Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] Cheating, a great argument against online courses.

I misunderstood your reference to MIT. On first reading, it seemed you were saying that because I said online degrees were suspect, then MIT online degrees were suspect. That's where the NBA analogy came in. I did not say that online degrees are useless. I said one should take them with a grain of salt, which is quite different. I grant you that the paper angle is no different online than in person. I should have focused solely on tests. When I taught online, there was absolutely no way to tell who was on the computer at the other end taking a test. All test takers were "ghost" test takers. The system lends itself to cheating. Anyone who knows math and science well can turn in all the required assignments in an online math or science course with little effort, doing it for someone else. It's much easier than writing a paper.

If online schools now use video software, that most definitely changes my mind. My comments regarding cheating in online schools (tests, not papers, as you pointed out) are not emotional. They come from experience teaching online. And I did not say that schools like Walden and U of Phx are diploma mills. If someone makes it through either of those schools, the degree is legitimate. Without verifying video, though, the opportunities for cheating in test-taking courses are numerous. One can compare the value of a U of Phx degree with a Harvard degree, as one can with all schools. But I don't believe U of Phx is a diploma mill. Their standards are obviously lower than some other schools, though.

Bill


William C. Robertson, Ph.D.
Bill Robertson Science, Inc.
Stop Faking It! Finally Understanding Science So You Can Teach It.
wrobert9@ix.netcom.com
1340 Telemark Drive
Woodland Park, CO 80863
719-686-1609

On Nov 17, 2010, at 2:32 AM, M. Horton wrote:

The test issue is not what you said. You talked about turning in fraudulent
papers.

I have nooooooooo idea how your NBA metaphor relates to any of this. And
you completely missed the MIT point.

You said that online university degrees are useless because someone can turn
in a paper that someone else wrote. I pointed out that the same thing
happens at in-person schools like MIT as well. According to your original
logic, if online degrees are useless because of fraudulent papers, then
in-person degrees are useless because of fraudulent papers too. I didn't
say that MIT has any online courses.

I know I'm not going to change your mind, but I am friends with the
principal of an online school in my area and all of the students are on web
cams with headphone/microphones during lessons. They have software on the
computer that takes their picture during tests through the webcam, doesn't
allow any other windows (i.e. internet) to be opened during the testing
session, and ends the test if there is no activity for a certain amount of
time. The teacher can see if the student leaves the computer, opens a book,
etc. Don't throw out all online education just because one school is bad.
Sure, there are degree mill online universities. But there are degree mill
in-person universities too. Both Walden and UoP have in-person schools.

It appears to me that your distaste for online schools is more emotional
than logical or you would have seen how all of your arguments apply to both
types of schools equally. There is cheating in both and there are both
types of degree mills.

I'd be curious to see if there's research comparing cheating in online
courses and traditional courses.

Mike