the point.

      --
      Stefan Axelsson
    98. Re:Ok, so... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Perhaps something not far off from that might actually be more beneficial than we're thinking

      What value would that have though? The point of a qualification is to mark some degree of competence in a subject. If you just want to know if someone is rich enough, you can ask for a bank statement.

      Assuming, of course, there's a basic level of understanding and education

      But that's the fundamental point. You want to know if there's a basic level of understanding and education. How do you measure that?

      at what point is rote valuable?

      It isn't: I mean rote memorisation without understanding isn't useful.

      I had a professor who gave us open book, out-of-class, exams. We were encouraged to use questions from previous years, to work with our peers, to use any resources available to us. None of us had the same exam questions and, as near as we can tell, he never repeated any exam questions - ever.

      That's great, and an enormous amount of work, and requires more skill than most people have to make the difficulty consistent. And that is great for instruction. However if you're using it for the first point (confirming that someone has the education) it can easily be gamed by paying someone to do it for you.

      That only makes sense if a degree has value. But they do.

      I'm not arguing in favour of exams as such: I think they're awful things. But for a degree as a qualification to have value, then you need some sort of quality control on the people getting it.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    99. Re:Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I should add that I'm not just thinking about collegiate education but high school as well. And, really, how much do we need to teach 'em? Do we teach them how to work out the answers or do we teach them where to go find the answers? Obviously, others would opt to go learn to work them out - but does everybody need to be able to figure out the number of square inches for a piece of plywood - or do they need to know how to Google for that information should they have to find out?

      Chances are, if someone's paying someone to do their work - they're not actually going to ever be doing that work themselves but will be paying others to do it for them. Rich Kid Bob's not going to need much in the way of math classes. Why not teach him to bargain and get the best price for the work to be completed? He'll learn to source quality work at reasonable prices. Poor Kid Ralph, he's not going to be able to pay - but he'll still have to have the work done so he learns to do it himself. He can sell his work to Rich Kid Bob which helps him improve his skills and upward mobility.

      Is Poor Kid Bob going to need those history classes? Suzie wants to be a journalist when she grows up. He can bargain with her and do her math homework while she does his history. Or, perhaps, they can just go online and get the answers which shows that they don't actually know them BUT that they know how to find that information if they need to.

      I don't think it's nearly as insane as it looks at first blush. It's a rather pragmatic approach to the changing needs of society. Given the ubiquity of information and connectivity, what competencies are we training for? Something, somewhere in that direction, and probably with more tracks (like engineering, health, administrative, business, construction, welding/fabrication, plumbing, etc) might actually work. I get that it sounds preposterous but I think that's because we've become so acclimated to doing things the way we have been doing them.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    100. Re:Ok, so... by unrtst · · Score: 1

      why is it important to test that you can memorize them when they can be looked up in seconds.

      As the previous poster noted, he had scratch paper, and could jot them down at the beginning of the test. IMO, that's a perfect compromise.
      It's very important to test for them because one should (must?) know how they work to understand how many other things work. Most people (not network admins) only see dotted quad netmasks like 255.255.255.0, but most of those same people would have no idea if 255.255.255.128 or 255.255.255.132 are legal, or know why. They should know that 255.255.255.128 = /25 = 11111111111111111111111110000000, or at least know enough to be able to determine that (it doesn't have to be memorized, but the maths behind it should be known).

    101. Re:Ok, so... by toddestan · · Score: 1

      I'd get another insulin pump. I wouldn't trust any smartphone to control something that's critical for me to continue living. Smartphones can crash, lock up, get dropped, lost, have the non-changeable battery go dead, suffer interference over the Bluetooth link, and other countless products.

    102. Re:Ok, so... by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Long division would be an interesting question to ask. When I learned it way back in grade school, they basically taught it to us a series of steps, basically an algorithm you did by hand to crunch out the answer. I don't really remember exactly what they taught me any more, But, I know enough math to figure it out again pretty quickly. So by asking that, you're going to see whether the person can reason out how to do long division again, or if they just throw their hands up in the air and give up (or if the actually still remember how they were taught to do it).

    103. Re:Ok, so... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Just wait until augmented reality hits in undetectable wearables such as contacts that have network capacity and OCR.

      Then exams will be conducted in the nude. Or, failing that, in school-supplied surgical gowns, after the examinees are ordered to strip themselves nude, leave their clothes and gadgets in lockers, and walk slowly through a seawater shower before gowning-up.

      I'd start to put these contingencies into the school rules about now, so that when the next exam cycle comes through in 3, 4 or 7 years (depending on the length of your course ; does it go up to 11 years for architects in your country?), the option is in the tuition contracts and has been for the duration of the student's enrolment in the system.

      I'd include a provision : for a generation or two, the names and photographs of the first student caught using $CHEATING_TECHNIQUE$ will be posted as part of the exam regulations, every year, so that the person who is responsible for such expensive and (moderately) invasive regulations being enacted. Blame where blame is due. For all $CHEATING_TECHNIQUE$ .

      There are ways of dealing with "appropriate reference books" e.g., in my practical microscopic mineralogy and petrology exams, we were permitted our individual copies of DH&Z on the desks, though if the invigilator thought that you'd stuck too many post-its and annotations, he might swap your copy for one from the Department library. (It should be pointed out that one was encouraged to own, and annotate, one's copy through one's student career. The Department copies were for people who forgot their copy, the dog ate it, it was soaked in driving rain ...) How to deal with that in the digital age is a harder question. I'd suspect that issuing a sealed tablet in the exam room with (say) reference books, PDFs of the lecturer's notes and permitted apps would be a starting line.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    104. Re:Ok, so... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      I'd have to find and then read my exam certificates to find out the names of the exams I took.

      When I read "O-levels", I think "15-16 year old", and for "A-levels" I think 17-18 year olds." I don't get hung up over the details of particular courses, since you only see them filtered through the shifting changeable mask of (relatively small) numbers of individual's responses to them. Unless you're an educational professional, or perhaps a recruitment professional.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    105. Re:Ok, so... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      To put KGIII's comment into a different context ...

      My wife used to work with archiving medical records. When she went into work, she took her phone (not a smart one) out of her pocket, put it in her locker, locked the locker, and went from the changing room to the office to do her work.

      Failure to do so was an instant sacking offence. Similarly with a camera (defined as "anything capable of storing an image).

      Enjoy your time in the blow torch flame, Snowflake. I don't think you'll last very long.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    106. Re:Ok, so... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      What are the odds that learning the exam questions (and answers), or developing and memorising the "tap-code" would be a harder solution than actually learning the fucking subject?

      I remember reading - I think it was the original Frank Herbert "Dune" - where they talked about a "battle language" which I deduced to be a private sign-language. That's good - as a fairly arbitrary encoding it has elements of information hiding that provide a degree of security (as long as the Other Side don't have access to a substantial corpus of messages)

      Some years later, I started working in "high noise" environments, where the wearing of ear-defenders is (1) just common sense, (2) company policy, and (3) backed-up by criminal law. and the idea of teaching people to use a sign language in high-noise environments would get trotted out on occasions. It never flew ("I'm an Merkin ; I ain'n't gonna leern no stinking British Sign Language when there are as many Merkin Sign Languages as there are schools for the deaf." encapsulates several problems), but I tried.
      In the last 5 years, combinations of ear defenders, VHF radios (which are Explosion-Proof to acceptable standards - 2 faults), and earphones/ microphones have become available and dropped in price below about a kilo-dollar each ... and the need has just died.

      Similarly, there is a debate - vicious and of varying quality - over the "preservation" of Sign Languages, as general education becomes more integrated, and cochlear implants can greatly reduce deafness itself. Improving technology is changing the question, and the range of potential solutions.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    107. Re:Ok, so... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      To be honest, people that rich hire proper doctors and proper civil engineers. They put what little intelligence they have into choosing which politician/ bureaucrat to bribe/ honey-trap or otherwise co-opt and which laws to ignore.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    108. Re:Ok, so... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      "I need to hear the professor's instructions."

      s/ professor/ invigilator. Or if you're American, "proctor"?

      [SHRUG] If your hearing is bad enough to get a doctor's note explaining why you need to keep your hearing aids (if it's one aid, then you just use your working ear), then the exam administrators know you have bad hearing and provide you with the script of instructions that the invigilator works from.

      What - you think they don't have notes? The fuck they don't. Very often the notes ARE the front page of the exam paper. But there are things they MUST mention, and they're in a script of some sort. You get the script. If it's not on the exam cover page. Printed. In high contrast (black on white, normally). And if you need it, IN LARGE PRINT.

      Your excuse might work for the first exam in a series. Or, for my finals, maybe the first day (2 exams, 4 hours each). But when you get to the second day, there will be your information. (Actually, it would only have worked for one day in my first year exams. Of four years.)

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    109. Re:Ok, so... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      it can often be difficult to impossible for an outsider to distinguish between a device whose sole purpose is for legitimate health reasons and one that may be superficially designed to appear as such

      Who is this "outsider"?

      For most important exams - the ones you've spent multiple years at the institution - well, this isn't your first encounter with the authorities in that institution.

      Otherwise, you've probably been living with your problem for ... well, much of your life. So you know that you need to contact the invigilators well before the event to manage problems like this. At which point, where are the "outsiders" again?

      Oh, and I'd doubt that you're the first user user of this device to experience this problem with this device. So there's very likely a reminder in the Friendly Manual about such confusion - likely next to warnings about TSA fondlings. You do RTFM, don't you? Seriously, you do, don't you?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    110. Re:Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Then exams will be conducted in the nude.

      I did some teaching at the university level after I retired. It was basically an introduction into collegiate level mathematics. This was UMF where they generally graduate teachers more than anything else. So, if that happens, I just might be able to get over my loathing of the environment and go back to teaching.

      Further down (or up?) in this thread, I mentioned a prof that gave us individualized exams. We were encouraged to take them home as no time was provisioned for them in class. We were encouraged to collaborate, to use any and all resources, and to even use old exams that prior students had left behind or made available. As near as we can tell, no questions were ever repeated. I learned a lot but it really, really sucked. Well, no... Not sucked so much as it was just really hard. I kind of enjoyed it.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    111. Re:Ok, so... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with that? Boy, ah say boy, is you one of them thar cormanusts?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    112. Re:Ok, so... by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      In grade school I was tested on my times tables etc. That is a useful skill to have!

      You're still missing the point. I'm not saying that memorizing the times tables isn't important. I'm saying that teaching them as something to be memorized is the worst possible way to teach them, and that testing the times tables by testing for rote memorization is unnecessary and inefficient. If I were teaching multiplication, I'd let students use index cards for their times tables. I would then immediately jump into multi-digit multiplication.

      The thing is, if you understand how to do multiplication, and if you know your times tables, you won't have trouble computing 75 x 13 quickly. If you don't, you will. And even if you're using an index card, if you're actually using all those single-digit products regularly, you'll end up memorizing them eventually. This is doubly true if you use speed drills where you get prizes or whatever for answering the problems more quickly. Students will end up practicing on their own in an effort to do better on the speed drills, and that effort will result in them remembering the times tables more and more, and relying on the cards less and less, until those memory aids no longer matter.

