Cheating in online exams!

How much of a problem is cheating in virtual, online and technology mediated learning environments?  From my perspective, there can be academic dishonesty in a live class with a proctor present.  I have caught students cheating on exams in my live classroom.  I have been told after exams that certain students were cheating that I didn’t catch.  I cannot penalize a student who I didn’t observe cheating; I can only watch that student more closely if there is another exam.  My point is that there is probably cheating that I don’t catch in my live classroom.  The potential for cheating is significantly greater when there is not a “live” proctor.  We must also take into consideration that access to an online class also grants access to the internet.  The World Wide Web grants access to tremendous amounts of information on almost any subject in less than a second.  These factors may increase the frequency of cheating.

The article Online exams and cheating: an empirical analysis of business students’ views is a study on the matter.  The research by the authors demonstrates that unless there is a clear online test taking policy, students will be tempted to cheat on online exams.  “Respondents felt quite liberal in their views of potentially “cheating” behaviors when there was no test taking policy set by the course instructor.

This segues into mechanisms that can be put in place to mitigate cheating.  The Online exams and cheating article specifically states that academic standards must be clearly spelled out.  Honor codes must be posted in print form, on websites and discussed in class.  Students must be aware of disciplinary actions due to academic dishonesty. 

Other mechanisms can be put in place to lessen cheating.  The video with the exam cops gives tips on reducing the possibility of cheating in online exams.  Some of the suggestions are specifically geared towards the Angel software used at their institution, but the main ideas can be implemented in any online platform.  One suggestion is that time limits are enforced in online exams.  A timer being set once the student begins the exam will cut down on cheating in many ways.  There should be a fair amount of time given to answer each question, so the student does not have time to “Google” the questions.  The timer must keep running, even if the student logs out or clicks save.  When the timer is up, the test should automatically be submitted.  Another suggestion is an online proctor that ensures that the test is taken in one sitting.  One suggestion that I have used is delivering slightly different exams to different students.  One way is to randomize the questions and multiple choice answers.  Moodle allowed me to do this effectively in my experience.  Another way is to draw from larger question bank.  For example, I have 30 questions relevant to the learning with similar degrees of difficulty.  The testing mechanism can be programmed to choose 20 random questions from the bank for different students.  In this situation, there will be different questions and answers to draw from – besides random order.  This will assist in mitigating online cheating.  The last suggestion comes from one of the advantages for instructors.  The program will mark the test automatically.  But it is important that a question and answer key do NOT appear with the automated score.  This way, students cannot pass questions and answers to their peers.