Cheating in e-exams and paper exams: the perceptions of engineering students and teachers in Norway

被引:73
作者
Chirumamilla, Aparna [1 ]
Sindre, Guttorm [1 ]
Anh, Nguyen-Duc [2 ]
机构
[1] Norwegian Univ Sci & Technol, Dept Comp Sci, Trondheim, Sor Trondelag, Norway
[2] Univ South Eastern Norway, Dept Business & IT, Boi Telemark, Norway
关键词
Electronic examinations; pen and paper examinations; academic dishonesty; cheating prevention; mixed-method approach; ACADEMIC DISHONESTY; GROUNDED THEORY;
D O I
10.1080/02602938.2020.1719975
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
A concern that has been raised with the transition from pen and paper examinations to electronic examinations is whether this will make cheating easier. This article investigates how teachers and students perceive the differences in ease of cheating during three types of written examination: paper exams, bring your own device e-exams and e-exams using university-owned devices. It also investigates perceptions about the effectiveness of some typical countermeasures towards cheating across these examination types. A mixed-method approach was used, combining questionnaires and interviews with students and teachers in the authors' own university. A total of 212 students and 162 teachers participated in the questionnaire survey, and then, a more limited number were interviewed to get a deeper understanding of the results. Six-different cheating practices were considered - impersonation, forbidden aids, peeking, peer collaboration, outside assistance and student-staff collusion and seven different countermeasures were considered - proctors, biometry, mingling, shuffling, random drawing, sequencing and broadcasting. Both students and teachers perceived cheating as easier with e-exams, and especially with bring your own device. They also thought some countermeasures would be easier to implement with e-exams.
引用
收藏
页码:940 / 957
页数:18
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2013, ED RES PLANNING COND
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1999, CHEATING TESTS DO IT
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2006, Assessment Evaluation in Higher Education, DOI DOI 10.1080/02602930600679415
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2011, How to design and evaluate research in education
[5]  
APAMPA K M., 2010, International Journal. Digital Society, V1, P1
[6]  
Atlas.ti, 2019, ATL TI WIND VERS 8 4
[7]  
Bjorklund M., 1999, EUR C ED RES LAHT FI
[8]   Contract cheating and assessment design: exploring the relationship [J].
Bretag, Tracey ;
Harper, Rowena ;
Burton, Michael ;
Ellis, Cath ;
Newton, Philip ;
van Haeringen, Karen ;
Saddiqui, Sonia ;
Rozenberg, Pearl .
ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2019, 44 (05) :676-691
[9]   Academic dishonesty, ethical norms and learning [J].
Colnerud, Gunnel ;
Rosander, Michael .
ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2009, 34 (05) :505-517
[10]   GROUNDED THEORY RESEARCH - PROCEDURES, CANONS AND EVALUATIVE CRITERIA [J].
CORBIN, J ;
STRAUSS, A .
ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SOZIOLOGIE, 1990, 19 (06) :418-427