March 4, 2013

Tips to Reduce the Impact of Cheating in Online Assessment

Student sitting at computer

Preserving the integrity of student learning assessment is as much of a priority for online courses as it is for traditional face-to-face instruction. Although there is concern that academic dishonesty or ‘cheating’ might be more likely to happen in an online setting, studies comparing face-to-face and online settings have yielded mixed results (Grijalva, Nowell, Kerkvliet, 2006; Lanier, 2006; Stuber-McEwen, Wiseley, Hoggatt, 2009). Yet, a perception persists that challenges to preventing cheating are somewhat different in an online setting because faculty and students are physically separated from each other. This remoteness certainly makes it difficult to monitor various types of learning assessment activities.

Watson and Sottile (2010) have reported that cheating online can manifest in a number of ways including students who: (1) submit others’ work as their own, (2) receive/send answers from/to other students (by texting, using instant messaging, talking on a phone) while taking a test or quiz, (3) receive answers from a student who has already taken a test or quiz, (4) copy other students’ work without permission, (5) knowingly plagiarize from an article or book, or (6) use a term paper writing service.

Although it may be difficult to prevent cheating entirely, faculty can implement steps to reduce its impact in the student learning assessment process for online courses. The following are some practical tips to prevent or reduce cheating for two common learning assessment activities, namely testing and homework assignments.

Tips for Testing

    • Purposefully Select Assessment Methods – Use online testing, particularly objective test (i.e., multiple choice, multiple answer, true/false) for lower stakes assessment of student learning. In assessing student mastery of course goals and objectives, objective tests should be only one option considered among a spectrum of methods considered. Each type of assessment method may be designed to measure different indicators of student learning based on course goals and objectives. While an objective test can measure a student’s ability to recall or organize information, other methods can be used to assess higher order/critical thinking skills including understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating (Krathwohl, 2001).

 

    • Mix Objective and Subjective Questions – While online testing can include objective measures (multiple choice, multiple answer, true/false, fill in the blank, etc.), faculty can also include short answer or essay questions. This type of question is more subjective in nature and may demand a deeper understanding of the subject being tested. While mixing objective and subjective type questions may not discourage or stop sharing of information, it may limit the effect on the student’s final grade (Watson and Sottile, 2010).

 

    • Use Question Pools – Rather than using a fixed number of items that remain unchanged for each administration of the test, consider creating a question pool. Questions can be grouped by any number of criteria, including topic, subject matter, question type or difficulty of question. A pool will generate an assessment with randomized questions selected by the faculty member. Pools can be created from new questions or questions in existing tests or pools. Pools are most effective when there are large numbers of questions in one group. For example, one might have a pool of true/false questions, another of multiple choice and a third for fill in the blank. The faculty member could then create an assessment drawing a specific number of questions from each of the question-type pools. Faculty can also add new questions to pools each time the course is taught to expand the variability of questions. Conversely, older questions can be removed. Check the Teaching with Blackboard Question Pools web page for more details.

 

    • Randomize Questions – When creating a test in Blackboard, one test option allows faculty to randomize the selection of test questions as well as the order in which they appear. The result is that students are not likely to get the same questions in the same sequence when taking a test. This strategy can address the issue of students who take a test at the same time in order to share answers. This is also relevant if faculty allow students to repeat the test. Each time this occurs, a test will be made up of questions that are randomly selected and ordered.

 

    • Limit Feedback – Limit what types of feedback is displayed to students upon completion of a test. Available test options include test ‘Score’, ‘Submitted Answers’, ‘Correct Answers’, and ‘Feedback’. Providing test scores is important feedback that indicates how well students have performed and should be made available. However, through a process of elimination, students may be able to determine the correct answer for each test question if their submitted answers are identified as incorrect, or if the correct answer is provided. Students could lose the incentive to both prepare for testing or to seek out correct answers by reviewing lecture notes, assigned readings, or through group discussion after completing tests. Thus, faculty might reconsider whether to include ‘Submitted Answers’ as an option to be displayed to students. This is especially relevant if faculty have allowed students to repeat tests. Each time a test was taken, students could attempt a different answer for a test question that was previously graded as incorrect. Correct answers to all test questions could eventually be accumulated and passed on to other students, or to students of future classes.

 

    • Set Timer – Recognizing the fact that students taking an exam that is not proctored are free to use open book/notes, faculty may decide to use the ‘Set Timer’ feature in Blackboard. Students who adequately prepared for a test may be less likely to rely on open book/notes compared with students unprepared for testing. By setting a test with an expected completion time, unprepared students could have the most to lose as they spend time going over material, and risk not having sufficient time to respond to all the test questions.

