Main Nav

Although this site may not be new, it was new to me when an instructor brought it to my attention.


Has anyone had any interaction with them?

The idea of verifying that a student in an online class is the student registered is not new, albeit this is a new twist.  For those who have entirely online programs, and/or a significant number of online courses, how are your institutions handling this issue overall?

best,
aj


--
-----

AJ Kelton
Director of Emerging & Instructional Technology
College of Humanities and Social Sciences
Montclair State University
----------
Twitter: @ELDConf
Hashtag: #ELD12
----------

********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

Comments

We do authenticate an online student periodically using Acxiom, which uses publicly available data that, for the most part only an individual would know.  If you've ever applied for a loan online, you've probably been asked multiple choice questions about your house payment or car payment or lender.   That is Acxiom.   We don't ask financial questions, but we do have it set up to ask what street the individual lived on in a certain year and things like that.

Julie

Julie Ouska
CIO/VP of IT
Interim Executive Director CCCOnline
Colorado Community College System
Julie.ouska@cccs.edu
(720) 858-2781 


From: Kyle Johnson <kyle@KYLEJOHNSONCONSULTING.COM>
Reply-To: CIO List <CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Date: Monday, September 17, 2012 4:05 PM
To: CIO List <CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

Haven’t seen this company but it should not be surprising. Whatever verification methods we use, students can probably get around if they are willing to offer up their login data (and many younger students do this with all their accounts anyways). Kyle is right that it amounts to outright cheating, but we come across that in the F2F environment and all prohibitions seem even easier to violate online. If we also ask for personal data (street addresses, etc.), students could easily provide that to the company as well.

 

If this became popular we may have to start checking IP addresses – if a bunch of different discussion posters all come from the same place, that could be a serious problem. But there’s ways around that if the company is shrewd enough. At some point, it seems like a technical solution has to be implemented if you are not doing on location proctored exams – webcams, fingerprint authentication will just be part of the environment. out of necessity.

 

Quick story: in my early days at LSU – and the early days of large 500 student lecture classes – it was pretty easy to pay someone to take your Intro. to Psych final if you wanted. No one checked IDs and everyone was under the delusion that it just wouldn’t happen, but it did. The biggest obstacle was that most of us didn’t have the money or the nerve to pull it off (and yes, we had a basic sense of honesty). Wetakeyourclass sounds just as simple and for now, money and nerve are probably the primary obstacles.

 

But we’re already dealing with this issue in our F2F classes so it should be no surprise in the online environment. Many of my Nursing instructors now insist that all purses, coats and Smart phones be checked at the door for final exams due to the ingenious answer schemes that some students have come up with.

 

Cheers,

 

-ec

 

Emory M. Craig

Director of eLearning and Instructional Technologies

The College of New Rochelle

New Rochelle, NY   10805

 

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Kyle Johnson
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 6:06 PM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

 

Thanks Kyle, Julie, and Emory for your response.  I'd love to hear from others as well who have discussed or addressed this issue.

Kyle, yes, I'm sure this goes beyond just cheating and absolutely violates acceptable use policy (and if it doesn't, shame on that institution).  So the question becomes, how does the industry deal with this moving forward.

Julie, thanks for the tip on Acxiom, I'll give it a look over and also pass the info up the line.

Emory, good point on the IP address, and they've anticipated it by putting into their FAQ the following:

Can a professor see that someone logged in from a different ip address?

Absolutely not, we use 100% untraceable (non set) IP Addresses. No one will know, and its 100% safe.

They also guarantee an A or a B or your money back.

I guess there is nothing to stop someone from registering for a F2F class and then sending someone in their place for 15 weeks, but with online classes, one individual could be taking multiple classes all at the same time.

There is a big difference between a faculty member who decided (along with their department/program/etc...) to offer a course in an online format and an entire program that is offered online.  Its challenging to provide a solution to the individual who is offering their course in a hybrid or online format, but this issue must have come up for entirely online programs.  What are the current conventional wisdom on addressing this?

Things like this are like bugs in your house, once you see one you know there are lots more you don't see yet.

aj


For the research on academic integrity and cheating, start with Donald McCabe and Linda Trevino.  They have published extensively on this topic in higher education journals, including Business Ethics Quarterly, Change, Ethics and Behavior, and the Journal of Higher Education.   They have researched why students cheat, and how well honor codes and classroom discussions of cheating work.  I recall their talking about large lecture classes; I don't know how much they have to say specifically about the online environment.

Identity verification issues are also being addressed in the financial aid area, because the DOE and the post-secondary community want to reduce the amount of Pell-grant-related fraud.  See http://www.educause.edu/blogs/jcummings/educause-comments-financial-aid-fraud-and-identity-verification

Glenn Everett, PhD
Pembroke, MA
gseverett1@gmail.com
617-688-2102
http://geverettconsulting.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/geverett



********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

Charter Oak State College is a 100% online public institution, so we have been struggling with this issue for a long time. We developed a 3 step process for attempting to ensure the student who signs up for the assignment/course/program is who they claim to be.  I like to think of them as a series of hurdles designed to discourage fraud while not discouraging our student body. I have summarized the steps below if anyone wants more detail please let me know.

 

1.       Initial verification of identity. Checking an ID. When a student initially enrolls and on the first log in to the portal they need to answer a series of questions generated by the Acxiom service. If they fail, they are locked out of the portal and directed to call the Registrar. The Registrar’s office interviews the student and manually administers another Acxiom quiz over the phone. If they fail or their data does not exist in the Acxiom DB they need to provide notarized documentation attesting to their identity.

2.       Pedagogical barriers – Increasing the number of assignments, frequency of assignments, and the overall interaction that need to take place within the course improves learning and makes it more $$ for students to pay someone to take the course on behalf of the student. When we base a large % of a student’s grade on 1 or 2 multiple choice exams we are inviting fraud.

3.       Verification at the point of assessment. We are using Acxiom within our LMS (Bb) prior to a high stakes assessment. Currently we are just looking at pedagogically vulnerable courses.

 

We are pretty happy with steps 1 & 2.  In my opinion, I would like to see something that would make the verification within the LMS even more secure. Perhaps using two factor authentication (and something you have to something you know) so a student would need to have a security token (a smartphone app or separate device for those without a smartphone). I’m pretty sure a student is not going to send their iphone 5 to the folks at wetakeyourclass.com! If anyone would be interested in co-developing something please let me know.

 

 

Eric Zematis

Director of Enterprise Systems

Charter Oak State College

860.515.3770

 

 

 

 

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of AJ
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 8:56 AM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

 

Thanks Kyle, Julie, and Emory for your response.  I'd love to hear from others as well who have discussed or addressed this issue.

 

Kyle, yes, I'm sure this goes beyond just cheating and absolutely violates acceptable use policy (and if it doesn't, shame on that institution).  So the question becomes, how does the industry deal with this moving forward.

 

Julie, thanks for the tip on Acxiom, I'll give it a look over and also pass the info up the line.

 

Emory, good point on the IP address, and they've anticipated it by putting into their FAQ the following:

Can a professor see that someone logged in from a different ip address?

Absolutely not, we use 100% untraceable (non set) IP Addresses. No one will know, and its 100% safe.

They also guarantee an A or a B or your money back.

I guess there is nothing to stop someone from registering for a F2F class and then sending someone in their place for 15 weeks, but with online classes, one individual could be taking multiple classes all at the same time.

 

There is a big difference between a faculty member who decided (along with their department/program/etc...) to offer a course in an online format and an entire program that is offered online.  Its challenging to provide a solution to the individual who is offering their course in a hybrid or online format, but this issue must have come up for entirely online programs.  What are the current conventional wisdom on addressing this?

 

Things like this are like bugs in your house, once you see one you know there are lots more you don't see yet.

 

aj

 

 

If you google their services, you'll see a number of complaints from students who have sent them money and received nothing back in return.  I suspect the students are reluctant to take them to court to recover their payment (which you have to make up front) because it would be against nearly all student conduct policies.   Like going to the police because your drug dealer cheated you….

_____________________
Steve Swartz
Chief Information Officer
Fitchburg State University
978-665-4444



On Sep 18, 2012, at 8:55 AM, AJ <keltona@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU> wrote:

Thanks Kyle, Julie, and Emory for your response.  I'd love to hear from others as well who have discussed or addressed this issue.

Kyle, yes, I'm sure this goes beyond just cheating and absolutely violates acceptable use policy (and if it doesn't, shame on that institution).  So the question becomes, how does the industry deal with this moving forward.

Julie, thanks for the tip on Acxiom, I'll give it a look over and also pass the info up the line.

Emory, good point on the IP address, and they've anticipated it by putting into their FAQ the following:

Can a professor see that someone logged in from a different ip address?

Absolutely not, we use 100% untraceable (non set) IP Addresses. No one will know, and its 100% safe.

They also guarantee an A or a B or your money back.

I guess there is nothing to stop someone from registering for a F2F class and then sending someone in their place for 15 weeks, but with online classes, one individual could be taking multiple classes all at the same time.

There is a big difference between a faculty member who decided (along with their department/program/etc...) to offer a course in an online format and an entire program that is offered online.  Its challenging to provide a solution to the individual who is offering their course in a hybrid or online format, but this issue must have come up for entirely online programs.  What are the current conventional wisdom on addressing this?

