AT the university of technology where I teach physical education, the semester began in mid-February due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the school has now entered summer vacation.
While assigning students their grades this week, I found a number of them failed the course with poor scores or even earning a zero on the written tests. Deliberating whether to give some students a chance to retake the course, I could not help but wonder how this could have happened.
After careful consideration, I am certain that the culprit is online exams.
By the end of the semester, my university had adopted a policy similar to that of other colleges and universities, in which the faculty can conduct distance learning and in-person classes at the same time.
However, it is difficult to test students on physical performance with an online exam. Without the venue and necessary equipment, it is difficult to assess a student’s performance by asking them to perform exercises in front of a camera.
Three weeks before the end of the semester, I began asking students to come to the school to take their physical education tests at their convenience. As for the written test on sports regulations and rules, I conducted the test in the final week of the semester.
On the day of the test, several unexpected things happened. Even though I had clearly written “no switching to other windows” on the test instructions, many students did so anyway. I did not want to jump to any conclusions by labeling them as “cheating,” and would think of them instead as intending to use other software to look up information in a moment of forgetfulness.
The way the system had been set up, if the student changed windows, the test would automatically be submitted, and when it did, it was understandable that the examinees would panic.
The e-learning software used by colleges is useful in that it allows teachers to post course notices, upload teaching materials, and set up assignments and quizzes. Although user-friendly, the system is not up to the task of differentiating genuine errors from cheating, leaving it wide open for behavior such as having some students hand in identical reports.
Students have been using this kind of technology since they were young, and they have a million ways of beating the system if they set their mind to it. Given the necessary equipment and seamless “teamwork” on different computers, students would not have much difficulty in scoring high marks in an online test.
With central and southern Taiwan still experiencing spikes of COVID-19 cases, many colleges have extended virtual courses until the end of the semester.
Nonetheless, while many schools have asked students to return to campuses in person to attend the final exams, some students have petitioned against it. Many object to the policy on grounds of “a risk of cluster infection,” with the most notable example occurring at Taichung Municipal Taichung First Senior High School.
However, if the exams were all changed to online tests, could they still remain impartial and objective?
Maybe some people would criticize me for not trusting the students, but is this not a little naive? Even with the multiple mechanisms to prevent cheating on computers, in a test-oriented society and without teacher supervision, it is at least arguable that many students could succumb to the temptation of cheating.
Li Cheng-ta teaches physical education at the Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology.
Translated by Rita Wang
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS