At every level of education, technology has enabled dishonest students to plagiarize, copy, find and share solutions. “The anywhere/anytime access these devices provide to vast web resources, sprawling social networks, and real-time communication has spawned a new kind of cheating in K-12 environments — an easier, tech-enabled version of bad behavior that is as old as the classroom, but with the potential to compromise virtually every aspect of modern student assessment” (Waters, 2013, p.7). Academic integrity is put into question when mobile technologies are included or allowed in the pedagogy. Despite the many benefits of new technologies within education, technology also provides new tools for students to cheat.
Visit the OER to learn more about how students use mobile devices to cheat and what can be done to stop or slow down academic dishonesty
I’m posting this early in the hopes that you might provide some feedback and suggestions of how it can be improved
Sam provides a very useful summary of the issues of academic integrity in online learning, especially mobile online learning.
I recently looked into the same issues as part of my work at VCC and also as part of a research project with BCcampus. The outcome of the BCcampus project was an Alternative Assessment Toolkit/Decision Tree that is designed to provide suggestions of ways to assess, depending on the integrity concerns of the instructor. The decision tree and associated code is licensed under Creative Commons Non-Commercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) – I’d be happy to share if anyone is interested. The link to the tool is: https://ctlr.vcc.ca/teaching-and-learning/alternative-assessment-decision-tree/
*******************************************************************************
The Fraud Triangle
A useful framework for understanding (and mitigating) dishonesty in online assessment is the fraud triangle, first proposed by Cressey in 1950 in relation to the financial sector, but applied convincingly by Feinman (2018) and Varble (2014) to the problem at hand.
The Fraud Triangle describes three factors that are present in every situation of fraud:
1. Perceived Pressure – the need for cheating (to pass a course, for example);
2. Rationalization – the mindset of the cheater that justifies them to cheat (‘everyone does it’); and
3. Perceived Opportunity – the situation that enables cheating to occur (the ability to Google answers to a test, for example).
Breaking the Triangle
Breaking the Fraud Triangle is the key to ensuring academic integrity. Breaking the Fraud Triangle implies that we can remove one or more of the elements in order to reduce the likelihood of cheating.
This interactivity provides some suggestions for breaking the triangle: https://ctlr.h5p.com/content/1292059189794934628
A common response to cheating in tests has been to invigilate or proctor tests so that students are observed while taking the test, reducing the opportunity to cheat. In online tests this is more difficult. One solution adopted by many educational institutions has been to implement proctoring software. This can help reduce cheating, but research has shown that judicious use of existing tools and practices can have the same results (Feinman, 2018), and can avoid the negative side-effects of proctoring tools.
References:
Cressey, D. R. (1950). The criminal violation of financial trust. American Sociological Review, 1, 738–743. doi:10.2307/2086606
Feinman, Y (2018). Security Mechanisms on Web-Based Exams in Introductory Statistics Community College Courses. Journal of Social, Behavioral, and Health Sciences 2018, Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages 153–170 DOI:10.5590/JSBHS.2018.12.1.11
Varble, D. (2014). Reducing cheating opportunities in online tests. Atlantic Marketing Journal, 3, 131–149.
Hi Sam, great job with this OER. I work at an online school, and your project reminded me of some of the problems we’ve had with not being allowed by the school district to use anti-cheating software. Apparently, any software or technology that stores student work to compare it to others is an invasion of student privacy, and therefore teachers are not allowed the use of any anti-cheating software. I agree though with the discussion in this comment section about the need to change assessment to be more focused on “how we think” versus “what we know.” One question I have from your OER is the quote you provided: “By proactively changing the narrative around cheating such that there is a belief that all students see it as a distasteful behavior, professors may be able to prevent it to a greater extent, especially in those with an interdependent self-construal” (Brodowsky et al, 2020, p. 34). Doesn’t cheating already have a “distasteful” reputation among most students? Hasn’t there already been discourse since the modern education system was established that cheating is wrong? I think instead that if the system were to shift, along with the help of technologies like you mention, cheating would instead just become much more difficult to accomplish successfully. Thanks for the thought-provoking OER!
Thanks for sharing Liam. Although I agree that cheating has always been “distasteful,” the focus for students and most of our educational institutions is on success either earned or acquired. If a student cheats, but gets an A, they are more likely to rationalize it as a success. It is an interesting philosophical debate.
