Online & in person? Here's a song for all instructors

[regentrude]

Here is a song by the same professor who did the "I will survive" song at the beginning of the pandemic (which ended up a huge hit with 3 million views)

 

[MamaSprout]

Sigh... first day of class tomorrow. In person. With about 25% of my classes attending by Moodle. So I guess my school's answer is BOTH! I actually set my classes up as completely online and we'll meet face to face as long and a much a we can. Need to attend by Moodle? Take notes and turn them in.

[regentrude]

1 hour ago, MamaSprout said:

Sigh... first day of class tomorrow. In person. With about 25% of my classes attending by Moodle. So I guess my school's answer is BOTH! I actually set my classes up as completely online and we'll meet face to face as long and a much a we can. Need to attend by Moodle? Take notes and turn them in.

oh yes, all our face to face classes are also online at the same time, because we cannot seat all students n the classroom with distancing/have to allow students who are not able to attend to participate remotely. It's going to be a circus... and who knows how long it'll last

Edited August 10, 2020 by regentrude

[JennyD]

That's awesome.  Just sent it to my dean 🙂

[elegantlion]

"I miss blue book exams" 😁 

 

This is great. 

[Bootsie]

I do fondly remember the days that I only needed chalk to teach....

We start next Monday and it has been an every moving target.  We will on be in-person, in-person if the class is smaller than 40, no that number is 30, well unless the student wants to be online, split the class into A, B, and C with some there each time, well faculty can choose if they want to be in person, classes will be in person but office hours must be online but you can meet with students individually or in small groups as long as it is at a time different from your official office hours...  

I am so glad that I did not spend a lot of time in April when we got all of our guidelines for the three modes that we had to build a resilient syllabus for; I knew it would be time consuming but there was a high probability that the classes I would be teaching would change because of some unplanned retirements.  I didn't want to spend a lot of time developing materials for classes I wouldn't even be teaching.  I have lost track of how many versions of requirements we have been through.  

 

[G5052]

I moved to entirely online five years ago, but it's truly a mess this fall with constant changes coming at my on what should have been stable course shells. We open those up next Friday. I have one class about 2/3 customized, and don't even have the other shell yet that starts next Friday. My other sections start in September and October. 

This week it is the protocol for online proctoring. I don't want to provide too many of the details, but every student has to have a webcam which is on while they take the exam on their own time. Artificial intelligence algorithms to "watch" and potentially report problems to the professors who then watch the archive and follow protocols to report cheating. THAT sounds like loads of fun, but here we go...

Edited August 14, 2020 by G5052

[regentrude]

1 hour ago, G5052 said:

This week it is the protocol for online proctoring. I don't want to provide too many of the details, but every student has to have a webcam which is on while they take the exam on their own time. Artificial intelligence algorithms to "watch" and potentially report problems to the professors who then watch the archive and follow protocols to report cheating. THAT sounds like loads of fun, but here we go...

I have been pondering this, but do not see how it would actually eliminate cheating. You could easily have another person stand behind the computer, off camera, and provide info. Headsets with camera can be now so tiny as to be hidden in an ear. Or totally low tech: information on sheets of paper can be pinned up on the wall behind the computer. Or you could have info a second browser open next to the window in which you're taking the exam (so you don't even have to switch away from the LMS which could be detected by the software).

It sounds like an unwinnable arms race where instructors spend a more and more time and effort trying to catch cheaters who, if determined, will always be a technological step ahead. I have 480 students. How many recorded videos of kids taking exams am I supposed to watch? 

Edited August 14, 2020 by regentrude

[G5052]

3 hours ago, regentrude said:

I have been pondering this, but do not see how it would actually eliminate cheating. You could easily have another person stand behind the computer, off camera, and provide info. Headsets with camera can be now so tiny as to be hidden in an ear. Or totally low tech: information on sheets of paper can be pinned up on the wall behind the computer. Or you could have info a second browser open next to the window in which you're taking the exam (so you don't even have to switch away from the LMS which could be detected by the software).

It sounds like an unwinnable arms race where instructors spend a more and more time and effort trying to catch cheaters who, if determined, will always be a technological step ahead. I have 480 students. How many recorded videos of kids taking exams am I supposed to watch? 

 

Some of those situations are supposedly covered. Of course we were skeptical. There were about 100 professors in session I attended and LOTS of Zoom chat. 

Supposedly it will flag and email us when there is a problem with the time stamp included, but gosh, all I need is more to do. I will have probably 150 students at that school, and then about the same at the second school I'm teaching for. Thankfully the second school was already more in the  "alternative assessment" camp, so not as much of an issue.

Previously online students had at least two exams that they had to take at a college testing center, with an approved proctor, or with ProctorU. They are still allowing approved proctors. 

