Glad that you had an automatic system going, but most universities don't have one and can't fund its development, and wanting to shift this burden to professors is unreasonable.
Your stance is that it’s unaffordable for a university to spend a small amount of money on randomized browser tests, therefore they should spend a large amount of money on intrusive spying software?
I don't believe a public institution would be able to come up with a system like this that works reasonably and have it developed in a reasonable amount of time within a reasonable budget.
> I don't believe a public institution would be able to come up with a system like this that works reasonably
I don't believe “e-proctoring” companies are capable of it, either. I got disqualified from an exam for five `onblur` events (while my screen was being recorded), and it kept counting while the “DO NOT CHEAT” lockout message was displayed; if that's “works reasonably” then I don't know what isn't.
In 2009 I developed a system like this as part of my course at the equivalent of a community college. The premise of the class was to develop a real world application employing the skills we had learned so far (project management, programming, etc). The whole class (10 people) participated in building this software.
We spent 6 months on it and as far as I heard was still in use as late as 2015.
You don't have to create a whole system; just a database that prepares variants of questions, and a method to put it into the existing exam software.
> ...and wanting to shift this burden to professors is unreasonable.
Why is it unreasonable? What level of duty do you perceive course instructors having to achieving positive outcomes for their students? Who is responsible for pushing improvements beyond the trough of the status quo?
