Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Academic Integrity in Online Courses


Published on

Techniques for curbing cheating in distance learning courses.

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

Academic Integrity in Online Courses

  1. 1. Academic Integrity in Online Courses Judy Baker, Ph.D. Dean Foothill Global Access Foothill College
  2. 2. <ul><li>Cheating in Online Classes </li></ul><ul><li>Plagiarism Detection </li></ul><ul><li>Proctored Testing </li></ul><ul><li>Alternatives </li></ul>
  3. 3. Agree or Disagree? <ul><li>Cheating is more likely in online courses. </li></ul><ul><li>List at least two reasons. </li></ul>
  4. 4. Group Debate
  5. 5. Assumptions <ul><li>Cheating is the student’s fault </li></ul><ul><li>Online courses compared to F2F courses </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Easier to cheat </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cheating more likely </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Proctored testing decreases cheating </li></ul>
  6. 6. Student Assessment In the good old days…
  7. 7. Student Assessment In the information age…
  8. 8. Hi-Tech Cheating in Classroom
  9. 9. What’s Changed? <ul><li>Changed </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ease of cheating </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ease of monitoring cheating </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ease of preventing cheating </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Not Changed </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Definitions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Honor code policies and procedures </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Student assessment quality, validity, reliability </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Academic Integrity? <ul><li>Hypocrisy of focusing on student cheating behaviors when… </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Student Code of Honor policies are antiquated and inconsistently enforced </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Student assessment is fundamentally flawed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Behavior called “cheating” in school considered desirable in working world: </li></ul></ul><ul><li>“ NETWORKING” </li></ul>
  11. 11. Research on Academic Honesty <ul><li>Merged data from a student randomized response survey on cheating behavior with class-specific information provided by faculty (2002) </li></ul><ul><li>Sample of students in a large public university </li></ul><ul><li>Evidence that academic dishonesty in a single online class is no more pervasive than in traditional classrooms </li></ul>
  12. 12. Easier to Cheat in a Face-to-Face or Online Class? <ul><li>Traditional </li></ul><ul><li>Online </li></ul>
  13. 13. Easier to Cheat in a Face-to-Face or Online Class? <ul><li>Physical separation </li></ul><ul><li>Creation of psycho-social “distance” resulting in less influence by social norms </li></ul><ul><li>Excuses and alibis </li></ul><ul><li>Intentionally sending a corrupted file or an attachment that cannot be opened </li></ul><ul><li>Faking technical difficulties during online tests </li></ul>
  14. 14. Easier to Cheat in a Face-to-Face or Online Class? <ul><li>Hacking </li></ul><ul><li>Looking at source code or a Java script might show the answers to online quizzes </li></ul><ul><li>Changing the clock on your computer to send email late but to have an earlier date and time </li></ul>
  15. 15. Advantages of Online for Monitoring Academic Integrity <ul><li>Electronic record of all correspondence maintained for online courses </li></ul><ul><li>Entire courses are archived for future reference and for quality control purposes </li></ul><ul><li>Instructor has a readily accessible record of everything done by each student from the first day of class to the last </li></ul><ul><li>Easy to compare a student’s writing style on different class assignments </li></ul>
  16. 16. Plagiarism Detection Software
  17. 17. Agree or Disagree? <ul><li>Test proctoring is necessary to ensure academic integrity and quality in distance learning courses. </li></ul><ul><li>List at least two reasons </li></ul>
  18. 18. Pros of Proctored Testing <ul><li>Opportunity for F2F with distance students </li></ul><ul><li>Identity security </li></ul><ul><li>Availability of student assistance during testing </li></ul><ul><li>May address accreditation concerns </li></ul><ul><li>Conformity with on-campus model of testing </li></ul><ul><li>Control over student’s unauthorized use of resources in completing an assessment </li></ul>
  19. 19. Cons of Proctored Testing <ul><li>Costs and staffing </li></ul><ul><li>Logistics </li></ul><ul><li>Inconvenience </li></ul><ul><li>Long feedback loop </li></ul><ul><li>Negates anytime/anyplace of distance learning </li></ul>
  20. 20. Need for Proctored Testing Differs by Course? <ul><li>Courses that prepare students for state boards or other certification exams </li></ul><ul><li>Prerequisite courses </li></ul><ul><li>Pass-fall courses </li></ul><ul><li>Less stringent, more affordable testing processes may be developed for courses with low risk for cheating </li></ul><ul><li>Remote students vs. local students </li></ul>
  21. 21. Course Management System Quiz & Proctoring <ul><li>Use password protection for test proctoring arrangements </li></ul><ul><li>May be possible to limit access to a test to a specific computer at a specific internet address, where a proctor can be present </li></ul>
  22. 22. Alternatives to Proctored Testing <ul><li>High tech ID methods </li></ul><ul><li>Online assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Pedagogical solutions </li></ul>
  23. 23. High-Tech ID Methods <ul><li>Retinal scans </li></ul><ul><li>Ear shape </li></ul><ul><li>Facial identification through thermographs </li></ul><ul><li>Voice, palm, or fingerprints </li></ul><ul><li>Hand geometry </li></ul><ul><li>Ongoing handwriting analysis throughout the exam </li></ul><ul><li>Require students to use a camera on their computer desktop for discussions and exams </li></ul><ul><li>High-tech security = high cost </li></ul><ul><ul><li>May not be warranted in many cases </li></ul></ul>
  24. 24. Advantage of Online Testing <ul><li>Low cost </li></ul><ul><li>Convenient </li></ul><ul><li>Rapid feedback to student </li></ul><ul><li>Allows exams </li></ul><ul><ul><li>To be password protected </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To have a different test form every time a different student logs in </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To give immediate feedback to the student </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To be given to the instructor immediately </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Reduces the need for transporting exams from one location to another </li></ul>