      Also, students should learn to count. Even if you don't remember that 9 x 9 = 81, you can count it out. Adding 9 is like adding 10 and subtracting 1. So 9 + 9 = 19 - 1 = 18. That's 2 x 9. Add another 9 is 28 - 1 = 27, which is 3 x 9. Once you fully grasp what multiplication really means, you can solve problems even if you don't have a full memory of the multiplication tables. And in my mind, that sort of coping skill is the more valuable approach, because it is useful even in extreme cases. Quick, without a calculator, and without multiplying it out the long way, what's 99 x 39? It's 99 less than 99 x 40, which is 40 less than 100 times 40. Five seconds of subtraction later, you get 3861.

      When I ran a nuclear plant you better believe it was important that I was rigorously tested on both memorization and understanding.

      I'll grant you that for emergency procedures, memorization can be important because of time constraints. Most people's jobs don't involve making split-second decisions that can destroy three counties if they make the wrong call, though, so this is the exception that proves the rule.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    113. Re:Ok, so... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but individualised tuition of any sort is kind-of expensive compared to the sausage-grinder commoditised model of education. So you'll get people who could really fly with individualised education who can't afford it and end up working flipping burgers, and others who have thousands of $MONEY$ thrown at their education who would have been better used flipping burgers instead of running daddy's property company or running for president.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    114. Re:Ok, so... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      It was at MIT so it was fairly expensive which meant I ended up using the GI Bill and going for four years, reenlisting while taking a few satellite courses, and then finishing up with the GI Bill being used again. (The GI Bill is quite different today, much better.) I don't think any of us ended up flipping burgers. I did *not* do individualized testing. I gave no final exam - I did many short quizzes.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  2. From the website by stackOVFL · · Score: 1

    "Others follow us sell may be fake and bad quality.Pls check seller is makesdo" Why would I want to by that shit?

  3. in stannum veritas by Pseudonymous+Powers · · Score: 5, Funny

    Everyone on the internet laughed when I started Tinfoil University, where every lecture hall and, indeed, every room is a Faraday cage. But who's laughing now?

    Seriously, I'm asking. For some reason, my smartphone doesn't get a very good signal anymore, which severely limits my ability to keep track of who's laughing about what on the internet these days.

    1. Re:in stannum veritas by evolutionary · · Score: 1

      one flaw in your perfect plan: This watch as 8 GB of memory.More than enough to store an indexed table of any textbook I know.

      --
      "Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
    2. Re:in stannum veritas by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Well first, they activate the magnetron to completely wipe all devices in the room, and shut down any pacemakers (to eliminate the weak and old). The faraday cage is there to keep them from downloading it all again or reaching the Internet.

  4. It's not Amazon, at least not directly by evolutionary · · Score: 1

    To be clear, it isn't Amazon that is promoting this watch, it's a company calling themselves "MKSD". The amazon employees should exercise a little more quality control in their submissions as this is going to mar their corporate image big time.

    --
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
  5. Well written exams... by VAXcat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If it's a well written exam, access to 8GB of cheating info wouldn't help...

    --
    There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
    1. Re:Well written exams... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      There's a catch 22. You either make an exam easy enough to remember and disallow all notes, in which cased 8GB would definitely help, or you make the exam really test your skills rather than rely on memory in which case you're likely to have an open book exam anyway making the entire topic moot.

    2. Re:Well written exams... by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. In many of the exams I took, it wasn't so much that calculators and the like weren't allowed, they weren't even really needed.

      For example, in trigonometry class they generally presented problems in terms of a unit circle, i.e. a circle with a diameter of 1. Makes many of the arithmetic operations easy enough that you can do them in your head, or at least on paper. But you were required to show all steps of your work, so if you didn't understand the basic principles then the "easy" problems didn't help you.

      I was told other sections of the class didn't even let you bring notes to class. I never understood that. Forcing students to memorize what trig identities look like doesn't do a lot of good. What they need to know is which ones apply where. The memorization method seems to be geared solely toward test-taking, rather than really helping students understand.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    3. Re:Well written exams... by Aaden42 · · Score: 1

      What???!!! An exam that actually tests whether you can think and apply your knowledge to solve problems rather than mindlessly reguritate disconnected facts from a text book or lecture? Sweet Finagle, what will they think of next????

      Seriously, any test you can “cheat” on with notes is likely useless. There are very few real-world situations in which it’s necessary to vomit up facts on command without consulting any kind of reference. The medical field is probably one of the few exceptions, but other than that, if bringing notes into the test makes a different, the test is flawed.

  6. Exams should be open-book anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Exams which test memorization are pointless. Better to make them problem-solving based, challenging and open-book. That way cheaters will still do poorly. It's more a problem of lazy exam creators than anything.

    1. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by paulpach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exams which test memorization are pointless. Better to make them problem-solving based, challenging and open-book. That way cheaters will still do poorly. It's more a problem of lazy exam creators than anything.

      I would agree 100% with you if we are talking about math, programming, physics, etc... On these subjects I am all for open book tests.

      But if you are talking about history or anatomy, well, the entire subject is about memorization.

    2. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by idontgno · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But if you are talking about history or anatomy, well, the entire subject is about memorization.

      Well, you forget that as this is Slashdot, the basement-dwelling shoe-gazing trogs don't think those subjects should be taught or tested either, because TECHNOLOGY!.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    3. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      “Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.” Edmund Burke, History teacher.

    4. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by cyn1c77 · · Score: 1

      Exams which test memorization are pointless. Better to make them problem-solving based, challenging and open-book. That way cheaters will still do poorly. It's more a problem of lazy exam creators than anything.

      I would agree 100% with you if we are talking about math, programming, physics, etc... On these subjects I am all for open book tests.

      But if you are talking about history or anatomy, well, the entire subject is about memorization.

      The GPs point was that those subjects are perceived to be that way because of lazy teaching.

      History is as much about interpretation of past events and its application to present/future events as it is about simply memorizing facts. Anatomy is about memorizing details to be able to instantly apply those details to a patient's problem.

      Unfortunately, many profs choose to simply test for the memorized details because they are easier to grade. But that approach can result in less critical thinking from the students as a result, unless that is emphasized elsewhere in their educational processes.

    5. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      If the test is to check how well you've memorized facts, then the student who has to look them up on his smartwatch will be slower at completing the test than the one who has all the facts in her head. So a simple solution for memorization tests is to set an appropriate time limit that weeds out the cheaters.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    6. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 1

      I agree with this entirely.

      Thankfully my undergrad did this and the exams where almost all open book, notes, calculator etc a few where even open laptop with internet access and if you did not understand the material you would fail badly. If you understood the material the exams where challenging but not too bad and you could look up anything you needed.

      Any exam that can be trivialized with just raw data is worthless as an exam. Too many confuse education with memorization.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    7. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by Etherwalk · · Score: 1

      If the test is to check how well you've memorized facts, then the student who has to look them up on his smartwatch will be slower at completing the test than the one who has all the facts in her head. So a simple solution for memorization tests is to set an appropriate time limit that weeds out the cheaters.

      That unfairly punishes people who have mastered the material but are slow and thoughtful. I am relatively quick so I always have an advantage in standardized testing environments, but shouldn't speed really be a *different* metric than mastery of the material? It is profoundly stupid to grade along one dimension.

    8. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      How thoughtful do you need to be on a timed memorization test? What is the purpose of memorizing something if it doesn't need to be quickly regurgitated in real life? And if it needs to be quickly regurgitated in real life, isn't a timed test exactly the right sort of test for it?

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    9. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      How thoughtful do you need to be on a timed memorization test?

      What makes you think a closed-book no-notes test is "timed memorization"? What about a history test where the question is "compare and contrast event X to event Y in the context of international trade"? By the time you've looked up event X and event Y to see what they were, the test is over. And just looking them up doesn't answer the question.

      What is the purpose of memorizing something if it doesn't need to be quickly regurgitated in real life?

      Because the phrase "those who don't know history tend to repeat it" isn't very useful unless you can remember what it is that is being repeated. And rereading all your history books to find out what it is that you think is being repeated today -- not very efficient.

    10. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      What makes you think a closed-book no-notes test is "timed memorization"?

      I already explained how a memorization test doesn't need to be closed-book no-notes if the test has an appropriate time limit.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    11. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      All A is B is not the same as All B is A. What makes you think a closed-book test is "timed memorization"?

    12. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      What makes you think I think that?

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    13. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by LaurenCates · · Score: 1

      Well...it depends.

      Back when I was in high school, I took AP History.

      Tests were multiple choice and required that you memorize facts and figures from the text in order to do well.

      I was, otherwise, an "A" student.

      Were the tests primarily essay-based, I would have probably had done much better, even on multiple choice questions. Because rather than establishing that I know factoids, it would have put those factoids in a perspective that would help me understand them better and assure that I could deduce a correct answer, rather than try and pick out what the correct answer was based on a disjointed perspective of possible answers.

      People make the mistake that history isn't at all like science. That's just not true. There's as much cause-and-effect in history as there is in any given lab-based science. Once I came to that realization, history was much more an enjoyable subject, but I only learned that long after it ceased to matter (in terms of schooling, that is).

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    14. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by spitzig · · Score: 1

      I disagree about history. There's a lot of memorizing, but a good history test should have essay questions. Why did something happen? Give an opinion and support it. Memorization, but also an understanding of how things are connected. I'm guessing anatomy is similar at some level-not just "what is this thing?" but also "Tell everything that happens after this part does something".

    15. Re:Exams should be open-book anyway by Obfuscant · · Score: 1
      Because when I asked you why you referred to a closed-book test as "timed memorization" and what made you automatically assume it was, you answered by telling me that timed memorization tests don't have to be closed book. "All closed-book is timed memorization" is not the same as "all timed memorization is not closed book".

      Perhaps my mistake was assuming that your answer was relevant to the question I asked?

  7. too stupid by SumDog · · Score: 1

    So...this is for kids too stupid to use a tiny piece of paper and a 0.5m mechanical pencil? Cause that solution costs $5 and has worked for decades.

  8. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    A more interesting aspect is we can now print electronic circuits with their own near field power into people's clothes.

    Resistance is useless. Why are you testing rote facts instead of useful concepts?

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  9. Re:Err, who gives a fuck? by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you are cheating, you won't hurt anyone except yourself

    Totally correct. I got somebody else to do my exams in med school, and only a few of my patients have died this week. And it's not my fault - they were already pretty ill or they wouldn't have gone to hospital in the first place.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  10. Re:Most exams allow 1-2 pages of notes nowadays by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Notes? Most exams I did allowed you to bring whatever you want in the class, except for a laptop.

  11. Re:Here is another solution by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    In my day it was an automatic fail. Same for plagiarism.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  12. Why memorization? by srw · · Score: 1

    I don't get why memorization is still so important in exams. If there are commonly available tools that allow you to get the correct answer in the allotted time, what is the problem with that? Sure, there are things you will simply have to have memorized, but if you have to take the time to look those up, you will simply run out of time in a well designed exam. My best prof's exams were open book, open door. You could head to the library during the exam if you wanted. Of course, if you did, you would never finish the exam.

    1. Re:Why memorization? by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 1

      You need to know the general ideas you don't have to memorize all the details.

      For instance I solve very complex non-linear optimization problems. I need to have a general understanding of what optimization strategies work under different kinds of problems and how the goal impacts the solution. I do not need to memorize the details of all the different solvers, I can trivially look that information up.

