240 likes | 352 Views
Missouri State Online Academic Integrity Week. October 6, 2009. Academic Integrity Week. Missouri State Online and Instructional Technologies Presents: “Changing the Culture from Online Cheating to Online Learning.” . Panelist Introductions. Dr. Gary Rader, Director for MS Online
E N D
Missouri State Online Academic Integrity Week October 6, 2009
Academic Integrity Week Missouri State Online and Instructional Technologies Presents: “Changing the Culture from Online Cheating to Online Learning.”
Panelist Introductions • Dr. Gary Rader, Director for MS Online • Dr. Scott Wegner, Ed.D. • Dr. Julie Anderson-Ituarte, M.S. • Michael Frizell, Director, Writing Center • Shellie Jones, CASL, MSAS Student • Andy Lear, BKD, MSAS Student
Considerations for Online Academic Integrity Growth in Academic Dishonesty Growth of online courses and enrollments Concern about academic integrity in the online classroom + =
MSU – online enrollment stats 2004-09 Spring semesters show impressive growth of students taking online classes.
What Research Shows • Perception: Academic Dishonesty is more prevalent online than face-to-face. • Research: Shows online students are less inclined to cheat • Assessment: Motivated students cheat less • Friends University (2009)
Forms of Online Academic Dishonesty • Cheating on Tests • Plagiarism • Aiding and Abetting • Friends University Study (2009)
Detection and Deterrence: The Faculty Perspective Scott Wegner Julie Anderson-Ituarte
The Student Integrity Profile • Younger rather than older are more inclined to cheat • Early cheating continues through graduate school • Lack of awareness produces cheating • Cultural differences • Friends University Study (2009)
The Student Perspective Shellie Jones Andy Lear
Changing the Culture • Proactive faculty from the start • Establish Honor Code – increase student awareness • Inform faculty how academic dishonesty applies to online education • Provide procedures to detect it • Policies to support faculty who detect and pursue instances of academic dishonesty.
Unintentional Online Plagiarism? Michael Frizell, The Writing Center
Design Online Exams toDeter Cheating • Open book exams • Timed exams • Scramble the order of questions • Pop quizzes • Non-exam assessments • Proctored exams
The Non-Exam OptionReduce cheating by changing the “culture” Are there alternative non-exam options for all subjects? • Motivating student learning through alternative pedagogies (the discussion forum) • Assessing student learning through critical thinking • Stimulating student motivation to learn and assess learning outcomes • Providing autonomy with structure, relatedness and competency • Empowering students to engage in the learning process
The Proctored Option • University of Connecticut (2008) study reveals online, un-proctored multiple choice exams suffer more from cheating than supervised multiple choice exams. • Various technologies to reduce cheating are expensive and less than satisfactory. • Higher Education Opportunity Act (2008) addresses authentication concerns. • Test Proctoring provides another good alternative for supervising traditional test-taking and authenticating student identities.
MS Online Test Proctoring Pilot Project - Summer 2009 Purpose of the pilot is to provide: • F2F supervised alternative to online testing without sacrificing distance convenience and modality. • Additional means for “authentication.” • Instrument to prevent cheating online. • Student/faculty support infrastructure for HLC approval to offer online degrees.
MS Online Test Proctoring Narrative • Selection of Pilot Subjects SPE 506/507 • Number of students • Initial costs in time and resources • Policies and Procedures • Dealing with off campus testing • Administration of exams and reporting of results • Julie Anderson-Ituarte • Aundrayah Shermer
Test Proctoring Schedule Proctor Acknowledgement
Outcomes • Summary and Conclusion • Student satisfaction • Faculty satisfaction • Pilot did not measure reduction of cheating • Pilot set up to address concerns for potential cheating
Future Steps • Repeat the process in the fall of 2009. • Employ feedback from summer results. • Utilize assessment tools to measure learning outcomes in online courses with proctored and un-proctored objective exams. • Design courses with alternatives to traditional concepts of test taking. • Provide proctored testing for subject areas where objective exams are necessary to discourage cheating.
A Q &
Contact Information Missouri State Online Kenneth E. Meyer Alumni Center 300 S. Jefferson (417)-836-3718