The entire smart-education system was created to make learning easier. All circumstances must therefore be considered, particularly in examinations. The aim should not be a contest to catch cheaters, but to reduce cheating without excessive suspicion. Overzealous procedures can make students anxious and afraid, negatively affecting their performance.
Some universities and schools use traditional measures such as different questions or a different question order. I support this approach. An exam's purpose is to measure knowledge, not to make full marks unattainable. Hard work deserves its reward, while someone who does not study will not achieve full marks anyway and may hope only to pass. Abilities differ, and exams are not the sole measure of merit. Success takes many forms and there are different kinds of intelligence. Those with bodily-kinaesthetic intelligence may not excel in written examinations but perform best in practical ones.
Most universities using technical solutions employ LockDown Browser, which prevents copying and pasting and opening other applications. It can, however, be bypassed in several ways.
I have noticed two flaws in the monitoring system. First, the camera sometimes does not work. I have witnessed this myself and tried every repair option, as did the university's support team. The exam will not begin until LockDown activates the camera. What fault is that of the students?
Second, facial movements may be tracked through facial recognition, or the student photographed repeatedly. I certainly object to the latter: students' privacy should not be violated to monitor them. As for the first method, I sometimes smile while reading because I have a vivid imagination. Does that mean I am cheating? No. One student told me he looks upwards when thinking, a natural human behaviour. Eye movements can indicate thought. How can that be treated as cheating?
I want to stress another important point. Some lecturers have more free time and respond by increasing assignments. Many students are nearing graduation, but regardless of that, a student may have a midterm or final exam alongside five or more assignments, perhaps projects and a presentation. Should the student submit the assignment, prepare the presentation, or study for the exam?
I am not justifying cheating in any way. But how can we expect students not to cheat when their hands are tied and they have no time to study? Workloads should be eased and circumstances considered, particularly psychological challenges. Not everyone thrives under pressure; some may suffer a breakdown.
Among the unreasonable conditions imposed by some schools and universities are that the student sit alone in a room and show the room on camera. Some share a room with siblings and may be taking exams at the same time. Showing the room also conflicts with the privacy of students and their families, and its appearance may embarrass them. As for the requirement of silence, how can students be responsible for what happens throughout the home, particularly those living in apartments?
Not everyone has their own device; some share. Exam timing should therefore be flexible. These technologies also use substantial bandwidth. Some students lack internet access, and those given mobile connectivity may not have fixed-broadband speeds. Many homes have slower plans, and with multiple devices connected, speeds will not be high.
Some universities allow students who experience technical problems to postpone their exams. This is impractical and even involves a paid “incomplete” arrangement. Some lecturers have also said the deferred exam will be harder. Such practices contradict universities' efforts to make things easier. Some universities have commendably introduced open-book exams.
Finally, make things easier, not harder, and work to make this experience succeed. Education is a noble mission, not an exercise in setting impossible demands. Be gentle with students.