      Memorization is a waste of time and effort and nothing you do will keep the information anyways. Your brain is very good at realizing what information is easy to find and it will delete the information as soon as you are not constantly using it and trying to keep it in memory.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    2. Re:Why memorization? by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 1

      Our focus was on understanding and not on memorization. We solved many problems and had lab classes to get a real understanding of what is reasonable and what isn't.

      I remember a lot of the theory for how different separation processes work in chemical engineering and the general pros and cons of different methods and what to look out for etc but I would have to look up the equations to actually solve problems with them. Memorizing the equations doesn't do you any good and most of the times you have many different equations for different pieces of equipment.

      The goal is to learn and test understanding. All the facts you can look up. There is no reason to memorize the heat transfer equations for transverse over offset pipes or along offset pipes or the heat capacities of different solutions etc.

      The coding example is a good one. I do parameter estimation problems right now and I know lots of different methods for solving problems and when I can use them and when I can't. However, I could not write very many of them from memory and would have to look them up.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
  13. It looks like a watch designed to be noticed... by evolutionary · · Score: 1

    One design flaw with this cheaters watch: It's the BIGGEST watch I've seen in YEARS. It looks like a toy and it draws attention to itself. you walk in with this big bulky black square no your wrist and people's eyes are drawn to it...either to laugh at the most awkward watch made in since the old calculator watches in the 70's/80's, or to wonder why anyone would wear such a bulky watch in the first place. Guaranteed to get noticed by profs everyone (and most of your friends too...)

    --
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
    1. Re:It looks like a watch designed to be noticed... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Not to mention, you likely have to interact with the watch in some way to get to the information you need to cheat on the test. The professor might notice you repeatedly tapping and swiping on your Definitely-Not-A-Giant-Cheating-Smartwatch. About the only thing I can think of to make it more obvious is require voice commands. "Watch, what is the square root of 64 divided by 2 cubed?"

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:It looks like a watch designed to be noticed... by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      Even the Timex "calculator/pda" watches were much smaller and that was three decades ago.

    3. Re:It looks like a watch designed to be noticed... by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      either to laugh at the most awkward watch made in since the old calculator watches in the 70's/80's, or to wonder why anyone would wear such a bulky watch in the first place.

      I still wear an '80s calculator watch you insensitive clod!

  14. My Fossil Wrist PDA from 2003 did it better by mmiscool · · Score: 1

    Back when I was going to school I used my Fossil Wrist PDA to manage pertinent data rewired for my studies. I could also drive the teachers nuts by controlling the TVs with the built in infrared. Kids will always find a way. Just go to you tube and search for test cheating rubber band.

  15. deja vu by s.petry · · Score: 1

    Dating myself, but we had the same issues with calculators when they became programmable. I know a guy who cheated with his HP J7 (I think that was the model) because it knew all the physics formulas, all he had to do was plug numbers in the right boxes. It was obvious to the professors what happened because he never showed anything on paper except for the right answer. Calculators were banned the next semester, but the class provided a couple of the old simple models for those who really needed them.

    In Calculus we were told to go ahead, because a calculator really did not help. A "correct" answer was only 1 out of 20 points generally, and the other 19 were the steps to find the answer. No steps was no credit, and you failed.

    Today people can do much more with much less device, so the answer is simple. As you and GP both said, ban the device during testing.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:deja vu by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Dating myself

      Isn't about half of /.?

    2. Re:deja vu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I know a guy who cheated with his HP J7 (I think that was the model) because it knew all the physics formulas,

      When I took physics in high school we were allowed to write all the formulas down. Because our teacher didn't give us shitty tests where you could solve problems by "plugging in numbers". If you didn't understand the material, you weren't going to be able to solve the problems, end of story.

      Sounds like all your teachers were testing was your ability to memorize your cheat sheets. And that right there is the #1 problem with our educational system.

    3. Re:deja vu by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Instead rewrite the test so that aids like this don't help.

      Make the test assuming students have access to pretty much all information and make the test about actual understanding of the material. If a test can be trivialized due to cheating it is a bad test to begin with.

      The math test sounds like an example of a good test, same for my engineering exams. 95% or so of the points where for defining all the equations, knowns, unknowns, make sure there where enough equations for all the unknowns, showing the understanding of the problem etc. and 5% was for actually solving the problem. As it stands today humans define problems, computers solve them and humans interpret the results and make sure they are sane.

      I have encountered so many students from a calculus class that could solve a math problem if given to them in the notation used in the class but given a word problem where they had to define the actual equation and then evaluate if the answer was reasonable they where completely lost. In real life you have to define the equation yourself and also figure out if the answer is reasonable and schools almost never teach that part and memorization does NOT help with those problems.

      --
      Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
    4. Re:deja vu by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1
      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    5. Re:deja vu by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      My geometry teacher tried to fail me for only writing the answers. But since I didn't use a calculator, she couldn't. She found out I could memorize the textbook if I wanted, so remembering the formulas and procedures was easy.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    6. Re:deja vu by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Flawed logic all the way around. You being able to memorize a book entry does not prevent your ability to WRITE down that information. In fact the better your memory really is, the easier that task would be. Just like being able to perform math in your head does not prevent you from writing down the numbers used to perform math.

      While you may be truthfully claiming you had a idiot for a teacher, I find your claim of having a great memory to be quite suspect.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    7. Re:deja vu by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I asked if I could use a calculator on a HS English test.

      Teacher looked at me like I was crazy. Said yes.

      Calculator was an early Casio with about a k of memory and text.

      Turned out not to matter. We knew he was fired before he did. He found out when he walked into class, we had written 'Your Fired' in 5 foot letters on the blackboard. Tried to flunk everybody in all his classes. Including the hard working cheaters.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    8. Re:deja vu by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Sounds like all your teachers were testing was your ability to memorize your cheat sheets. And that right there is the #1 problem with our educational system.

      I have to agree.

      The solution to preventing cheating like this is to, as you said, give problems that aren't just 'plug in numbers', but require understanding the material.

      Because, in real life, we're going to be using computers and references to figure out problems if it comes up, not using formula we once memorized years ago and haven't used since.

      Hell, there's a lot of positions out there - military, piloting, where they issue checklists and tell you to NOT memorize them, because they want you USING the checklists.

      For my calculus classes, no notes combined with constraining time limits meant the tests were more measuring how well you had memorized the various shortcuts they taught(remember, there's normally more than 1 way to integrate a problem), and ability to recognize which applied to the problem they gave you, than understanding the material.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    9. Re:deja vu by qwijibo · · Score: 1

      I sat next to a guy in a physics class that only showed up for tests with his HP 48G, plugged in the numbers and passed. That's when I bought one and learned to program it. Not because it was easy to pass physics tests, but because it was a good calculator and that was one of its many capabilities. I still have more than one of those today.

      I had engineering teacher that said if you knew enough about your calculator to store notes on it, and the subject matter well enough to know what to store, you would probably make a good engineer.

    10. Re:deja vu by ShaunC · · Score: 2

      'Your Fired'

      Maybe getting the English teacher fired wasn't such a great idea...

      --
      Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    11. Re:deja vu by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      'Your Fired'

      Maybe getting the English teacher fired wasn't such a great idea...

      Or it was a demonstration that the class understood irony.

    12. Re:deja vu by tibit · · Score: 1

      I completely and wholeheartedly agree. Exams are to test understanding, if they can be fooled by memorizing things, they are not testing what ought to be tested. This extends to exams that historically have been "about" memorization. E.g. anatomy exams that can be "passed" with a top grade just by looking into an anatomy cheatsheet are nonsense. You should be asked to apply your knowledge of anatomy, not merely recall the fucking atlas.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    13. Re:deja vu by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      Similar experiences here. In my Engineering Physics classes, all the exams were open notes plus calculator. Some of us even had the full exams from previous semesters as part of our "notes". And the physics profs never failed to create exams that were hard as hell, even with all of that available. Rote memorization or the ability to look up formulae are not the same thing as understanding the material.

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    14. Re:deja vu by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      It was on purpose. Still remember to look on his face. Not quite as funny looking back as it was at the time.

      He really did need to find another job. This was apparently the second school where he failed.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    15. Re:deja vu by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      When I wrote down numbers, I would make a mistake, such as reversing two. It's not dyslexia, but I have similar problems sometimes. I have to check my math three or four times if I write it down, versus none if I don't. Might not seem like a big deal, but I would rather get no wrong answers with my method than get wrong answers with hers. Especially since her reason for demanding the shown work was to figure out where the student made a mistake. My mistake would have been writing it down.

      I tested it in trig class the following year. On a twenty problem test, I went through first and wrote the answers. Then I went back and wrote all the work down. Two of the problems had different answers between the two methods. One I forgot about a minus sign, and added when I should have subtracted (add a negative), which was about the only type of mistake I made doing the work in my head. On the other, I wrote something down wrong that I had right in my head. So either way I would have had one wrong answer on the test. Considering I got 100% on most of my homework and tests, doing it in my head was far more reliable.

      But, yes, I could do the procedures for high school geometry in my head. I finally 'won' our fight when I recalled the hardest problem from one homework/quiz page and solved it showing all work. I did this is the time I was waiting for the other students to do the other work on the page, which was simply copying answers from their previous homework, and which I had just done as well.

      As for actually memorizing a text book in general, yes I did, thought not for a class. I was in an group that participated in the Citizen Bee, in my sophomore or junior year. I memorized every question and chart in a ~200-page book. It wasn't a text book that had long descriptions on a subject, or example problems. It was just page after page of questions about American history, government, and culture. You could have asked me part of any of the questions, and I knew the whole question, the answer, the page it was on, and the questions above and below that one. I certainly did have a great memory. As long as I didn't write it down.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    16. Re:deja vu by mh1997 · · Score: 1

      As for actually memorizing a text book in general, yes I did, thought not for a class. I was in an group that participated in the Citizen Bee, in my sophomore or junior year. I memorized every question and chart in a ~200-page book.

      You could memorize 200 pages but can't remember if it was your sophomore or junior year?

    17. Re:deja vu by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Glad I'm not the only skeptic :)

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    18. Re:deja vu by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I hold a Ph.D in Applied Mathematics. Needless to say, I've taken some pretty rough tests.

      Some of the more difficult ones were from a professor who gave *every* test as a take-home test. Yup. You could not only take it home but there was no in-class time set to take the test. You were encouraged to work on it with your peers. Except, not one of the tests had the same questions on it. None of them (for as hard as we looked) were repeats of questions from exams from prior years.

      *sighs* I did fairly well. It was a hell of a lot of work for everyone involved but worth it. It has been some 30+ years but I still retain a goodly amount of it - though it's rather useless for me today. The thing is, he'd been a professor for nearly 30 years when I had him. As near as we could tell, not one question was identical to another - ever.

      But, absolutely... We were encouraged to work with each other, use any resources we could, and to do the work outside of class.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    19. Re:deja vu by KGIII · · Score: 1

      It's not entirely unknown. Or at least i can vouch for something similar. If you let me read the book and, maybe, do a practice exam (where I can see the answers) I can generally pass a test in any given subject. I can't retain it. I can't recount it to you a year later. It is like it stays in RAM until it is no longer needed.

      I test very well. I am not a smart person. On paper it might look like I am a smart person. I am not. I actually have to work really hard if I want to retain something or I have to use it very frequently if I want to retain it. For short-term stuff? I can pound a textbook into me pretty quickly and pass the exams with a > 70%. I won't understand it at anything other than a superficial level.

