[JoshTriplett]

> Wouldn't a one-on-one interview be a better way to establish a broad evaluation of competency.

1) Possibly, depending on the material, but most classes aren't looking for a "broad evaluation of competency", they're looking for the specific material taught. It'd make more sense as a graduation requirement: the equivalent of a dissertation but for undergraduate work.

2) Even in small classes (e.g. 20-30 students) that wouldn't scale, let alone the massive courses earlier in a curriculum or that are shared by many degrees (e.g. hundreds of students).

[userbinator]

I think suspected cheaters should be subjected to an interview.

[panicinducer]

Maybe not everything needs to "scale"? You're asking each student to spend well over 100 hours in lectures and study for each class. Surely you can find 20 or 30 minutes per student for evaluation.

[JoshTriplett]

Please by all means direct more funding at universities, hire several times as many professors, and have them each teach half as many classes with a fraction of the students. The result would absolutely be an improvement.

(That said, any kind of subjective assessment has its own pile of hazards compared to objective assessments.)