Hello Sam,
Cheating is a huge issue in education. I agree that a combination of several strategies is necessary to fight this problem. Mazur (in Dere Bok, 2013) suggested that we need to examine teachers’ and students’ habits and use various assessment practices. But mainly, it is essential to use assessment to invite learners to solve problems and apply the knowledge. Those assessment practices should allow them to use information or look for some on their devices because this is how we work in real-life. But even though, I find it really important to promote the ethical use of technologies, as you suggested. Interesting work! – Reference: Dere Bok Center. Harvard University [Username]. (2013, November 19). Assessment: The Silent Killer of Learning / Eric Mazur [Dudley Herschbach Teacher/Scientist Lecture]
[Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBzn9RAJG6Q
Hello Sam. Thank you for tackling such a crucial topic and exploring it in such an organized way. I personally believe that a mobile to cheating is like a shotgun to hunting in the sense that it is difficult to fight the urge to cheat as long as you have the tools that seamlessly facilitate it. Owing to the proliferation of tests, which most of them are redundant and unnecessary, most people cheat because they do not see value in assessment, and others do because they rationalize the cheating act as legitimate. During the pandemic, the IELTS testing centres closed, and the British Council activate the online testing format where candidates can take the test from the comfort of their homes. Of course, that was a temporary solution, and most academic institutions did not recognize or accept IELTS online certificates. That was mainly for how easy it is to cheat while taking an online test. Actually, there now exist many proctoring applications such as Proctoru, examify, and Quiz App. Notwithstanding, identifying cheating is more difficult than ever. I think the only way to prevent teaching would lie in changing the attitude because it’s hard to fight human nature, and people would not risk failing an essential test for self-discipline or integrity, especially when cheating is facilitated and easy to get away with. The way forward is to apply authentic assessment where students are assessed on “how” they use what they have learned rather than on the “what”. Not only does this approach prevent cheating attempts and dishonesty, it promotes creativity and critical thinking. Therefore, I say the flaw is in the testing format and the educational system as a whole. PISA and OET tests are designed to leave little space for cheating if possible. I think it is important to reshape how we evaluate our students more efficiently rather than prevent cheating attempts as if there were in prison. Do you think that changing the candidates’ mindset should be prioritized over educational reform?
Thanks for your feedback Feras. I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment of the issue and potential solution, but I worry that many educators already feel overburdened with invigilation and marking. In practice, authentic assessment would require additional marking from instructors.
Between the pressure of achieving the highest marks, and systems as they currently stand, the solution doesn’t appear to be cut-and-dry. With that said, authentic assessment is certainly one way to effective navigate around some components of online cheating (but what stops a student from using a service like Chegg for their “authentic” assessment responses)? In the latter scenario, mobile technology can help identify potential cheating within the authentic context.
To answer your question… I do think that a cultural re-imaging of assessment and status could lead to educational reform, but I think it is unlikely.
So, authentic assessment is more creative and leaves less pace for cheating because the students are unable to prepare cheating notes to answer the “what” questions. However, that does not mean that they could not use some notes to help them remember some of the basic rules or equations to solve the given problems. Therefore, cheating is a phenomenon that, in my view, will continue to exist in different forms and at various levels. That’s why cultural re-imaging is still needed to mitigate cheating regardless of the question format. Thanks Sam,
Hi Sam! Thanks for presenting such a relevant OER. Academic integrity is a very “hot” topic in higher ed, especially as the transition to remote learning has resteablished the exam-taking environment. MANY courses rely on a midterm and a final exam as their only means of assessment… so moving online has presented many challenges for them, as you can imagine, and academic integrity is a huge concern. I work as an instructional designer and learning technologist, so a lot of my job is supporting instructors in using ed tech in ways that enhance teaching and learning in their courses. There are basic tips we can give to support maintaining academic integrity – shuffling questions, creating question pools, having multiple versions..etc, but ultimately, I feel like these are band-aid solutions. There are so many issues with online proctoring, that many universities have decided against allowing it. Reasons include the risk of technical failure, infringement on student privacy, and the requirement to install software (which assumes that all students have a laptop in the first place). As someone else below said, it creates a culture of policing and assumes that most students want to cheat… when that’s not the case and that assumption is disempowering for students. There are certain environments that increase the likelihood of cheating which have more to do with the design of a course and assessments used. Having high-stakes exams with limited time to complete, inflexibility, and lacking diversity in assessments are things educators should be avoiding in order to foster a climate for academic integrity, rather than focusing on measures to police students. So I really think involves reconsidering the assessment rather than putting in all of these stops to prevent it. But in reality, that is often what instructors do not want to hear because it is time consumming to re-think your assessments, which I do sympathize with… but in the long term, it would save a lot of anxiety on both the student and the instructors part and it would create a different, more positive culture surrounding assessments and learning, in general.
