63

Over the last few years, our university has seen a rise in high-tech academic dishonesty. We have a no electronics policy, except calculators when needed (even those now are provided by the school, and personal calculators are not allowed). However, students still sneak cell phones into the exam and use them in a very inconspicuous way.

We have had students take pictures (presumably with a cell phone) during an exam and have someone outside the room sending them back solutions. We have had them communicate with classmates somewhere else in the room (some have been caught this way giving the right answers to the wrong exam). We have had numerous students using their phones to store notes, copies of old exam solutions, etc., and use them as an aid during the exam (this is the most common).

We have caught some students, but I know it is a small fraction. Students will tell us they see cell phone use routinely during exams, but don't want to squeal on classmates because of anticipated reprisal. Our instructors are quite vigilant in watching the classroom, but it is very difficult to watch 30 to 70 students constantly. (Larger classes have multiple proctors.) Instructors have been informed of the classic cues as well. Our penalties are stiff (first offense, F in the course, second offense, student gets the boot from the school). However, students are still getting away with high-tech cheating.

My question is, does anyone have any sure fire ways of identifying students attempting to use cell phones or other high-tech cheating devices during exams? I'm looking for methods, electronic sniffers, etc.

ff524
  • 108,934
  • 49
  • 421
  • 474
num40
  • 611
  • 1
  • 5
  • 5
  • 15
    Those cheating methods were actually employed also around 20-25 years ago when I was a student, only with lesser-tech devices (radios and programmable calculators instead of smartphones, solutions left in the restrooms etc.) In this answer, which is somehow related, I suggest another strategy. – Massimo Ortolano Sep 30 '15 at 17:45
  • 8
    You can't legally block radio signals via active jamming. Shielding the exam hall would probably be prohibitively expensive. You could try setting up "honeypot" cellular/wireless hubs, but smartphones need not connect to the first hub they find... This is a nontrivial problem – keshlam Sep 30 '15 at 17:46
  • 3
    Jamming doesn't help it the phone is used to store a crib sheet. – vonbrand Sep 30 '15 at 18:16
  • 1
    My physics professor would have a hand held metal detector to find extra cellphones and the like but as other commenters pointed out this doesn't prevent putting answers in the bathroom, passing pieces of paper, making noises, etc. – Faraz Masroor Sep 30 '15 at 20:08
  • 2
    I'm not sure if I'm surprised or not. – Faraz Masroor Sep 30 '15 at 20:22
  • 2
    @MorganRodgers: well, it depends on the duration of the exam: for instance, we have many exams which have a duration between 2 to 4 hours, and you cannot really prohibit people from using the bathroom. Sometimes you can split the exam in different parts with a break, but sometimes no. – Massimo Ortolano Sep 30 '15 at 20:36
  • 18
    EMP the exam hall. Warn the students in advance that this will happen. If their phones are destroyed, they had notice. Distribute Casio FX991s from a faraday cage picnic basket afterwards, to be returned like 3D glasses after a movie. – J... Sep 30 '15 at 23:23
  • 15
    In my four years of undergrad, the best prof I ever had was one who flat out told us, "Ask me anything on the test. Literally - if you don't know how to do something, ask me. I'd rather you learned how to do something right than just skip the question or put down a wrong answer." It unnerved us at first, but eventually we realized that he really meant it. The flip side was that we knew that we couldn't rely on him to pass the test - he didn't have time to help us all - but he became another resource. I don't know if that will help with cheating, but I just want to have it noted. – tonysdg Oct 01 '15 at 01:14
  • 26
    I don't know how you are actually watching the students. It certainly helps if there is at least one person behind the students' back, so the students don't actually know what this person is looking at without turning their head and making them suspicious... – traindriver Oct 01 '15 at 06:28
  • 2
    "Students will tell us they see cell phone use routinely during exams, but don't want to squeal on classmates because of anticipated reprisal." When I was a student, the fear of reprisal was the least concern of us all. The point was not to be a snitch even when you look at yourself in the mirror. But the overall atmosphere and seriosness of finding someone was much different that it probably is in the US (and our phones didn't have internwt back then). – Vladimir F Героям слава Oct 01 '15 at 07:35
  • 3
    Recording video cameras are getting cheaper and cheaper, and it won't be clear to students exactly what their field of view is. Have a camera in each corner of the room, and tell students that the video can be reviewed at any time. – Daniel Griscom Oct 01 '15 at 15:14
  • 6
