Hi Clare,
With the number of solicitors out there now advertising they will represent students accused of misconduct (and thinking about the juicy payout they may get from universities who leave loopholes in their processes), I'd shy away from anything too specific.
So, for instance, what if a wired device is used which then connects to a non-wearable device used to communicate?
My thought is this could be captured in an "unauthorised devices" section of which wearable technology is one type. Examples of technologies could be given, but this is ever changing and a policy needs to be future proof.
For instance, in my recent talks on exam cheating, I've often mentioned hidden earpieces, cheap and easily available but completely hidden from view as they are concealed inside the ear. These also came up in the research Irene Glendinning and I (and others) were involved with about academic misconduct in South East Europe. But strictly speaking, would these be classified as wearable computing?
I'm also concerned about the glasses advertised now with hidden cameras in, which I imagine would be very hard to spot. There are also glasses which transmit audio to the ears using bone conduction which just can't be heard by anyone other than the wearer.
I agree with all watches being placed in plastic bags and placed out of reach. It is near impossible to tell a smart watch with certain faces displayed from a traditional watch. Really, universities have a duty to display prominent and synchronised clocks so that separate watches aren't needed.
The equipment students can bring into exams also has to be monitored. I know there's a move for universities to supply calculators as they can be used to store data (and you can buy working calculator shells to hide mobile phones inside), but a communication device could equally well be hidden in a pen
Thanks,
