Cheating in online exams and Proctorio

[theteacher]

Hi all,
I co-teach a course that has an online component with another junior colleague (call her Olivia). Olivia expressed concerns about students cheating in an online exam based on reports generated by Proctorio https://proctorio.com. Behavior counted as cheating may include looking away from the monitor, covering their faces, whispering, etc.

So Olivia had an informal chat with a group of students who completely denied cheating, arguing their behaviors were normal given the exam stress and difficulty. However, Olivia is still unsatisfied and wants to start a painful formal investigation process.

I'm concerned that the cheating allegations are based on suspicion, as Proctorio doesn't provide clear evidence. I'm pretty sure the education team will reject the cheating cases due to the lack of evidence. I'm worried Olivia is causing unnecessary stress to everyone involved, particularly students.

How should I address Olivia's integrity concerns?

[Antiphon1]

OK, I'm going to sound like a jaded, old professor.  But here goes -

1.  Olivia may be paranoid. 

2.  The students may be lying.

3.  The truth is somewhere in the squidgy middle of the two positions.

You haven't said why Olivia thinks the students are cheating beyond the students exhibiting particular actions during the test that fall into the suspicious behaviors end of the analytics.  OTH, students deny the allegations (Who me?).  My experience says the students are probably using a phone, another laptop and/or a partner to look up some answers.  Given that you can't really prove any of these suspicions, you might require an in person, proctored, paper based essay final.  Using this requirement would not call out any particular person, but would treat all students the same.  And before you say this is a totally online course, you can always do the essay option online with a very particular set of required elements from varied sources types and a short time limit designed to flummox any cheater or AI.

Good luck.  This is a headache you really don't need at the end of the semester. 

[Kron3007]

I have not used this type of system (our university now discourages it for privacy/mantal health reasons), but don't most of them record the students so that you can manually check the flagged activities?  I assumed it would be like plagiarism software, where it flags it so you can investigate.

In my opinion, these actions themselves are no where near the level of confidence you would need to find someone guilty of (or even accuse) cheating.  Without something more substantial, it seems crazy to escalate. 

[Caracal]

There was a nytimes article about this.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/27/technology/college-students-cheating-software-honorlock.html

There are really serious procedural and moral issues involved in accusing students of cheating on the basis of ambiguous actions reported by AI surveillance. I never accuse a student of cheating unless I'm completely sure and have the evidence. I don't think ambiguous violations of incredibly restrictive and unreasonable test taking procedures qualify as evidence of cheating.

When I'm working on something on my computer I don't stare directly at it the whole time. If I'm trying to think I sometimes stare off into the distance, or look up at the ceiling, or off to the side. This is all pretty automatic for me and I'm pretty sure I would find it really distracting to try not to do these things and stare straight at the screen the whole time so I don't get flagged and I'm not sure I could do it. A student who whispers might just be muttering to themselves, or somebody might have come into their room with some urgent or non urgent question and they are trying to answer it or tell the person they can't talk right now. When my students take exams in class, they frequently put their hands over their heads for a minute. That's a pretty natural gesture in a stressful situation. Obviously, breaking the rules of an exam can be considered evidence of cheating in some cases. If a student is surreptitiously looking at their phone in the middle of an exam, you don't have to actually see what's on the screen to take action. However, the rules have to be reasonable and possible for everyone to follow. "Don't look at your cellphone during the exam" is really different than "don't look to the side of your computer screen for more than two seconds."

I'd make these points to Olivia and I'd also ask her to think about her position in this. If a student wasn't cheating and didn't do anything wrong besides fail to stare at their computer screen like a robot for an hour, how is it going to feel to be interrogated by their professor, be accused of lying when they tell the truth and deny doing anything wrong and then get officially reported for cheating? What's that going to do a student's sense of trust, or commitment to going to school?

In a larger sense, I would rethink using these systems in the first place. The whole thing wigs me out...

[marshwiggle]

There was a nytimes article about this.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/27/technology/college-students-cheating-software-honorlock.html

There are really serious procedural and moral issues involved in accusing students of cheating on the basis of ambiguous actions reported by AI surveillance. I never accuse a student of cheating unless I'm completely sure and have the evidence. I don't think ambiguous violations of incredibly restrictive and unreasonable test taking procedures qualify as evidence of cheating.

I would sincerely hope this is how most people would feel about accusations of cheating in any context, whether it involves technology or not.

[mythbuster]

Like the other comments, I am not a fan of these online surveillance proctoring systems. But that does not help your issue. In terms of future exams, if you can I would go for in person or else truly take home, open book/note etc exams. I teach an online course with all in person exams. It can be set up that way, but only if students know from the start. It's hard when you have students in far flung locations- although still possible if they can find a test center to proctor them.
   In terms of the current allegations, I would consult with your student conduct board as to the strength of the evidence that you have. They should be able to give you a good sense of if this is really worth pursuing.