    The problem is a lot simpler than you think. Look at these 2 statements: "Students [...] don't want to squeal on classmates" and "Our penalties are stiff". Of course students won't tell on someone if that person then gets booted from the school for what seems to be (in their mind) a minor offense. Think of a more sensible punishment, one the students accept to be fair, and they will start to tell you. – Peter Oct 01 '15 at 15:14
  • 3
    Maybe out of topic, but our university professor of "Discrete Mathematics" actually allow us to have one A4 paper with our custom, homemade text - and the magnifying glass was allowed too :) The trick was, that the paper had barely enought space for the formulas, how to use them we had to learn/know. AFAIK no one cheated, becouse if they want, they can write short example on their "cheet sheet" - but have to exclude some other piece of information becouse of remaining space. Some guys was really creative with their A4... If i remember correctly, there was a small bonus for "no cheat sheet"... – Jan 'splite' K. Oct 02 '15 at 08:14
  • 5
    @Peter I am pretty sure this is not accurate. – xLeitix Oct 02 '15 at 08:24
  • 1
    I agree with @traindriver. A simple immediate solution is to have more TAs watch the students more carefully. I cannot imagine that it is infeasible to watch 70 students (a laughably small crowd, all things considered) in a way that it is not practically possible that they use their cellphones during exams, at least not to the extend that it actually impacts exam results. However, it certainly needs more than one person per room - the minimum is usually 3 (1 for the front, 1 for the back, one that answers questions etc.). – xLeitix Oct 02 '15 at 08:27
  • 1
    In the military, the incentive is that if you cheat/fail, your mates are going to be punished. If you find someone cheating, make them all retake the assignment. This may work, depending on the size of groups, how much compassion you have, how costly a retake is etc. – FooBar Oct 02 '15 at 10:06
  • 1
    @xLeitix Let's assume that TAs are capable of detecting cheating. How can you be sure that TAs are not compromised themselves? At my previous university, where we had huge problems with cheating, TA positions were regular full-time jobs, not related to any doctoral studies, so we've had a mix of older people in their 50s who were TAs as well as fresh graduates. Older guys would regularly notice people cheating, while younger TAs would somehow inexplicably see absolutely no cheating happening. – AndrejaKo Oct 02 '15 at 10:17
  • 2
    @AndrejaKo Well, I typically assume I can trust our teaching staff to do their basic duties. I still maintain that if you can't prevent a group of 70 students to commit relatively easy-to-spot cheats (texting in-exam, reading from smartphones), you have a problem to which the answer is not "sophisticated technology". The answer may be "get sufficient TAs", or "get TAs that actually do their job", but I am sure it is not "electronic sniffers" or "metal detectors". – xLeitix Oct 02 '15 at 11:01
  • @xLeitix I agree completely. – AndrejaKo Oct 02 '15 at 11:06
  • I bet that when calculator was a new thing, it was forbidden to use (anyone remember that? I am 90s kid so I dont)... everyone has a smartphone these days; www is largest source of information ever. There is no point in stopping one cheat in matter of "live research about the question", I do see problem when people communicate thru IM while being tested. Exams should be written in matter "you either understand it or fail" + anything is allowed (bring your quantum computer) – Kyslik Oct 02 '15 at 14:26
  • Some GRE testing centers make you go through a metal detector or use a metal-detecting wand on you before you are allowed to enter the testing area, but this seems to be slightly overkill for a university exam. – chipbuster Oct 02 '15 at 17:20
  • Where is this taking place? Which country? – Lightness Races in Orbit Oct 02 '15 at 19:13
  • 1
    "it is very difficult to watch 30 to 70 students constantly." I've done it; it's not very difficult, at least in the sort of classrooms I've taught in. You just have to actually watch them, and not read or use the web. If you can see all their hands and laps and writing surfaces, you can see if they are accessing a device. – Chelonian Oct 03 '15 at 01:01
  • As Peteris suggest, it may be a good idea to review how you test your students. I still remember my "Programming Languages I" exam: although we could use our text book (which inevitably many had filled with "annotations") many students didn't manage to complete the test. If you haven't studied, you won't have time to acquire the skills during the exam. – algiogia Oct 05 '15 at 15:33
  • I had to pass detector and had my pockets searched in front of the cam for the GRE. It was horrible. But I guess it's the system itself to blame for. Stop standarized tests, make people think and you'll realize if they have the knowledge. You can't cheat a three page idea development and, as a professor you'll find interesting and unique ideas. Maybe not college but life itself doesn't have ABC choices, you have to make your own. – Matias Andina Oct 15 '15 at 02:20

10 Answers10

110

Ultimately, this is not a technological problem but a cultural and pedagogical problem.

