I spent the entire 12 year stretch of school as a homeschooled student.

I’d wake up at 4AM and start with coffee, then move on to whatever subject was most likely to tickle my fancy on that particular day. The ability to control my own routine – somewhat effectively – is part of what taught me how to keep a handle on freelancing today.

At the time, homeschooling saw a lot of criticism: Some of the biggest questions surrounded how people could still be “social” at home – and how on earth cheating during exams could be effectively stopped in a home environment.

Today, faced with lockdowns, the same questions suddenly apply to the bridge environment.

The answer to the first one? Online bridge – just like online board games used to be a social refuge at the time; the answer to the second might take some explaining.

Here’s how I found homeschooled exams and bridge cheating to relate – and how one might hold the answer to another.

Exams at Home: Keeping Logs, Taking Names

Homeschooled students would write several tests and exams throughout the year. All of this would be done from home. 

First, files were released at a set time – and had to be uploaded at a specific time. These files were kept locked, accessible only with the password, and you could only get this by calling in and giving your student details. 

If someone screwed with the system, it would be obvious. 

For bridge, I imagine that logging bridge plays and user accounts are much the same. Bridge keeps records, and it’s by looking at these records that some cheaters can be identified and kicked in an easier way.

The Invigilator: Keeping Watch

One of the first things implemented to stop potential cheating during home exams was the use of an invigilator. For exams, a third-party invigilator had to sign (several) documents – and then stay present for the exam to keep an eye over conditions.

Why did this work? People are much less likely to cheat in the presence of a third-party – and much more likely to get caught when they try. 

It still presented the obvious issue that students could cheat if they could cheat the invigilator. 

For online bridge, we might very well need video recordings supplementing games to “keep an eye” on players, so to speak. This way, collusive cheating (and anything else that might fall along a crooked path) can be obviously seen and immediately stopped.

Whistleblowers Work: See Something, Say Something

What did you do if you thought that someone had cheated their way through an exam? Well, you said something.

Bridge has taken much of the same approach so far.

If someone was somehow clever enough to screw their way through the system, it was in nobody’s benefit to wait or to let them get away with it. Students who cheated once on a smaller exam would later continue to cheat until their later school years just because they found a gap – and what they did after this, I’m not sure.

Whistleblowing and strict penalties for cheating acted as a massive deterrent for would-be cheaters; the presence of invigilators and the proper recording of records took care of anyone else who tried.