10-08-2019, 02:13 PM
I think 30 was probably an exaggeration, but the rumor was that it was enough to rouse concern from TESU. And given how challenging I've heard many say Shmoop courses actually are, I personally question this rumor, because it doesn't sound like cheating would be easy. Though I suppose if there was a will, anyone can find a way lol Some of the ridiculous proctoring requirements such as having to own and keep a cell phone is view of a proctor are proof of that.
It could of just as easily been a student who slogged through everything first and opted to takes exams only once they were confident they could pass, since you only get 2 max attempts at their final exams. A good example of this would be a homeschooled student who used Shmoop as their curriculum provider. You can't access the final exams but most of the college courses are available as HS options. And there is probably very little difference between the HS or College Credit eligible versions.
That said, many here come from all sorts of educational backgrounds. A very well read individual for example, could probably work through a ton of literature courses (of which Shmoop has many) and the related quizzes and an exam (to prove competency) very quickly if they came to the table with pre-existing knowledge. I've never used Shmoop, but if I recall correctly you do not need to watch X portion of videos ect, but rather you could go right to the quizzes/exam. That is the case for many providers of these alternative credit options. This is not very different than when someone goes cold into CLEP testing. If they already have acquired the knowledge, taking an exam may be ALL they need to do in order to demonstrate it.
Even with SDC's 100+ quizzes for courses, an exam and needing to turn in assignments for some as well, the newer 5 exam limitation can quite literally be limiting to those who could work through at a faster pace. You could spend an entire year homeschooling a child using some of these curriculum providers at a reduced cost. And if and when that child were to decide, hey I would like to earn college credit for it, a parent may decide to foot that bill over a student loan. And in that situation there is no reason an individual could not simply take the multiple final exams necessary to meet their goal saving both time and money. They certainly would not need to spend a couple of weeks reviewing what they could of just spent an entire school year learning.
A BAin4Weeks is another perfect example that no one needs to cheat necessarily to accomplish amazing goals in a short period of time.
And of course as Sanatone suggests, if you can focus 100% on education and don't have other obligations (such as a job), then I'm not sure the only logical conclusion is that someone had to of "cheated", but rather what they accomplished was unique and therefore became suspicious. The lack of required proctoring at the time, most likely enhanced that suspicion.
Shmoop appeared to have recognized the perhaps legitimate issue that not having a proctor caused and added it as a requirement initially. When TESU still refused to accept their courses with or without proctoring, and Shmoop had to deal with the many students who had paid for an 88/month plan that was supposed to allow for college credit without paying additional money to a proctor, maybe Shmoop decided the best option was to try to find middle ground. This seems to of lead to optional proctoring. If I had to guess I would think most are probably foregoing proctoring to save money, not to cheat. Optional proctoring may of been put in place, because ACE did not require it and students didn't want to have to pay it, unless their school required them to. Again, just a guess.
The sad truth is that, if every course provider had to jump through hoops to meet the demands and scrutiny of individual schools instead of expecting schools to at least place some trust into ACE/NCCRS to properly evaluate the provider course (proctored or not), I am not sure we would have as many options as we do today. The reasons behind why TESU is or is not accepting courses regardless of proctoring requirements is really anyone's guess. Just the same as whether anyone truly did cheat to earn credits is. And if a student did cheat, ban the student, not the provider. To me that would be logical. But no matter the reasoning, it is a shame to see the recent changes and understandably frustrating.
It could of just as easily been a student who slogged through everything first and opted to takes exams only once they were confident they could pass, since you only get 2 max attempts at their final exams. A good example of this would be a homeschooled student who used Shmoop as their curriculum provider. You can't access the final exams but most of the college courses are available as HS options. And there is probably very little difference between the HS or College Credit eligible versions.
That said, many here come from all sorts of educational backgrounds. A very well read individual for example, could probably work through a ton of literature courses (of which Shmoop has many) and the related quizzes and an exam (to prove competency) very quickly if they came to the table with pre-existing knowledge. I've never used Shmoop, but if I recall correctly you do not need to watch X portion of videos ect, but rather you could go right to the quizzes/exam. That is the case for many providers of these alternative credit options. This is not very different than when someone goes cold into CLEP testing. If they already have acquired the knowledge, taking an exam may be ALL they need to do in order to demonstrate it.
Even with SDC's 100+ quizzes for courses, an exam and needing to turn in assignments for some as well, the newer 5 exam limitation can quite literally be limiting to those who could work through at a faster pace. You could spend an entire year homeschooling a child using some of these curriculum providers at a reduced cost. And if and when that child were to decide, hey I would like to earn college credit for it, a parent may decide to foot that bill over a student loan. And in that situation there is no reason an individual could not simply take the multiple final exams necessary to meet their goal saving both time and money. They certainly would not need to spend a couple of weeks reviewing what they could of just spent an entire school year learning.
A BAin4Weeks is another perfect example that no one needs to cheat necessarily to accomplish amazing goals in a short period of time.
And of course as Sanatone suggests, if you can focus 100% on education and don't have other obligations (such as a job), then I'm not sure the only logical conclusion is that someone had to of "cheated", but rather what they accomplished was unique and therefore became suspicious. The lack of required proctoring at the time, most likely enhanced that suspicion.
Shmoop appeared to have recognized the perhaps legitimate issue that not having a proctor caused and added it as a requirement initially. When TESU still refused to accept their courses with or without proctoring, and Shmoop had to deal with the many students who had paid for an 88/month plan that was supposed to allow for college credit without paying additional money to a proctor, maybe Shmoop decided the best option was to try to find middle ground. This seems to of lead to optional proctoring. If I had to guess I would think most are probably foregoing proctoring to save money, not to cheat. Optional proctoring may of been put in place, because ACE did not require it and students didn't want to have to pay it, unless their school required them to. Again, just a guess.
The sad truth is that, if every course provider had to jump through hoops to meet the demands and scrutiny of individual schools instead of expecting schools to at least place some trust into ACE/NCCRS to properly evaluate the provider course (proctored or not), I am not sure we would have as many options as we do today. The reasons behind why TESU is or is not accepting courses regardless of proctoring requirements is really anyone's guess. Just the same as whether anyone truly did cheat to earn credits is. And if a student did cheat, ban the student, not the provider. To me that would be logical. But no matter the reasoning, it is a shame to see the recent changes and understandably frustrating.
![[-]](https://www.degreeforum.net/mybb/images/collapse.png)