Things like this are like bugs in your house, once you see one you know there are lots more you don't see yet.

aj


The site is so brazen about it. I’m amazed. I wonder how they take the courses for the students – does the student provide them with their user id and password or does the student simply pass on what the assignment is and post what they provide? If the student provides them with user id and password, they’re certainly violating acceptable use policy and can be prosecuted on that basis alone (much less violating any academic integrity policy). The hard part is catching them in using such a service. I would think that Turnitin.com might be helpful in catching papers that they’ve used.

Sandie

 

 

Sandra L. Miller, Ed.D.

CCUMC President-Elect

Director of Instruction & Research Technology

William Paterson University

300 Pompton Road

Wayne, NJ  07470

973.720.2530

millers@wpunj.edu

P Think before you print

 

 

I think that this points out an interesting opportunity.  Wearing my former network admin hat, I would be curious to see if there was an IP (or pool of IPs) where the folks at wetakeyourclass.com submitted papers from.  Maybe not enough to accuse an alleged violator, but perhaps enough to raise suspicion and dig deeper.....

Jake

Jake Holmquist
Director of Information Technology Services

Riverdale, NY 10471
Phone: 718-862-7449
Fax: 718-862-8024



The problem is the professional course takers do not work out of a cube in a big office building. They use Comcast, Time Warner, AT&T and Wifi at Starbucks or the local college campus – in other words they would match the profile of the rest of our students. In fact, now that I think about it, there is a high probability they are our students!

Eric

 

 

Eric Zematis

Director of Enterprise Systems

Charter Oak State College

860.515.3770

 

 

 

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jake Holmquist
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:28 PM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

 

I think that this points out an interesting opportunity.  Wearing my former network admin hat, I would be curious to see if there was an IP (or pool of IPs) where the folks at wetakeyourclass.com submitted papers from.  Maybe not enough to accuse an alleged violator, but perhaps enough to raise suspicion and dig deeper.....

 

Jake


Jake Holmquist

Director of Information Technology Services

Riverdale, NY 10471

Phone: 718-862-7449

Fax: 718-862-8024



Not surprisingly, a wetakeyourclass.com representative declined to be included in our twice annual, market research study of the U.S., Four Year college student market.

 

Eric Weil

Managing Partner

STUDENT MONITOR LLC

"Converting Data To Insight"

550 North Maple Ave., Ridgewood, NJ 07450

(201) 612-8100

 

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Eric Zematis
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:51 PM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

 

The problem is the professional course takers do not work out of a cube in a big office building. They use Comcast, Time Warner, AT&T and Wifi at Starbucks or the local college campus – in other words they would match the profile of the rest of our students. In fact, now that I think about it, there is a high probability they are our students!

Eric

 

 

Eric Zematis

Director of Enterprise Systems

Charter Oak State College

860.515.3770

 

 

 

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jake Holmquist
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:28 PM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

 

I think that this points out an interesting opportunity.  Wearing my former network admin hat, I would be curious to see if there was an IP (or pool of IPs) where the folks at wetakeyourclass.com submitted papers from.  Maybe not enough to accuse an alleged violator, but perhaps enough to raise suspicion and dig deeper.....

 

Jake


Jake Holmquist

Director of Information Technology Services

Riverdale, NY 10471

Phone: 718-862-7449

Fax: 718-862-8024

 


Preventing this kind of cheating is hard, when the student possessing the secret credentials (id/password) *wants* to share them, in at least some limited way.  Acxiom may be an interesting idea, but what happens if the real student is in real-time contact with the fake, via txt or phone or remote desktop?  Could the real student answer the Acxiom questions, then let the fake take the test? 

I don't have a solution, and I think any technical effort would result in some counter-effort arms race.  Of course, cheating pre-dates the internet.

Bob Goldstein, UIC


On 09/18/2012 01:51 PM, Eric Zematis wrote:

The problem is the professional course takers do not work out of a cube in a big office building. They use Comcast, Time Warner, AT&T and Wifi at Starbucks or the local college campus – in other words they would match the profile of the rest of our students. In fact, now that I think about it, there is a high probability they are our students!

Eric

 

 

Eric Zematis

Director of Enterprise Systems

Charter Oak State College

860.515.3770

 

 

 

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jake Holmquist
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:28 PM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

 

I think that this points out an interesting opportunity.  Wearing my former network admin hat, I would be curious to see if there was an IP (or pool of IPs) where the folks at wetakeyourclass.com submitted papers from.  Maybe not enough to accuse an alleged violator, but perhaps enough to raise suspicion and dig deeper.....

 

Jake


Jake Holmquist

Director of Information Technology Services

Riverdale, NY 10471

Phone: 718-862-7449

Fax: 718-862-8024



Message from bauer.rick@gmail.com

As a testing company that delivers over 300,000 certification exams a year, CompTIA is acutely concerned about validating identity, and so this article was of particular interest and we passed it around internally. The outrageousness of this "service" is matched by websites that routinely post answers to exams. We scramble them, use forensics (time exams), look at patterns in various centers (unfortunately, this is an all-too-common problem--simply put, folks can make more money selling exams than running test centers. We try to use the DMCA take-down notices to go after these scofflaws (I am wondering if there is any recourse with this group, but I would imagine their DNS is offshore).

We to not provide education, curriculum materials, or classrooms, so our business model is bifurcated--the teacher is not the agency charged with administering the exam. I wonder if that might be a trend that will grow with these identity issues in academe. We participate in a non-profit called the "Association of Test Professionals" (http://www.testpublishers.org/ ), which has a separate security practice.

We are using more and more technology assisted tools (biometrics on the horizon, it would appear) to validate the identity of the test-taker, and to provide greater intelligence behind the integrity of the exams (we auto scramble, random fill from test banks of hundreds/thousands of psychometrically-valid questions, so that the test experience on a subject is as unique as possible. All of this costs lots of money and time, but I am afraid it becomes viewed as yet another "responsibility for tech" to figure out, and more on the load. Nothing bulletproof at this point (we require two forms of ID, a letter or authorization, and we have independent proctors, and we routinely scan sessions in real time for anomalies (don't want to go into this online), and I think more intrusion into the "test event" will show up in the environment.

Not selling anything, just informing the community that the certification testing part of this equation is "feeling the innovation" to cheat, too.

As an old network admin told me, "teach like an optimist; but secure it like a Calvinist."

