...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of behavioral and experimental economics >Can we stay one step ahead of cheaters? A field experiment in proctoring online open book exams
【24h】

Can we stay one step ahead of cheaters? A field experiment in proctoring online open book exams

机译:我们可以保持领先一步的骗子吗?天天p在线实验开卷考试

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

As more institutions of higher learning expand their offerings of online courses, the use of online assessments has become an important topic of discussion. Although the use of online assessments can be very beneficial, instances of cheating in the absence of a proctor poses a cost in protecting academic integrity. This has led to the development of many proctoring solutions to address this challenge. This paper presents two field experiments used to analyze the effects of proctoring methods on exam scores: one involving a face-to-face class and the other involving an online class. Also, two proctoring methods were used: live proctors and web-based proctors. In each class, best practices were used to minimize cheating and students were informed in advance which exams were proctored. Our results show that students whose exams were not proctored scored over 11% higher on average than those whose exams were proctored. However, the results varied significantly: the use of live proctors in the face-to-face class had a much larger effect on test scores than web-based proctors in the online class. We compare variables affecting each testing environment to uncover possible determinants, including the ease of collaboration, test anxiety, and information sharing over the testing period.
机译:随着越来越多的高等学校扩大他们的产品的在线课程,使用在线评估已经成为一个重要的课题的讨论。的评估是非常有益的,实例作弊在缺乏监督构成了成本保护学术诚信。许多学监的解决方案的开发应对这一挑战。田间试验用于分析的影响天天p考试分数的方法:一个涉及一个面对面的类和其他涉及在线课堂。使用:现场监考和基于web的监考。每一个类,用来最小化的最佳实践作弊和学生提前被告知考试被代理人。学生的考试没有学监得分超过11%的平均高于那些考试天天p。显著:现场监考的使用面对面的课堂上有更大的影响考试分数比基于web的在线监考类。测试环境发现成为可能决定因素,包括缓解的协作、考试焦虑、和信息在测试期间的分享。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号