Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formattingExcerpt from essay:
The camera that is used at Troy, which is made by Massachusetts-based Software Secure, eventually could monitor all of Troy University's distance learners. And while some might see this kind of test monitoring as intrusive, the new higher-education law could make such devices commonplace in online learning programs nationwide. Legislation necessitating greater accountability for distance-education programs has been in lawmakers' sights for several years. And college officials haven't been surprised with the legislation that has been unveiled. While online programs should solidify their test-verification policies, cutting-edge technology could face fierce opposition among students and university faculty (Carter, 2008).
There has been a lot of concern that has come along with the new monitoring technology. People often feel like these systems are rather intrusive, and they raise questions of privacy. Each institution is going to have different ways of dealing with this issue. Most institutions feel that since students pay their own tuition to go to school that it would be somewhat ludicrous for someone to cheat for you. It's counterproductive to why they are enrolling in the first place (Carter, 2008).
Officials at Western Governors University (WGU), an online university based in Salt Lake City, Utah, believe that their current proctoring and monitoring policies satisfy those outlined in the law. The university which has 11,000 students, all taking online classes has strict monitoring of all exams. They feel that this is the only way students could prove their college education was equivalent to their on-campus peers. The law says that they have to be sure the individual who is taking the test is who they say they are and they believe that they already do that (Carter, 2008).
WGU has 220 evaluators that are charged with detecting plagiarism or other forms of cheating. One evaluator, known as the cheater chaser has been trained on how to find students who have violated school policies such as buying an essay or term paper from unscrupulous web sites. WGU officials are considering purchasing keystroke technology and web cameras that will allow students to take exams from home. But currently, the university has more than 3,000 proctor sites nationwide, usually within 30 miles of a student's house (Carter, 2008).
Blackboard Inc. A global leader in education technology, recently announced the general availability of an integrated solution for enhanced student identity verification, powered by technology from Acxiom Corporation. The Acxiom Identify-X service allows colleges and universities to deploy an enhanced verification program that integrates seamlessly with the Blackboard Learn platform and does not interrupt the learning process. Instructors are in control of when, where and how frequently they verify student identity while maintaining the integrity and privacy of student information. The service does not require institutions to purchase any additional hardware or software (Blackboard Launches Solution for Enhanced Student Identity Verification, 2009).
Institutions will be provided with a limited number of free verifications based on their total student enrollment and Blackboard license. The majority of institutions choose not to verify every student for every assessment. Instead they use random verification of test takers to ensure that the process does not become predictable, burdensome or cost prohibitive. The process does not require the release of student information, thereby avoiding any potential issues with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (Blackboard Launches Solution for Enhanced Student Identity Verification, 2009).
Following students login to the Blackboard platform and access a course assessment, Acxiom's technology will periodically and randomly present real-time challenge questions that only the enrolled student will know how to answer. The likelihood of students being required to verify their identity may be determined by instructors at the course level or system administrators at the institutional level (Blackboard Launches Solution for Enhanced Student Identity Verification, 2009).
Additional software that is being used is that of FactCheck-X. This software requires test takers to answer detailed, personal challenge questions. The information for the questions comes from a variety of databases, and the company uses it to ask for old addresses or previous employers. This tool requires no hardware and operates within most testing environments. Colleges control how frequently students are asked to verify their identities (Is That Online Student Who He Says He Is, 2008).
Institutions are using a variety of methods in order to verify the identities of distance learners in order to comply with the new federal law. Some are only verifying logins and passwords while other are implanting new devices and software. For now the government has left it up to the colleges as to how they comply with the law so long as they are complying. Institutions have to deal with complying with the federal law while trying to keep costs down. It is also important that they keep students privacy in mind.
There are a couple of different technologies that are being explored by colleges in order to help them comply with the new federal law. One of these is a device that along with a web cam acts as a remote proctor. This concept works well but is still on the expensive side. Another idea is that of software that is installed to randomly verify a student's identity by asking random questions to the student that only they would know the answers to. This concept is a lot more cost effective and does not require the student to buy anything. All of these ideas work to satisfy the requirements that have been set down by the federal law.
