Smartwatches are getting banned by colleges and universities worried about cheating

Smartwatches are getting banned by colleges and universities worried about cheating
First, it was the mini-calculator. Colleges and universities worried that students could possibly cheat on math tests using them. But because prices have allowed the device to become ubiquitious, most schools will allow students to use them on certain tests. Then came the smartphone, bringing Google in tow. And while those have been banned from exam rooms, along comes the smartwatch.

A couple of months from now, the Apple Watch is expected to be released which should send the popularity of connected timepieces soaring to a whole new level. One university out of London said last year that the Apple Watch would create "a problem in the examination hall from 2015 and beyond," mostly because proctors wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the device and your typical unconnected digital watch. Part of the focus on the Apple Watch is due to Apple's plan to make the device part fashion item, part tech device.

Universities around the globe have started banning all watches from the exam room since it really is not feasible to ask a proctor to examine each student's timepiece. City University in London now considers a smartwatch to be the same as a smartphone when it comes to students taking an exam. That means that students attending that University remove their smartwatch and smartphone and put them in a plastic wallet under the desk. Exam rooms at City University now have more large clocks hanging on the wall, and students can request a desk clock to check the time while taking an exam.

The next device for colleges and universities to worry about? How about the smartring?

source: BuzzFeed via MacObserver, SlashGear



1. Neros

Posts: 1016; Member since: Dec 19, 2014

Just because certain universities in certain countries do that, it doesn't mean such devices are prohibited everywhere, PA.

2. RebelwithoutaClue unregistered

Where does it say everywhere?

3. Neros

Posts: 1016; Member since: Dec 19, 2014

Just look at the title. It clearly implies a larger/more global approach. Should've added "some" or "few" to the title.

21. techperson211

Posts: 1280; Member since: Feb 27, 2014

I think it should be. Smart watches is an extention of our smart phone and sooner or later we don't have to pull it out. We just have to check the smart watch. I'm still in to conventional watches though.

4. Evan_C

Posts: 153; Member since: Dec 15, 2014


5. sherkhan

Posts: 35; Member since: Oct 02, 2014

Already Two Cases in my College in India ...Both of them were copying from their Sony SW2.. Both of them got a Year drop and the Principal took their watches

6. Derekjeter

Posts: 1572; Member since: Oct 27, 2011

It's funny that the smart watch will be relevant now that Apple will make one. Just like NFC and large screen on the iPhone 6 plus. "It doesn't matter until apple makes it"

7. LetsBeHonest

Posts: 1548; Member since: Jun 04, 2013

But Large screens are relevant but not because of Apple makes one IMO. There were plenty of large screen smartphones. It just forced Apple to follow them not the other way around.

29. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

Sorry, but Apple worked on the smartphone with "large screens" first. What Apple found was that these large devices would have to wait until the display technology, battery technology, processor technology (like 64-bit processing), etc was available. While other companies introduced large screens into the market place to help differentiate themselves from Apple's 3.5" screen, these commercial introductions does not negate the simple fact that Apple had worked on the idea first. In summary, Apple waited years for the technology to arrive as opposed to following the android competitors. Just ask yourself where are Samsung's smartphones with 64-bit processors that came out to match the iPhone 5S?

30. tedkord

Posts: 17505; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

That is out and out a lie. What Apple found was that, contrary to what they kept insisting, people did want a large screen, and Apple hopped on the bandwagon reluctantly (and half assedly, offering 760p and 1080p when the market had moved on). In summary, Apple resisted the clear trend for years, and the tech not only arrived before Apple caved, it went even further, as evidenced by devices like the GS5 having a better screen than the 6 month newer iPhone 6.

35. iushnt

Posts: 3173; Member since: Feb 06, 2013

Such a pointless post.. It's not that Apple was waiting for technology improvement.. They had ipads with larger screen with similar hardware setup of iPhones.. Battery life wasn't a problem either.. They were just insisting.. Keeping the pressure so that when it explodes it will get massive openings..

36. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

I'd love to see a 3.5" screen on a phone with a non slide out physical keyboard or on a flip phone. But let's say your right and Apple was first to a large screen phone, what did they do then? They stagnated until a tiny bump in size 5 years later, and then a more significant one 7 years later, and that just to keep them near what the competition was doing. So yeah, they innovate, then stagnate for a few years, then innovate just enough to keep themselves close to their competition.