      Perhaps the other person is exaggerating their abilities and confusing it for being intelligent? Perhaps they're making it up? Perhaps they're telling the truth? I have no idea but I'm a bit similar. It's why I'm often cautious in my speech. "I'm not sure but I seem to recall that it was _____." The difference between the poster above and myself is that I don't think that it makes me intelligent. I think it's the exact opposite. Stuff is hard pressed to be put into long-term storage but I have plenty of RAM, so to speak.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    20. Re:deja vu by cyclomedia · · Score: 1

      We had graphics calculators waaay back in the 90s and we were allowed to use them (even encouraged for certain hardcore physics and maths exams) - on the way in they'd check the screen of your calculator to make sure the programmable memory was empty.

      So I wrote a program that rendered a fake home screen with a fake zero-bytes-used status.

      --
      If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
    21. Re:deja vu by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Human memory is funny that way. Memorizing facts is different from memorizing events.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    22. Re:deja vu by tibit · · Score: 1

      Some of the more difficult ones were from a professor who gave *every* test as a take-home test.

      Yup! I've had a couple classes like that, and these take-home tests where the hardest tests I ever had to take.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    23. Re:deja vu by toddestan · · Score: 1

      I would have failed you too. Showing your work is part of the answer. Whether or not you used a calculator to get to the end result is irrelevant.

    24. Re:deja vu by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      Considering it was around 1987, I don't think that's a big difference at this point.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    25. Re:deja vu by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      Too bad for you. You probably don't believe people can memorize words like "Suffrutescent" for a spelling bee.

      Go to the CSPAN website and search for "Citizen Bee". Watch some of the videos, like this one.

      Our team had me and two upperclassmen. We spent three months studying the book before the regioinal competition. And, yes, I did have it memorized.

      As for which school year I was in this, it was probably my sophomore year. It was three decades ago, so I can't swear to it.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    26. Re:deja vu by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Too bad for you that in addition to lacking knowledge, intellect, logic/reasoning abilities, you also lack ESP.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  16. You get caught by no-body · · Score: 1

    kicked out and called to the principle/director whoever is sitting on top, maybe penalized just for possession of such a watch because it implies intended fraud.
    Good luck!

  17. Re:Where's that APPS! guy? by tnk1 · · Score: 1

    Yes... but I get the idea that under normal circumstances, the normal smart watches are not optimized for the quick switches you need if you actually have roving proctors, as opposed to the TAs who sit at the front and play with themselves during prelims and finals.

  18. Tough open book tests by sjbe · · Score: 4, Informative

    if the answer is not in the book, or computer or neighbor... then your teacher is just a sadistic asshole.

    Not at all. I've taken tests that were 100% open book BUT if you had to spend a lot of time looking stuff up you were going to fail the test due to time constraints. The point of open book tests is to avoid needlessly penalizing folks for forgetting some minor bit of trivia or a formula. It's not supposed to be a substitute for actually learning the material.

    1. Re:Tough open book tests by kwbauer · · Score: 1

      Exactly, open book tests are meant to simulate (in a fashion) the real world where you have access to all manner of reference material to do your job but you need to have enough familiarity with the subject to know where to look and what you are looking for.

    2. Re:Tough open book tests by tibit · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Most graduate engineering exams I took were open everything, some of them were even offered in computer labs with mathematica and matlab installed, but internet access temporarily suspended.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    3. Re:Tough open book tests by zlives · · Score: 1

      so.... google is allowed.

    4. Re:Tough open book tests by zlives · · Score: 1

      i can understand a subject where you are suppose to be a Master of ( or trying to be)

    5. Re:Tough open book tests by Grog6 · · Score: 1

      I had some really good Professors over the years; one I remember well.

      The Final exam in Differential Equations. 3 hours.

      We were allowed to bring "anything except someone to take the test for us."

      I brought a laptop with Mathcad, all my previous exams (which he specifically mentioned), my DE book, my Calc book, and my physics book.

      He also said there were no questions allowed to him for the first hour. (!)

      All he wanted were the answers; no work to be shown. :)

      It was 10 word problems, each with about 10 variables.

      There was no way possible to do that test in the time we had available.

      However, every problem simplified to the same Equation as a question on a previous exam; so all I had to do was put in the new numbers or the same numbers in some cases where it mattered, and write down the Answers.

      I was done in 10 minutes, thanked him and left. :)

      Everyone else was working furiously. :rofl:

      --
      Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
    6. Re:Tough open book tests by timholman · · Score: 2

      I've taken tests that were 100% open book BUT if you had to spend a lot of time looking stuff up you were going to fail the test due to time constraints. The point of open book tests is to avoid needlessly penalizing folks for forgetting some minor bit of trivia or a formula. It's not supposed to be a substitute for actually learning the material.

      Open book tests are extremely inefficient. They're noisy (everyone turning pages) and slow (finding that obscure equation in 100 pages of material takes time), even if you know your stuff. As I tell my students: "If I wanted you to do poorly, I'd give you an open book exam."

      Instead, I give them a six-page handout with all relevant equations and diagrams two weeks in advance of the exam. On exam day, I give them the same handout. But if they haven't practiced solving the problems, it doesn't do them a bit of good - at least not in an electronics class.

    7. Re:Tough open book tests by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      Too noisy? Are you for real? In real life people don't get handouts with all the necessary information on them but they do have books and learning to use them and in particular when to use them is a critical skill you are failing to teach.

      Open book exams don't just teach the material, they teach other very important things and I'm surprised as a teacher you don't realize that. Open book exams are standard in the applied sciences (Engineering) for this reason. As the previous poster mentioned, if you don't know the material an open book exam isn't going to help you but it sure as hell teaches you how to prioritize learning, test time management and how and when to look for information.

    8. Re:Tough open book tests by larryjoe · · Score: 1

      Poorly written open-book tests focus on finding/remembering trivia. Good open-book tests focus on the application of basic principles. There should be no need to scan page after page for an obscure formula or fact. Frantic reading of the textbook for well-written open-book tests is an indication of trying to cram during the test.

      I've had high school and college classes where each student was allowed a single-sided page of personal notes. The notes could contain anything. The idea was to aid in remembering core formulas and numbers. In general, the students that stuffed as much info using extremely small fonts were the students that struggled the most during the test.

      When I was in college, we didn't have smartwatches or even smartphones or PDAs. However, some students still found a way to store contraband info in their calculator memories. Of course, unless the contraband included the actual answers, any other info was usually not that useful.

    9. Re:Tough open book tests by kwbauer · · Score: 1

      That would depend entirely upon the class and the rules, wouldn't it.

      I see the whole problem is that we, as a society in general, have decided that rules don't matter and learning is for rubes and such. Regardless of opinions to the contrary, the moral decay of society is real and it is not a good thing.

    10. Re:Tough open book tests by timholman · · Score: 1

      In real life people don't get handouts with all the necessary information on them but they do have books and learning to use them and in particular when to use them is a critical skill you are failing to teach.

      An interesting logical leap: because I give my students a "cheat sheet" rather than have them use a textbook during an exam, somehow I am failing to teach them how to use a book.

      As an engineer, you'll be using reference books throughout your entire career. What you won't be doing is using them to solve open book exams. A 55-minute open book exam is an academic construct. It's not the real world. The "cheat sheet" saves time and allows me to give more comprehensive exam problems.

      I do teach them (or at least try to; some students simply refuse to open a book) to use reference books and data sheets for homework assignments, design projects, and labs, i.e. assignments that don't have the time constraints of an exam. That is where those skills matter, not in an exam where every minute counts.

    11. Re:Tough open book tests by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      "moral decay" would seem to imply that the standard of morals is getting worse. I'm not seeing that.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    12. Re:Tough open book tests by zlives · · Score: 1

      brother Caligula would tend to disagree, o wait... you meant worse.

  19. Re:Err, who gives a fuck? by tnk1 · · Score: 1

    On the contrary. You go to college so you can get your piece of paper, and/or so you can get into grad school. Cheating on tests is a very effective path straight through to your first Master's thesis. At that point, you just need to muddle through and plagiarize or get someone to write it for you. I wouldn't usually suggest trying that in a doctoral program, but there are countries where it is a lot easier to pull off.

    And no, I am not suggesting that. But let's face it, an undergrad degree is either there to get you for first job or to get you in grad school. With the weed-out classes that many popular majors have, actual learning is your second priority. If you just want to learn things, audit the classes you are trying to challenge yourself with and take whatever the easiest classes are to pass with. Learning is a luxury in college.

  20. Re:Err, who gives a fuck? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    If you are cheating, you won't hurt anyone except yourself

    Not true. When I review resumes, if they list a degree from certain colleges, I automatically toss them in the trash. I have learned from experience that those schools graduate incompetents. So by cheating your way through, you are degrading the reputation of your institution, and hurting everyone who graduates.

  21. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And we would like to see you use a spell-checker.

  22. Watch the students by ThatBeDank · · Score: 1

    Since when is a test time for a teacher to goof off? Walk around and watch students making sure they're not paying a little too much attention to their wrists. Want to know the easiest way to cheat in math and science classes? They're those TIs!

  23. It's about learning to think by sjbe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've been in industry for 20 years now. No one has asked me to perform long division on paper.

    And did you think the purpose of doing it on paper was the end goal? If so you completely missed the point. The purpose was to help you actually learn what is happening in a fundamental way AND to practice arithmetic in the process. I learned long division in the third grade. Doing it by hand helped my brain develop and it taught me lots about math beyond simply a process to do division. The point is to learn to think and hopefully you learn some math along the way.

    No one has asked me to solve a laplace transform without a calculator.

    But if they had simply handed you a calculator with it programmed in then you would never have learned it in the first place. I see that routinely in students I have tutored. The ones that simply whip out the calculator immediately struggle to learn what is actually going on and they almost invariably do worse than those students who slog through it by hand and actually learn the material.

    No one has asked me to sit in silence for 20 minutes reciting things from memory.

    Really? I do a version of that every day in my job. I have all sorts of things I do from memory and I'm pretty sure you do too if you think about it.

    No one has forced me to solve some kind of hard problem without the ability to go get some reference material.

    What are you going to do when there is no reference material? If every problem you solve has a reference available for it then you are doing nothing but solving trivial problems.

    1. Re:It's about learning to think by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      And did you think the purpose of doing it on paper was the end goal?

      We're talking about setting exams, not about the process of learning. Long division is important to learn. Judging you by your ability to do it under pressure with no reference material is not.

      Really? I do a version of that every day in my job. I have all sorts of things I do from memory and I'm pretty sure you do too if you think about it.

      Wow you can keep your job. If your job is like sitting an exam every day and you enjoy it, more power to you. No I spend my time at my job solving problems. This often involves technical discussions, reading papers, running simulations, not sitting in silence tapping my pen at my teeth while sweating with a person standing behind me looking at a watch.

      You sound like you're getting caught up on my words, so I'll give you a word to get caught up on: "Exam". Just remember what it is we're talking about here.

      What are you going to do when there is no reference material? If every problem you solve has a reference available for it then you are doing nothing but solving trivial problems.

      Since when does reference material equate to "having the answer" or making something "trivial"? Reference material is far more than that. Reference materials are methods, they are theory. Reference materials are first basis explanations from which you can derive a solution. Reference materials are any kind of assistance that can get you towards answering the problem you have.