Thanks for sharing Jasmine. Juggling between a fear of something new (technology, delivery methods, and assessments) and established, long-standing practices is very challenging for many instructors. For those like you and me who support faculty and instructors, it puts us in an awkward position.
You referenced the issues with proctoring software — and are probably aware of this case https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/22/21526792/proctorio-online-test-proctoring-lawsuit-universities-students-coronavirus.
Re-configuring the way we approach assessment is pivotal to addressing cheating. In many cases, it doesn’t require more work but simply a different way of ensuring that students meet course outcomes/attributes.
Douglas Adams once said “I’ve come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that’s invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you’re thirty-five is against the natural order of things.”
First off, excellent OER Sam. Cheating is a significant problem nowadays with high demand undergraduate programs requiring 90% + to get admission. We saw this pre-pandemic as students felt pressure to gain every possible advantage to gain every fraction of a mark to one-up the person beside them who is also trying to get into Engineering school. We saw classic cheating like notes hidden on the inside of waterbottle labels, hats with hidden pockets, and my favorite where a more adept student moved a water bottle to different corners of their desk at a specified cadence to coincide with the questions on the test (front-left at 11:00 = A, Back right at 11:02 = D …). I love that you identified the mitigation methods but I think that there is a bigger issue here (at least in K-12 education) which is a disparity of technological literacy and resourcing. As per the Douglas Adams’ quote, the students are in a realm of being digital natives in a web 2.0 world that includes mobility; the teachers are not. As a reference point the AP Computer Science exam this year will be written with #2 HB pencils; we are so far behind that we have to enforce really antiquated conditions so that the antiquated tests seem valid! The pandemic laid this fully bare with exactly how unprepared the educational world as a whole was to assess digitally as students who are used to Googling everything were offered an incentive to cheat (skyrocketing admission averages) as well as a teacher who likely would never find out because they just learned how to video-conference last week. In some cases we had teachers working on school board computers that were outstipped in terms of speed and functionality by every single student’s phone in their class, that it was a joke. The solution here should have been to access some new technology such as algorithm generated assessments that are unique to each student, desktop control applications to prevent on-screen internet access, or the rather flawed biometric applications you mentioned. In pandemic world this didn’t happen and instead we were told that the problem was too hard and we should just give up on assessment until we could do them in person again (which was actual Alberta government policy in 2020). As long as the numbers determine students’ futures there will be cheating and as long as there is a technology imbalance in the learning space that favours the students, some of that cheating will be technological.
Thanks Mitchell. Appreciate your response.
It is sad, and true, that assessment took a back seat in the pandemic despite its importance in professional careers, admittance to post-secondary, and so many other realms of our world. You referenced the antiquated pencil requirements of AP Computer Science, and in the OER I made mention of nursing students not allowed to bring jackets into exams. Having learners (and educators) better understand what cheating is, and why demonstrating knowledge can be effectively accomplished in other ways might reduce cheating but until the marks are meaningless cheating persist.
During the pandemic, many faculties at UBC provided students with a Cr/D/F option for undergraduate courses. If they passed, regardless of their grade, they could receive a Cr on their transcript. It was an good idea, but had implications related to GPA and thereby scholarship requirements, financial aid, and admissions to other institutions. I have often wondered whether grades are artificially inflated in today’s elementary and secondary levels. Is there truly a difference between a student who receives 78% and one who achieves 98%? Does that 20% really matter?
This may get philosophical here, but the meaning of grades is a constant point of debate among high school teachers. I would argue that you can probably tell the difference between a 78% student and a 98% student. The 98% student is likely much less prone to errors of inattention and incomplete understanding. They also, if assessments are designed properly, are likely to be much more adept at synthesizing complex tasks. That being said, the difference between a 98% student and a 93% student would be quite negligible. My argument is that a four-point scale is probably correct; the top level are students I’d hire every time I had the chance and would have leading projects, the second level is students who would work effectively most of the time, the third are students who need frequent guidance and supervision, while the fourth level are those who in business terms would be “promoted to customer”. My board uses a slightly more complex scale https://school.cbe.ab.ca/School/Repository/SBAttachments/5ca96074-efa6-4a98-9079-7b0619958b46_ProficiencyScalesforAcademicAchievement.pdf . It is quite correct though that the systems we use are interconnected. Every time we try to overhaul high school grading we get asked “how does this affect university admission? You can still convert this to a percentage, right?” It is a frustration I am all too familiar with.
