Is It Cheating To Use Online Resources For Exams
Chegg and Course Hero provide students with easy access to answers online; these sites are advertised as studying tools rather than cheating platforms.
Studies on cheating behaviors conducted among participants surveyed many studies and divided it into Individual or Group categories. Individual cheating occurs when you access information without seeking assistance from another individual.
It’s Not Cheating
NBC News Stay Tuned recently spoke with students at the University of Oslo who are taking part in Norway’s experiment to provide full Internet access during national exams. Students report using social media, search engines and online textbooks as sources for assistance during tests – however their concern is that too easily accessing this information might lead to accusations of cheating in exams – prompting reevaluation of traditional definitions of cheating in this modern era of global information resources.
Many research studies have asked participants to self-report their reasons for cheating during online exams, with participants self-reporting their motivations for doing so. Although it is hard to compare statistics directly, they indicate at least some students consider cheating during these examinations. Out of seven studies which inquired both Group and Individual cheating participants reported most commonly sharing answers or contract cheating (having someone take an exam on behalf of another).
Cheating can become tempting when tests represent a larger percentage of final course grades, particularly end-of-course exams and midterms, or when questions have low memorization requirements or can be found online as multiple-choice or fill-in-the-blanks. Such temptations become especially apparent during end-of-course exams and midterms that carry high weightage grades; end-of-course exams and midterms provide particular temptation for cheating.
One way to reduce the temptation for cheating during an exam is to create unique exam questions. As opposed to asking memorisation or regurgitation questions, use higher-level application questions which require students to analyze and synthesize information gathered both personally and from class. Limit the number of questions that appear at once and prohibit backtracking so students cannot quickly look up answers from previous questions while taking a current one. Also ensure your answer sheets and test booklets have pre-coded answer sheets so it will be impossible for students to share or copy from each other after their exams have been marked.
It’s a Natural Extension of Learning
Online courses give students the flexibility to engage with course material as they see fit. From reading articles or books, listening to podcasts, and watching videos – whether that means reading articles from magazines and newspapers, listening to podcasts or videos – to participating in discussion boards which enable collaboration among classmates and instructors – students have many tools at their fingertips for learning – these activities should not be seen as cheating if utilized during exams but can result in serious penalties from instructors and institutions if caught cheating during examinations.
Academic dishonesty has long been a source of concern among educators working in online learning environments. Some have speculated that digital environments might make cheating easier than face-to-face classrooms; however, research on this matter has been mixed, and numerous factors may determine whether a student cheats in an online course.
Numerous studies have examined this question, employing various methodologies to investigate whether online exams are more or less amenable to cheating than traditional ones. One such experiment used a quasiexperiment where one group took an exam without proctoring while the second took one with proctoring – this allowed for direct comparisons of performance pre and post proctoring while simultaneously controlling for any variables that might alter results.
Another approach involved asking participants to self-report their frequency of cheating during online exams and compare it with a control group that did not report cheating in such exams. Researchers then coded these responses using Noorbehbahani’s typology of individual and group cheating behaviours.
Individual cheating refers to any form of dishonest behavior undertaken alone; for example, looking up information during an online exam or using unapproved resources in it. Group cheating involved working together with another individual (whether sharing answers or sitting exams for another).
There are various strategies available to combat online cheating environments. Strategies may include altering course and assessment design to make it harder for students to access inappropriate material or collaborate among themselves, identity authentication programs that range from scanning a photo of the student to keystroke recognition, or secure exam browsers which limit what students can access during an exam session.
It’s a Natural Extension of Assessment
Searching the Internet during an assessment is an integral part of how students assess their own learning. Students often utilize this resource when writing essays or discussing board posts; additionally, it can assist with research presentations; create infographics; or even video projects. Therefore it is hard to argue that such activities constitute cheating when society relies on such knowledge on an everyday basis.
Some researchers suggest that an online environment makes it easier for people to cheat during assessments, but other reasons could also influence students to cheat during online tests. Studies indicate that students find online tests more appealing because they allow more flexibility for how students work (see this study), while additional studies have indicated that students who take online courses tend to feel more at ease using technology during assessments.
One of the challenges associated with online tests is monitoring student behavior during assessments, and this difficulty becomes even greater when administered through a proctoring service. Proctoring services either use automated software programs to track students or have live proctors oversee the exam; either way, these types of services may prevent cheating but cannot provide guarantee against this possibility.
Online assessments might also make cheating easier because they carry greater weight than in-person exams, according to research studies. If exams make up a substantial percentage of final grades, there can be increased incentives for students to cheat. A solution might be for teachers to incorporate frequent low-stakes comprehension checkpoints throughout a course so when big assessments come along they have confidence they have grasped all course material without being motivated to cheat.
It’s a Natural Extension of Feedback
If a student feels they’re making little or no progress with an assessment or not understanding something, it makes sense for them to turn online to seek feedback on their work. This could include using discussion boards, sending emails directly to instructors, or finding tutors – this process should not be seen as cheating but simply an extension of learning; unfortunately though these tools are frequently misused during exams as means for cheating.
At times, assessment structures can contribute to an inflated perception of cheating. For instance, when exams account for a significant percentage of grade or are taken home assessments with multiple questions available online can encourage students to find answers or cheat. Furthermore, traditional classroom tests often have more difficult and confusing questions which make cheating easier than online tests.
One strategy to address this problem is through low-stakes formative assessments throughout a course that offer regular, high-quality feedback on students’ understanding. This may help disincentivize cheating on higher stakes exams like midterms and final exams.
Proctoring software is another effective means of deterring cheating during exams, providing automated or live supervision during an exam session. Although not foolproof, evidence indicates that such systems reduce student self-reported cheating during online exams.
Psychological characteristics may also make students more prone to cheating. Impulsivity and high needs for sensation have been associated with more accepting attitudes toward academic dishonesty and increased tendencies to cheat (Wilks et al., 2016).
If you are concerned that your students are engaging in cheating during exams, it’s important to remember that no system is infallible and cheating may be hard to detect. There are, however, ways in which exams can be made more secure – for instance providing two-stage exams or group assessments in which students must collaborate together on tasks.