For a select few students at Carnegie Mellon University, hand cramps from taking three-hour exams are a thing of the past. Instead, these lucky students have the opportunity to take their in-class exams on their laptops — following a trend that has popped up in a few schools throughout the country.
But for at least the immediate future, University students won't be joining the trend. Neither the administration nor professors have hopped on the technology bandwagon, and those that wish to do so face a variety of obstacles.
"The University's current academic regulations do not permit any use of computers during in-class exams," Howard Dobin, associate dean of the college, noted. "It is not now permitted at Princeton. I don't foresee us permitting it in the future because of certain obvious problems with protecting the integrity of the work."
A notable problem with laptop-based exams is immediately apparent — the laptop. Unlike schools such as the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, which requires all incoming freshmen to purchase a laptop computer, Princeton does not require students to own a computer, let alone a laptop.
"Not all students have laptops or even computers," Howard Strauss, academic applications manager at CIT, explained. "Some colleges require students to have laptops or give laptops to them. Princeton does not have any such program."
Since many University students do not own laptops, any laptop-based exam initiative would have to be limited at best and would have to provide alternatives for those who do not own laptops.
Even with all of the necessary infrastructure, however, the ultimate decision to use computers during exams could still rest with the course instructor. Many University professors were not opposed to the idea of using computers during exams, but could not see how it would work in their own classes.
For example, Sharad Malik, a professor in the electrical engineering department, said, "Conceptually I don't have any problems with doing it."
However, Malik continued, it would be difficult to use computer-based exams in his classes. She pointed to the difficulty of drawing and sketching on the computer. "If students have [to draw] a circuit, for example, it gets a little harder," he said.
Though she refused to rule it out, computer science professor Andrea LaPaugh gave different reasons for personally not wanting students to use computers for exams. "I know myself, because of the nature of what I teach, I usually disallow the use of all electronic equipment. There are computations I don't want people to do on the computer," she said.
"Certainly my own tests tend to lend themselves not to be computerized," LaPaugh said. "The multiple choice tests are not the kinds we tend to give. I imagine many other professors tend to have the same problem."
The use of computers during exams also raises new security questions. Using a computer could potentially allow a student to access various sorts of unauthorized information and could potentially lead to cheating. Furthermore, it would be difficult to ensure that the student taking the exam is actually who he or she claims to be.
Eli Goldsmith '04, freshman class president and member of the honor committee, indicated that the Honor Code would make it easier for the University to allow such a proposal to go through. "Because of the Honor Code, testing in-class examinations has become looser," he noted. "The University is allowed to take more chances on people because we know you sign something that says you're not going to cheat.
"Because of that, I think the University is more likely to take a chance on the use of laptops on an in-class examination," Goldsmith added.
The Honor Code, however, only extends so far. Dobin said he did not feel the Honor Code was enough insurance against possible cheating. "We do have an honor code but we do require students to sit every other seat during exams," he said. "I think it's never a good idea to create more temptation rather than less."
Dobin said he agreed in principle, however, with the use of technology as a writing tool for in-class examinations. "If a laptop could be a pure writing machine there probably wouldn't be an objection," he said.
Although computers are prohibited during in-class examinations, they are allowed, with instructor permission, for take-home exams. Thus, Strauss said he believes even in-class exams written on computers would need to be treated as take-home exams.
"I would treat an online exam as a take home exam — with all of the advantages and disadvantages of such an exam," he explained.
Even though University students are not likely to start toting their laptops to exams anytime soon, the University does have extensive support set up for taking quizzes and exams online. The University's Blackboard CourseInfo system — which hosts Web pages for many of Princeton's courses — can also administer quizzes and exams over the Internet.
According to Strauss, most students use this feature as a self-assessment tool. However, professors can also use the on-line quizzes and exams to evaluate their students.
"This would allow some exams to be taken on any computer from anywhere," Strauss said.
"The bottom line is that Princeton has the necessary infrastructure to offer online exams. The exams can be made to have a start and end date, a time limit, and a password can be assigned so that only students aware of the password can take the exam," Strauss said. For multiple choice and other simple exams, the entire grading process could be automated, he added.
And someday in the future, this infrastructure may be put to use. But for now, students will have to be content writing exams the old-fashioned way.
"For midterms, finals, and other major exams I would imagine that paper will remain superior to computers in the immediate future," Strauss noted.
Read More
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ’03 ‘plagiarized’ small portions of his senior thesis, experts say. But how serious is it?
Sena ChangA review of the senior thesis of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ’03 by The Daily Princetonian, in consultation with three plagiarism experts, found eight instances of uncredited material, sham paraphrasing, and verbatim copying. According to the experts, each passage violated Princeton’s academic integrity policies but varied in severity.
A review of the senior thesis of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ’03 by The Daily Princetonian, in consultation with three plagiarism experts, found eight instances of uncredited material, sham paraphrasing, and verbatim copying. According to the experts, each passage violated Princeton’s academic integrity policies but varied in severity.
CPUC discusses University policy changes and classroom scheduling in final meeting of academic year
Cynthia TorresPresentations included minor changes to Title IX policy, Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Studies (ODUS) protest policies, and updates to the classroom scheduling process.
Presentations included minor changes to Title IX policy, Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Studies (ODUS) protest policies, and updates to the classroom scheduling process.
Federal funding cuts hit McCarter, Princeton University Concerts
Devon RudolphThe Trump administration announced plans to end the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) on May 2. Both the McCarter Theater and Princeton University Concerts have received notice that federally awarded NEA grants have been rescinded.
The Trump administration announced plans to end the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) on May 2. Both the McCarter Theater and Princeton University Concerts have received notice that federally awarded NEA grants have been rescinded.