Take-home exams are scrapped in the fight against AI cheating
In an effort to prevent AI cheating, several departments at Stockholm university have chosen to replace take-home exams with in-person exams. Photo: Studietid
Several departments at Stockholm University are scrapping take-home exams to prevent students from cheating with AI. Instead, more in-person exams are introduced — however, there might not be enough classrooms to meet the new demands.
At the end of 2022, the AI service Chat GPT was launched. And ever since then, universities have had new challenges to tackle.
Since cheats with artificial intelligence are difficult to detect, SU has appointed a task force to produce a support document for the teachers — and to develop a long-term strategy.
But until a university-wide strategy is in place, each department has to come up with its own solutions to counter AI cheating.
Studietid has contacted departments at each faculty to hear how they work to prevent AI cheating.
More in-person exams are the first solution
The most common solution is to replace take-home exams and introduce more in-person exams. By introducing more written exams, as well as using the monitoring tool Inspera during in-person exams on the computer, hopes are that AI cheating will diminish.
Students in law, computer and systems science, history as well as in education will in the near future, or are already, writing fewer take-home exams.
"The change in the examinations is taking place gradually. Some courses have already switched to in-person exams or combinations of written and oral tasks that can better respond to the challenges posed by AI tools," Matilda Wiklund, deputy head at the Department of Education, writes in an email.
However, there is concern about whether there will be enough rooms for the in-person exams. Wiklund says that this is "unlikely", which is why they have started a discussion with other departments and the area management team.
"We request a temporary relaxing of the requirement to specify the exact form of examination in course syllabuses. We have tried to use the wording 'individual written task' in the syllabuses to be able to adapt, for example, to a lack of rooms and to be able to take advantage of innovations from the work that is now being carried out by course managers after the advancement of AI tools," Wiklund writes and adds that this has not been accepted by the teacher’s program.
The Department of Philosophy has not yet made a decision on the issue but is investigating a number of different measures.
"It's about, for example, having exams with essay assignments fixed in the classroom, or supplementing home exams with in-person exams or other submissions," Sama Aghari, director of education at the department, writes.
New system at DSV is to minimize cheating
At the Department of Computer and Systems Science, more in-person exams were introduced a year ago.
However, they quickly realized that there were not enough classrooms, according to the Head of Department Jelena Zdravkovic.
– It did not solve the problem, we are a department with many programs and courses in need of different forms of exams, she says.
Therefore, a new system has been introduced where different forms of exams are divided into zones. Some, where it is partly still possible for the students to cheat, and some where it is not possible at all.
– Exams in green zones mean that the exam cannot be influenced by AI robots, for example, an in-person exam with paper and pencil, or with Inspera. Red exams are when the student does a homework assignment without Inspera on their computer. The yellow zone is, for example, programming tasks, with questions that we know Chat GPT can solve partially. A red or yellow exam should be supplemented with a short oral examination, she explains.
However, each learning objective must be examined once in the so-called green zone, she says.
“AI services are useful”
At the Department of Mathematics, a majority of the exams are already conducted in the classroom. However, AI may be used as an aid in both classroom and take-home exams for programming courses.
This is possible since AI is not sufficiently developed, according to Joanna Tyrcha, head of the department.
"On the one hand, we believe that AI services are useful and it is good if students learn to use them, on the other hand, it can still be difficult to identify the use of these services. We can also see that it is only on the most basic tasks that AI services, so far, provide too much help. On more difficult programming tasks and most math tasks, the AI services are so far not helpful enough," writes Tyrcha.
Discussions about allowing AI as an aid during exams are also ongoing in several departments. At the Department of Law, for example, the issue has been discussed, Björn Lundqvist, deputy head tells us.
– We will definitely have to include it in our teaching in the future, but that also requires that the students can progress and learn at the same time. We are not quite there yet.
Students prefer classroom exams
Studietid went out to ask students what they thought about having more in-person exams. Most of them say it's a positive thing.
Law student Elin Eriksson says that she thinks in-person exams are better than take-home exams — but she would like to see a combination of both.
– It's nice in a way with in-person exams because then you get it done quicker, she says.
Hariharan Senthil Kumar, Photo: Jennifer Snårbacka
Even the student Hariharan Senthil Kumar, who is studying at KTH to become an energy engineer, prefers in-person exams.
– If I sit at home, I get distracted very easily. If I walk into a classroom and see my classmates turn their heads down to write, it motivates me more. But it also depends a little on the type of subject.
Vendela Hellsten. Photo: Jennifer Snårbacka