      But hey if you prefer to sit in a darkened room with nothing but a device on a wall going "tick... tick... tick..." to help you solve your tough problems then again more power to you.

      But really I think you've just completely misunderstood what I was saying.

    2. Re:It's about learning to think by Obfuscant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But if they had simply handed you a calculator with it programmed in then you would never have learned it in the first place.

      This. And you would not have learned when it was appropriate to use and when it was not. I have two examples to make this point.

      The first was when I was a TA and a student asked to borrow my calculator for a quiz. I told him it was an HP and asked if he knew how to use it. Sure, he said. So I loaned it to him. One of the answers he turned in was "1.00". This was for the concentration of hydrogen ions in a buffer solution of a weak acid. At some point he had pressed "number enter number enter divide", adding an extra "enter" and thus dividing the second number by itself. This is a common error, and meant nothing, really. But here's the problem: his answer showed me that he knew the equations but had no grasp on the concept of "weak acid" or "buffer solution", or of pH in general, since his answer was about six orders of magnitude wrong.

      Several years earlier I had been a student in the same class. We had a quiz problem about pKa and ... hydrogen ion concentrations in buffer solutions. There are two different equations you can use to solve this. One is short, simple, and requires an approximation. The other is longer, more complicated, and doesn't. If you just hand someone both equations, you can guess they'll pick the easier one because it's easier, but they'll never learn about the assumption it requires and they'll get the wrong answer. Every time. This tendency to pick the shorter one is so strong that the TA had automatically used the wrong equation when creating the quiz key and he marked my answer, using the long form, wrong. And then I got to point out that the assumption was invalid and my answer was, indeed, the correct one.

      Tests to determine mastery of concepts aren't always testing things you're going to do in a direct way in adult life. And even for long division, yes, there have been times when I want to figure something out and don't have a calculator at hand to do the division. I consider the lack of ability of the common person to do simple math like this to be one of the losses of civilization. Even just having to fumble for a calculator when you want to split a check three ways -- that's ridiculous.

      If every problem you solve has a reference available for it then you are doing nothing but solving trivial problems.

      Not necessarily, but he's going to waste an awful lot of time having to look things up while other people remember stuff and can synthesize new and better things without spending days looking all the details up. His more productive co-workers will get the raises; he'll get to visit the technical library. Yes, I love the fact I can pull out the Perl Quick Reference to refresh myself on perl commands, but it sure does make writing the code a lot slower. And when I learned 68000 assembly language, I got a lot more productive at it as I memorized what the instructions did and didn't have to look up every one every time.

    3. Re:It's about learning to think by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Wow you can keep your job. If your job is like sitting an exam every day and you enjoy it, more power to you.

      I've just spent the last ten minutes writing a response to the GP. Imagine how much longer it would have taken had I needed to look up every word I wanted to use.

      Pretty soon I'm going to go try to get a large code package to compile. Imagine how long and hard that task would be if I had to look up every command I needed to use to do that, or to fix the things that aren't working. Hmmm, there seems to be a missing package. What is a "package"? What tool might I use to get the missing package? How do I find out if that package is already there and the problem is something else? Where's my book? It must be in a book somewhere.... nobody could possibly expect me to remember any of those three letter commands to do useful stuff. And shoot, two letter commands are hard enough!

      Your complaint that exams aren't real life is true. They aren't intended to be. Never were. They aren't always intended to test skills that you will use directly on a daily basis, but to test your understanding of the skills and how they relate to other things. No, you probably won't ever need to do a cube root by hand on paper. Big deal. That doesn't make knowing how to do it that way useless. And while you think the GP is caught up in the wrong thing, you seem to equate "exam" with "useless concepts", which is quite wrong itself.

    4. Re:It's about learning to think by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      Dividing a check by 3 isn't long division. No one does long division by hand. He's very very right about long division. They should still teach it, as in the methodology behind it, but they shouldn't spend 4 years in elementary school teaching something no one will ever use. And not just teaching it but making students spend hours doing problem after problem. If they hadn't wasted all that time on long division they could have been introducing more abstract mathematical concepts that are far more valuable like algebra and trigonometry.

      To this day I have no idea why I had to do so much long division. I'm not even sure I could still do it many many years later because I've never ever used it.

    5. Re:It's about learning to think by Howitzer86 · · Score: 1

      Occasionally I'll do long division by hand. Sometimes I don't trust the calculator, or rather... my fingers punching the numbers. This happens when I'm doing more than one thing and I want to be careful. I find the scrap of paper handy for keeping up with where I've been, more so than a calculator's record scroll. Sometimes I cheat and do both to check my work.

      I see it, multiplication, fractions and percentages, and basic algerbra, as essential skills.

      I know a guy who can't calculate 20% tips without a calculator. When I tried to teach him, he just shuts down and asked me to stop. He can't do simple math, this is a real problem that's really common. The guy is really smart, but schools failed him big time and he'll never learn how to tip without a calculator, let alone balance a budget (even with a computer... tried to teach him Excel with predictable results).

      Kids are in school to learn to learn. That's why a lot of it seems pointless at first, but appreciated later. People do math in day to day life to figure something out. Like the ability to read, it's a tool to learn something.

    6. Re:It's about learning to think by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I've just spent the last ten minutes writing a response to the GP. Imagine how much longer it would have taken had I needed to look up every word I wanted to use.

      Don't be dense. Or do you study for your exams by having someone remind you how to breath. You know quite well what is involved in the study for an open book exam vs a closed book exam and it has nothing to do with looking up every word in the dictionary.

      How do I find out if that package is already there and the problem is something else? Where's my book? It must be in a book somewhere.... nobody could possibly expect me to remember any of those three letter commands to do useful stuff. And shoot, two letter commands are hard enough!

      Oh I love that you used this example, and even more that you used it facetiously (look that one up on your cheat watch). I have a question for you: Did you ever find yourself stuck in a closed room for 90 minutes where your future career depended on knowing some 2 letter command you haven't used in a while and you weren't allowed to open a man page?

      Your complaint that exams aren't real life is true. They aren't intended to be. Never were. They aren't always intended to test skills that you will use directly on a daily basis, but to test your understanding of the skills and how they relate to other things.

      Then you misunderstood my complaint. My complaint is not that exams aren't real life, it's that we apply real life penalties to exams which don't reflect real life.

      Also closed book exams do not test understanding in the slightest. They test memorisation under stress, nothing more. Any exam where a small watch spitting out factoids to help you cheat means the difference between passing and failing does not test understanding at all. Which is a shame because there are plenty of assessment methods which do like open book exams, tutorials, practicals, supervision, group projects, etc

    7. Re:It's about learning to think by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Don't be dense.

      And don't be dishonest. You use things you had to memorize in school every day. You didn't have to learn how to breath by going to school and taking a test.

      I have a question for you: Did you ever find yourself stuck in a closed room for 90 minutes where your future career depended

      Don't be dishonest. I've also never been stuck in a room for 90 minutes taking a test where my future career depended on knowing a two letter command. and I doubt that you have been. If so, you should have picked a better career.

      Also closed book exams do not test understanding in the slightest.

      Don't be dishonest. The open or closed nature of a test has nothing to do with whether it tests understanding. The questions on the test determine that. You can have open-book tests that test nothing about understanding, too.

      Yeah, there are a lot of evaluation methods that aren't closed-book tests. Some of them take a lot more work and time for both the evaluator and evaluatee, and that sometimes makes them inappropriate or unusable. If you are honest, you'll admit that.

    8. Re:It's about learning to think by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Dividing a check by 3 isn't long division.

      It is a problem solved by using long division. I've seen a definition of long division that requires the divisor to have multiple digits, but oddly enough the Wikipedia section on long division has several examples of numbers divided by four. I think if "dividing by 4" is long division, dividing by 3 is, too.

      but they shouldn't spend 4 years in elementary school teaching something no one will ever use.

      Blame the dumbing down of education if it took you four years of school to learn long division.

      they could have been introducing more abstract mathematical concepts that are far more valuable like algebra and trigonometry.

      Because third graders are at just the right age to understand trigonometry.

      I'm not even sure I could still do it many many years later because I've never ever used it.

      Good thing your cell phone has a calculator, otherwise you'd never be able to split a check.

  24. India style by nospam007 · · Score: 2

    Do it like India showed us last week, all exams are do be done in swimming gear, preferably on glass desks.

    1. Re:India style by alphatel · · Score: 3, Informative

      Do it like India showed us last week, all exams are do be done in swimming gear, preferably on glass desks.

      You mean in their underwear

      --
      When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
    2. Re:India style by samwichse · · Score: 1

      OMG, it's like someone took the classic stress dream and made it reality.

  25. Cool if it has an SDK by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    Really I want one if I can get an SDK for it. Not to cheat but to write my own apps for it.
    $50 and a nice big screen is kind of cool.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  26. Oh, the good ol' days by RevRagnarok · · Score: 1

    I remember one class (HS, circa 1990) where we had to "clear the EEPROMs" on our TI-85s because somebody was caught with their notes all typed in, which must have taken longer than actually studying.

    We made a program that emulated the flash process without doing anything, right down to the cursor blinking for the right count etc. We had too many useful programs that we didn't want to lose, like one called "SuperFactor!" which could do up to 4th order polynomial factoring...

    --
    I should put something clever here. Maybe someday.
  27. maybe the tests need to change by shadowrat · · Score: 1

    According to ray kurzweil, we are going to have memory nanites injected into our brains next year! The singularity is coming in 2 years. I'm not as optimistic as ray, but it does seem like the tech to look up the entirety of human knowledge is eventually going to be inextricably linked to the human taking the test. We should probably start planning for that.

    Maybe the skills of the future have more to do with using tech to access information than filling your head. I try to think things through for myself, but honestly i don't know why when the end result of someone just copying from stack overflow seems just as good as my result. looking shit up and copying it is the skillset of the future.

    What we probably need are tests that acknowledge that and students can't just come in armed with a list of answer indices, but actually have to dig around for the right information.

  28. Never underestimate cheaters by sjbe · · Score: 1

    I tend to think that if a device is actually needed for their health, they're not going to be too big on modding it to add more functionality at risk of damaging it.

    I think you hugely underestimate how motivated people are to cheat and the lengths they will go to to get ahead.

    1. Re:Never underestimate cheaters by CSMoran · · Score: 1

      I tend to think that if a device is actually needed for their health, they're not going to be too big on modding it to add more functionality at risk of damaging it.

      I think you hugely underestimate how motivated a hardly relevant fraction of people are to cheat and the lengths they will go to to get ahead.

      FTFY. We're not looking for a perfect solution, are we, just a considerable improvement.

      --
      Every end has half a stick.
    2. Re:Never underestimate cheaters by stealth_finger · · Score: 2

      I think you hugely underestimate how motivated people are to cheat and the lengths they will go to to get ahead.

      Everything up to actually studying apparently.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    3. Re:Never underestimate cheaters by sjbe · · Score: 1

      I think you hugely underestimate how motivated people are to cheat and the lengths they will go to to get ahead.

      Everything up to actually studying apparently.

      Ironic isn't it? But the funny thing is that the even with all that work on cheating it's still less effort than actually doing the work to learn it in most cases.