 

    • Display Questions One At A Time – If a test has more than 5 questions, do not choose the ‘All at Once’ option for displaying all the questions on the same screen. It is quite easy for students to take a screen capture of the displayed questions and share them with other students. While students can still screen capture pages with single questions, or even type them into a document, it is more time consuming and unwieldy.

 

Tips for Homework Assignments

    • Create Application Assignments – Create assignments that require students to apply essential course concepts to a relevant problem. This may force students to seek relevant information beyond the assigned readings and lectures, and conduct independent research by identifying credible sources to support the development of their assignments. Students can be required to report their progress on a regular basis through email, or through the Journal feature in Blackboard. This documentation makes it easier for faculty to see the development of a student’s work from inception to completion, and possibly identify unexplained gaps that could occur if students used the work of others and claimed it as their own. Faculty can add input at any point in this process to provide guidance, and perhaps suggest new directions for students. Both documentation of progress through regular status reporting and occasional faculty input can add a greater level of scrutiny to students, making it more difficult to pass off the work of others as their own.

 

    • Create Group Assignments – Create group assignments that require students to interact with group members regularly. Groups can be made responsible for determining the functional roles for each member, establishing a mechanism for accountability (i.e., submitting weekly progress reports), and sharing drafts of individual progress on a group project. For a project to be truly collaborative, each group member should be familiar with everyone else’s work, and be able to describe how every group members’ contribution supports the whole group assignment. Students who are using the work of others may not be able to adequately describe the significance of their ‘own’ work, or how it integrates with the group’s overall project.

 

    • Create Assignments that Require Presentations – Faculty with a Blackboard course can use the web conferencing tool, Blackboard Collaborate, to conduct a synchronous online session for class presentations. Students may be asked to submit a progress report or use a Journal to reflect on what they have learned in the past week that supports work toward the presentation. To further scrutinize work on the presentation, students may be asked to include time for questions and answers. Students who have developed the presentation should be comfortable answering a range of topic-related questions. Faculty Developments offers workshops and one-on-one consultations on the use Blackboard Collaborate.

 

    • Check for Plagiarism using SafeAssignSafeAssign is a plagiarism prevention tool that detects matches between students’ submitted assignments and existing works by others. These works are found on a number of databases including ProQuest ABI/Inform, Institutional document archives, the Global Reference Database, as well as a comprehensive index of documents available for public access on the internet. SafeAssign can also be used to help students identify how to attribute sources properly rather than paraphrase without citing the original source. Thus, the SafeAssign feature is effective as both a deterrent and an educational tool. You can learn more about SafeAssign by visiting the Faculty Development and Instructional Design Center’s Teaching with Blackboard SafeAssign Web page. Faculty Development also offers workshop and one-on-one consultations to faculty and staff on using SafeAssign.

 

    • Use Discussion Assignments – Create a Discussion Board assignment that requires students to demonstrate critical thinking skills by responding to a relevant forum topic. Faculty may also design a rubric that is specific to the Discussion Board assignments, and develop questions that require students to respond to every rubric category. Having assignments that are very specific makes it more difficult for students to use portions of a previous term paper or other sources that may only indirectly touch on the Discussion Board topic.

 

    • Include Academic Integrity Policy Statement in the Course Syllabus – Faculty should consider including a policy statement regarding academic integrity in their course syllabus. In addition, faculty may want to reiterate academic policies to students taking an online course and clarifying guidelines for completing test and assignments so that students are not confused about what they can and cannot do. While this, in and of itself, may not be sufficient to change behavior, its acknowledged presence in the syllabus recognizes a commitment to honesty in the academic arena and establishes the clear expectation that academic integrity is an important principle to live by. Faculty may also choose to mention this policy using the ‘Announcements’ feature in Blackboard, or while conducting a live web conference session.

 

Learn More

Preserving academic integrity is an ongoing challenge for traditional face-to-face, blended, and entirely online courses. While a number of expensive technology solutions, such as retinal eye scanners and live video monitoring are being developed to prevent cheating in online courses, the practical suggestions offered above can prevent or reduce the impact of cheating on assessing student performance in online courses. For more information on this topic, readers are invited to view the archived online workshop, “Tips for Assessing Student Learning Using Blackboard.”

In addition, the Faculty Development and Instructional Design Center offers many Blackboard workshops, including those that touch on assessment. You are invited to visit the Faculty Development Web site that lists upcoming faculty and staff programs. Finally, readers are encouraged to review the following suggested readings and resources.

Suggested Readings and Resources

Grijalva, T., Nowell, C., & Kerkvliet, J. (2006). Academichonesty and online courses. College Student Journal, 40(1), 180-185.