[Bootsie]

6 hours ago, regentrude said:

I have been pondering this, but do not see how it would actually eliminate cheating. You could easily have another person stand behind the computer, off camera, and provide info. Headsets with camera can be now so tiny as to be hidden in an ear. Or totally low tech: information on sheets of paper can be pinned up on the wall behind the computer. Or you could have info a second browser open next to the window in which you're taking the exam (so you don't even have to switch away from the LMS which could be detected by the software).

It sounds like an unwinnable arms race where instructors spend a more and more time and effort trying to catch cheaters who, if determined, will always be a technological step ahead. I have 480 students. How many recorded videos of kids taking exams am I supposed to watch? 

I have been wondering about the same things.  Supposedly the browser is locked-down so that a second browser can't be opened on the computer (I don't know if that is REALLY the case).  I had some colleagues who used this technology last semester--one said she had the highest grades she had ever had, and the difference was statistically significant.  Another professor said his grades were actually lower--he did not go through and look at the videos; he thought that the "threat" was enough to keep students from cheating.  As we discussed this one of my colleagues demonstrated how he could be looking at a computer directly behind the one with the camera on and that none of us could detect it.  

I have a reputation for taking cheating seriously, but I can't imagine trying to defend an accusation of cheating because a computer program detects that someone's eyes left the screen--or whatever the program detects.  And I can't imagine having to take an exam under those circumstances.  Since I teach classes that require mathematical calculations, it isn't like someone can just look at the screen and choose answer B.  They will need to be able to write out a problem and use their calculator--I am not sure how the software will be able to detect a student using a calculator for a calculation versus looking something up on a phone.  Or, how would the computer know if a student drops a pencil and picks it up if they were really looking at something on the floor?

[regentrude]

13 hours ago, Bootsie said:

I have been wondering about the same things.  Supposedly the browser is locked-down so that a second browser can't be opened on the computer (I don't know if that is REALLY the case).  I had some colleagues who used this technology last semester--one said she had the highest grades she had ever had, and the difference was statistically significant.  Another professor said his grades were actually lower--he did not go through and look at the videos; he thought that the "threat" was enough to keep students from cheating.  As we discussed this one of my colleagues demonstrated how he could be looking at a computer directly behind the one with the camera on and that none of us could detect it.  

 

I gave unproctored online multiple choice exams last semester, and the grade average and grade distribution were basically the same we get during normal semesters when students solve long form problems with partial credit on paper. Yes, there were two students whose grades I consider suspect, but I have large enough sample sizes of approx 500 per semester to be certain that there was no widespread cheating going on.

Quote

 Since I teach classes that require mathematical calculations, it isn't like someone can just look at the screen and choose answer B.  They will need to be able to write out a problem and use their calculator--I am not sure how the software will be able to detect a student using a calculator for a calculation versus looking something up on a phone.  Or, how would the computer know if a student drops a pencil and picks it up if they were really looking at something on the floor?

Same here. Even with a computerized multiple choice test, my students must work out the problem with pencil on scratch paper before they can reasonably select their answer. The will not be staring at the screen. They are allowed to use a standardized equation sheet, but the AI has no way of identifying whether students have additional information on their equation sheets.

I refuse to engage in this ridiculous spiral. Last semester, after the lockdown, I ended up spending way too much time and effort on the assessment aspect of the course. We should spend our energies on teaching and helping them learn, not on trying to get ahead of the cheating.

[regentrude]

13 hours ago, CuriousMomof3 said:

A couple of the AP teachers at my school said that they felt that their students' scores on the AP tests were a little higher than they expected, but they were distributed as they expected, so that the kids they thought would do well did, and the kids they thought would struggle did, but that maybe there were a few more 5's from kids where they expected 4's or 3's where they expected 2's.  

Since the College Board deleted significant portions of the material, this year's AP exams are absolutely not comparable to the norm. In Physics E&M, all magnetism was cut, and that is the conceptually and mathematically most difficult content. In Calc BC, they cut sequences and series, which is a challenging topic as well.Based on that alone, I would expect students to have higher scores this year.

Edited August 15, 2020 by regentrude

[Bootsie]

19 hours ago, regentrude said:

I have been pondering this, but do not see how it would actually eliminate cheating. You could easily have another person stand behind the computer, off camera, and provide info. Headsets with camera can be now so tiny as to be hidden in an ear. Or totally low tech: information on sheets of paper can be pinned up on the wall behind the computer. Or you could have info a second browser open next to the window in which you're taking the exam (so you don't even have to switch away from the LMS which could be detected by the software).