    4. Re:Never underestimate cheaters by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Students are better off doing the studying in most cases, and people with diplomas are better off if the cheaters don't get them. If we make cheating sufficiently hard that studying becomes the easier way to get good grades, we're helping a lot of people.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  29. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  30. Students are hurting themselves by gweihir · · Score: 1

    Unless the degree aimed for is worthless in itself (a far to common occurrence these days), the only effect this has is students hurting their own skills. And once you have an aural exam or an advanced exam that requires actual understanding, that will come back to bite the cheaters.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Students are hurting themselves by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Very true.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  31. Re:Err, who gives a fuck? by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

    By the way, your computer is ready. I was able to remove the trojans and viruses by removing Windows and installing SteamOS. I then played games on it for 50 hours to make sure it's working properly.

  32. Sounds like a problem with the test by hawguy · · Score: 1

    If you can cram enough information into a watch to help you with the test, then that sounds more like a problem with the test -- students should be allowed to bring any materials they want with them into the exam.

    If an exam question relies on rote memorization of some fact, formula, or theorem, that question doesn't belong on the test since in the real world the student will have access to Google for those trivia questions.

    The exam should test how well students can apply these facts to solve problems, not on the memorization of trivla.

    I always loved open-book exams, even when the instructor warned "My open book tests are much harder". I liked those even better than exams where you're allowed to bring in a single sheet of note paper, which was always an exercise in how small I could write.

  33. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by kwbauer · · Score: 1

    Because some "rote facts" help you determine that certain concepts are bullshit. One example i read about is that a college professor at a prominent California university was teaching his Black Studies students that a slave uprising in the French Caribbean helped kickstart the French Revolution. His students ate it up because this was the first time they had been taught how big of an influence on World History "their" culture had had. The biggest problem with that whole thing was not that most of those students were not descended from anything relating to the slave uprising and so it really wasn't their culture. No, the biggest problem was that the slave uprising happened about 12 years after the French Revolution so it could not possibly have had any influence on the French Revolution.

    Yes, sometimes facts help us weed out bogus "concepts". And for math and physics students, it is absolutely necessary to understand the formulas and how to do all that by hand if you are going to pursue any kind of related career because having the fundamental understanding helps you to know what the computers are doing. And actually memorizing addition and multiplication tables really is necessary to considering one's self a semi-educated adult.

  34. Re:Miniturization by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

    Well that's a huge warning right there, mister. Nobody go study at the University of Michigan otherwise you'll get multiple sclerosis!

  35. If you cheat on all your CS exams by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Then good luck passing my interview process.

    (why do you keep squinting at your watch? you're supposed to be writing source on this white board to perform Boolean operations on quad tree)

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  36. Teachers are not stupid by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

    Teachers tend to rely more on behavior than whatever gadget students use to cheat.
    These smart watches are not that different from regular cheat sheets in the way they are used. And while they store more data than a piece of paper, that's actually a trap for the cheating student. No one expects you to learn 8GB of stuff, which means that the watch will be filled with useless data the cheater will have to sort through in less than ideal conditions.

  37. Re:Write better exams by gweihir · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Indeed. I made excellent experiences with "open notes" exams as the lecturer of an EE course over several years. (That was the first time I was the primary examiner and could do that.) For one, students take better notes and ask questions during the lecture if things are unclear. And you can ask more difficult things, which makes the exams better overall. I also got very positive feedback from students, saying that while things did not get easier, they understood more and generally felt the course was more worthwhile taking as they could focus on understanding things and not on remembering them. And while you have to ask new questions every time, I did not find that difficult or hard to do.

    Personally, I will only do "open notes" in the future whenever the decision is up to me and, if the lecture is based on a book, "open book".

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  38. Re:Most exams allow 1-2 pages of notes nowadays by gweihir · · Score: 1

    That is the only sane way to test actual skills.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  39. The solution by HuguesT · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The solution is to design exams so that having a cheating watch is of no help. Open-book exams are the best. Disclaimer: I'm a prof, all my exams are open-book. If you didn't study beforehand, the textbook is of little help.

  40. I fully support these watches by Ambassador+Kosh · · Score: 1

    I know this probably sounds strange but I fully support things like this existing.

    The reason people use them and the reason they help on exams is many exams are 100% memorization based. EVERYTHING that students can do to fight back against those kinds of exams should be done. There is really no way to justify a memorization based exam existing anymore. Memorization is something humans are getting worse at physically due to changes in the brain.

    Your brain basically has X neural cells and it can change what it uses them for. As technology has improved many of those cells have been tasked to do processing instead of memory. There is just no real reason to memorize anymore and it is completely ineffective. Most memorized material is forgotten within a few days at most.

    I really like my undergraduate engineering exams. Most of them where open book, notes, calculator etc and we where tested on actual understanding of the material. If you did not know what you where doing you would fail the exam and no amount of notes, books etc could help that. If you knew what you where doing you spent your time working on the problem and looking up any formulas, constants etc you would need. I have even had a few exams that where open internet.

    We have the ability to look up pretty much any fact at any time. What we don't have the ability to do is instantly understand those facts. That is why you have to learn how to understand the material but any details you can look up.

    It won't be too long before students will have microchips in their heads and can download pretty much anything they want into them. Memorization exams will die but professors will have to be fought at every step and dragged into the modern world kicking and screaming. In the end it will probably even end up in some supreme court case where it is made very clear you can't force someone to turn off a microchip inside their brain just because you belong to an archaic belief system and can't handle that memorization is not a replacement for understanding and education.

    --
    Computer modeling for biotech drug manufacturing is HARD! :)
  41. Re:Err, who gives a fuck? by BoberFett · · Score: 1

    Wait, you let your patients die because you were too lazy to look up any information, and insisted on relying only on your memory? You're a terrible doctor.

  42. Re:Err, who gives a fuck? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    If someone walks into ER with a screwdriver stuck through his head there isn't usually time to post it on stackexchange. You have to decide right away - ice pack or aspirin.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  43. Who has the time? by Tempest_2084 · · Score: 1

    Who has the time to comb through page after page on their watch to find an answer? Unless the test is relatively short or the user only needs to jog his memory on one or two questions there's no way you'd have the time to do this.

    Back when I was in school most of my teachers gave us either one page of paper or a note card that we could use as a 'cheat sheet'. I used to fill it up with all kinds of formulas and equations, but rarely actually looked at it during the exam because hunting for the info took too much time, and by writing it all down I already memorized it. This was actually a great study tool that I used even when we weren't allowed a cheat sheet (I obviously didn't bring it to the exam). I remember seeing people with the front and back of the paper absolutely crammed with info at a 6 point font (some even brought a magnifying glass to read it) and would consult it for almost every question. They were usually the ones crying for more time to finish.

    And no, that pun was not intended. Sometimes they just work out that way.

  44. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You still don't "get it". Let me explain, using your example.

    Bad test question: In what year or years did the French Revolution take place?
    Bad test question: In what year did the slave uprising in the French Caribbean occur?

    Good test question: Explain the role that the Slave Uprising had on the French Revolution. Justify your answers.

    Any kids who didn't pay attention or know the answer will give you a pile of bullshit. The kids who paid attention will write "It had no role because it didn't happen until after the Revolution."

    The problem is teachers who are lazy or overloaded with students, or who simply don't understand how to give good tests. If people can cheat using a "crib sheet", high-tech or low-tech, then all you're testing is their ability to memorize their fucking crib sheet.

  45. Re:Err, who gives a fuck? by BoberFett · · Score: 1

    And how would cheating on a test affect that decision? Is there a diagnosis code for "Screwdriver in the head" that tells you how to treat it?

  46. Others follow us sell may be fake and bad quality. by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    While the advertising for this watch is truly disgusting, it seems really likely to only hamper lazy teachers who focus on meaningless memorization rather than comprehension. The watch doesn't do any real kind of good cheating, like let you access the Internet or other students. It just serves as a place to keep your krib sheets. And from the advertisement quote that I used in my title, I suspect the quality isn't very good either. Life is an open book test, school tests should be open book to and focus more on student comprehension rather than just the ability to memorize countless facts and formulas.

    Some of the best classes I ever had were high school Physics I and II with a teacher who understood this and said that all tests were open book. He even suggested that if we didn't want to waste time flipping all through the book trying to find the right formula that we could and should make sheets of all the formulas that we thought we might need, so that we could access them quicker. The exams didn't depend on just giving back the formula or plugging in a couple single digit integers and doing grade school math, they depended on understanding the problem presented and knowing the right way to approach it. These were great classes and he was a very good teacher who understood what was really important.

    Sure, you could take away all watches and have the students just use the clock on the wall, but that only encourages lazy teachers to make more poor tests based on memorization rather than comprehension. And you're likely still going to favor rich cheaters who can get the next generation of fancy cheating gimmicks over the poorer or more honest students. Far better would be to make all tests open book and open notes and require the teachers to design tests that measure comprehension, not memorization.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  47. A quote comes to mind. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

    The Alcalde's gaze was impassive. "The 'unaided skills' test, Miss Washington. There is nothing whatsoever _naked_ about it."
                  "It might as well be, Mister." Patsy was speaking in English now, and with none of the light mocking tone that made her a minor queen in her clique. It was her image and voice, but the words and body language were very un-Patsy. Juan probed the external network traffic. There was lots of it, but mostly simple query/response stuff, like you'd expect. A few sessions had been around for dozens of seconds; Bertie's remote was one of the two oldest. The other belonged Patsy Washington -- at least it was tagged with her personal certificate. Identity hijacking was a major no-no at Fairmont, but if a parent was behind it there wasn't much the school could do. And Juan had met Patsy's father. Maybe it was just as well the Alcalde didn't have to talk to him in person. Patsy's image leaned clumsily through the chair in front of her. "In fact," she continued, "it's worse than naked. All their lives, these -- we -- have had civilization around us. We're damned good at using that civilization. Now you theory-minded intellectuals figure it would be nice to jerk it all away and put us at risk."
                  "We are putting no one at risk ... Miss Washington." Mr. Alcalde was still speaking in Spanish. In fact, Spanish was the only language their principal had ever been heard to speak; the Alcalde was kind of a bizarre guy. "We at Fairmont consider unaided skills to be the ultimate fallback protection. We're not Amish here, but we believe that every human being should be able to survive in reasonable environments -- without networks, even without computers."
                  "Next you'll be teaching rock-chipping!" said Patsy.
                  The Alcalde ignored the interruption. "Our graduates must be capable of doing well in outages, even in disasters. If they can't, we have not properly educated them!" He paused, glared all around the room. "But this is no survivalist school. We're not dropping you into a jungle. Your unaided skills test will be at a safe location our faculty have chosen -- perhaps an Amish town, perhaps an obsolete suburb. Either way, you'll be doing good, in a safe environment. You may be surprised at the insights you get with such complete, old-fashioned simplicity."

  48. Flight plan aid! by gavron · · Score: 1

    I'm going to get me one of those and put flight plans on those.
    It looks a lot more comfortable than a kneeboard!

    thanks, Slashdot!

  49. Re:Err, who gives a fuck? by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    Yea, what do I care if my doctor cheated on all his exams, or my lawyer or the guy who designed the bridge that I'm driving over as I type this into my smartphone? They are the ones who are really cheated, they may make the big money but at the end of the day that don't have the satisfaction of knowing that they earned it.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  50. Ti-83 by DrYak · · Score: 1

    but any kind of device in sight other than the school-sanctioned TI-83 is grounds for dismissal.

    Cue in smart asses hacking their Ti-83, replacing the guts while keeping the cover.

