You are here:

Perceptions of Cheating on Online versus Face-to-Face Mathematics Exams PROCEEDING

, Arizona State University, United States

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Amsterdam, Netherlands Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Abstract

Academic dishonesty covers a long list of unsanctioned behaviors such as plagiarizing the work of others and working collaboratively on individual assignments. Cheating on examinations is one form of academic dishonesty that is particularly problematic since results from assessments often form the basis for assigning course grades and promoting students to more advanced courses. Yet one third of university students surveyed in a national study admitted copying from another student during a test using crib notes or helping someone else cheat (Alschuler & Blimling, 1995). The changing landscape of instructional environments has also changed the face of academic dishonesty online education now provides additional avenues for cheating both in general and on exams (Cluskey, Ehlen, & Raiborn, 2011; D'souza & Siegfeldt, 2017). In particular online courses may allow students to take exams in remote locations without being supervised or proctored thereby perhaps increasing the temptation to cheat while simultaneously decreasing the likelihood of being caught. The major research question addressed in this study is whether students perceptions of cheating differ depending on instructional context. In particular, do students view cheating on an exam differently in an online proctored online unproctored versus face to face setting?

Citation

van de Sande, C. (2018). Perceptions of Cheating on Online versus Face-to-Face Mathematics Exams. In T. Bastiaens, J. Van Braak, M. Brown, L. Cantoni, M. Castro, R. Christensen, G. Davidson-Shivers, K. DePryck, M. Ebner, M. Fominykh, C. Fulford, S. Hatzipanagos, G. Knezek, K. Kreijns, G. Marks, E. Sointu, E. Korsgaard Sorensen, J. Viteli, J. Voogt, P. Weber, E. Weippl & O. Zawacki-Richter (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 2132-2137). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved September 21, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Davis, S.F. (1993). Academic dishonesty in the 1990’S. The Public Perspective, without proctor supervision. Journal of Academic& Business Ethics, 4, 1–7.
  2. Jensen, L.A., Arnett, J.J., Feldman, S.S., & Cauffman, E. (2002). It’s wrong, but everybody does it: Academic dishonesty among high school and college students.
  3. McCabe, D.L. & Trevino, L.K. (1996). What we know about cheating in college: Longitudinal trneds and recent developments. Change: The Magazine of Higher McCabe, D.L., Butterfield, K.D., & Trevino, L.K. (2012). Cheating in College: Why Students University Press.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Slides