The problem with technological solutions is that they set up an "arms race" with the students, in which you will certainly lose. Electronics are constantly getting smaller and obtaining more means of communication, so a student who really wants to cheat will likely have a means that you won't be readily able to distinguish. Consider, for example, the recent emergence of smart watches: are you going to ban watches from the classroom? What about low-tech but still effective forms of cheating like scraps of paper? If you get a frequency scanner, will you be able to catch somebody using non-standard communication bands?

The best defense against cheating students is other students who understand that it cheats them out of the value of their well-earned grades. If you can inculcate a school culture where most students are not just not cheating but actively opposed to cheating, then it will be much harder for cheaters to prosper.

The second best defense against cheating is to design exams that are more about process than product. Think "show your work" and "essay question." Yes, it's possible that a cheating student will outsource their work and render themselves a puppet of an expert whispering guidance in their ear, but that's a lot harder to do than secretly googling for information about Kirchoff's laws. I am, in fact, a big fan of open-book tests, which tend to push students to focus on synthesis instead of memorization. This, I believe, has much more value to students in the long run, and also has the nice side effect of rendering high-tech cheating much less valuable as well.

jakebeal
  • 187,714
  • 41
  • 655
  • 920
  • 37
    +1 for writing questions that require showing thought and process. – Fomite Sep 30 '15 at 19:42
  • 14
    "If you can inculcate a school culture" -- this is extraordinarily difficult, if not impossible. My personal experience is that a minimum requirement for honor codes to work is a small enough population such that students personally know a majority of their peers, so that their decision making takes into account harm done to their friends by cheating. Otherwise, the dominance of amoral rational agents will quickly find the Nash equilibrium of everyone cheating. –  Sep 30 '15 at 20:28
  • 25
    The fact is while we tell them they are cheating themselves, this only applies in a nonexistent reality where students actually benefit primarily from knowledge imparted. In the US at least, college degrees are given as stamps of approval -- diplomas may as well read "we certify this person to be competent to handle general adult tasks" in most cases. If one can get the same stamp of approval with less work and at the cost of diminishing the value of that school's degrees by some unmeasurable epsilon years down the road, those amoral rational agents will do just that. –  Sep 30 '15 at 20:32
  • 3
    As an added bonus, all of the evidence shows that students who have to learn the process do better than those that have to learn only facts that can be tested on a multiple choice test. – Wolfgang Bangerth Sep 30 '15 at 21:17
  • 10
    I had one exam (electronics) where we were allowed to bring in whatever books we wanted. People brought in whole backpacks. What I loved about the questions is that they were built up to fore you to THINK and not degurgigate what you learned the night before. They were actually simple and the ones who took a minuute to lean back and think were done in 15 minutes. The rest was going though the libraries they brought. – WoJ Oct 01 '15 at 12:18
  • 2
    I think you're right that this is the ideal approach, but it's unfortunately fighting against the tide, at least in the UK, where schools' "league table" status is based on how many pupils pass a basic level of exams. In this environment, the teacher is encouraged to focus on making sure the student passes the exam, rather than making sure the student understands the subject. It's a very depressing trend, which i believe will be ultimately very harmful to our country. Under these conditions, the teachers might be tempted to ignore cheating. – Max Williams Oct 01 '15 at 14:33
  • 2
    +1 for saying Ultimately, this is not a technological problem but a cultural and pedagogical problem. - I find this extremely spot on, as is clearly mirrors the engineering saying (my personal fave btw) that goes along the lines of "You can't solve a psychological problem with an engineering solution."; every now-and-then someone asks a question about how to create a device that'll make its users use it only in honest ways, by means of "smart engineering" etc., and I find it amusing that people actually think it's possible to force people to behave honestly ^_^ –  Oct 02 '15 at 01:56
  • 1
    +1 for open book open notes. I also allow open computer open internet. The students think this is a gift until they realize it allows me to ask harder (and more interesting) questions. – Ethan Bolker Oct 02 '15 at 17:11
  • 2
    @MaxWilliams: I suppose the eventual consequence will be that teachers can't be trusted as exam proctors. After all, in principle the proctor represents the examiner, so if the school is what is being examined then it shouldn't be an employee of the school in that role. That said, I think most teachers in the UK are still some way off from ignoring cheating when they see it, since they still feel a responsibility both for education and to the students who don't cheat. Removing that sense of duty is a big job, but with focus and determination I'm sure the DfE can achieve it eventually. – Steve Jessop Oct 02 '15 at 23:35
49

It is a hopeless task trying to prevent cheating for standard exams.