    That's not even news: a long time ago, there used to be an article about some student replacing the logic board of their Ti-83 with a supperior Texas Instrument, that still used the same button layout and more or less the same screen size, but with more advanced functions.

    Nowadays, you could pack quite a lot of computing power and notes in the same form factor.

    It's beginning with a few geeks doing it for the sake of it,
    and it will finish with cheap chinese manufacturer selling ready to use kit (logic board where you just need to screw around your school's sanctionned cover over it.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:Ti-83 by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      I don't know about the TI-83. But the TI-85 could easily be hacked to run assembly programs, instead of the BASIC it supported out of the box. No hardware mod was required. From there, you could knock up a program that would appear to clear the memory if the professor (More like the TA proctoring the exam.) was having you clear it out on your way in. But there would still be a hidden memory area in which you could stash whatever notes you were going to use to cheat. Of course, if you were good enough to do the hack and write the program, you were probably also smart enough not to have to cheat on the sort of exam where you'd have access to said TI-85 in the first place. Not like you'd have any legit reason to have a scientific calculator on your desk for a history exam, after all.

      It also had a good enough CPU that you could write and run things like Pacman and Tetris.

      --
      Imagine all the people...
  51. Time to re-think testing then? by Pascoea · · Score: 1

    How about we just rethink the necessity of tests that are just regurgitating information from memory, and replace them with tests that require cognitive thinking or creative reasoning?

    Give every kid a laptop with an open internet connection and let them Google during the test to their hearts content. Having to write a sentence or two about the repercussions of Columbus sailing the ocean blue in 1492 is probably a better exercise than just asking what year it happened.

    And when was the last time you had to answer a complicated question at work and you weren't allowed to use your technology to figure it out?

    When you start getting into more substantial tests later in life you can devolve to proctored testing facilities where they make you dress down to a hospital gown and hand you a pencil.

    1. Re:Time to re-think testing then? by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      And when was the last time you had to answer a complicated question at work and you weren't allowed to use your technology to figure it out?

      Never. But the times when I've had to answer a complicated question and didn't have to say "I don't know I'll get back to you" and then run off to google something -- that my boss could have saved time and money by just googling himself -- are legion. That's because I memorized things.

      If all I'm going to do is be a middle-man between my boss and Google, why is he paying me when he can just ask Siri or Amazon's thing instead?

    2. Re:Time to re-think testing then? by Pascoea · · Score: 1

      If all I'm going to do is be a middle-man between my boss and Google, why is he paying me when he can just ask Siri or Amazon's thing instead?

      Very valid point. But in a technical role, if your boss is asking you a question that can be answered quickly by asking Siri than I would argue that YOUR value is knowing what to ask Google and analyzing the results to research a valid solution. The non-IT management in my company would google "Document fails to print" and most likely not get a resolution, whereas a technician would know to google "Windows 10 HP2365 error code 11". I wouldn't expect a technician to memorize what an error code 11 is (unless it's something they see every day) but I would damn well expect them to be able to figure it out and fix it rapidly. (And yes, I pulled that model and error code out of my ass, I have no idea if they even exist)

    3. Re:Time to re-think testing then? by Pascoea · · Score: 1
      Shit, forgot a part...

      And on a certification exam, which question would be a better test of a technicians worth?

      1) What does an error code 11 mean on the standard HP network driver package?

      or 2) What steps would you perform to correct a error code 11 for an HP printer on a Windows 10 machine? (And let them use their computer to research an answer)

  52. Real Life by Etherwalk · · Score: 1

    Nope. Looks like you got it. Even from the summary:

    But professors are striking back. "My microbiology professor does a watch check every time we have a test," says Abigail Lauze. "If it's not an old school analog it has to come off and go in the cell phone bin."

    Sounds good. Every student gets a bag. Puts his/her name on it. Then puts ALL of his/her electronics into the bag. They can be reclaimed AFTER the test ON THEIR WAY OUT OF THE CLASSROOM.

    This is what you do in real life. Important exams have requirements to limit the possibility of cheating except in incredibly trusting environments. Actuarial Exams, Bar Exams, Professional Responsibility Exams, all of them have very brief "permitted items" lists and prohibit non-analog watches. Some especially trusting colleges and graduate schools do not put such strict rules in place--"take home exams" are part of the culture in some places where cheating is not a problem, for example, especially for 24-hour exams.

  53. Re:Err, who gives a fuck? by Etherwalk · · Score: 1

    And how would cheating on a test affect that decision? Is there a diagnosis code for "Screwdriver in the head" that tells you how to treat it?

    No, you need to use code that most closely identifies the condition, in this case "headache." The insurance company assures me that aspirin is an appropriate treatment, so I will not worry about all these silly warnings. Who knows what an anticoagulant is, anyway?

  54. No need for modding by DrYak · · Score: 2

    if a device is actually needed for their health, they're not going to be too big on modding it to add more functionality at risk of damaging it.

    No necessarily need to mod them.

    Case in point: cochlear implant (i.e. "cybernetic ear" used to give back hearing to deaf people). There's an electrode array directly stimulating the auditive nerve.
    Normally, there's a box with a microphone picking up sound, processing it (basically: fast fourrier-transforming it) and feeding the signal to the nerve stimulator.
    This coarsly simulates hearing sound.
    As the spectral resolution of the thing isn't stellar, it's very sensitive to noise.
    Trying to listen to a phone in a noisy environment is really hard (= so hard that this is a test for quality for each new generation of device. "how much is the new one better at listenning on the phone in a sub-optimal circumstance")
    To simplify it, there's a way to plug-in an aux input to it (to bypass the effect of the noisy environment).
    Even 15 years ago, while I was studying medicine, the box had an AUX jack already there.
    I'm betting that the latest generation can be paired over bluetooth.
    (Have moved away to other field of specialty).

    That begs to be exploited as a form of secret radio earpiece:
    e.g.: kid fully deaf with bilateral implants.
    left cochlear implant still used to pick up from mike so kid seem to be hearing normally.
    right cochlear implant bluetooth paired to a smartphone outside the class room (but still within range) used by an acomplice to transmit informations.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:No need for modding by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      right cochlear implant bluetooth paired to a smartphone outside the class room (but still within range) used by an acomplice to transmit informations.

      How does the accomplice get to know what the questions are?

      With national/ international exams, you might have a chance. But for exams cooked up on site for a particular school's particular course ... much harder.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  55. Re:Here is another solution by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Automatic fail and 'the boot' for academic dishonesty.

    After which, no school would admit you. It was also 'the boot' for failing to list any previous academic institutions you attended.

    Cheating used to be a _really_ big deal. Most teachers didn't make official reports, especially in the soft subjects, but I saw a dude busted and his academic life ended.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  56. Cheating by Andrio · · Score: 1

    Why should the race always be to the swift, or the Jumble to the quick-witted? Should they be allowed to win merely because of the gifts God gave them? Well I say, "Cheating is the gift man gives himself."

    --
    The Internet King? I wonder if he could provide faster nudity.
  57. Slashvertisement by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    I don't need a watch to help me cheat on exams. The only exams I get now involve medical professionals. I need a watch to help me cheat on my wife.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  58. Re:don't be a dumbass by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Sure... but my point is that such devices may be augmented to have additional purposes. At one time, a watch only could tell the time, and wasn't really useful for cheating. What is to prevent other devices, particularly those that might be needed by some people for legitimate medical reasons, from eventually experiencing similar updates?

    Although things like Google Glass are pretty obvious to an onlooker right now, it is not a far stretch to imagine that in the not too distant future, a workalike device might be virtually indistinguishable from genuine glasses, or possibly even embedded into contact lenses.

  59. University of Michigan by rossdee · · Score: 1

    If you are in Michigan, drink only bottled water

  60. Who cares? by tibit · · Score: 1

    Most exams can be written in a way where notes don't really help, or at least they help with things that are not important to test. Exams are supposed to verify understanding, not memorization skills. If your exam can be cheated through with mere memorization, the exam is bogus anyway - it doesn't test what it should be testing.

    --
    A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    1. Re:Who cares? by stevelinton · · Score: 1

      Most exams can be written in a way where notes don't really help, or at least they help with things that are not important to test. Exams are supposed to verify understanding, not memorization skills. If your exam can be cheated through with mere memorization, the exam is bogus anyway - it doesn't test what it should be testing.

      This is more or less true, although memorisation and recall isn't a bad proxy for understanding, since it's a lot easier to memorise and then explain a load of stuff ifit makes sense to you.

      Where it gets interesting is devices with comms capability. Now your ability to solve problems in exams depends on how big and well-trained and well-equipped a support team you can muster, which mostly comes down to money.

      For now the problems are solvable. Looking ahead, when every teenager has a surgically implanted (or maybe grown in situ, or even genetically engineered in) comms system in their skull, this is going to get harder. Even defining individual skill or performance, let along measuring it becomes tricky. Indeed, in extreme scenarios, even defining "individuals" becomes tricky.

  61. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by tibit · · Score: 1

    actually memorizing addition and multiplication tables really is necessary to considering one's self a semi-educated adult

    That's bullshit. Memorizing these simply means you lack the capacity to actually do the calculations fast enough. If you actually understood the basics of algebra and number theory, you could use them to perform the calculations quickly. Since you have no understanding, you pretend that memorizing tables is somehow fundamental. No, it isn't. It's a crutch for pupils who have no understanding, and for teachers who can't make anyone understand because, perhaps, they don't understand themselves. This anecdote gives you a gist of what's involved in fast mental math. What you are supposed to memorize largely isn't numeric results, but techniques.

    --
    A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  62. Re:Err, who gives a fuck? by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

    who let the HR person in?

  63. Re:Here is another solution by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    I think Jay Sherman said all that needs to be said about that.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  64. Re:Better idea... by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

    How about no watch devices period? Don't some smart watches look a bit too much like an analog watch, or am I mistaken? Nothing on the wrist might be better.

    I wouldn't mind it in the least if I had to remove my watch during an exam because I probably don't need to know what time it is and that's about all it's good for. I would, however, be very reluctant to remove the MedicAlert bracelet on my other arm; it's saved my life more than once, and I wouldn't trust the instructor to remember it if/when I passed out during a long exam because of low blood sugar.

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  65. Well, that explains it by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    I had a Dumbwatch, I flunked all my exams.

  66. Re:Err, who gives a fuck? by painandgreed · · Score: 1

    If someone walks into ER with a screwdriver stuck through his head there isn't usually time to post it on stackexchange. You have to decide right away - ice pack or aspirin.

    By time you're having to worry about the ER, you're already an R3 and have already spent several years in residency. Even then, you're there to get new experience and and attending will be there to double check your work before the patient leaves. As an R4 you might spend over night and just have people on call, but really, your example of med school and patients dying doesn't relate because it will be years after med school through more training that you can be kicked out for doing badly (or not showing up for training) before you see a patient and even then, more years working in the real world till they'll ever let you see a patient and somebody doesn't meticulously follow up on your result.

  67. What is a watch? by westlake · · Score: 1

    What's a watch, grandpa?

    The one piece of jewelry other than a wedding ring a man can wear in public in any situation, no questions asked.

    The one gadget you own that is pretty much guaranteed to continue to do its job no matter how badly you neglect or abuse it.

    1. Re:What is a watch? by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Oh, you mean a pocket watch. Those went out two centuries ago.