Regards,

Rick Bauer, Director of R&D
CompTIA

On , Bob Goldstein <bobg@uic.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Preventing this kind of cheating is hard, when the student
> possessing the secret credentials (id/password) *wants* to share
> them, in at least some limited way.  Acxiom may be an interesting
> idea, but what happens if the real student is in real-time contact
> with the fake, via txt or phone or remote desktop?  Could the real
> student answer the Acxiom questions, then let the fake take the
> test? 
>
>
>
> I don't have a solution, and I think any technical effort would
> result in some counter-effort arms race.  Of course, cheating
> pre-dates the internet.
>
>
>
> Bob Goldstein, UIC
>
>
>
>
>
> On 09/18/2012 01:51 PM, Eric Zematis wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The
> problem is the professional course takers do not work out of
> a cube in a big office building. They use Comcast, Time
> Warner, AT&T and Wifi at Starbucks or the local college
> campus – in other words they would match the profile of the
> rest of our students. In fact, now that I think about it,
> there is a high probability they are our students!
> Eric
>  
>  
> Eric
> Zematis
> Director
> of Enterprise Systems
> Charter
> Oak State College
> 860.515.3770
>  
>  
>  
> From:
> The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv
> [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Jake Holmquist
>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:28 PM
>
> To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
>
> Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com
>  
> I think that this points out an interesting
> opportunity.  Wearing my former network admin hat, I would be
> curious to see if there was an IP (or pool of IPs) where the
> folks at
> wetakeyourclass.com
> submitted papers from.  Maybe not enough to accuse an alleged
> violator, but perhaps enough to raise suspicion and dig
> deeper.....
>
>  
>
>
>
> Jake
>
>
>
>
> Jake
> Holmquist
>
> Director
> of Information Technology Services
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Riverdale,
> NY 10471
>
>
>
> Phone:
> 718-862-7449
>
>
>
> Fax:
> 718-862-8024
>
>
>
> jake.holmquist@manhattan.edu
>
>
>
> www.manhattan.edu
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Not sure why technology enabled services are held to a higher standard than traditionally delivered services (maybe not, but it seems like it to me). Is it simply the scale at which they can be delivered? That is, technology enables large scale cheating? 60 minutes interview with Sam Eshaghoff http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/01/01/sam-eshaghoff-discusses-long-isla... The good news is the word is out. Apparently this service that cheats for you, also cheats you... http://we-take-your-class.pissedconsumer.com/917-300-9820-wetakeyourclas... || |||| ||| || | | || ||| || ||| || | | ||| || ||| || Patrick Masson Chief Technology Officer, UMassOnline The University of Massachusetts, Office of the President 333 South St., Suite 400, Shrewsbury, MA 01545 (774) 455-7615: Office (774) 455-7620: Fax (970) 4MASSON: GoogleVoice UMOLPatMasson: AIM massonpj: Skype Web Site: http://www.umassonline.net Blog: http://www.umassonlineblog.com ________________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Rick Bauer [bauer.rick@GMAIL.COM] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 6:40 PM To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com As a testing company that delivers over 300,000 certification exams a year, CompTIA is acutely concerned about validating identity, and so this article was of particular interest and we passed it around internally. The outrageousness of this "service" is matched by websites that routinely post answers to exams. We scramble them, use forensics (time exams), look at patterns in various centers (unfortunately, this is an all-too-common problem--simply put, folks can make more money selling exams than running test centers. We try to use the DMCA take-down notices to go after these scofflaws (I am wondering if there is any recourse with this group, but I would imagine their DNS is offshore). We to not provide education, curriculum materials, or classrooms, so our business model is bifurcated--the teacher is not the agency charged with administering the exam. I wonder if that might be a trend that will grow with these identity issues in academe. We participate in a non-profit called the "Association of Test Professionals" (http://www.testpublishers.org/ ), which has a separate security practice. We are using more and more technology assisted tools (biometrics on the horizon, it would appear) to validate the identity of the test-taker, and to provide greater intelligence behind the integrity of the exams (we auto scramble, random fill from test banks of hundreds/thousands of psychometrically-valid questions, so that the test experience on a subject is as unique as possible. All of this costs lots of money and time, but I am afraid it becomes viewed as yet another "responsibility for tech" to figure out, and more on the load. Nothing bulletproof at this point (we require two forms of ID, a letter or authorization, and we have independent proctors, and we routinely scan sessions in real time for anomalies (don't want to go into this online), and I think more intrusion into the "test event" will show up in the environment. Not selling anything, just informing the community that the certification testing part of this equation is "feeling the innovation" to cheat, too. As an old network admin told me, "teach like an optimist; but secure it like a Calvinist." Regards, Rick Bauer, Director of R&D CompTIA On , Bob Goldstein wrote: > > > > > > > > Preventing this kind of cheating is hard, when the student > possessing the secret credentials (id/password) *wants* to share > them, in at least some limited way. Acxiom may be an interesting > idea, but what happens if the real student is in real-time contact > with the fake, via txt or phone or remote desktop? Could the real > student answer the Acxiom questions, then let the fake take the > test? > > > > I don't have a solution, and I think any technical effort would > result in some counter-effort arms race. Of course, cheating > pre-dates the internet. > > > > Bob Goldstein, UIC > > > > > > On 09/18/2012 01:51 PM, Eric Zematis wrote: > > > > > > > The > problem is the professional course takers do not work out of > a cube in a big office building. They use Comcast, Time > Warner, AT&T and Wifi at Starbucks or the local college > campus – in other words they would match the profile of the > rest of our students. In fact, now that I think about it, > there is a high probability they are our students! > Eric > > > Eric > Zematis > Director > of Enterprise Systems > Charter > Oak State College > 860.515.3770 > > > > From: > The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv > [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] > On Behalf Of Jake Holmquist > > Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:28 PM > > To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > > Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com > > I think that this points out an interesting > opportunity. Wearing my former network admin hat, I would be > curious to see if there was an IP (or pool of IPs) where the > folks at > wetakeyourclass.com > submitted papers from. Maybe not enough to accuse an alleged > violator, but perhaps enough to raise suspicion and dig > deeper..... > > > > > > Jake > > > > > Jake > Holmquist > > Director > of Information Technology Services > > > > > > > > Riverdale, > NY 10471 > > > > Phone: > 718-862-7449 > > > > Fax: > 718-862-8024 > > > > jake.holmquist@manhattan.edu > > > > www.manhattan.edu > > > > > > > > >
Message from dabantz@alaska.edu

Two factor authentication (requiring in addition to password something the student has or is at the time of login) would seem to at least make impersonation more difficult. While a cheater might give away their password, will they (or can they) give away that second factor (if needed for access to multiple purposes) to the impostor? On Tue, 18 Sep 2012, at 13:44 , Bob Goldstein wrote: > Preventing this kind of cheating is hard, when the student possessing the secret credentials (id/password) *wants* to share the ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
I'd be interested in hearing from any schools that have implemented two factor authentication.  I think it is a direction many of us are considering but getting there presents some challenges.
Steve

Steve Smith, Assoc VP/Deputy CIO
University of Hawaii


Yes, I think the concern is exactly that this sort of thing can be done large scale.  The amount of cheating that can go on in a face-to-face environment is limited.  If you're going to "hire" someone to take your PSYC 101 exam, the hired gun can only take one test at a time.  That same hired gun, in an online class, can sit in on - what - 6 classes, 8 - 12?

So its not only a question of numbers but also a question of quantity.  A cheater is not going to hire someone to go to their entire face-to-face class.  What this site seems to be about is taking an entire online class for someone.

Perhaps, as noted - the cheating company is not really cheating our institutions but cheating the cheaters (which seems both ironic and poetic) but this is likely just the tip of an iceberg that, as many have noted, may be difficult to address.

Yes, cheating has been around and is not something new.  As I mentioned in my original post, this type of site presents an interesting twist on it though.

Many great thought in this thread so far.

aj


Interesting thread…. Following up on AJ’s comments… in the long run, what impact does this behavior have on the “cheater?” Is the cheater doing this because  he/she can’t pass the course? Or needs an A vs. a C….. even if these people (cheaters) graduate….are there any data on future success of cheaters or does, not learning something matter at all???? And if the latter what does that say about what we are teaching????

 

Just early morning ruminations!!!

 

Best,

Rob

 

Dr. Robert Paterson

Vice President – Information Technology, Planning and Research

Molloy College

Rockville Centre, NY

 

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of AJ
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 9:11 AM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

 

Yes, I think the concern is exactly that this sort of thing can be done large scale.  The amount of cheating that can go on in a face-to-face environment is limited.  If you're going to "hire" someone to take your PSYC 101 exam, the hired gun can only take one test at a time.  That same hired gun, in an online class, can sit in on - what - 6 classes, 8 - 12?

 

So its not only a question of numbers but also a question of quantity.  A cheater is not going to hire someone to go to their entire face-to-face class.  What this site seems to be about is taking an entire online class for someone.

 

Perhaps, as noted - the cheating company is not really cheating our institutions but cheating the cheaters (which seems both ironic and poetic) but this is likely just the tip of an iceberg that, as many have noted, may be difficult to address.

 

Yes, cheating has been around and is not something new.  As I mentioned in my original post, this type of site presents an interesting twist on it though.

 

Many great thought in this thread so far.

 

aj

 

these cheaters will be designing our next generation of airplane, car, nuclear power plant....  
Comforting

Because education is so labor intensive - even with online classes I don't see this model really scaling well.  

If you hire someone to take a quiz, you'd still have to do all the homework, tests, papers - so you'd have to know the subject matter anyway.  If you hire them to do the entire class, they'd have to make sure any papers or work are different enough that the instructor doesn't notice it's coming from the same person - and they couldn't use papers used in previous years because the professor would notice.  

The one complaint online referenced a cost of $80 to take one quiz (and they took the money but never took the quiz) so it doesn't look like it could be used in any large way without a substantial amount of money paid.

I would think that it would be a pretty easy process to correlate the home address of a student to the location of the IP address from the source computer -- while this wouldn't prove theres cheating going on, it would allow you to highlight suspect work for further scrutiny.  If we're sending the bill to a student in Boston and the online work is coming from California - it might be legitimate but might also flag it as suspect.   I know there are ways to technically circumvent this, but the more hoops they have to jump through, the higher the price for the service.

_____________________
Steve Swartz
Chief Information Officer
Fitchburg State University
978-665-4444



On Sep 19, 2012, at 9:10 AM, AJ <keltona@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU> wrote:

Yes, I think the concern is exactly that this sort of thing can be done large scale.  The amount of cheating that can go on in a face-to-face environment is limited.  If you're going to "hire" someone to take your PSYC 101 exam, the hired gun can only take one test at a time.  That same hired gun, in an online class, can sit in on - what - 6 classes, 8 - 12?

So its not only a question of numbers but also a question of quantity.  A cheater is not going to hire someone to go to their entire face-to-face class.  What this site seems to be about is taking an entire online class for someone.

Perhaps, as noted - the cheating company is not really cheating our institutions but cheating the cheaters (which seems both ironic and poetic) but this is likely just the tip of an iceberg that, as many have noted, may be difficult to address.

Yes, cheating has been around and is not something new.  As I mentioned in my original post, this type of site presents an interesting twist on it though.

Many great thought in this thread so far.

aj


I suppose it was only a matter of time before a company like that came into being.  The existence of this company reminds me that it is probably useful to identify our customers, products and services. 

 

It’s normal to think of the individual students as customers, and the service to be facilitation of learning.  Products include the academic transcript and diploma.  Most students want both the service and the products, but some are only interested in the products, and not the service – the target market for wetakeyourclass.com.  Some (very few) are interested in the service but not the product; auditors of classes would fall into this category.  Of course we cannot ignore our other customers – everyone who gives us money, like government and donors.  Also complicating the situation is the fact that the customers can affect the value of the products for other customers – if the institution gets a bad reputation by giving away diplomas to incompetent people, then the value of the diploma falls, even though the learning may be no different.  So we universities need to get in the “arms race” of detecting cheaters, so that we don’t award diplomas to people who don’t know the material.  The same goes for testing services, as Rick Bauer mentions.  We might lose that “arms race” due to these cheater facilitation companies and willing cheaters.  The reason I think we may lose that race is that I’m reminded of how we thought captchas would dramatically reduce the ability for spammers to create e-mail accounts for their misdeeds.  Those captchas are being deciphered by workers around the world, making about 0.1 cents each…

 

I wonder if we will end up with different levels of learning validation – 1) courses taught with at least some substantial portion in person, where there is a professor willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student, and 2) courses taught with none or little in person interaction, where the professor is not willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student.