The suggestion of jakebeal will not work. While I personally never cheated, I would never snitch on someone which cheats. You are working together as a group which builds social cohesion and teachers/professors are an outgroup. You simply do not do that. Apart from that it is not my business to prevent cheating.

The other thing is that the impression of "lazy" cheaters is often wrong. I often wondered why cheaters do often a staggering amount of work for cheating which they could have used for learning. They are getting all possible exams, write down the core questions, prepare their cheating sheets, build groups... There are people out there who are so good that you even do not see cheating in the exam from the next table behind although you know that they are cheating.

My electronics professor in the university solved the problem for himself: He allowed that students bring everything into the exam. Calculators, sheets, lexika, laptops. The students were divided in space, if necessary, he took two rooms.

So he designed the question in advance to be not solvable with pure knowledge approaches. He designed tasks, modified them so people who did read and learned the stuff understood what the design was doing (if they were not sure, they knew easily where exactly the necessary information can be found) and made the design so extensive that it takes time to read and solve the question sequentially. Only five questions for two hours.

The cheaters were stuck. Because the tasks were unique, they could not use old exams (If similar tasks were mentioned, you could bet that the professor modified them so that old approaches were useless or even traps). Information did not help, they had information, but not the knowledge to use it. Because the tasks were so extensive, the time penalty for smuggling out the questions, let them solve frantically by an expert outsider, smuggling them back and write them down was so prohibitive that it was not an option.

The spacing out was intended to make communication not impossible, but simply an ardous and easy to spot task. Even if someone who knew the stuff would help he simply was not able to tell the solution because it needed too much explanation.

Thorsten S.
  • 4,745
  • 2
  • 18
  • 28
  • 10
    Yes, I suspect this is the only viable approach. I have used approximations to it, with considerable success. Another aspect is having varying "data" for varying exams (pre-tested to be sure that "workload" is comparable), and numbering exams and passing them out by number so that it is clear later who sat next to whom, also. (Of course, if they "copied" naively, they'd have wrong data... which did happen...) – paul garrett Sep 30 '15 at 21:22
  • 7
    You misinterpret my remarks: I would not generally expect students to inform a professor. Refusing to help and displaying social contempt, on the other hand, is well within likely behavior. – jakebeal Sep 30 '15 at 21:33
  • 2
    @jakebeal On what moral grounds should people display social contempt ? You never stole cherries ? You never lied to your parents ? You never smoked cigarettes (or other things) secretly ? You never played with fire as adolescent in the figurative sense ? Anything you know weren't right at the time you were doing it ? Acting with social contempt would invariably be judged as a holier-than-thou attitude. – Thorsten S. Sep 30 '15 at 21:48
  • 14
    @ThorstenS. I, like most people, discriminate between different degrees of transgression. Cheating on collegiate exams is, in my mind, far worse than the sort of juvenile boundary-pushing in your examples. And that is exactly the sort of cultural view that I think an institution does well to cultivate in students. See, for example, this community's response to a question about being caught cheating: it's not "oh, you were naughty," but "you were seriously dishonest." – jakebeal Sep 30 '15 at 22:32
  • 9
    @ThorstenS. Those are not very good examples, simply because when you're at college you're expected to act your age, like the adult you are. Someone cheating themselves to better grades could land a job otherwise only available to those who actually studied for the exam. To me that's reason enough to not only socially contempt the act but also blow the whistle. – Seralize Sep 30 '15 at 22:42
  • 7
    My open-book tests in college and grad school were also some of the most challenging. I'm definitely in favor of this approach, but it asks more of the instructor. – shadowtalker Oct 01 '15 at 00:37
  • @Serialize And when the cheaters get the job, their cheating prepared them to fulfill it ? What do you think will happen in real life, not in school or university ? Yes, their conscious decision will have consequences, they do not need someone who tries to punish them, they won't listen anyway. Your stance you are describing here is sending the message:"I will not tolerate behavior I deem inappropiate and react accordingly. My tolerance level for inappropiate behavior is quite small." The result will be that your circle of acquaintances will be people with an impeccable record. – Thorsten S. Oct 01 '15 at 08:03
  • As a student your motivation for turning in cheaters should be to add value to your degree program. If word gets out that <your_university> has allowed cheaters to graduate - and word can get out - then that news usually spreads pretty fast. Things like job fairs usually have a 'core' group of employers that target <your_university> and if they hear that the quality of students is sub-par due to cheating, then your job fairs are going to have fewer employers. This idea of social cohesion is complete bunk imo. I have no loyalty to someone who wants to decrease the value of my degree. – Shaz Oct 02 '15 at 13:40
  • @Ryan Let me explain my background: I am born in a country which were under control of not only one, but two notorious dictatorships. The population was encouraged to turn in not only wrongdoing but every naysayer or malcontent. The state also encouraged pupils which should turn in their parents if they uttered something which could be considered critical. People faced severe repercussions for violating ideals (sth like "reputation" or "value of a degree"). If you really think that this has no impact on social cohesion of people or "social cohesion" is bunk.... – Thorsten S. Oct 04 '15 at 14:46
  • Apart from that: Because the strong majority of students does not cheat anyway, your argument does not hold. Cheating is much easier with diploma mills which give you your title without testing you. What really counts is how good your normal students are (some specific faculties in specific universities are known to produce "bad apples", while other ones have a famous reputation). Employers know that there are always some people which don't hold what their degree is promising. The method I lined out not only prevent cheating, but values real knowledge. – Thorsten S. Oct 04 '15 at 15:02
13