      Keep up.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  68. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by kwbauer · · Score: 1

    So always having to calculate 2+3=5 is somehow better than memorizing 2+3=5? Some of that basic algebra and number theory is based on knowing some key facts. Sometimes having the basics memorized is very useful. Being able to quickly run calculations for larger numbers is also useful. I was required to memorize at least all the single digit addition tables and multiplications through 12*12. I don't remember all of them any more but generally remember the smaller ones and quickly calculate the larger ones of that group. I will agree that memorizing anything beyond the single-digit tables is not of any value.

  69. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by kwbauer · · Score: 1

    No, the point is that if anybody had bothered to teach those supposed adult college kids some basic facts (the dates of those events) or had the asshole college professor decided to use those actual facts, then he would not have been able to lead his students astray. But the teacher was able to teach falsehoods by using the mantra that "memorizing rote facts is useless" to not teach the facts that showed the lie of his concept.

    My point was that the teacher in question was using the "no facts" mantra to his advantage to teach bogus concepts. His students ate it up because they liked what they were hearing and they had already been taught that facts only get in the way of learning so they didn't bother looking for them.

  70. Re:Here is another solution by yithar7153 · · Score: 1

    You know what the sad part is? A lot of people in my university cheated on the last project for the introductory CS course which teaches OOP and Java. And instead of failing the course, they just got 0s on their projects. I'm like... they don't deserve to be CS majors if they have to cheat in the first course which is like super easy as long as you study. Way too lenient. Too many people doing CS because it's the "next big thing" and they're not going to finish the major with that attitude.

  71. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by KGIII · · Score: 1

    Nothing they wrote is misspelled. Perhaps you meant a grammar-checker?

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  72. Why not let them cheat? by skovnymfe · · Score: 1

    Why not let people cheat on exams? They're going to cheat their way through their work life afterwards anyway. Can't use the internet? Why not? Not like the internet is going anywhere afterwards.

    "But the exam exists to test the rote memorization skills of people! They can't be allowed to cheat!" Why not? Can you remember everything you've ever read, or do you yourself look up material when you can't remember? Did the people who wrote the tests get every question from memory, or did they pour through books and references to find the least useful questions ever?

    If Jimmy leaves USA on a spaceplane going 10,000 miles per hour, can an Oreo the size of Texas truly feed the starving people in Who Gives A Fuck?

    A) Yes B) No C) Why isn't Jimmy a woman? Women can do everything men can do too and I think Jimmy should be a woman.

    1. Re:Why not let them cheat? by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      Students are allowed to cheat, they are not allowed to get caught. Like in life afterwards.

  73. Re:Err, who gives a fuck? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    If someone walks into an ER with a critical injury anything your learnt on how to deal with it would have been assessed by a medical practical and not by a closed book regurgitate your memory for 90 minutes exam.

    That's actually the funny part. Most medical exams are apparently open book according to several of my friends who's chief complains are the weights of their bags when going in and out of exam rooms.

  74. Re:Here is another solution by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

    In my day it was an automatic fail. Same for plagiarism.

    There's software to detect that too. How on earth are people going to get degrees anymore?

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  75. Better solution by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

    Have everyone leave their electronics in their lockers on the day of the test. Then detonate a small EMP bomb in the middle of the class that will destroy any electronics that they may have snuck in with.

    (insert trollface here)

  76. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by JazzLad · · Score: 1

    I wonder about homonyms. People using the wrong one is a pretty big pet-peeve of mine (though mostly when that person already annoys me in some other way, people I don't know don't bother me when they do it wrong & if I suspect they're doing it on purpose, it doesn't bother me). If I mean "your" but I type "you're" didn't I still misspell "your"?* Yes, no (current) spell-checker (that I am aware of) can catch that, as the misspelling happens to be another word (and a grammar-checker likely would), but does that make it not a misspelling?

    If my child in grammar school was being given a spelling test and the word was your, the teacher would give the word in a sentence. If she wrote "you're," the teacher would rightfully mark it wrong. I duhno, I suspect I am being overly pedantic (especially given what you were replying to was a reference to using a spell-checker and no spell-checker could do what they asserted it could) and maybe this is more of a philosophical question, but I figured you wouldn't mind wasting a few moments pondering it with me (or demonstrating why I was wrong, if I was).

    *I had to look up my punctuation for this sentence; periods and commas go inside quotation marks at the end of a sentence but apparently exclamation marks and question marks only do when the punctuation goes with the quoted item. English is a weird language, but since it's the only (written) language I know (no written form of ASL), I figure I aught to use it as accurately as my brain allows (and I welcome corrections, save obvious typos).

    --
    "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
  77. The Incentive to Cheat by Malachias · · Score: 1

    In my opinion, the fundamental problem is that we have an education system which creates huge incentives to cheat. One's test scores can determine whether college is affordable or not (or whether you will be in debt the rest of your life). Test scores can determine whether one is selected or rejected by one's preferred college. When one looks at the problem with respect to economics, the demand is ever increasing, but the supply, at least for the most preferred colleges and universities, is effectively flat. In essence, one's life and potential is reduced to a handful of numbers that seemingly determine one's future -- relying on one's abilities alone is for some too great a risk. I don't subscribe to the particular notion, but clearly some aspirations are made much more achievable by attending certain schools or encountering certain opportunities (e.g., jobs, gates, and joy all had unprecedented access to computers as teenagers, the beetles spent a year playing gigs every week in Hamburg). So when cheating reaches epidemic proportions, weak or absent morals are not solely to blame. The fact that so many find themselves in an environment where failure is too much to bear and where assessment mechanisms are designed first and foremost to be inexpensive explains much of the problem. Collegiate and professional athletics exhibit similar issues. In the end, when we create a system that incentivizes cheating, many of those that are honest and have true merit will be passed over, for in the cheating arms race, the clever cheater probably has the advantage.

    1. Re:The Incentive to Cheat by Nightjed · · Score: 1

      Yeah the system constantly pushes the idea of "Pass at any cost" instead of "Acquire knowledge, improve yourself"
      Its sort of a mix of lazy professors, lack of advancement in education techniques and terrible attempts at motivating the students

      The attempts at fixing this have turned education into a "You tried, so you still pass" award show that is getting even WORSE results

  78. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by KGIII · · Score: 1

    My thinking is that a spell-checker won't find that but a grammar-checker might find it. I've been playing with 'After the Deadline' as of late. My grammar is far from perfect which is why I continually strive to improve it. I must say, you should have seen how poor it was prior to my acting on my desire to improve. In short, it was horrible.

    I am not one to get upset about much. Things like grammar do not bother me unless it's really showing a lack of effort. We have one notably bad grammarian and I've actually (gently) prodded them to make improvements. They're not perfect, not by a long-shot, but they're certainly improving. Sometimes I prod under my own username but that's not frequent. I usually tick the box and post as an AC. It took some effort but they're now using a spell-checker.

    I'd call them out but I am not that kind of person and it's probably obvious who he is. I try to give simple directions and mild correction and they actually are showing signs of improvement. I don't mind that, they're making an effort. I am also not perfect and do make more than my share of mistakes. I'm also not likely to value my posts a great deal so I don't always put as much effort into them as I could. I'm okay with that, it's about accepting certain standards for different things. Various behaviors are fine for various circumstances.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  79. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by JazzLad · · Score: 1

    Various behaviors are fine for various circumstances.

    Indeed, especially on /. where quite a few people know more languages than I do and oft use better English than my (mono-lingual) co-workers (the primary source of my pet-peeve triggers - actually, the worst quit a little while back; while he was a fine person, I do not miss his constant errors [not homonyms in this case, but verbal issues such as 'I and so-and-so' rather than 'so-and-so and I' and no amount of gentle or otherwise prodding had any affect - people for whom English is a second language should only receive encouragement, but people that claim written proficiency but are 'just lazy when speaking' should be taken out back and ... but I digress] :)).

    BTW: Run-on, multi-nested sentences like the above are perfectly fine for /. ;)

    --
    "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
  80. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by kwbauer · · Score: 1

    The course in question was at UC Berkely and Dinesh D'Souza wrote about it years ago. There was no test question. Please read with comprehension as the goal.

    Because certain students were so enamored by the "no rote facts" mindset, they were easily led astray by one of their professors and when someone tried to point out the fallacy by using the facts (the actual dates), the students didn't want to listen because they were busy enjoying the concept and they didn't need any facts to do that. The whole point is that without facts as a basis it is far to easy to teach false concepts.

  81. Re:Ok, so... Privacy by KGIII · · Score: 1

    I'd get a bit frustrated with that. I find that people who are lazy in areas like that are also lazy in other areas in life. I don't really have high standards for people and I've only got one really big pet peeve for in-person contact. I'm pretty sure it's a form of insanity called 'mesophonia' or something like that.

    I can not stand someone eating with their mouth open, talking with their mouth full, or eating noisily. I *will* say something - even if you're at a different table and I'm in the restaurant. I did not go out to eat to dine with pigs. I don't care what fork you use. I do not want to hear slurping, chomping, loud crunching, etc... I do not go to places where they would eat like that. I've had people thank me (including applause) for my behavior and I've never been kicked out. I have had someone threaten to take me outside and I led the way. He paid his check and left with his family in a huff.

    I don't know what it is and, try like I might, I can't get over it. It has prevented me from enjoying parts of life. It has prevented me from doing out and doing certain things. I know this. I will break someone's jaw if provoked once my dander gets up. I have no idea what it is and, try as I might, I can't get over it. I simply avoid areas where that's a likely problem. I'll position myself where I neither see nor hear. Sometimes I can cope but it is not easy. Other times, I'll get up and leave or, if egregious enough, I'll intercede. There is no stopping me once I get going. I did spend eight years in the Marines and took each and every single level of MCT - all the way through the advanced levels and then the various training levels specific with my MOS.

    Not even raw boots on the Island ate like some of those people do. I can not and will not stand it. If particularly peeved and sufficiently motivated, I will not be the one leaving. Well, unless the staff asks me to leave - so far, so good. And no, I've even spoken with a shrink about it and I'm told I'm sane but they pointed out the mental illness at the same time - so they might have just been polite. I dunno. It's going to end up with me in jail at some point. Strangely? I'm okay with that.

    You can probably hit me and I'll walk away and say nothing. You can do a whole lot of things and I'll do nothing. Then, there's that one thing... I snap like a patient fresh out of the State Mental Hospital.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  82. Re:Here is another solution by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    They should transfer to Law or Business, cheating is a prerequisite to getting on the course.

    Second thoughts, they'd throw you out for getting caught.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  83. You are looking at the wrong problem by Nightjed · · Score: 1

    You are never going to beat technology, in a handful of years youll get students have that have AR overlays implanted on their eyes, you are not going to beat this kind of cheating

    The problem is that the testing method using today is too easy to cheat, instead of trying to do the impossible how about designing tests to be more practical making the students apply their knowledge instead of having them parrot information that can be easily written down on a paper.

    The whole written test thing is pointless in many subjects, if you are in an embedded processors class, have the students use a test rig to do something, if you are in a chemistry class have the students repeat an experiment, i understand that in the most basic level you have to test basic knowledge but if you try a little bit you can find a better test than "parrot those 10 formulas you have seen in class to the paper again"

    I have seen so many students with memory so perfect they could rival Sherlock Holmes but when its time to actually use that information to deduce an equation, explain something or compose a complex answer they turn into drooling mutes