It sounds like an unwinnable arms race where instructors spend a more and more time and effort trying to catch cheaters who, if determined, will always be a technological step ahead. I have 480 students. How many recorded videos of kids taking exams am I supposed to watch? 

Do you think the tiny headsets with camera can be used during an in-person exam and go undetected.  Especially in a large lecture hall?  At a previous university, I strongly suspected that some students were receiving assistance on the exam from someone outside of the classroom.  

[regentrude]

21 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

Do you think the tiny headsets with camera can be used during an in-person exam and go undetected.  Especially in a large lecture hall?  At a previous university, I strongly suspected that some students were receiving assistance on the exam from someone outside of the classroom.  

Yes, absolutely. Our testing center staff showed me materials and advertisements - the devices were  impossible to detect. The camera can be a shirt button. The ear pieces are completely hidden inside the ear.

Check out: https://www.examdevices.com/en/home/29-wireless-button-camera-cheat-exam-test.html#:~:text=The PX-500 Pro Xtreme,in just 1-3 sec.

"This cheating on exam system is ideal for use in major exams and where the supervisors' degree of exigency is high (where there are 2 to 3 supervisors in the exam room)."

Or this: https://www.monorean.com/en

Quote

The Monorean is among the best cheating techniques—if not the best. It is a device designed to cheat on tests and exams that consists of a hidden earpiece the size of a rice grain that you put into your ear. Through the earpiece you’ll be able to listen to your partner crystal clear and in a discrete manner.

Cheating in exams has never been so easy! The Monorean invisible earpiece is the smallest earpiece in the world, for cheating on tests! Pure exam cheating technology.

 

There is absolutely nothing universities and test providers can do to secure against this - unless they block cell signal, which is against federal law . Any student who wants to cheat can easily do so in a proctored in-person exam, so the whole lock-down-browser/ProctorU/Zoom proctoring gymnastics are useless.

Edited August 15, 2020 by regentrude

Am I the only person who wouldn’t want to put something the size of a grain of rice in my ear?  The whole cheating bit is out of control.  Just study...it isn’t that hard.

1 minute ago, CuriousMomof3 said:

I actually had a different thought.  We're 100% virtual to start, but when school goes back in a hybrid mode, one of the questions is how might I, as a special ed teacher, support one kid who is in person, and another who is watching from home, when I can't go n the classroom myself and get close enough to talk quietly to my students.

Something that would let me see and hear what's going on, and whisper in their ears sounds perfect.  

It was more the size seemed so small that it didn’t seem like it belonged in one’s ear.

[Roadrunner]

On 8/14/2020 at 6:55 PM, square_25 said:

Not directly relevant, but DD8 took the Math Kangaroo this year, and the amount of cheating was just astounding. I mean, I'm just assuming here, but the numbers of perfect scores going up by factors of 10 for all grade levels was a bit of a tip-off 😉 . 

And the Math Kangaroo doesn't even matter for anything! I can't imagine what it's going to be like for real classes. 

We heard from PS kids that cheating on AP exams was rampant. Kids pretending they couldn’t submit, hiring tutors to write their exams. Sickening. 

[Roadrunner]

On 8/15/2020 at 10:29 AM, regentrude said:

Since the College Board deleted significant portions of the material, this year's AP exams are absolutely not comparable to the norm. In Physics E&M, all magnetism was cut, and that is the conceptually and mathematically most difficult content. In Calc BC, they cut sequences and series, which is a challenging topic as well.Based on that alone, I would expect students to have higher scores this year.

But tiny things mattered. A tiny mistake was amplified because exam was so short. So basically a significant number of kids cheated based on what we heard from our high school and got good grades. CB attempted to mimic score distribution to previous years. 
not was easy and hard at the same time because kids had no opportunity to shine on harder material but were severely punished for every misstep no matter how small.

11 hours ago, Roadrunner said:

But tiny things mattered. A tiny mistake was amplified because exam was so short. So basically a significant number of kids cheated based on what we heard from our high school and got good grades. CB attempted to mimic score distribution to previous years. 
not was easy and hard at the same time because kids had no opportunity to shine on harder material but were severely punished for every misstep no matter how small.

I would agree it was rather like a pop quiz counting as a final for multiple semesters of college credit.
 

How do you have a Physics E & M exam with no M and still have it give credit for the same class as the full test?  I am furious about how the exams went, but I am also disappointed that colleges are going to give these kids credit when they didn’t cover the material in order to be “caring” and place them into classes for which they are unprepared. 

[Roadrunner]

1 hour ago, Mom2mthj said:

I would agree it was rather like a pop quiz counting as a final for multiple semesters of college credit.
 

How do you have a Physics E & M exam with no M and still have it give credit for the same class as the full test?  I am furious about how the exams went, but I am also disappointed that colleges are going to give these kids credit when they didn’t cover the material in order to be “caring” and place them into classes for which they are unprepared. 

