Princeton has big brother monitor your tests?

I have never cheated on a test in my entire life. Except for that...err...ok let me rephrase that, I prefer to play by the rules when possible...which is seldom. Or as Nixon said, "I am not a crook".

Princeton Changes Its 133-Year-Old Honor Code Over AI Cheating Fears

Faculty voted to require proctoring in all in-person exams starting this summer, reversing a policy set in place in 1893

By Douglas Belkin, WSJ

May 12, 2026 6:51 pm ET

Princeton University faculty voted to require proctoring in all in-person exams, reversing an 1893 policy.

For more than a century, Princeton University prided itself on an honor code so revered that proctoring during exams was banned. Students’ pledge not to cheat was enough.

Those days are over—largely because of AI.

On Monday, faculty voted to require proctoring in all in-person exams starting this summer, reversing a policy set in place in 1893 when Princeton introduced its honor code. The change came after “significant numbers” of undergrads and faculty requested it, “given their perception that cheating on in-class exams has become widespread,” according to a letter from Michael Gordin, Princeton’s dean of the college.

AI has made it both easier for students to cheat and harder to spot, Gordin wrote. Students are loath to report cheating because they are afraid they’ll be called out on social media. Those who do make reports often file anonymously, making it difficult for the school to investigate.

Princeton had been among the few schools to use an honor code letting students take exams without a professor present. Students will still be required to attest: “I pledge my honor that I have not violated the Honor Code during this examination.”

The code is embedded in the university’s culture and has long been a point of pride. It goes back to the 19th century, when students petitioned to eliminate proctors during examinations, according to the student newspaper.

The new policy means instructors will be present during exams and will document any infractions they observe. They will report those to a student-run honor committee for adjudication.

Nadia Makuc, a Princeton senior, chaired that committee during the past year. She said she thinks most students support the new policy because it alleviates pressure to report classmates. The committee received about 60 cases in the past year, an uptick, but she thinks most go unreported.

The ease of cheating has created a growing temptation, she said.

“If the exam is on a laptop, someone can just flip to another window. Or if the exam is in a blue book, it’s just people using their phone under their desk or going to the bathroom and using it,” she said.

In a survey of over 500 seniors conducted by the student newspaper last year, 30% reported they had cheated on an assignment or exam. Nearly half reported knowledge of an honor code violation but less than 1% had made a report.

The steps taken at Princeton underscore the enormous challenges facing colleges and universities as generative AI tools have become widespread in recent years. Nationwide, studies suggest that a third of students admit to using artificial intelligence to produce entire assignments, said Christian Moriarty, a professor of ethics and law at St. Petersburg College in Florida and a director at the nonprofit International Center for Academic Integrity.

Professors at campuses across the country have turned to old-fashioned blue books, oral exams and AI-detection software to combat cheating. Students now use AI-detection programs on their own essays before turning them in, to avoid getting caught by their teachers’ software.

The belief that everyone is cheating makes students feel both that it’s more acceptable and that it’s necessary to compete, Moriarty said. That cycle undermines higher education’s dependence on academic integrity to maintain the value of the credentials at the foundation of its business model.

“At stake here is not just the soul of education, but also the genuine development of critical thinking among the population,” Moriarty said. “Would you go to a doctor that used AI throughout all of medical school? Would you hire a lawyer to defend you who used AI to take the bar exam?”