  25. 25. Online Assessment Integrity Strategies <ul><li>Utilize Blackboard and WebCT testing security features </li></ul><ul><li>Set availability dates and times for all assessments </li></ul><ul><li>Set time limits and the number of permissible accesses </li></ul><ul><li>Track the time, duration, and number of attempts that a student accesses an assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Create large question pools for randomized assessments </li></ul><ul><li>Add a password to proctored exams, and an IP restriction if feasible </li></ul>
  26. 26. Course Management System Quiz Settings <ul><li>Randomly generate test questions from Quiz Question Pool or Database </li></ul><ul><li>Set Quizzes to have only one question per screen to make printing of quizzes more difficult </li></ul><ul><li>Set Quizzes to not allow return to previous questions </li></ul><ul><li>Limit accessibility to tests to specific time periods </li></ul><ul><li>Use timed online testing </li></ul>
  27. 27. Pedagogical Solutions
  28. 28. Pedagogical Solutions <ul><li>Assign work and tests that are due frequently throughout the semester </li></ul><ul><li>Assign work that builds sequentially on prior submitted work, such as revisions of drafts </li></ul><ul><li>Call students at random during the semester to administer an unannounced oral exam </li></ul><ul><li>Make all tests/quizzes open-book style </li></ul>
  29. 29. Pedagogical Solutions <ul><li>Debrief/interview a student concerning their test/quiz </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ask specific questions about their answers </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Use alternative modes of student assessment such as portfolios, rubrics, self-assessment, peer assessment, and contracts </li></ul><ul><li>Use multiple methods of measuring performance, mastery, and skill </li></ul>
  30. 30. Pedagogical Solutions <ul><li>Require assignment and test responses to relate the subject matter to students' lived experiences or test questions tied to current news events </li></ul><ul><li>Deliver test/quizzes &quot;orally&quot; through live chat </li></ul><ul><li>Meet with students individually online and test/quiz them on course content </li></ul><ul><li>Require students to participate in discussion groups </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Keep the log and review writing styles of students </li></ul></ul>
  31. 31. Construction of Effective Tests <ul><li>Validity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Items are clear </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Content matches learning goals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Items has appropriate weight of final score </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Level of thinking matches the learning goals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Range of items wide enough to accurately represent the goal for learning </li></ul></ul>
  32. 32. Construction of Effective Tests <ul><li>Reliability </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Clear instructions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Time limits are realistic </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Vocabulary </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Layout of the test appropriate </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Make-up exams of same type as original exam </li></ul></ul>
  33. 33. Alternatives to Tests <ul><li>Use multiple methods of measuring performance, mastery, and skill </li></ul><ul><li>Group projects </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Creating a web site </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developing a database </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Solve a problem and explain the process </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Case studies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Research projects </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Simulations, games and puzzles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Portfolios: samples of a variety of materials </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Tests taken by teams instead of individuals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Peer collaboration; peer assessment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Have the students provide a presentation as either a web site or powerpoint presentation and post them to the web </li></ul></ul>
  34. 35. Alternative Means of Evaluating Student Performance <ul><li>Art of Negotiable Contracting for Assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Alternative Assessment & Electronic Portfolios </li></ul><ul><li>Cons ortiu m for Equity in Standards and Testing </li></ul><ul><li>Critical Issues in Assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Example of Scoring for a Concept-Resource Map </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment and Evaluation for online courses </li></ul><ul><li>Quizzes, Tes ts, and Exams </li></ul><ul><li>Classroom Assessment Techniques </li></ul>
  35. 36. Cheaters Serve as Catalysts Cheating challenges educators to design distance course content and assessment more carefully.
  36. 37. Sources
  37. 38. Sources <ul><li>Carnevale, D. (1999, November 12). How to Proctor From a Distance. The Chronicle of Higher Education, p. A47. </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Curtis, D.D. & Lawson, M.J. (2001). Exploring collaborative online learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(1). From </li></ul><ul><li>Heberling, M. (2002). Maintaining Academic Integrity in Online Education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Vol. V, No. I, Spring 2002 From </li></ul><ul><li>Identity Security and Testing Issues in Distance Education From </li></ul><ul><li>Illinois Online Network &quot;Strategies to Minimize Cheating Online&quot; From </li></ul><ul><li>Olt, M. (2002). Ethics and Distance Education: Strategies for Minimizing Academic Dishonesty in Online Assessment Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Vol. V, No. III, Fall 2002 From </li></ul><ul><li>Rowe, N. (2004). Cheating in Online Student Assessment: Beyond Plagiarism. .On-Line Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Summer 2004. From </li></ul><ul><li>Tulloch, J. & Thompson, S. Accreditation and Student Assessment in Distance Education. From </li></ul><ul><li>Van Belle, G. How Cheating Helps Drive Better Instruction. From </li></ul><ul><li>Wellman, G. & Marcinkiewicz, H. (12/2004) Online Learning and Time-on-Task: Impact of Proctored vs. Un-Proctored Testing. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. Vol. 8, No. 4. From </li></ul><ul><li>Zero Cost E-Learning. From </li></ul>