Jon Dron says a bunch of nice things about David Wiley's proposal to employ random audits as a deterrent against cheating and then says "for all that is good about it, I think it's almost exactly the wrong idea, though I have an idea to save it." Wiley's proposal is "far from infallible, because few of us are rational game players." The ranks of the unreasonably wealthy are filled with those who rolled the dice despite the risk. Moreover, Wiley's proposal "is a very much stronger signal of the authority and control that the teacher/institution has over the the student than the conventional process." Ultimately, "it doesn't deal with or consider the reasons that students cheat in the first place: it's just a response to the fact that some do." Instead, Dron recommends combining assessment from a range of different courses. "If done with commitment, it could largely decouple learning and assessment because instrumental revision would not be an option." Dron's approach is (as he admits) too structured for occasional or informal learning. But there is merit to the decoupling of learning and assessment - not that traditional universities would ever been keen on that.
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
