Do Online Exams Facilitate Cheating? An Experiment Designed to Separate Possible Cheating from the Effect of the Online Test Taking Environment

Fask, Alan; Englander, Fred; Wang, Zhaobo

doi:10.1007/s10805-014-9207-1

Cited by 108 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lamenting moral failure, assessing yet another potential antecedent, or debating the propensity to cheat given latent orientations distract us from the fact that academic dishonesty is an enduring concern (McCabe et al, 2001;Brown & McInerney 2008;Fask et al, 2014). The persistence, prevalence, and propensity of academic dishonesty, if unchecked, challenges the integrity of online education.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Poor performance often follows, not because of cognitive limits or under-preparation, but because of the tension of evaluation. Coping with test anxiety, reinforced with memories of earlier consequences, encourages academic dishonesty (Stowell & Bennett, 2010;Fask et al, 2014). Deterring students' propensity to cheat ultimately calls for engaging evaluation methods that reduce a key catalyst of cheating, namely test anxiety.…”

Section: Tapping the Testing Effect To Mediate Test Anxietymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Forecasts have predicted that roughly half of all college classes will be e-learning-based by 2019, with that figure steadily on its way to 75% (Allen & Seaman, 2014). Safeguarding academic honesty, along with tangential implications to student engagement, performance anxieties, learning effectiveness, and workflow efficiency, fan escalating concern (McCabe, Butterfield, & Trevino, 2006;Stogner et al, 2013;Fask, Englander, & Wang, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

An Integrated Approach to Preempt Cheating on Asynchronous, Objective, Online Assessments in Graduate Business Classes

Sullivan

2016

OLJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cheating, left untended, erodes the validity of evaluation and, ultimately, corrupts the legitimacy of a course. We profile an approach to manage, with an eye toward preempting, cheating on asynchronous, objective, online quizzes. This approach taps various technological and social solutions to academic dishonesty, integrating them into a technology-centered, socially-sensitive pedagogy. The resulting design engages a battery of technology tools, within a social context moderated by the testing effect, to minimize the practicality, productivity, and hence, students' propensity to cheat. Operationally, we used the Canvas LMS to generate a differentiated series of objective quizzes from question banks holding several hundred potential items. We assess cross-sectional data from 178 MBA students spanning eight online-only classes. The results support the effectiveness of an integrated blend of technology tools and social methods to encourage students' consciousness of the resulting uselessness of cheating. We review the implications of the results to test anxiety, student engagement, learning effectiveness, and workflow efficiency.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Tapping the Testing Effect To Mediate Test Anxietymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Integrated Approach to Preempt Cheating on Asynchronous, Objective, Online Assessments in Graduate Business Classes

Sullivan

2016

OLJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Once the semester was underway, Hollister and Berenson (2009) randomly assigned one of the sections to a traditional assessment mode (in-class, proctored exams) and the other section to an assessment mode based on online examinations. Another such experiment has been recently undertaken by Fask, Englander and Wang (2014). Two sections of introductory statistics were assigned to complete a practice final exam several days prior to the actual final exam.…”

Section: Hindering Cheating On Digital Examsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring the Impact of Innovations in Bertheussen’s ‘Digital School Examinations’

Fask¹,

Englander²,

Wang³

2014

IBR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews Bernt Arne Bertheussen's recent article published in this journal which offers a promising new approach to teaching undergraduate finance courses. Bertheussen (2014) presents a comprehensive approach which argues that a greater emphasis on the use of spreadsheets satisfies the students' desires to develop increased experience, familiarity and skill in working with information and communication technology. Such a practice, suggests the author, would also nurture a deeper, more enduring understanding of the underlying finance concepts covered. The current review of this innovation offers Bertheussen substantial credit for an important innovation in finance pedagogy. However, this review does draw attention to and analyzes the substantial limitations in the approaches that Bertheussen utilizes to measure the effectiveness of this innovation. Alternative approaches to gauge the effectiveness of this new teaching method which might serve to persuade more instructors of the utility of such a pedagogical advancement are discussed.

show abstract

“…But taking off campus online exams worries faculties because of the risk of cheating. Fask, Englander and Wang (2014) designed an experiment to assess the difference in student performance between students taking a traditional exam in an examination room and those taking an unproctored exam online. They found no significant difference between online and class exam scores.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proctoring to improve teaching practice

Brouwer

Heck

Smit

2017

MSOR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Universities organise digital summative assessments in special assessment computer rooms and they conduct strong restrictions on the resources. This policy assures safety and security of assessments but obstructs authentic problem solving where open resources are needed. A digital assessment room is also not a proper solution when students for some reason cannot attend the assessment on campus. We present three scenarios from the science and mathematics teaching practice at the University of Amsterdam in which we have used proctoring to create the flexibility of online exams that was needed. Online remote proctoring of computer screens on the campus and/or students at home enabled (1) more authentic exams by allowing open resources, (2) use of own laptops (BYOD) in a regular lecture room, (3) off campus online exams as a part of an online programme, for example, at home anywhere in the world. We have shown that proctoring is not just a different way to control students using computers, but that it enabled improvement of the quality of learning processes in which summative assessments are an integral part.

show abstract

Do Online Exams Facilitate Cheating? An Experiment Designed to Separate Possible Cheating from the Effect of the Online Test Taking Environment

Cited by 108 publications

References 15 publications

An Integrated Approach to Preempt Cheating on Asynchronous, Objective, Online Assessments in Graduate Business Classes

An Integrated Approach to Preempt Cheating on Asynchronous, Objective, Online Assessments in Graduate Business Classes

Measuring the Impact of Innovations in Bertheussen’s ‘Digital School Examinations’

Proctoring to improve teaching practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About