Open book exams and speed

Some types of exams are rather immune to such cheating, namely exams designed to be taken with "open book" (i.e., any and all reference material allowed) with a rather strict time limit.

If questions are designed to test skills obtained during the course instead of memorization, then preparation of any extra "cheating" materials helps the learning process (as it's well known that transcribing material helps you also remember it better).

Another approach is that question time limits can be designed so that you can finish them all in time only if you know the answers right away - where you possibly could look up some answer (or ask it to someone else), but if you have to look up multiple answers would mean that you simply run out of time before even reaching half of the questions. I have had a bunch of subjects with such open book exams, and they were surprisingly effective at revealing differences between mastered/not mastered areas of study.

Peteris
  • 8,241
  • 30
  • 40
  • 9
    While I agree that speed will indeed help to minimize cheating I'm personally not a big fan of speed exams. A lot of students suffer in a mild form of examination stress. Knowing that you can afford take a mental break for 30 seconds to regain your breath can go a long way. – magu_ Oct 01 '15 at 16:41
  • 7
    Even without exam stress, some students simply read and write faster or slower than others and there is a very weak (basically no, probably even sometimes negative) correlation between that and actual knowledge of the subject in question. By college (at least for native speakers of the language being used,) reading speed is probably more correlated with eyesight than anything else. – reirab Oct 01 '15 at 16:47
  • I agree with reirab's comment - writing and reading speed affect these exams much more than subject knowledge. I never once completed a high-school English exam, despite never stopping writing to think (timed tests with word-count minimums).

    Also, the sort of online test favoured by many job interviews, that acknowledges that since it's online you likely have Google at your disposal and so times you - assuming that the ones who have to rely on Google will run out of time - vastly underestimate the efficiency of people who are not good at the subject, but at crafting Google queries.

     – Logan Pickup Oct 01 '15 at 19:45
  • +1 For mentioning that transcription of material significantly aids in memorization and understanding. One of my professors had closed-book open-notes tests. You were allowed a single college ruled notebook with anything you wanted, but not your textbook. The professor then collected the notebooks with the tests to verify they were the same handwriting. I don't think anyone was penalized for different handwriting, but then again it was a 100+ student class, so I may not know. – Sidney Oct 01 '15 at 21:33
  • You dont need speed just a exam that is long enough not to have time to pass. The inability to judge progress achieves the same effect as speed. Those that know the subject will just concentrate on what they know those that dont will just search themselves to death. This is what i do in open internet tests. As far as im concerned if you can google the answer in minutes then you know enough of the subject matter. – joojaa Oct 04 '15 at 10:37
7

I answered a similar question a while ago. This answer might be interpreted as an extension of the previous one.

The exact same issue happens in my university too and my opinion on this subject is usually met by very negative comments.

I think the reason of high tech dishonesty is not the ethics of students. It is about the examination system itself. While technology is growing exponentially almost quadratically, the students still take exams with pen and paper. Even homeworks are designed for a student to "read the course book" whereas he/she can clearly use the Internet.

