Successfully reported this slideshow.

Academic Integrity in Online Courses

6

Share

Upcoming SlideShare
Assessment
Assessment
Loading in …3
×
1 of 38
1 of 38

More Related Content

Related Books

Free with a 14 day trial from Scribd

See all

Related Audiobooks

Free with a 14 day trial from Scribd

See all

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>http://www.fact.usu.edu/tutorials/PDF%20Tutorials/Cheating/CheatingDistanceEducation.pdf </li></ul><ul><li>Curtis, D.D. & Lawson, M.J. (2001). Exploring collaborative online learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(1). From http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/Vol5_issue1/Curtis/curtis.htm </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 http://www.westga.edu/%7Edistance/ojdla/spring51/spring51.html </li></ul><ul><li>Identity Security and Testing Issues in Distance Education From http://www.pbs.org/als/agenda/articles/testing.html </li></ul><ul><li>Illinois Online Network &quot;Strategies to Minimize Cheating Online&quot; From http://illinois.online.uillinois.edu/IONresources/assessment/cheating.html </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 http://oregonstate.edu/dept/econ/pdf/cheat.online.pap6.pdf </li></ul><ul><li>Rowe, N. (2004). Cheating in Online Student Assessment: Beyond Plagiarism. .On-Line Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Summer 2004. From http://www.cs.nps.navy.mil/people/faculty/rowe/dlcheat.htm </li></ul><ul><li>Tulloch, J. & Thompson, S. Accreditation and Student Assessment in Distance Education. From http://www.astd.org/NR/exeres/1F6D7C77-285A-42B8-9C6E-F0A7EA93FB82.htm </li></ul><ul><li>Van Belle, G. How Cheating Helps Drive Better Instruction. From http://www.plagiarized.com/vanb.html </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 http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v8n4/index.asp </li></ul><ul><li>Zero Cost E-Learning. From http://www.astd.org/NR/exeres/1F6D7C77-285A-42B8-9C6E-F0A7EA93FB82.htm </li></ul>

Editor's Notes

×