My kids certainly covered all the material even if they weren’t on the exam. All of it! By the time Covid disruption began, the classes were starting review process. 

We are equally unhappy about the exam design, but glad at least kids have something to show for it as opposed to nothing at all. 

[regentrude]

6 hours ago, Mom2mthj said:

How do you have a Physics E & M exam with no M and still have it give credit for the same class as the full test?  I am furious about how the exams went, but I am also disappointed that colleges are going to give these kids credit when they didn’t cover the material in order to be “caring” and place them into classes for which they are unprepared. 

In our university, the physics and math departments have chosen not to punish the students for the College Board's decision not to include that material, and we don't want the students to be even more screwed than they were already by the chaotic spring semester. We are also mindful of the fact that the decision to use an AP class can be of financial significance and part of the long term college prep and financing strategy of a family. 

In physics, we give credit and are offering free online lectures for the students to catch up on the material that has not been tested (we cannot discern whose student's school covered or did not cover the content).  All physics majors are encouraged to retake the course. 

The math department is giving credit for Calc 2 if the students take a workshop during opening week that covers the missing sequences&series material.

No student is ever forced to take the AP credit; if they feel they would benefit from retaking the course at college, they are free to do so. They usually exercise pretty good judgment about it.

 

Edited August 18, 2020 by regentrude

[ieta_cassiopeia]

I have done proctored testing before, and there are definitely measures that can be done against some of the measures the AI is supposed to cover. (Though I would expect all measures to be explained to students before taking the test, simply to avoid problems with accessibility - simple "the computer will do it" is a recipe for accessibility-based fails and resulting appeals). The human proctoring I have experienced was live, and outsourced to a global company that specialises in proctoring other organisations' exams. (My exam was multiple-choice, but in theory a university could have the proctoring done, and then have the actual course lecturer only look at exams from students who were believed not to have cheated).

I was required to download and install a special browser on the day of the exam (that took longer than the exam itself, thanks to technical issues), and prove I was using it to the proctor before being issued the test. It was full-screen with no minimise or resize option (and a hidden close button to reduce the risk of accidentally pressing it; closing automatically ended the exam - and would have triggered a phone call discussing options had that happened), with no ability to add tabs and detection of tab-switching (such detection would also auto-end the exam - I was prompted to put my antivirus on "silent" for the duration of the exam for this reason). The toolbar was force-hidden (so tricks of the "send email to Outlook for yes, don't send for no" wouldn't work). That was already all done on algorithm (apart from any phone call, which the human proctor would have initiated if necessary).

I was required to take the exam alone, in a room with closed doors, and provide a 360-degree live view of that room, plus the floor and ceiling in front of my anticipated seating position. This was billed as being part of the calibration process, but the proctor said it was also to deter cheats and give context for questionable activity. It's a lot easier to believe someone's dropped something if there is space for the object to fall and nothing that could be construed as cheating was visible. If the door opened during the exam, or at any point I was inaudible, I would be required to stop everything and fix it silently. Failure to do so, or any sign of deliberately taking such actions (e.g. covering up the microphone) would be an automatic fail. I would expect software to be able to do the necessary prompts and at least have a basic idea of whether the required information had been recorded.

The only electronic equipment permitted was a phone, which I was required to turn off on-camera. My phone was small enough that I was able to leave it in camera view for the duration, but having it off and out of the way within the room was also permitted. A computer can prompt and check for this to much the same extent that a human can do so, though I'm not sure any online proctoring can fully account for this.

The reason the phone was required in the room at all was because before the exam, I had to receive and send a text from an appropriate location (basically, it confirmed whether I was taking the exam in the country and phone number that was expected). Apparently there had been problems in the past with people paying dodgy companies to sit other people's exams with fake ID (the one I was doing was a professional qualification needed for certain jobs, so the motive was obvious...) That part can be computerised.

However, I would not voluntarily take a computer-proctored exam unless I knew there was a live human moderator to whom I could appeal odd calls from the computer. As repeatedly indicated in WTM, software programming is not a panacea. This is especially so given I have a disability that is known to affect gaze (autism) - the human proctor for my exam knew this and took it into account, but an algorithm trained on neurotypical people couldn't possibly do so.

Also, I still don't know any good defence (even for in-person exams) for someone with a sufficiently small/hidden camera...

[frogger]

So I was surprised DS prof asked him to do a proof in class. As a remote learner, I figured he mainly be listening in and he would be able to at least ask questions in the off hours. The prof just had him say it out loud while he wrote it on the board for the rest of class to see. I was seriously impressed with the dedication to his only remote student.