When a student uses an Internet article verbatim, it is called plagiarism. But when he/she paraphrases, it is called a good homework.

The students should be able to use any device they want. Cellular phones, laptops, whatever they want. The questions should be prepared accordingly. The students have to struggle to find the correct answer to a question.

If a question is like "how high is the Mt. Everest", students will cheat. Either one might have memorized the answer and does not hesitate to help a friend or just take a look at the answer by typing it in his/her cellphone.

However, if the question is like "please discuss the reasons not to climb Mt. Everest", then (i) there is not a unique right answer, (ii) even though laptops are free to use in the exam, the student should do a tiny research to state the reasons, and (iii) helping a friend becomes being a chump.

By the way, I have never cheated in exams and I am not defending cheating. But at the time a baby is able to unlock and choose a game to play in a smartphone, expecting teenagers or adults to keep themselves away from technology is not very reasonable.

Examination methods must keep pace with technology just as every other thing in life.

Bad news: Google Glass is being used by more and more people and we cannot do anything about it.

Community
  • 1
padawan
  • 12,245
  • 8
  • 48
  • 83
  • Although technology is growing, this growth is not exponential. – gerrit Oct 01 '15 at 10:04
  • 1
    We can ban Google Glass from the exam room. That's a pretty trivial thing we can do about it. (And that article is old; Google has since stopped selling Glass so there won't be any more people using it unless they start selling again.) – Michael Hoffman Oct 05 '15 at 15:09
5

Some universities have taken to disabling the WiFi in classrooms to deal with the laptop use "problem". That doesn't get you around cellular data use on phones, and you can't legally jam cellular signals (in the US) as keshlam noted in their comment.

Bill Barth
  • 48,733
  • 6
  • 112
  • 194
  • 5
    As noticed during a day of open doors at University of Berne (Switzerland), one of their renovated lecture halls actually was equipped to suppress at choice of the lecturer WiFi or/and cell phones so that only the nationwide emergency calls (fire brigade, ambulance, and police) were possible. It did not represent any problem for the presenter (professor in Swiss civil law), as there was a land line phone, too. Compared to the observation of some university libraries where -- except in the first reading room next to the loan booth -- all other sections are blocking the cell phone completely. – Buttonwood Sep 30 '15 at 21:24
5

I am aware of several commercial products that can detect phones in areas they are not supposed to be used (typically used by the financial markets to spot inside trading). Such as those from AirPatrol, BV Systems and Libelium. Some of these you buy multiple sensors to work out which "zone" the mobile device is being used in.

Then I suppose to detect electronics generally (that are not connected to a network) you could go down the whole route of metal detecting. Unless they are using tiny mobile phones that are alleged to defeat metal detectors but as the devices are so small reading a vast sum of information off them discretely would be somewhat difficult.

Depends really how far you want to go (full airport style pat-downs?) and how much money you have.

Matthew1471
  • 151
  • 2
4

The solution is a lot more complex than "Do x to stop cheating."

We are moving into a stage as a society where the ability to retain a large amount of facts is not as important as being able to process facts and draw conclusions from them. With the wealth of human knowledge at our fingertips, what is more important?

The ability to recall a billion facts at-will, or the ability to process any given fact in a logical and intelligent manner coupled with the ability to discover any related facts?

If you get nothing from this response take in this one thing:

You will never win this fight. Cheaters will always be one step ahead.

Amagii Discordus Penndragon
  • 187
  • 4
  • 2
    the ability to retain a large amount of facts is not as important — First, [citation needed]. Second, exams do far more than test retention of a large number of facts. – JeffE Oct 02 '15 at 21:53
2

The best way to counter cell phone use is to not allow cellphones.

In the "most strict" exams I have ever taken (the Canadian/U.S. Government recognized tests for knowing the English language), each person had their own bin in which they emptied their pockets into. No sweat shirts or hats allowed. A gentle pat-down was done, mostly just making sure pants pockets were empty, and one of those metal-detection or electronic detection wands briefly waved over me. All the exam preparation takes place in a different room from the room the exam was taken in, so you can't just leave stuff there before-hand.

During the exam, we were only allowed to use the tools given to us. There was very strict monitoring. Some portions were on a computer, but the short time limit on those sections meant that even if you could get around to the internet or whatever without getting caught, by the time you managed to look anything up the question would be over.