ACE Analysis of Higher Education Act Reauthorization. (2008). Retrieved January 19, 2010,
from American Council on Education Web site: http://www.acenet.edu/e-newsletters/p2p/ACE_HEA_analysis_818.pdf
Blackboard Launches Solution for Enhanced Student Identity Verification. (2009). Retrieved
January 19, 2010, from Blackboard Web site:
Carter, Dennis. (2008). New law aims to validate online learning. Retrieved January 19, 2010,
from e School News Web site: http://www.eschoolnews.com/2008/09/15/new-law-aims-
Foster, Andrea L. (2009). New Systems Keep a Close Eye on Online Students at Home.
Education Digest. 74(7), p45-47.
Is That Online Student Who He Says He Is? (2008). Retrieved January 19, 2010, from The
Chronicle of Higher Education Web site: http://chronicle.com/blogPost/Is-That-Online-
Littlefield, Jamie. (2008). How the College Opportunity and Affordability Act Affects Online
Students. Retrieved January 19, 2010, from About.com Web site:
Methods to Verify the Identity of Distance Learning Students. (n.d.). Retrieved January 19, 2010,
from Web site: http://www.acxiom.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/website-resources/pdf/White_Papers/AC-0031-09_DistanceLearningStudentsWP.pdf
New Distance Education Requirements of the Higher Education Act of 2008 Require Immediate
Implementation. (2008). Retrieved January 19, 2010, from http://220.127.116.11/~jond/ohlone/DE/DE_10_13_08_meeting/New_Distance_Educatio
Parry, Marc. (2009). Online Educators Won't Have to Spy on Students, New Rules Say. Retrieved
January 19, 2010, from The Chronicle of Higher Education Web site:
"Higher Education Reauthorization Of The" (2010, January 20) Retrieved October 24, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/higher-education-reauthorization-of-the-15676
"Higher Education Reauthorization Of The" 20 January 2010. Web.24 October. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/higher-education-reauthorization-of-the-15676>
"Higher Education Reauthorization Of The", 20 January 2010, Accessed.24 October. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/higher-education-reauthorization-of-the-15676
Congress did more than just reauthorize the Act, though. It also required that state agencies be established that would be able to handle some of the work that accrediting agencies were once expected to do on their own (Crow, 2009). By doing that, it was assumed accreditation would be easy to attain for deserving schools, and the value of being accredited would be seen once again (Crow, 2009). It became
Higher Education There have been many significant historical events that have affected the higher education system in the United States. There is not space to address them all but three of the most important will be addressed here, in an effort to show how much higher education has changed and the types of adjustments it has gone through over time. The 1947 Truman Commission Report, the 1954 Brown v. Board
In a world that favors early adopters and revolves around the latest technology, individuals will be better served if they continue to seek out learning opportunities after their formal education has ended. Local governments and communities should provide these opportunities through libraries, universities and community centers. The skills gap applies to all. Conclusion Although people are defined by their different skill sets and this diversity enhances the richness of life in
Education Policy Reading First is a new grant program proposed by President Bush and endorse as part of the 2001 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The new program is part of Title I Part B, along with the Reading First program, which is focused on students in kindergarten through third grade. Reading First provides competitive grants directly to the local level to improve the reading readiness of preschool age
S. is a worthwhile goal, but the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002 is a poorly conceived approach whose deficiencies may actually do more to undermine many aspects of education than any meaningful improvement inspired by its programs. References Caillier, J. (2007) No Child Left Behind Act: Are States on Target to Make Their Goals?; Journal of Negro Education, Fall 2007 Issue. Retrieved September 8, 2008, at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3626/is_200710/ai_n25139930/pg_10 Crawford, J. (2004) No Child
Fifth, the NCLB is devoid of any meaningful consequences for failing to achieve federal objectives other than the publication of such failures in conjunction with the rights of parents to request transfers of their children to better-performing academic institutions (Darling-Hammond 2004). Critics have suggested that the most likely result of enforcement of such limited consequences for noncompliance is the overcrowding of institutions who fulfill the federal requirements to their detriment
The court held that the district court's refusal to reopen the case and receive additional evidence after the remand from the court was not error. The court did not remand with directions to reopen the case and retry it. The only direction was that the district court was to make more detailed findings on the question of allegedly discriminatory hiring practices that adversely affected the educational opportunities afforded the Mexican-American