Princeton University is overturning a tradition that has lasted for more than a century: starting this summer, all offline exams will re-enable proctors to deal with what the school has identified as "an increasingly common cheating problem in the era of generative artificial intelligence." The move marks a major shift in the school's honor code system, which has been established since 1893 and has centered on student self-discipline.
For more than a century, Princeton has prided itself on an exam system that does not require proctoring. Students sign a non-cheating pledge on the test paper, which is considered sufficient to protect academic integrity. However, with the popularity of various AI tools, the school believes that on the one hand, technology makes it easier for students to cheat on exams and homework, and on the other hand, it makes violations more difficult to detect. Provost Michael Golding said in a letter to students and faculty that a “large number” of undergraduates and faculty have recently requested the reinstatement of proctoring because of a general feeling that cheating on classroom exams has become “widespread.”
According to the new regulations, all future offline exams must have a classroom teacher or designated invigilator present, and record the violations witnessed by themselves, and then submit them to the student-led honor committee for adjudication. Even with the return of proctoring, students are still required to sign a traditional statement on their exam papers: "I certify on my honor that I have not violated the Honor Code during this exam." The code is considered deeply embedded in Princeton's campus culture, and its origins can be traced to the 19th century, when students petitioned to eliminate exam proctors.
Goldin points out that the emergence of AI has changed the risk-benefit structure of cheating. On the one hand, students can switch windows on their computers to call AI tools at any time; on the other hand, reporting violations has become more difficult. Schools have found that students are often reluctant to report their classmates for cheating for fear of retaliation or publicity on social media. Even if someone makes a report, it is usually done anonymously, making it more difficult for the school to investigate and collect evidence.
Nadia Makuk, a current senior who served as student honor committee president for the past year, said most students actually support reinstating proctoring because it would relieve them of peer pressure to "snitch out" on cheaters. The honor committee received about 60 cases last school year, an increase, but Makuk believes the reality is much more than that and most violations may never enter the formal process. She admitted that the "easiness" brought by technology itself constitutes a huge temptation - whether it is switching windows at will during a computer exam, hiding the phone under the table during a paper-and-pencil exam, or using the phone to search for answers when going to the toilet.
Student self-reports also reveal the extent of the problem. According to a survey of more than 500 graduating students conducted by the student newspaper last year, about 30% of the respondents admitted that they had cheated on an assignment or exam. Nearly half of those surveyed said they were aware of honor code violations, but less than 1% actually reported them to school administrators.
Princeton’s adjustment reflects the common challenges faced by American universities in maintaining academic integrity amid the rapid proliferation of generative AI tools. Christian Moriarty, professor of ethics and law at St. Petersburg College in Florida and co-director of the International Center for Academic Integrity, pointed out that studies across the country show that about one-third of students admit to using artificial intelligence to complete an entire assignment. In this situation, university teachers are forced to seek more “traditional” or “artificial” monitoring methods to deal with new technologies.
In many campuses in the United States, teachers are re-introducing blue test books, switching to face-to-face formats such as oral exams, and supplementing them with various AI detection software to curb cheating. Some students even “self-check” using AI detection tools before turning in their assignments to confirm that their text will not be flagged as AI-generated by the system used by teachers. Moriarty believes that when students generally believe that "everyone else is cheating," it is easier to regard this as reasonable behavior, and even feel that if they do not cheat, they will be at a disadvantage in the competition.
In his view, this vicious cycle is shaking the foundation of higher education, because the value of college degrees and certificates is based on the premise of academic integrity. “What is at stake here is not just the ‘soul’ of education, but the true development of the public’s overall critical thinking skills,” Moriarty said. He asked rhetorically: "If there was a doctor who relied on AI throughout medical school, would you be willing to see such a doctor? If a lawyer used AI to pass the bar exam, would you feel comfortable letting him defend you?"