 

What is University of Phoenix doing about this problem?  They probably have the most to lose from companies like wetakeyourclass.com, where if enough students get diplomas without learning, and get hired and do poor work, the university gets a bad reputation and goes out of business.

 

Maybe I’m blowing it out of proportion, and there are in actuality few people who want diplomas without education, and so those few people won’t ruin a school’s reputation.

 

Kevin

 

From: AJ [mailto:keltona@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU]
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:11 AM
Subject: Re: wetakeyourclass.com

 

Yes, I think the concern is exactly that this sort of thing can be done large scale.  The amount of cheating that can go on in a face-to-face environment is limited.  If you're going to "hire" someone to take your PSYC 101 exam, the hired gun can only take one test at a time.  That same hired gun, in an online class, can sit in on - what - 6 classes, 8 - 12?

 

So its not only a question of numbers but also a question of quantity.  A cheater is not going to hire someone to go to their entire face-to-face class.  What this site seems to be about is taking an entire online class for someone.

 

Perhaps, as noted - the cheating company is not really cheating our institutions but cheating the cheaters (which seems both ironic and poetic) but this is likely just the tip of an iceberg that, as many have noted, may be difficult to address.

 

Yes, cheating has been around and is not something new.  As I mentioned in my original post, this type of site presents an interesting twist on it though.

 

Many great thought in this thread so far.

 

aj

 

Wal-Mart heiress returns USC diploma after cheating report http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-10-19-wal-mart-heiress_x.htm || |||| ||| || | | || ||| || ||| || | | ||| || ||| || Patrick Masson Chief Technology Officer, UMassOnline The University of Massachusetts, Office of the President 333 South St., Suite 400, Shrewsbury, MA 01545 (774) 455-7615: Office (774) 455-7620: Fax (970) 4MASSON: GoogleVoice UMOLPatMasson: AIM massonpj: Skype Web Site: http://www.umassonline.net Blog: http://www.umassonlineblog.com ________________________________________ From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Shalla, Kevin [kshalla@UIC.EDU] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 5:08 PM To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com I suppose it was only a matter of time before a company like that came into being. The existence of this company reminds me that it is probably useful to identify our customers, products and services. It’s normal to think of the individual students as customers, and the service to be facilitation of learning. Products include the academic transcript and diploma. Most students want both the service and the products, but some are only interested in the products, and not the service – the target market for wetakeyourclass.com. Some (very few) are interested in the service but not the product; auditors of classes would fall into this category. Of course we cannot ignore our other customers – everyone who gives us money, like government and donors. Also complicating the situation is the fact that the customers can affect the value of the products for other customers – if the institution gets a bad reputation by giving away diplomas to incompetent people, then the value of the diploma falls, even though the learning may be no different. So we universities need to get in the “arms race” of detecting cheaters, so that we don’t award diplomas to people who don’t know the material. The same goes for testing services, as Rick Bauer mentions. We might lose that “arms race” due to these cheater facilitation companies and willing cheaters. The reason I think we may lose that race is that I’m reminded of how we thought captchas would dramatically reduce the ability for spammers to create e-mail accounts for their misdeeds. Those captchas are being deciphered by workers around the world, making about 0.1 cents each… I wonder if we will end up with different levels of learning validation – 1) courses taught with at least some substantial portion in person, where there is a professor willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student, and 2) courses taught with none or little in person interaction, where the professor is not willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student. What is University of Phoenix doing about this problem? They probably have the most to lose from companies like wetakeyourclass.com, where if enough students get diplomas without learning, and get hired and do poor work, the university gets a bad reputation and goes out of business. Maybe I’m blowing it out of proportion, and there are in actuality few people who want diplomas without education, and so those few people won’t ruin a school’s reputation. Kevin From: AJ [mailto:keltona@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:11 AM Subject: Re: wetakeyourclass.com Yes, I think the concern is exactly that this sort of thing can be done large scale. The amount of cheating that can go on in a face-to-face environment is limited. If you're going to "hire" someone to take your PSYC 101 exam, the hired gun can only take one test at a time. That same hired gun, in an online class, can sit in on - what - 6 classes, 8 - 12? So its not only a question of numbers but also a question of quantity. A cheater is not going to hire someone to go to their entire face-to-face class. What this site seems to be about is taking an entire online class for someone. Perhaps, as noted - the cheating company is not really cheating our institutions but cheating the cheaters (which seems both ironic and poetic) but this is likely just the tip of an iceberg that, as many have noted, may be difficult to address. Yes, cheating has been around and is not something new. As I mentioned in my original post, this type of site presents an interesting twist on it though. Many great thought in this thread so far. aj
Message from mike.cunningham@pct.edu

Isn’t it possible to do this in face-to-face classes? I hire someone to attend all my classes for all 2 or 4 years of my degree and get a diploma issued in my name. Much more expensive to do but possible. I would be fairly easy to do in a large freshman class with 100-200 students unless someone is checking photo ids for every student who turns in a test.

 

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Shalla, Kevin
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 5:09 PM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

 

I suppose it was only a matter of time before a company like that came into being.  The existence of this company reminds me that it is probably useful to identify our customers, products and services. 

 

It’s normal to think of the individual students as customers, and the service to be facilitation of learning.  Products include the academic transcript and diploma.  Most students want both the service and the products, but some are only interested in the products, and not the service – the target market for wetakeyourclass.com.  Some (very few) are interested in the service but not the product; auditors of classes would fall into this category.  Of course we cannot ignore our other customers – everyone who gives us money, like government and donors.  Also complicating the situation is the fact that the customers can affect the value of the products for other customers – if the institution gets a bad reputation by giving away diplomas to incompetent people, then the value of the diploma falls, even though the learning may be no different.  So we universities need to get in the “arms race” of detecting cheaters, so that we don’t award diplomas to people who don’t know the material.  The same goes for testing services, as Rick Bauer mentions.  We might lose that “arms race” due to these cheater facilitation companies and willing cheaters.  The reason I think we may lose that race is that I’m reminded of how we thought captchas would dramatically reduce the ability for spammers to create e-mail accounts for their misdeeds.  Those captchas are being deciphered by workers around the world, making about 0.1 cents each…

 

I wonder if we will end up with different levels of learning validation – 1) courses taught with at least some substantial portion in person, where there is a professor willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student, and 2) courses taught with none or little in person interaction, where the professor is not willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student.

 

What is University of Phoenix doing about this problem?  They probably have the most to lose from companies like wetakeyourclass.com, where if enough students get diplomas without learning, and get hired and do poor work, the university gets a bad reputation and goes out of business.

 

Maybe I’m blowing it out of proportion, and there are in actuality few people who want diplomas without education, and so those few people won’t ruin a school’s reputation.

 

Kevin

 

 

From: AJ [mailto:keltona@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU]
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:11 AM
Subject: Re: wetakeyourclass.com

 

Yes, I think the concern is exactly that this sort of thing can be done large scale.  The amount of cheating that can go on in a face-to-face environment is limited.  If you're going to "hire" someone to take your PSYC 101 exam, the hired gun can only take one test at a time.  That same hired gun, in an online class, can sit in on - what - 6 classes, 8 - 12?

 

So its not only a question of numbers but also a question of quantity.  A cheater is not going to hire someone to go to their entire face-to-face class.  What this site seems to be about is taking an entire online class for someone.

 

Perhaps, as noted - the cheating company is not really cheating our institutions but cheating the cheaters (which seems both ironic and poetic) but this is likely just the tip of an iceberg that, as many have noted, may be difficult to address.

 

Yes, cheating has been around and is not something new.  As I mentioned in my original post, this type of site presents an interesting twist on it though.

 

Many great thought in this thread so far.

