3 ms·

I largely agree with this. There are some careers -- firefighting is one of them -- where it is downright dangerous for the person to have a reliance on technol

I largely agree with this. There are some careers -- firefighting is one of them -- where it is downright dangerous for the person to have a reliance on technology (technology can help firefighters but the battalion chief still needs to know the entry/exit points on a structure to direct crews, the drivers need to *know* the city they are in, backwards and forwards to get to the site quickly (they cannot rely on Google Maps)), but I'm not sure how many of those careers (air traffic control would be another) would have remote-proctored exams anyway. Having said that, I do think that many of us have become too conditioned to having access to Google/the internet/the ability to always look stuff up, that it does become a problem (I am utterly incapable of getting around the city I live in without Google Maps, as an example), and that, I think is a negative for humanity. Having access to information and reference is great, but never taking the time to actually learn/memorize/understand concepts and content so that you feel confident doing something without checking the answer is still really important in lots of roles. There should be a balance. But none of this excuses the malware/spyware that ProctorU and other systems employ. Frankly, people who are that committed to cheating will cheat anyway. I've heard of similarly dystopic sorts of bullshit even when it comes to remote job interviews, often (but not limited to) code tests. I cannot imagine any job that would be worth me installing spyware/malware on my personal machine for the interview. Even for a university exam, I would push back hard on this sort of thing (or at least the onerous requirements and access it has) or demand the school issue testing laptops or at the very least re-think how/why they proctor exams the way they do. Individually, students don't have a lot of leverage, but if enough people complain -- especially in high dollar degree programs like a MSc -- universities will rethink their behavior -- or at the very least, force the software firms they pay millions of dollars to to support a fucking Chromebook.

halostatue 5y ago
Firefighting is actually a really awful example. The practices involved require in-person practica, and there are stages of growth expected. Additionally, for any structure of sufficient complexity, the "lead" firefighter will _absolutely_ be requesting and receiving building plans to direct the firefighters to the appropriate locations. Also, like London taxi drivers, fire truck drivers probably have to train on the streets they are protecting. (That said, I do recall stories of firefighters getting lost due to bad GPS directions.)
- filmgirlcw 5y ago
  That’s exactly what I said. I said firefighting is an area where you cannot rely on just googling something. You need to know the information, period. I wasn’t talking about in-person or online tests, I was responding to OP who said that that style of testing where you can’t have access to materials is incongruous with how most things work. Quoting myself: > but I'm not sure how many of those careers (air traffic control would be another) would have remote-proctored exams anyway.
  - halostatue 5y ago
    I am saying the exact opposite. The lead firefighter will use her profession’s equivalent of "google" to get the plans for a building that may be more complex (talking to the city planning department, looking in a city database, whatever). They will _not_ know the information by heart, and in a sufficiently large city…cannot. The same applies to the drivers of fire trucks. They’re going to both be trained to drive around for locations and tested on that, but they will also use appropriate tools to get the location. It might be an "enhanced" GPS, but it isn’t going to come down to someone’s memory all the time.

halostatue 5y ago

Firefighting is actually a really awful example. The practices involved require in-person practica, and there are stages of growth expected. Additionally, for any structure of sufficient complexity, the "lead" firefighter will _absolutely_ be requesting and receiving building plans to direct the firefighters to the appropriate locations. Also, like London taxi drivers, fire truck drivers probably have to train on the streets they are protecting. (That said, I do recall stories of firefighters getting lost due to bad GPS directions.)

filmgirlcw 5y ago
That’s exactly what I said. I said firefighting is an area where you cannot rely on just googling something. You need to know the information, period. I wasn’t talking about in-person or online tests, I was responding to OP who said that that style of testing where you can’t have access to materials is incongruous with how most things work. Quoting myself: > but I'm not sure how many of those careers (air traffic control would be another) would have remote-proctored exams anyway.
- halostatue 5y ago
  I am saying the exact opposite. The lead firefighter will use her profession’s equivalent of "google" to get the plans for a building that may be more complex (talking to the city planning department, looking in a city database, whatever). They will _not_ know the information by heart, and in a sufficiently large city…cannot. The same applies to the drivers of fire trucks. They’re going to both be trained to drive around for locations and tested on that, but they will also use appropriate tools to get the location. It might be an "enhanced" GPS, but it isn’t going to come down to someone’s memory all the time.