For my own school, there is an official "testing center" in which very similar procedures take place, though not quite as strict with the pat-down and metal detector - it is where all midterm and final exams are taken for every course. I suspect any student who puts enough thought into it and has the courage could cheat in this setting, but the consequence for being caught is very severe - an automatic failing of the entire class and possibly being expelled.

In the case where the exam is going to be taken in your every-day classroom, exam preparation for the previous strategy could be unfeasible, especially depending on the number of students. You'd need lockers, or bins, and some way to keep each person's stuff separate. And the time to sort all that stuff out. There's a couple other ways to enforce a "less strict" version of this policy:

  • If the exam is going to be taken first thing in the morning, collect everyone's cell phone at the door before they enter the room. They can have it back when they are finished with the exam. (In some cases, you could collect all the phones in one bin - when everyone gets their phone back any missing piece of property should readily be apparent, but you'd have to keep everyone in the room until everyone is done and has their phone back. Even then, some issues could arise - there needs to be trust by all parties if they are going to share one "bucket" to put all their phones into - There probably isn't going to be that trust in a room of 25-40+ students.)

  • Have each student place their cell phone on their desk/area in an easily visible spot. Keep extra attention on those who do not appear to have a cell phone, but be sure to still watch everyone.

DoubleDouble
  • 529
  • 3
  • 8
  • 1
    Anyone can borrow a decoy phone to put on the desk. – Davidmh Oct 15 '15 at 11:56
  • @Davidmh sure they can. Same for turning them in at the door. As I said, the amount of effort to completely prevent cheating is probably too much for the standard classroom. But since cheating is often opportunistic (not planned well), this would be as good as anything. – DoubleDouble Oct 15 '15 at 13:51
  • Came here to say this, have the same experience in UK immigration related tests. The only thing missing from your answer is that all students now have to show that they have no earpieces in (anyone in a head-scarf will be asked to remove it for examination, in private before being allowed to take the exam) There is a zero tolerance rule for any breach of the exam rules. – JeffUK Mar 13 '19 at 11:08
-3

This is a relatively easy matter,

You tell them no cell phones, have them sign a peice of paper that states in large font, "NO CELLPHONES/MOBILE DEVICES, I understand that using a cellular/mobile device(including but not limited to: ipad, iphone, and/or other type of electronic device) I WILL FAIL THE TEST AUTOMATICALLY" sign and dated. The threat and follow through of punishment of actually receiving an F for the exam, will spread like wildfire throughout the school hallways.(The biggest problem with follow through of punishment, will most likely be school administration, whom need high graded students for political reasons...)

AND/OR

You have a group of volunteers(could be other students from a different class, concerned parents, ect ect imagination is the limit...), whom stand behind the students, and observe them.

Combining both techniques, ensures a low tech way of informing of consequences, and removing cheaters, combining them makes a strong stand.

Also, if permissable, a slightly dimmed room may give yourself/volunteers an advantage of spotting the classic bright lit screens of a mobile device...

I will note that I agree with Amagii, at least in part, that changing tests from that of pure memory to that of testing logical thought processing, can change the way our tests are made, reducing burden of "dumb logic" aka reward for just having a good memory, to instead rewarding those with the ability to understand the subject(after all even the greatest and most skilled academics keeps reference books, so why build tests on the false premises that we don't need them?), which in the long run will be far more rewarding. Not just for the current academic settings, but out in the real world.

Best of Luck.

Dr. DS

Dr. DS
  • 11
  • 1
  • My phone adapts the screen brightness to the environment, so your dimmed lights will make reading the exam more difficult, but you won't see the glow of my screen. – Davidmh Oct 15 '15 at 10:43
-6

Create a smartphone/tablet app through which the exam itself is administered. This could simply be a stripped-down browser, with no special features like JavaScript support, no navigation controls, and that won't persist if it loses focus, e.g., the student switches to another app to cheat. (You can advise students to enable airplane mode, then turn WiFi on and connect to your special test-taking network, which doesn't provide general internet access, to avoid the risk of an unexpected phone call resetting their test.) Design the app to query a hard-coded server on your network for the address of a landing page, from which the students can select their test, which is delivered in a plain HTML format with basic form controls. If the exam is longer than an hour or so, you could also provide outlets for charging.

If any students don't have (or don't wish to use) a smartphone/tablet, they can still take the regular paper test, but in a separate, small room, which will make it trivial to spot a smuggled device.