 

aj

 

"Isn’t it possible to do this in face-to-face classes?" Wal-Mart heiress returns USC diploma after cheating report: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-10-19-wal-mart-heiress_x.htm From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Shalla, Kevin Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 5:09 PM To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com I suppose it was only a matter of time before a company like that came into being. The existence of this company reminds me that it is probably useful to identify our customers, products and services. It’s normal to think of the individual students as customers, and the service to be facilitation of learning. Products include the academic transcript and diploma. Most students want both the service and the products, but some are only interested in the products, and not the service – the target market for wetakeyourclass.com. Some (very few) are interested in the service but not the product; auditors of classes would fall into this category. Of course we cannot ignore our other customers – everyone who gives us money, like government and donors. Also complicating the situation is the fact that the customers can affect the value of the products for other customers – if the institution gets a bad reputation by giving away diplomas to incompetent people, then the value of the diploma falls, even though the learning may be no different. So we universities need to get in the “arms race” of detecting cheaters, so that we don’t award diplomas to people who don’t know the material. The same goes for testing services, as Rick Bauer mentions. We might lose that “arms race” due to these cheater facilitation companies and willing cheaters. The reason I think we may lose that race is that I’m reminded of how we thought captchas would dramatically reduce the ability for spammers to create e-mail accounts for their misdeeds. Those captchas are being deciphered by workers around the world, making about 0.1 cents each… I wonder if we will end up with different levels of learning validation – 1) courses taught with at least some substantial portion in person, where there is a professor willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student, and 2) courses taught with none or little in person interaction, where the professor is not willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student. What is University of Phoenix doing about this problem? They probably have the most to lose from companies like wetakeyourclass.com, where if enough students get diplomas without learning, and get hired and do poor work, the university gets a bad reputation and goes out of business. Maybe I’m blowing it out of proportion, and there are in actuality few people who want diplomas without education, and so those few people won’t ruin a school’s reputation. Kevin From: AJ [mailto:keltona@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:11 AM Subject: Re: wetakeyourclass.com Yes, I think the concern is exactly that this sort of thing can be done large scale. The amount of cheating that can go on in a face-to-face environment is limited. If you're going to "hire" someone to take your PSYC 101 exam, the hired gun can only take one test at a time. That same hired gun, in an online class, can sit in on - what - 6 classes, 8 - 12? So its not only a question of numbers but also a question of quantity. A cheater is not going to hire someone to go to their entire face-to-face class. What this site seems to be about is taking an entire online class for someone. Perhaps, as noted - the cheating company is not really cheating our institutions but cheating the cheaters (which seems both ironic and poetic) but this is likely just the tip of an iceberg that, as many have noted, may be difficult to address. Yes, cheating has been around and is not something new. As I mentioned in my original post, this type of site presents an interesting twist on it though. Many great thought in this thread so far. aj
Or even in proctored exams: 

"Exam Cheating on Long Island Hardly a Secret"


On Sep 19, 2012, at 22:02, "Masson, Patrick" <pmasson@UMASSONLINE.NET> wrote:

"Isn’t it possible to do this in face-to-face classes?"

Wal-Mart heiress returns USC diploma after cheating report: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-10-19-wal-mart-heiress_x.htm


From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Shalla, Kevin
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 5:09 PM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

I suppose it was only a matter of time before a company like that came into being.  The existence of this company reminds me that it is probably useful to identify our customers, products and services.

It’s normal to think of the individual students as customers, and the service to be facilitation of learning.  Products include the academic transcript and diploma.  Most students want both the service and the products, but some are only interested in the products, and not the service – the target market for wetakeyourclass.com.  Some (very few) are interested in the service but not the product; auditors of classes would fall into this category.  Of course we cannot ignore our other customers – everyone who gives us money, like government and donors.  Also complicating the situation is the fact that the customers can affect the value of the products for other customers – if the institution gets a bad reputation by giving away diplomas to incompetent people, then the value of the diploma falls, even though the learning may be no different.  So we universities need to get in the “arms race” of detecting cheaters, so that we don’t award diplomas to people who don’t know the material.  The same goes for testing services, as Rick Bauer mentions.  We might lose that “arms race” due to these cheater facilitation companies and willing cheaters.  The reason I think we may lose that race is that I’m reminded of how we thought captchas would dramatically reduce the ability for spammers to create e-mail accounts for their misdeeds.  Those captchas are being deciphered by workers around the world, making about 0.1 cents each…

I wonder if we will end up with different levels of learning validation – 1) courses taught with at least some substantial portion in person, where there is a professor willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student, and 2) courses taught with none or little in person interaction, where the professor is not willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student.

What is University of Phoenix doing about this problem?  They probably have the most to lose from companies like wetakeyourclass.com, where if enough students get diplomas without learning, and get hired and do poor work, the university gets a bad reputation and goes out of business.

Maybe I’m blowing it out of proportion, and there are in actuality few people who want diplomas without education, and so those few people won’t ruin a school’s reputation.

Kevin


From: AJ [mailto:keltona@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU]<mailto:[mailto:keltona@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:11 AM
Subject: Re: wetakeyourclass.com

Yes, I think the concern is exactly that this sort of thing can be done large scale.  The amount of cheating that can go on in a face-to-face environment is limited.  If you're going to "hire" someone to take your PSYC 101 exam, the hired gun can only take one test at a time.  That same hired gun, in an online class, can sit in on - what - 6 classes, 8 - 12?

So its not only a question of numbers but also a question of quantity.  A cheater is not going to hire someone to go to their entire face-to-face class.  What this site seems to be about is taking an entire online class for someone.

Perhaps, as noted - the cheating company is not really cheating our institutions but cheating the cheaters (which seems both ironic and poetic) but this is likely just the tip of an iceberg that, as many have noted, may be difficult to address.

Yes, cheating has been around and is not something new.  As I mentioned in my original post, this type of site presents an interesting twist on it though.

Many great thought in this thread so far.

aj

There are two categories of cheaters

 

#1 ID Theft/Fraud – In this scenario the objective is for the individual to steal the identity of another with the goal of stealing federal financial aid dollars. They attend the class as long as needed to get the aid disbursements. The challenge questions like Acxiom provides are very effective for this population because the “student” probably does not know the real person whose identity they have stolen.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/az/press_releases/2012/APR/PR_05042012_Delgadoetal.html

 

#2 Course Cheating – The student is attempting to navigate their path to a diploma and they resort to cheating. Sharing old exams, buying term papers and paying someone to take your class. As mentioned in previous post this is a problem in the online and traditional classroom. I believe the scope of this problem is much greater – and our institutions have largely accepted a certain amount of cheating in our classrooms. We all have policies against it and we have discipline procedures to deal with it and that is it. When there is a fairly simple way to address cheating we take that step. Think about how quickly we adopted turnitin.com across highered – but how many faculty are using it for all their assignments?

 

So what is the role of the IT leader to protect our institutions from each of these categories?

 

Eric

 

 

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Shalla, Kevin
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 5:09 PM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

 

I suppose it was only a matter of time before a company like that came into being.  The existence of this company reminds me that it is probably useful to identify our customers, products and services. 

 

It’s normal to think of the individual students as customers, and the service to be facilitation of learning.  Products include the academic transcript and diploma.  Most students want both the service and the products, but some are only interested in the products, and not the service – the target market for wetakeyourclass.com.  Some (very few) are interested in the service but not the product; auditors of classes would fall into this category.  Of course we cannot ignore our other customers – everyone who gives us money, like government and donors.  Also complicating the situation is the fact that the customers can affect the value of the products for other customers – if the institution gets a bad reputation by giving away diplomas to incompetent people, then the value of the diploma falls, even though the learning may be no different.  So we universities need to get in the “arms race” of detecting cheaters, so that we don’t award diplomas to people who don’t know the material.  The same goes for testing services, as Rick Bauer mentions.  We might lose that “arms race” due to these cheater facilitation companies and willing cheaters.  The reason I think we may lose that race is that I’m reminded of how we thought captchas would dramatically reduce the ability for spammers to create e-mail accounts for their misdeeds.  Those captchas are being deciphered by workers around the world, making about 0.1 cents each…

 

I wonder if we will end up with different levels of learning validation – 1) courses taught with at least some substantial portion in person, where there is a professor willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student, and 2) courses taught with none or little in person interaction, where the professor is not willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student.

 

What is University of Phoenix doing about this problem?  They probably have the most to lose from companies like wetakeyourclass.com, where if enough students get diplomas without learning, and get hired and do poor work, the university gets a bad reputation and goes out of business.

 

Maybe I’m blowing it out of proportion, and there are in actuality few people who want diplomas without education, and so those few people won’t ruin a school’s reputation.

 

Kevin

 

 

From: AJ [mailto:keltona@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU]
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:11 AM
Subject: Re: wetakeyourclass.com

 

Yes, I think the concern is exactly that this sort of thing can be done large scale.  The amount of cheating that can go on in a face-to-face environment is limited.  If you're going to "hire" someone to take your PSYC 101 exam, the hired gun can only take one test at a time.  That same hired gun, in an online class, can sit in on - what - 6 classes, 8 - 12?

 

So its not only a question of numbers but also a question of quantity.  A cheater is not going to hire someone to go to their entire face-to-face class.  What this site seems to be about is taking an entire online class for someone.

 

Perhaps, as noted - the cheating company is not really cheating our institutions but cheating the cheaters (which seems both ironic and poetic) but this is likely just the tip of an iceberg that, as many have noted, may be difficult to address.

 

Yes, cheating has been around and is not something new.  As I mentioned in my original post, this type of site presents an interesting twist on it though.

 

Many great thought in this thread so far.

 

aj

 

FYI: There was a segment on this morning’s NBC Today Show on college cheating:

 

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp/49100383#49100383

 

An interesting comment was the role of parents in the process….

 

Thanks!

******************************************
Charlie Moran
Sr. Partner & CEO

1215 Hamilton Lane, Suite 200
Naperville, IL  60540
Toll-Free (877) 212-6379 (Voice & Fax)
Website: 
www.MoranTechnology.com
******************************************
P Please consider the environment before printing this email...

 

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Eric Zematis
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 7:25 AM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

 

There are two categories of cheaters

 

#1 ID Theft/Fraud – In this scenario the objective is for the individual to steal the identity of another with the goal of stealing federal financial aid dollars. They attend the class as long as needed to get the aid disbursements. The challenge questions like Acxiom provides are very effective for this population because the “student” probably does not know the real person whose identity they have stolen.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/az/press_releases/2012/APR/PR_05042012_Delgadoetal.html

 

#2 Course Cheating – The student is attempting to navigate their path to a diploma and they resort to cheating. Sharing old exams, buying term papers and paying someone to take your class. As mentioned in previous post this is a problem in the online and traditional classroom. I believe the scope of this problem is much greater – and our institutions have largely accepted a certain amount of cheating in our classrooms. We all have policies against it and we have discipline procedures to deal with it and that is it. When there is a fairly simple way to address cheating we take that step. Think about how quickly we adopted turnitin.com across highered – but how many faculty are using it for all their assignments?