Hi-Tech Cheating: Cell Phones and Cheating in Schools – A National Poll. Common Sense Media. Retrieved from http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/PDFs/2010_PDFs/100202_CellPhoneSchoolCheating.pdf.

Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. In L.W. Anderson & D.R. Krathwohl (Eds.), A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.

Lanier, M. (2006). Academic integrity and distance learning. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 17(2), 244-261.

Luce, A. (2012, Sept. 17). How do I know students aren’t cheating? Instructional Design & Development Blog. Retrieved from http://www.iddblog.org/?p=1194

McNett, M. (2002). Curbing academic dishonesty in online courses. Pointers and Clickers: ION’s Technology Tip of the Month. Retrieved from http://www.ion.uillinois.edu/resources/pointersclickers/2002_05/index.asp.

Olt, M. R., (2002). Ethics and distance education: Strategies for minimizing academic dishonesty in online assessment. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(3), Fall 2002.

Redmann, E. (n.d.) How Technology Is Raising the Stakes In Classroom Cheating. Edudemic. Retrieved from http://edudemic.com/2013/01/technology-classroom-cheating.

Stuber-McEwen, D., Wiseley, P., & Hoggatt, S. (2009). Point, click, and cheat: Frequency and type of academic dishonesty in the virtual classroom. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12(3), 1-10.

Trenholm, S. (2006-2007). A review of cheating in fully asynchronous online courses: A math or fact-based course perspective. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 35(3), 281-300.

Watson, G., & Sottile, J. (2010). Cheating in the digital age: Do students cheat more in online courses? Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring131/watson131.html?goback=%2Egde_52119_member_208797940.

  • http://twitter.com/garay Ed Garay

    Great post, Dan!

    I agree with these Best Practices wholeheartedly. Thanks for sharing.

    Other things I like to do or recommend is to break long online tests into a series of sequentially-administered smaller tests, say, taking at most 10 to 30 minute to complete; that way, we reduce the probability of students getting disconnected or otherwise distracted before they complete the smaller tests.

    I also like to make the tests re-entrant, which works very well with displaying questions one at the time, since each answer is saved individually; that way, when the test is resumed, the student is presented with the next questions left to answer.

    As for feedback, I initially only show the test scores. Then, after the test deadline, I change the Test Options to reveal all feedback, and invite the students to revisit their answers. I think, this facilitates an excellent reachable moment for the students to review what they did wrong.

    This semester, I assigned a multimedia presentation, five to ten minutes long, but instead of having them delivered in real-time. I had the students submit them asynchronously, as a ShareStream Assignment inside Blackboard Learn.

    I gave the 30+ grad students a half dozen topics to choose from, and I am quite impressed with the results. Each presentation is different and gave the students a wonderful opportunity to think more in-depth about the particular topic and to come up with their own presentation visuals and narration.

    When I am done grading them, I will make the multimedia presentations public to the class, which ShareStream (like Kaltura) makes it very easy to do within the LMS. I will also take advantage of ShareStream Assignments’ seamless integration with the LMS Grade book to provide individual feedback on the assignment.

  • Charles Mullen

    Thanks for the great tips, Dan! What about online proctoring? Have you had much success with that?

  • Dan

    Hello Charles,
    I can’t say that I have had any direct experience with online proctoring, but I recognize that as a viable approach to preserving the integrity of assessment.

  • Dan Cabrera

    Hello Ed, Thank you so much for your kind comments. I did learn quite a bit researching this topic. I also learn from your helpful comments as well. How is retirement going? I wish you and your family well. I hope to see you again soon, maybe at FSI this year.

  • Pingback: Preventing Cheating in Online Courses | eng225mdc

  • Jenny @ Sommerfeld-Majka

    Online learning has two faces good or bad, this article is really commendable to know how to prevent online cheating. I have seen this video it was just awesome.!!

    Jack @ Existenzgründung Münster
    http://www.sommerfeld-majka.de/leistungen/existenzgruendung-in-muenster/

  • http://www.southwestheatingandcooling.com/ Samaira Brown

    It is difficult to prevent cheating entirely, I hope your steps and tips to prevent online cheating impact positively on the people..

    http://www.southwestheatingandcooling.com

  • ian

    while this article does address so many of the cheating questions, faculty on my campus want to know how to determine who is taking your course, say a students father does all the work, from quiz, to discussions, to papers, while the teacher will get to know the students writing habits, it is really the students father not the student,
    You provide one great answer here, to use collaborate, I wonder if there are free alternatives to use?
    Has anyone experimented with testing sites? where ID is required