Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Now, I'll admit, from a pedagogical standpoint, there are drawbacks. I like to include fact-recall in tests to give students who struggle with analysis a chance to earn credit for studying - that's harder to do in an online-test environment.
But going all-online midstream last semester actually let me 'test' my shift to online testing without invasive proctoring, because I had the same group of students. With an analysis-focused (read: essay) exam, I saw no big cheating score-jump last semester.
My first-test to second-test score rise was well within my normal expectations for an entirely in-person semester (because the second exam *should* have a higher average than the first, since students should be learning)...
...which suggests to me that the expanded opportunities for cheating didn't translate to higher scores for the cheaters. I'm not naive, I'm sure some of my students tried to beat the exam with google and wikipedia. But wiki can't write an essay for you.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