 

So what is the role of the IT leader to protect our institutions from each of these categories?

 

Eric

 

 

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Shalla, Kevin
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 5:09 PM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

 

I suppose it was only a matter of time before a company like that came into being.  The existence of this company reminds me that it is probably useful to identify our customers, products and services. 

 

It’s normal to think of the individual students as customers, and the service to be facilitation of learning.  Products include the academic transcript and diploma.  Most students want both the service and the products, but some are only interested in the products, and not the service – the target market for wetakeyourclass.com.  Some (very few) are interested in the service but not the product; auditors of classes would fall into this category.  Of course we cannot ignore our other customers – everyone who gives us money, like government and donors.  Also complicating the situation is the fact that the customers can affect the value of the products for other customers – if the institution gets a bad reputation by giving away diplomas to incompetent people, then the value of the diploma falls, even though the learning may be no different.  So we universities need to get in the “arms race” of detecting cheaters, so that we don’t award diplomas to people who don’t know the material.  The same goes for testing services, as Rick Bauer mentions.  We might lose that “arms race” due to these cheater facilitation companies and willing cheaters.  The reason I think we may lose that race is that I’m reminded of how we thought captchas would dramatically reduce the ability for spammers to create e-mail accounts for their misdeeds.  Those captchas are being deciphered by workers around the world, making about 0.1 cents each…

 

I wonder if we will end up with different levels of learning validation – 1) courses taught with at least some substantial portion in person, where there is a professor willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student, and 2) courses taught with none or little in person interaction, where the professor is not willing to vouch for the authenticity of the student.

 

What is University of Phoenix doing about this problem?  They probably have the most to lose from companies like wetakeyourclass.com, where if enough students get diplomas without learning, and get hired and do poor work, the university gets a bad reputation and goes out of business.

 

Maybe I’m blowing it out of proportion, and there are in actuality few people who want diplomas without education, and so those few people won’t ruin a school’s reputation.

 

Kevin

 

 

From: AJ [mailto:keltona@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU]
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:11 AM
Subject: Re: wetakeyourclass.com

 

Yes, I think the concern is exactly that this sort of thing can be done large scale.  The amount of cheating that can go on in a face-to-face environment is limited.  If you're going to "hire" someone to take your PSYC 101 exam, the hired gun can only take one test at a time.  That same hired gun, in an online class, can sit in on - what - 6 classes, 8 - 12?

 

So its not only a question of numbers but also a question of quantity.  A cheater is not going to hire someone to go to their entire face-to-face class.  What this site seems to be about is taking an entire online class for someone.

 

Perhaps, as noted - the cheating company is not really cheating our institutions but cheating the cheaters (which seems both ironic and poetic) but this is likely just the tip of an iceberg that, as many have noted, may be difficult to address.

 

Yes, cheating has been around and is not something new.  As I mentioned in my original post, this type of site presents an interesting twist on it though.

 

Many great thought in this thread so far.

 

aj

 

The Campus Technology folks have a free webinar coming up which may be pertinent:

How our Students Take Exams at a Distance:
University of West Alabama, Frontier Nursing University & Student Perspectives
Wednesday, September 26, 2012 @ 11am PT/2pm ET

Distance Learning programs are affording students everywhere the opportunity to learn at their convenience. However, the mechanics of test taking has not. Remote students typically have to find proctors, or incur expenses by traveling to test centers.  And online testing administered remotely has its risks&#8212the potential for cheating.

The University of West Alabama, along with Frontier Nursing University were presented with a challenge that an increasing number of colleges and universities are facing today—how to deliver exams online without compromising exam integrity and still provide accessibility and convenience for students?

If anyone is interested, I can forward the entire message off-list.

Glenn Everett, PhD
Pembroke, MA
gseverett1@gmail.com
617-688-2102
http://geverettconsulting.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/geverett
********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

Kyle is exactly right. This is not a technology issue and technology will not/cannot stop this kind of social behavior, nor should we try. I suppose the provost, dean or even the president can send a notice to all students indicating that they should be aware of the site, know that it is not in the best interest of the student's educational efforts, that should they choose to take advantage dire consequences will follow. Tom Thomas H. Carnwath Vice President Technology and Information Services Hamilton Hall 320 South Broad Street Philadelphia, PA 19102 Tel: 215-717-6440 [cid:A2F76141-D346-4456-889A-E62741C55AD9] Need Assistance? Call OOPS (215-717-6677) to get answers. OTIS will never ask for your personal information or password in an email. Never share this information with anyone. This message and any attachment may contain confidential or privileged information and is intended for the intended individual named as addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender immediately by return email and delete this message and all attachments from your system. Any unauthorized disclosure, use, distribution, or reproduction of this message or any attachments is prohibited and may be deemed unlawful. Please consider the environment before printing this email. From: Kyle Johnson > Reply-To: EDUCAUSE Listserv > Date: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 9:14 PM To: EDUCAUSE Listserv > Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com
As technologists, we face two problems here. Firstly, just what are the limits of technology in reducing cheating? In some cases, we can make it more difficult (but hardly impossible) for an impersonator to take an exam or submit an assignment. In other cases, we can make it easier to detect after the fact, e.g. use plagerism detection programs. There might even be some social methods. I wonder, if assignments are done by groups, and if those groups get mixed up during the course, it might make it harder for an individual to cheat. It's much harder for a group to cheat, or to hide cheating within a group, than for an individual. Nonetheless, nothing can be perfect, and the state-of-the-art, either offense or defense, will not stay that way for long. (And if you read Dan Ariely, it may be that asking students to sign a "I did not cheat" statement *before* doing or submitting the assignment actually has a positive effect. Doing so at the end of the submission does not.) Secondly, we need to explain to the non-tech community exactly WHY technology cannot solve this issue, and just what the limits are. This is not always a comfortable conversation. Humans often have trouble making risk-based decisions, but teachers have to do so in a course, and colleges have to do so in deciding on procedures and credentials. It might be that Educause, or some subgroup, would have a better chance of educating the educators in this regard, rather than us attempting it individually. bobg On 09/20/2012 01:53 PM, Carnwath, Thomas wrote: > Kyle is exactly right. This is not a technology issue and technology will not/cannot stop this kind of social behavior, nor should we try. I suppose the provost, dean or even the president can send a notice to all students indicating that they should be aware of the site, know that it is not in the best interest of the student's educational efforts, that should they choose to take advantage dire consequences will follow. > > Tom > > Thomas H. Carnwath > Vice President > Technology and Information Services > Hamilton Hall > 320 South Broad Street > Philadelphia, PA 19102 > > Tel: 215-717-6440 > > [cid:A2F76141-D346-4456-889A-E62741C55AD9] > > Need Assistance? Call OOPS (215-717-6677) to get answers. > OTIS will never ask for your personal information or password in an email. Never share this information with anyone. > > This message and any attachment may contain confidential or privileged information and is intended for the intended individual named as addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender immediately by return email and delete this message and all attachments from your system. Any unauthorized disclosure, use, distribution, or reproduction of this message or any attachments is prohibited and may be deemed unlawful. > > Please consider the environment before printing this email. > > > From: Kyle Johnson> > Reply-To: EDUCAUSE Listserv> > Date: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 9:14 PM > To: EDUCAUSE Listserv> > Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com > >
Message from bauer.rick@gmail.com

One further pass-along from the certification testing people:

Two orgs that I know about....The Association of Record Management Administrators (ARMA) and the ISACA security audit folks, have moved (back) to paper-based tests (three or four versions) and two-factor ID with PII (SSN), hand-administered and proctored only by their organization (at their annual meetings)....ironic that our old high-school teacher, Mrs. Jones, walking the aisles during the test may prove to have been the most secure way to deliver this stuff.

Agree that technology can't eliminate cheating, but what is the appropriate use of some technology as a hindrance/barrier? The level of due diligence that the organization needs to provide seems to be constantly moving north. CompTIA has to do these things to protect our trademarks and our IP. I wonder to what extent tests and classes are the IP of a school or professor, and improper access/use of same could be an IP infringement. Not a lawyer on this.