[Antiphon1]

Here's an example of chronic online cheating and the resulting scandal at Texas A&M:

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/12/16/texas-am-chegg-cheating/

The university has been proactive in addressing the problem, but I don't think it has entirely squashed the problem.  I've had some cursory experience with A&M students who historically try to transfer as many classes as possible back to the.university to save time and money.  Understandable, but the practice calls into question how much of an Aggie the student really is if only 40 hours of a degree are are taken at A&M. Nonetheless, the vagaries associated with online instruction always makes me particularly vigilant about requiring in person, proctored testing.  You never know who is sitting in a class or behind a screen.  You can however put into place some fail safes that reduce the ability of hard core cheaters to game the system.

In total agreement with the above posters.  This whole part of teaching creeps the hell out of me. 

[apl68]

I don't know how these online cheating issues can be solved.  But they need to be, or people could start losing faith in the validity of online education and online degrees.  Issues like this could end up holding back online education.

[Caracal]

I don't know how these online cheating issues can be solved.  But they need to be, or people could start losing faith in the validity of online education and online degrees.  Issues like this could end up holding back online education.

I just think we need to get away from the idea that there's some technical solution involving monitoring of students in their homes. It's ineffective, obtrusive and unreasonable. Either find a way to create assessments where there would be no advantage to cheating (or it would be easy to figure out if a student did from a submission) or figure out ways for students to take exams at testing centers.

[marshwiggle]

I don't know how these online cheating issues can be solved.  But they need to be, or people could start losing faith in the validity of online education and online degrees.  Issues like this could end up holding back online education.

I just think we need to get away from the idea that there's some technical solution involving monitoring of students in their homes. It's ineffective, obtrusive and unreasonable. Either find a way to create assessments where there would be no advantage to cheating (or it would be easy to figure out if a student did from a submission) or figure out ways for students to take exams at testing centers.

And it has always been, and will always be, an unstable equilibrium. Like any arms race, whatever tools and procedures are put in place will lead to tools and procedures to circumvent them, and the cycle repeats.

[apl68]

I know that we proctor online exams some at our public library.  It might be necessary to create some sort of more regular testing center arrangements in our region.  We could perhaps host it, or perhaps the local vo-tech school could.  Or even the K-12 schools, but that would likely prove very awkward, and wouldn't work in the summer.

[the_geneticist]

I don't know how these online cheating issues can be solved.  But they need to be, or people could start losing faith in the validity of online education and online degrees.  Issues like this could end up holding back online education.

I just think we need to get away from the idea that there's some technical solution involving monitoring of students in their homes. It's ineffective, obtrusive and unreasonable. Either find a way to create assessments where there would be no advantage to cheating (or it would be easy to figure out if a student did from a submission) or figure out ways for students to take exams at testing centers.

Or replace exams with scaffolded projects or portfolios.  No advantage to trying to cheat since you'd have to start on day one.

[Sun_Worshiper]

My philosophy is that if the student must be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. For me, that means it has to be picked up by the school's official plagiarism checker.

[clean]

I use Examity and the live proctor.  They should at least ensure that the student is alone in the room and when their eyes go to one area and linger (or you can see their eyes move indicating reading, the stop the test and conduct another room scan.  The students are still cheating, hiding their cell phones someone, like under the computer  or placing the phone next to the laptop screen.  But this makes them think twice.

Covering the face and whispering are not normal test anxiety issues. 
Can Olivia require the students to retake the test in a proctored location?

Before we used live proctoring (which the students pay for within a total limit of $75 for the course), I had a disclosure in my syllabus that a certain percentage of exams would be 'audited' where the student retook the test in a proctored location. IF the score was within 10 points no problems, but if significantly worse, the new grade held and all future exams were taken in person.

IF the service now used is only recording them, and not correcting or challenging suspicious behavior, then an added layer of protection needs to be added, or whatever is being recorded should have few points. 

In my current courses, I have a lot of low value quizzes.  Many are dropped.  But if the Respondus Lock Down Monitor report is bad, I tell the student that quiz was dropped.  They get warnings of many of the things that Olivia cited.  IF you are out of the picture, or your face is not detected, a warning is triggered.  IF the student ignores it, the quiz is thrown out! 


It is not too late to modify the test rules for the rest of the term.   It is the student's responsibility to comply with the terms/rules of the test.  Spell them out and enforce them.  That would be my advice.

[Caracal]

Covering the face and whispering are not normal test anxiety issues. 

Covering your face could just mean putting your hand on your forehead, which is something lots of people do. When I'm alone, I catch myself talking out loud to myself a lot. I mutter to myself constantly when I'm writing, so it isn't that weird that some students might do it when they are trying to think through or remember something and they are sitting in a room by themselves.

I don't know, I just find the surveillance you're describing troubling. I understand what you're saying about trying to at least make cheating difficult enough to discourage students, but I just think its too obtrusive and invasive.