9. RebelwithoutaClue unregistered

Perhaps in the USA and UK, but NFC, larger screen and smartwatches were already relevant in many other countries. Smartwatches are already banned from exams in my country and NFC payments have been accepted in a lot of stores already.

12. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Because Apple sets the trends and the standards

18. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Because their user base will buy whatever product Apple puts out, so it's a guaranteed success. I've rarely if ever heard you say "No, I think I'll pass" when rumors or an announcement of a new Apple device come to light. It's usually something on the order of "My body is ready".

25. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Actually I wasn't too sure of the iwatch when it was first unveiled. That's just what you want to assume.

28. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Really, here's one of the first articles I found you responding to about the Apple Watch. It was only a fan render, which is funny when you read your first comment. The next article doesn't sound like you had any qualms about it, especially when you consider this was still in the rumor phase. And here's the third article you commented on the Apple Watch, again still in the rumor phase with nothing concrete except for the fact that they were working on a smart watch. Yup, you really sounded hesitant to purchase the Apple Watch, with absolutely nothing concrete to go on.

33. tedkord

Posts: 17505; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Yeah, he's never been "not too sure" about any Apple product. If they were to release the original iPhone exactly unchanged next year as the iPhone 6s, he'd proclaim it the best phone ever.

41. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Tedkord let me know when you plan on removing your head out of your rear end.

40. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Actually those comments were before Apple unveiled it. Good effort but not good enough.

44. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

OK, so you waited a whole month before jumping back to your previous stance, wow you are a mountain of hesitation. And these devices haven't been released yet and you're all in. I wait until I can see them myself before I decide to make the plunge. I've found most professional reviewers and many end users have some bias that colors their judgement.

51. Mxyzptlk unregistered

It took me a little more than a month to be convinced of the iWatch. What are you trying to prove anyway?

53. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

What am I trying to prove? If you can't see it you're dumber than I thought, and that's saying something. I'm saying that Apple could sell herpes in a box and you'd say "My body is ready". Of course you wouldn't be sure about it at first, right? I mean they've already said that it would get a full day of battery life, then less than a full day of battery life, and then said it would be depending on how much you use this feature or that. And yet, you have no qualms about it, you're ready to dive headlong into it. And let's be real, manufacturer battery estimations are always generous, so figure less than what they're figuring. But that won't affect you, even though you were hesitant for what, a month and a half then? Is that what it was? I mean FFS. For someone who thinks he's smarter than everyone else in the room, you can be pretty thick.

22. Slammer

Posts: 1515; Member since: Jun 03, 2010

Technology started to advance at an alarming rate a little more than 60 years ago. Apple was not around then. Apple as others, took ideas and capitalized on them, "helping" leapfrog advancements. Only the original iphone can be considered monumental in the day of bridging the UI experience of smartphones. Everything else is revolutionary; not evolutionary. You need to sit down and study the history of technology and its advancements. You would be surprised of past and present unknowns that had more of an impact of where we are today. Sales is not a technological advancement. It is a profit driven component mastered by cunning sales pitches and subliminal mind tactics. John B.

26. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Really? Before the iPad, was there really a market for tablets? I'll wait for your ridiculous answer.

32. tedkord

Posts: 17505; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

There was a market. It wasn't huge, mostly because the tech wasn't there for such portability then, and the used full blown operating systems, not mobile ones.

37. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Correct. Things like tablets, or even laptops for that matter, where the used more for work than entertainment back then. Before the smartphone boom, no one was streaming music, and the only video services around was YouTube with about 1/50th of the content it currently has. High tech gear was for work, not play back then.

42. Mxyzptlk unregistered

No there wasn't. There was no consumer market for tablets like there is now. It was pretty much a niche market before the iPad changed things. Checkmate

43. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010 Like he said, while the non business tablet market was limited, there were products available. But at that point, there was no subsidy in place for people to buy these at reduced rates, and with the higher cost of these devices, as there always is in the initial offerings, most people couldn't justify the price.

46. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

And you do realize, first you said, there was no consumer market for tablets, then it was a niche market. A niche market is a market. No market is no market. It wasn't the device itself that really made the market, but what you could do with the device. Streaming audio and video, and web browsing with a high speed connection is what made these devices. Take that away and these devices wouldn't be what they are today.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.
FCC OKs Cingular's purchase of AT&T Wireless