| Current (almost finished) OMSA student here. I agree that the tools themselves aren't terrible, but I do believe they're an example of "doing the wrong thing faster". My claim would be that all time-limited exams are bad news. 1. The strictness and quality of exams varies significantly by instructor (as you mentioned in your post) 2. Exams aren't representative of any real-world analogue (how often does your boss lock you in a room and tell you to solve the Lagrangian by hand, alone, under a time limit) 3. They don't actually stop determined cheaters (anyone with the foresight to put up notesheets in their bathroom) In short, proctored exams do not effectively assess student proficiency in a subject, and do not effectively prevent cheating. Making proctoring more scalable means propogating a bad practice at ever-greater rates. What I would suggest instead, and what many classes in OMSA have already done, is to leverage project-based assessments. * Demonstrates learning by actually using the material, instead of hollow repeat-backs * Encourages further learning since practice entails dealing with real-world complications * Helps students develop a portfolio so they have more to show at graduation than transcripts There are many other options though if that particular solution doesn't tickle your fancy. |