News

Garber Announces Advisory Committee for Harvard Law School Dean Search

News

First Harvard Prize Book in Kosovo Established by Harvard Alumni

News

Ryan Murdock ’25 Remembered as Dedicated Advocate and Caring Friend

News

Harvard Faculty Appeal Temporary Suspensions From Widener Library

News

Man Who Managed Clients for High-End Cambridge Brothel Network Pleads Guilty

Efficiency

NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED

The proctors have a system worked out pretty well. They have shifty eyeballs and suspicious natures. They have red lines on the blue books so you cannot pre-write an exam. They have attendance slips and, it is rumored, handwriting experts. They have alternate seats and alternate rows. They even have mild mannered young men who considerately watch you when you go to the lavatory.

Now we're not complaining about their diligence. Our complaint is that if they want to stop the dishonest, they should be more efficient about it--there is still room for improvement. For example, they still have no defense against students who have mastered the Morse code or a private brand of semaphore. They need screens, sound proofing, and cryptanalysts. They have shifty eyes, but not enough of them. They should also be more suspicious--indeed, they should all wear steel-rimmed spectacles and sinister expressions. They should have long necks, which can turn quickly, but still remain stiff.

Their weakness in allowing students to smoke is deplorable. Cigarettes should be checked lest they have messages on them; brand names should be erased lest they have a symbolic value. In the bathrooms, there is obvious need for more vigilance. Improvements on the present system can not be discussed here.

In short: we must tighten the system. Trap the culprits. Let the student know that the proctor is watching over his shoulder, ready to pounce. Once the student realizes that there is no chance for evil, he will become much more relaxed. Obviously.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags