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
There has been much catastrophizing in Taiwan recently about America becoming more unreliable as a bulwark against Chinese pressure. Some of this has been sparked by debates in Washington about whether the United States should defend Taiwan in event of conflict. There also were understandable anxieties about whether President Trump would sacrifice Taiwan’s interests for a trade deal when he sat down with President Xi (習近平) in late October. On top of that, Taiwan’s opposition political leaders have sought to score political points by attacking the Lai (賴清德) administration for mishandling relations with the United States. Part of this budding anxiety
The diplomatic dispute between China and Japan over Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s comments in the Japanese Diet continues to escalate. In a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, China’s UN Ambassador Fu Cong (傅聰) wrote that, “if Japan dares to attempt an armed intervention in the cross-Strait situation, it would be an act of aggression.” There was no indication that Fu was aware of the irony implicit in the complaint. Until this point, Beijing had limited its remonstrations to diplomatic summonses and weaponization of economic levers, such as banning Japanese seafood imports, discouraging Chinese from traveling to Japan or issuing
The diplomatic spat between China and Japan over comments Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi made on Nov. 7 continues to worsen. Beijing is angry about Takaichi’s remarks that military force used against Taiwan by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) could constitute a “survival-threatening situation” necessitating the involvement of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces. Rather than trying to reduce tensions, Beijing is looking to leverage the situation to its advantage in action and rhetoric. On Saturday last week, four armed China Coast Guard vessels sailed around the Japanese-controlled Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台), known to Japan as the Senkakus. On Friday, in what
On Nov. 8, newly elected Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) and Vice Chairman Chi Lin-len (季麟連) attended a memorial for White Terror era victims, during which convicted Chinese Communist Party (CCP) spies such as Wu Shi (吳石) were also honored. Cheng’s participation in the ceremony, which she said was part of her efforts to promote cross-strait reconciliation, has trapped herself and her party into the KMT’s dark past, and risks putting the party back on its old disastrous road. Wu, a lieutenant general who was the Ministry of National Defense’s deputy chief of the general staff, was recruited
RSS