Dan Henderson
  • 107
  • 4
  • 9
    Panic when an update on any one of a number of mobile operating systems disables your testing software. – Fomite Oct 01 '15 at 04:38
  • 8
    What's to stop someone from borrowing a friend's phone and using it to cheat while entering the solutions into the app on their own phone? Of course you could monitor the exam room to try to detect anyone hiding a second phone, but if you could do that reliably, then you wouldn't need the special app in the first place (since you could already detect illicit cell phone use). – Anonymous Mathematician Oct 01 '15 at 05:07
  • @Fomite a well-written app won't be broken by a system update (unless the system update itself is bad, in which case you're not the only affected app). For test administration, all it would really need to be is a feature-stripped browser: no address bar, no media support beyond static images, no JavaScript (just use HTML forms), etc. – Dan Henderson Oct 01 '15 at 22:12
  • @DanHenderson Except 'Every other app is broken too' doesn't matter when your Dean is wondering why you couldn't administer any exams this week. – Fomite Oct 01 '15 at 22:15
  • @Fomite well, my answer already includes a provision for paper tests for students without smartphones. If the app doesn't work just go back to plan A. – Dan Henderson Oct 01 '15 at 22:21
  • @Anonymous the need to acquire a second phone to cheat raises the barrier significantly. 100% cheat prevention is a pipe dream, but increasing the difficulty should reduce cheating and increase the likelihood of detection. – Dan Henderson Oct 01 '15 at 22:25
  • 6
    And then everyone insists on writing the paper exams anyways because can you imagine typing on your phone for hours**? – Jacob Raihle Oct 02 '15 at 12:01
  • 2
    a well-written app won't be broken by a system update — Pull the other one. It's got bells on. – JeffE Oct 02 '15 at 21:51
  • @JeffE I don't understand your comment. – Dan Henderson Oct 02 '15 at 22:26
  • @all downvoters: I edited the answer based on some of the comment feedback. Better? (If you downvoted without commenting, please leave one and give me the opportunity to improve this answer!) – Dan Henderson Oct 02 '15 at 22:48
  • @Dan Henderson JeffE's comment is a reference to someone "pulling your leg" when they try to deceive you or play a trick on you. It means you think the person is trying to trick you. It's roughly equivalent to saying "Yeah, sure, I believe you" in a real sarcastic tone. http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/pull-the-other-leg-one-it-s-got-bells-on – barbecue Oct 03 '15 at 01:37
  • Even the most well-written app can be broken by a system update if the system itself has bugs. And all systems have bugs. – JeffE Oct 05 '15 at 20:49
  • Well, I would argue that a bug-free system is always possible, but almost never practical. For example, a Hello, World program can easily be bug-free, but is of no use beyond education. Of course, the more complex the system, the more effort, attention to detail, knowledge, etc. required to attain that state, so anything useful will invariably cross a threshold of diminishing returns, beyond which the analytical capacity required to continue outweighs the severity of the remaining bugs. – Dan Henderson Oct 05 '15 at 21:14
  • I'd rather write my exam with my hands visibly cuffed to the table (no chance of cheating) than on a phone. – Davidmh Oct 15 '15 at 10:47
  • @Davidmh there is already a provision for this in my last paragraph. Also, I added tablets to the description - I didn't think I'd have to explicitly include them, figuring people would infer, but there it is. – Dan Henderson Oct 15 '15 at 11:45
  • @JacobRaihle see my most recent edit – Dan Henderson Oct 15 '15 at 11:50
  • @DanHenderson everybody would be taking the paper version, and you are back to square one. – Davidmh Oct 15 '15 at 11:53
  • 1
    "the need to acquire a second phone to cheat raises the barrier significantly" it doesn't. Where I studied, the cost of retaking a subject is the same of that of a cheap smartphone. The moment you cheat in two subjects, it is profitable to buy two phones. – Davidmh Oct 15 '15 at 11:54
  • @Davidmh it raises the barrier because everyone owns one but almost nobody owns two. It's not the monetary cost, but the physical act of obtaining the device, that creates a barrier; some cheaters don't plan to cheat ahead of time, just decide to during the exam, when they realize they aren't sufficiently prepared – Dan Henderson Oct 15 '15 at 11:59
  • And regarding "everyone would be taking the paper version" - I think it depends on the institution. Millennials embrace technology and most would be happy to see it more fully integrated in the classroom. – Dan Henderson Oct 15 '15 at 12:01