Rick Bauer, CompTIA


On , Bob Goldstein <bobg@uic.edu> wrote:
> As technologists, we face two problems here.
>
>
>
> Firstly, just what are the limits of technology in reducing cheating?  In some cases, we can make it more difficult (but hardly impossible) for an impersonator to take an exam or submit an assignment.  In other cases, we can make it easier to detect after the fact, e.g. use plagerism detection programs.  There might even be some social methods.  I wonder, if assignments are done by groups, and if those groups get mixed up during the course, it might make it harder for an individual to cheat.  It's much harder for a group to cheat, or to hide cheating within a group, than for an individual.  Nonetheless, nothing can be perfect, and the state-of-the-art, either offense or defense, will not stay that way for long.  (And if you read Dan Ariely, it may be that asking students to sign a "I did not cheat" statement *before* doing or submitting the assignment actually has a positive effect.  Doing so at the end of the submission does not.)
>
>
>
> Secondly, we need to explain to the non-tech community exactly WHY technology cannot solve this issue, and just what the limits are.
>
> This is not always a comfortable conversation.  Humans often have trouble making risk-based decisions, but teachers have to do so in a course, and colleges have to do so in deciding on procedures and credentials.  It might be that Educause, or some subgroup, would have a better chance of educating the educators in this regard, rather than us attempting it individually.
>
>
>
> bobg
>
>
>
>
>
> On 09/20/2012 01:53 PM, Carnwath, Thomas wrote:
>
>
> Kyle is exactly right. This is not a technology issue and technology will not/cannot stop this kind of social behavior, nor should we try. I suppose the provost, dean or even the president can send a notice to all students indicating that they should be aware of the site, know that it is not in the best interest of the student's educational efforts, that should they choose to take advantage dire consequences will follow.
>
>
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> Thomas H. Carnwath
>
> Vice President
>
> Technology and Information Services
>
> Hamilton Hall
>
> 320 South Broad Street
>
> Philadelphia, PA 19102
>
>
>
> Tel: 215-717-6440
>
>
>
> [cid:A2F76141-D346-4456-889A-E62741C55AD9]
>
>
>
> Need Assistance? Call OOPS (215-717-6677) to get answers.
>
> OTIS will never ask for your personal information or password in an email. Never share this information with anyone.
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment may contain confidential or privileged information and is intended for the intended individual named as addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender immediately by return email and delete this message and all attachments from your system. Any unauthorized disclosure, use, distribution, or reproduction of this message or any attachments is prohibited and may be deemed unlawful.
>
>
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Kyle Johnsonkyle@KYLEJOHNSONCONSULTING.COMmailto:kyle@KYLEJOHNSONCONSULTING.COM>>
>
> Reply-To: EDUCAUSE ListservCIO@listserv.educause.eduCIO@listserv.educause.edu>>
>
> Date: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 9:14 PM
>
> To: EDUCAUSE ListservCIO@listserv.educause.eduCIO@listserv.educause.edu>>
>
> Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com
>
>
>
>
Technically speaking, I would agree that this is not a technology-created issue but I suspect that it is going to be viewed as "technology" related problem that needs to be addressed by the "technology people". It would be wishful thinking for us to think that this is not going to end up on our plate in one way or another. I have already had people asking me "so what are you doing about it?". Hossein Shahrokhi CIO, UH-Downtown -----Original Message----- From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Carnwath, Thomas Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 1:53 PM To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com Kyle is exactly right. This is not a technology issue and technology will not/cannot stop this kind of social behavior, nor should we try. I suppose the provost, dean or even the president can send a notice to all students indicating that they should be aware of the site, know that it is not in the best interest of the student's educational efforts, that should they choose to take advantage dire consequences will follow. Tom Thomas H. Carnwath Vice President Technology and Information Services Hamilton Hall 320 South Broad Street Philadelphia, PA 19102 Tel: 215-717-6440 [cid:A2F76141-D346-4456-889A-E62741C55AD9] Need Assistance? Call OOPS (215-717-6677) to get answers. OTIS will never ask for your personal information or password in an email. Never share this information with anyone. This message and any attachment may contain confidential or privileged information and is intended for the intended individual named as addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender immediately by return email and delete this message and all attachments from your system. Any unauthorized disclosure, use, distribution, or reproduction of this message or any attachments is prohibited and may be deemed unlawful. Please consider the environment before printing this email. From: Kyle Johnson > Reply-To: EDUCAUSE Listserv > Date: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 9:14 PM To: EDUCAUSE Listserv > Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com
Some ideas: 1) ask LMS vendors to incorporate secondary multi-factor authentication, etc. for future releases (or add to the institution SSO before LMS entry). 2) ask LMS vendors to add real time, random and timed (while logged in) psychological profile queries previously developed during the admissions process (designed by psychiatrists). Such queries could randomly pop up and use probability and statistics to measure response times/answers for "level of confidence" of user authenticity. Record "level of confidence" for each session and weight grades accordingly. 3) require proctored, with multiple IDs, final exams. 4) ... Frank Monaco On Sep 20, 2012, at 19:46, "Shahrokhi, Hossein" wrote: > Technically speaking, I would agree that this is not a technology-created issue but I suspect that it is going to be viewed as "technology" related problem that needs to be addressed by the "technology people". > > It would be wishful thinking for us to think that this is not going to end up on our plate in one way or another. I have already had people asking me "so what are you doing about it?". > > Hossein Shahrokhi > CIO, UH-Downtown > > -----Original Message----- > From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Carnwath, Thomas > Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 1:53 PM > To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com > > Kyle is exactly right. This is not a technology issue and technology will not/cannot stop this kind of social behavior, nor should we try. I suppose the provost, dean or even the president can send a notice to all students indicating that they should be aware of the site, know that it is not in the best interest of the student's educational efforts, that should they choose to take advantage dire consequences will follow. > > Tom > > Thomas H. Carnwath > Vice President > Technology and Information Services > Hamilton Hall > 320 South Broad Street > Philadelphia, PA 19102 > > Tel: 215-717-6440 > > [cid:A2F76141-D346-4456-889A-E62741C55AD9] > > Need Assistance? Call OOPS (215-717-6677) to get answers. > OTIS will never ask for your personal information or password in an email. Never share this information with anyone. > > This message and any attachment may contain confidential or privileged information and is intended for the intended individual named as addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender immediately by return email and delete this message and all attachments from your system. Any unauthorized disclosure, use, distribution, or reproduction of this message or any attachments is prohibited and may be deemed unlawful. > > Please consider the environment before printing this email. > > > From: Kyle Johnson > > Reply-To: EDUCAUSE Listserv > > Date: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 9:14 PM > To: EDUCAUSE Listserv > > Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com > >
It looks to me like Charter Oak State College has implemented a very good approach.  It might be useful to the rest of us to know roughly how much these measures cost to get set up and what kind of ongoing costs you are incurring. 

While the IT Director at Midland University I explored a range of alternatives to address this concern.  The most interesting technical solution we looked at was a product called Remote Proctor from Software Secure--the same people who make the Securexam software.  From their site-- "Remote Proctor Pro is a hardware device that uses biometrics to authenticate the identity of the test-taker, records all sound, and videos a 360-degree view of the exam environment."  As I recall, the software automatically tagged recordings when possible indicators of cheating occurred.  A service component was available where the company staff would review those tagged recordings and then pass suspicious incidents on to the institution.    

We ultimately stepped back from growing the program that had us looking at the time, but it seemed like a pretty good (though relatively high cost) approach that preserves student convenience compared to having to drive to a proctored exam site.  If we had proceeded, it seemed to me that a critical step beyond the control of the Remote Proctor system would be to make sure we had done a good job of initial verification of identity as described by Eric.  We were going to require at least a couple days on campus at the start of the program and would have done the ID verification, distributed the devices and done a technology orientation as part of that on-campus experience.

We haven't heard from any adopters of the Remote Proctor technology on this thread.  Anyone who is using this technology care to comment about their experience?

Ken Clipperton
Former Director of IT at Midland University
(I am doing some IT consulting for MidlandU while they search for my replacement.)

My recommendation would be to replace stagnant online high-stakes examinations with a rich assortment of online formative and summative assessments which are more engaging and facilitate interactive mentoring opportunities to better meet the desired learning outcomes. Today's technology afford us a wealth of effective student assessment options, from a series of interspersed mini-quizzes, one-minute papers and online discussion activities per week, to authentic assessments, team-based, project-based, problem-based, media-based and cumulative assessments. Along with well-developed scoring rubrics and a good syllabus clearly stating what is expected of students, it is key to instruct students on academic honesty principles, plagiarism, intellectual property, copyright and the associated institutional policies. Ideally, we should think of student assessment as an extension of our teaching activities, and only rely on extended high-stakes online examinations if they are absolutely necessary *and* IFF they can be administered in a proctored environment. Online tests, for all intents and purposes, are open-book examinations. Furthermore, high-stakes online tests invite students to use cell phones, screen sharing, multiple computers/tablets and instant messaging apps (to name a few) to collaborate in real-time and take the tests together en masse. :( Breaking high-stakes midterm and final exams into a series of multiple weekly mini-quizzes, and other online student activities and tasks not only discourages cheating, but keeps students moving along and engaged in a learning continuum of self-reflection while regularly demonstrating their knowledge and proficiency with the course content. The Sloan Consortium, the Educause Learning Initiative, the University of Central Florida Blended Learning Toolkit and a number of instructional technology centers from universities and colleges around the world are great resources to tackle online assessment in today's e-Learning world. --- Ed Garay Sent from Nokia Lumia 900 Windows Phone From: Bob Goldstein Sent: 9/20/2012 2:33 PM To: CIO@listserv.educause.edu Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com As technologists, we face two problems here. Firstly, just what are the limits of technology in reducing cheating? In some cases, we can make it more difficult (but hardly impossible) for an impersonator to take an exam or submit an assignment. In other cases, we can make it easier to detect after the fact, e.g. use plagerism detection programs. There might even be some social methods. I wonder, if assignments are done by groups, and if those groups get mixed up during the course, it might make it harder for an individual to cheat. It's much harder for a group to cheat, or to hide cheating within a group, than for an individual. Nonetheless, nothing can be perfect, and the state-of-the-art, either offense or defense, will not stay that way for long. (And if you read Dan Ariely, it may be that asking students to sign a "I did not cheat" statement *before* doing or submitting the assignment actually has a positive effect. Doing so at the end of the submission does not.) Secondly, we need to explain to the non-tech community exactly WHY technology cannot solve this issue, and just what the limits are. This is not always a comfortable conversation. Humans often have trouble making risk-based decisions, but teachers have to do so in a course, and colleges have to do so in deciding on procedures and credentials. It might be that Educause, or some subgroup, would have a better chance of educating the educators in this regard, rather than us attempting it individually. bobg On 09/20/2012 01:53 PM, Carnwath, Thomas wrote: > Kyle is exactly right. This is not a technology issue and technology will not/cannot stop this kind of social behavior, nor should we try. I suppose the provost, dean or even the president can send a notice to all students indicating that they should be aware of the site, know that it is not in the best interest of the student's educational efforts, that should they choose to take advantage dire consequences will follow. > > Tom > > Thomas H. Carnwath > Vice President > Technology and Information Services > Hamilton Hall > 320 South Broad Street > Philadelphia, PA 19102 > > Tel: 215-717-6440 > > [cid:A2F76141-D346-4456-889A-E62741C55AD9] > > Need Assistance? Call OOPS (215-717-6677) to get answers. > OTIS will never ask for your personal information or password in an email. Never share this information with anyone. > > This message and any attachment may contain confidential or privileged information and is intended for the intended individual named as addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender immediately by return email and delete this message and all attachments from your system. Any unauthorized disclosure, use, distribution, or reproduction of this message or any attachments is prohibited and may be deemed unlawful. > > Please consider the environment before printing this email. > > > From: Kyle Johnson> > Reply-To: EDUCAUSE Listserv> > Date: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 9:14 PM > To: EDUCAUSE Listserv> > Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com > >
There is another possible approach to prevention--entirely non-technological.

Apparently the vendor's non-performance is fairly common, and egregious.  I was recently contacted by a student who had availed himself of this service, and discovered, a short time later, that he was failing the class(es) which were supposed to be "covered."  When he told the firm he wanted to cease the arrangement, they blackmailed him, threatening him with exposure, and extorted another $800.

A similar discussion has been running on the POD listserv.  The latest posting there quoted a law school professor who had posed this problem to his class: could a student sue?  Their answer was no, because "the object of the contract is against public policy and the parties are equally culpable.”

It may also be true that even tracking down the company through IP addresses or other technological means might be difficult and time-consuming, further serving to make any possibility of recovery unlikely.

Might the best preventative be making this information available to students?  Presumably they already know the short-term risks of exposure; add to this the possibility that they may run the risk and suffer the expense for no gain whatsoever, and then, not only have no recourse, but be under a long-term threat:  If at any time in the future it becomes profitable for someone to expose them, they have given these crooks detailed personal identification which would make it easy for these unscrupulous people to identify them publicly..

Glenn Everett, PhD
Pembroke, MA
gseverett1@gmail.com
617-688-2102
http://geverettconsulting.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/geverett

********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

Glenn, I think this is a great approach. Many online programs include an orientation course for new online students. Normally these courses are designed to acquaint the new online student with LMS features, functionality, usability, good practices, help desk and support options, etc. I could imagine including an assignment to discuss cheating online and it's consequences. For example: Many within higher education express concerns related to cheating within online courses. Because students are not monitored/proctored, as they might be during in-class assignments and test, many believe verifying submitted work is indeed that of the student is difficult. Please provide several ways online students could cheat, including the use of online services such as wetakeyourclass.com, http://boostmygrades.com and collegetermpapers.com. Also please provide examples of how the use of such services may be detrimental to both your education and even risk your continued status as a student at University of X. Resources: - Search Google for "'wetakeyourclass' scam" or "'wetakeyourclass' scam" "online course cheating" - Links to news stories on online cheating - Links to school policy - etc. I'm going to send this out to our instructional designers and faculty. As this is a first run on this, and suggestions would be helpful). I'm also going to cross post on the educause blended list. Thanks Glenn, Patrick || |||| ||| || | | || ||| || ||| || | | ||| || ||| || Patrick Masson Chief Technology Officer, UMassOnline The University of Massachusetts, Office of the President 333 South St., Suite 400, Shrewsbury, MA 01545 (774) 455-7615: Office (774) 455-7620: Fax (970) 4MASSON: GoogleVoice UMOLPatMasson: AIM massonpj: Skype Web Site: http://www.umassonline.net Blog: http://www.umassonlineblog.com ________________________________________
Thanks for posting this Patrick. There has been much discussion at ESC about this site. For those of you on this listserv, who've not heard of this, I suggest you take a look at the website http://wetakeyourclass.com  There are others out there like this.

I think addressing it directly with students, can be a very good idea. Not just a warning, but include information on how they can get assistance if they are struggling--you know, provide alternatives (options).


Ellen

Ellen Marie Murphy
Director of Online Curriculum
SUNY Empire State College
113 West Ave
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
518-587-2100 Ext: 2961
twitter: ellen_marie

-----The EDUCAUSE Blended and Online Learning Constituent Group Listserv <BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU> wrote: -----

Ken,

The mission of Charter Oak State College is to help adult students complete their degrees. One of the biggest barriers to completion is financing, therefore, we keep our expenditures down as low as possible in order to keep tuition/fees low. When we do anything done with an eye towards reducing costs and delivering value. I ball parked the cost below so you can get an idea. You can contact me off-list if you want more details. I’d be glad to help.

 

#1 Integrating the Acxiom system to deliver challenge questions when students are in the onboarding process involved some custom development which could be done in-house or third party. We used our SIS vendor development and they leveraged some of their existing portal functionality and the Acxiom API. COST under 5k and 1-2 dollars per new student and the Registrar staff time to deal with a couple of students a week who fail to verify through the portal.

 

#2 Pedagogical approaches to reduce cheating. This takes a lot of time (ID staff and faculty for redesign and faculty who need to interact with students more and not rely on multiple choice tests) but it improves our instruction so the cost is attributed to improving instruction not preventing cheating. COST none.

 

#3 On going identity check within the LMS – Before high stakes assessment challenge questions can be issued. We use Bb and there is a building block already in place. You choose the exams you want to use the challenge questions on and the % of students who will be challenged (for example, a random 25% of the students who take this assessment will see the challenge questions before their test). COST 1-2 dollars per challenge and Registrar staff time to deal with failures.

 

 

Eric Zematis

Director of Enterprise Systems

Charter Oak State College

860.515.3770

 

 

 

From: The EDUCAUSE CIO Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Clipperton, Ken
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 8:20 AM
To: CIO@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [CIO] wetakeyourclass.com

 

It looks to me like Charter Oak State College has implemented a very good approach.  It might be useful to the rest of us to know roughly how much these measures cost to get set up and what kind of ongoing costs you are incurring. 

While the IT Director at Midland University I explored a range of alternatives to address this concern.  The most interesting technical solution we looked at was a product called Remote Proctor from Software Secure--the same people who make the Securexam software.  From their site-- "Remote Proctor Pro is a hardware device that uses biometrics to authenticate the identity of the test-taker, records all sound, and videos a 360-degree view of the exam environment."  As I recall, the software automatically tagged recordings when possible indicators of cheating occurred.  A service component was available where the company staff would review those tagged recordings and then pass suspicious incidents on to the institution.    

We ultimately stepped back from growing the program that had us looking at the time, but it seemed like a pretty good (though relatively high cost) approach that preserves student convenience compared to having to drive to a proctored exam site.  If we had proceeded, it seemed to me that a critical step beyond the control of the Remote Proctor system would be to make sure we had done a good job of initial verification of identity as described by Eric.  We were going to require at least a couple days on campus at the start of the program and would have done the ID verification, distributed the devices and done a technology orientation as part of that on-campus experience.

We haven't heard from any adopters of the Remote Proctor technology on this thread.  Anyone who is using this technology care to comment about their experience?

Ken Clipperton
Former Director of IT at Midland University
(I am doing some IT consulting for MidlandU while they search for my replacement.)

I thought the group would be interested in this article in Inside Higher Ed
and the subsequent follow up that the web site has gone offline

best,
aj


Close
Close


Annual Conference
September 29–October 2
Register Now!

Events for all Levels and Interests

Whether you're looking for a conference to attend face-to-face to connect with peers, or for an online event for team professional development, see what's upcoming.

Close

Digital Badges
Member recognition effort
Earn yours >

Career Center


Leadership and Management Programs

EDUCAUSE Institute
Project Management

 

 

Jump Start Your Career Growth

Explore EDUCAUSE professional development opportunities that match your career aspirations and desired level of time investment through our interactive online guide.

 

Close
EDUCAUSE organizes its efforts around three IT Focus Areas

 

 

Join These Programs If Your Focus Is

Close

Get on the Higher Ed IT Map

Employees of EDUCAUSE member institutions and organizations are invited to create individual profiles.
 

 

Close

2014 Strategic Priorities

  • Building the Profession
  • IT as a Game Changer
  • Foundations


Learn More >

Uncommon Thinking for the Common Good™

EDUCAUSE is the foremost community of higher education IT leaders and professionals.