Great job with this OER – I found it really informative and such an interesting and relevant topic. I think it would be helpful to also include actual interviews with students to get their perspective especially as it relates to the crisis in learning as I know this was a huge issue with high school students and educators are still navigating through this process as students are now back in school and many who relied on apps to cheat last year and get good marks are now struggling because their missing many foundational pieces in their understanding. Many students in high school are also not aware of how much they are using technology to help them with assessments which is another factor, and I think the comments above are absolutely correct about educators being at a crossroads because of the advances in mobile technology and having to rethink how we ask students to show their understanding but also to students to rethink how they are learning, how often are they using technolgy to assist them? Do they truly know what they are able to do independently without it? As you pointed out, many have developed bad habits that they have become dependent on. I think the assessment piece is also really important as Grace mentioned above, I think cheating is also still playing an important role there as educators are still trying to figure out how to assess students in this hybrid model of learning and ensure that students are not sharing tests online, trying to create methods of assessment that truly capture what students are able to do in a classroom without access to the online materials or apps to help them. I listened to a few really interesting podcasts about ungrading that you might find useful in thinking through as phenomenon we’re currently experiencing in education of trying to balance this increased access to technology for learning being both wonderful and terrible for students and ultimately requiring that we look really critically at our current systems, how they are responding to this shift in education and our current practices. https://hdsb-theshift.com/podcast/
Thank you for sharing Asha. I will give that podcast a listen.
It does seem like a students don’t understand that cheating can take many different forms. Cheating seems to be evolving in step with pedagogy, so it really requires a major shift. Perhaps as Benjamin Zander suggests, shared by Grace, all students should start with an A instead of trying to achieve an A. It may originate with semantics, but it such an approach could have a dramatic impact on how educators approach assessment.
Sam,
Thank you for posting. What a fascintating topic. I was recently tasked with watching my daughter take a test online, and I had many questions about the larger probelm.
Assessment and digital tools are a large part of my portfolio and something I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about. I agree that addressing the problem of cheating is key, but then what? Educators need to go beyond the problem and find creative and pedagogically sound ways to challenge it. Education needs to evolve in assessment, and until that happens, ‘cheating’ will force educators to focus on policing rather than how the ways we assess.
One might challenge the status quo of assessment practices by asking:
How might I shift assessment to reflect competencies (soft skills) learned as opposed to strictly assessing content?
What is the intention of assessment and how does it inform my practice?
Are assessments diverse and reflective of the needs of learners?
Educators are at an assessment crossroads. Through advances in mobile technology, we can assess learning in authentic ways. Learners might be invited to show understanding of concepts through blogs, podcasts, games, digital story etc. The focus needs to shift from teachers delivering content and learners projecting it back to them, to a culture of learners creating evidence so it reflects the competencies developed.
A useful resource in shifting pedagogical assessment is Tolisano and Hale’s book, A Guide to Documenting Student Learning: Making thinking visible, meaningful, shareable and amplified.
Additionally, The following Ted Talk is a powerful example of how formative assessment allows educators and students to focus on the processes of learning rather than the product. (For some reason my hyperlink didn’t work – sorry)
Ted Talk: How to get an ‘A’ : https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvt7Dg5JSbk#dialog
In summary, perhaps a way to further develop your critical analysis might be to address the need for a pedagogical shift in assessment practices. Highlighting that advances in how we teach and learn through technology, comes an increasing pressure to shift how educators engage with assessment.
Tolisano, S. R., & Hale, J. A. (2018). A guide to documenting learning: Making thinking visible, meaningful, shareable, and amplified. Corwin Press.
Chicago.
Thanks for your insight, suggestions, and references Grace. Much appreciated!
Benjamin Zander’s talk is very inspiring. It reminds me of Mazur, E. (2012). Why you can pass tests and still fail in the real world [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyikmLxntrk]. YouTube. (10 mins.).
I will examine if I can bring your suggestion in developing the pedagogical shift in assessment practices utilizing mobile technology into the OER. My intention was to keep that part of the OER high-level, but based on your feedback I see the value in adding it to the project.
Hi Sam,
I enjoyed this OER, well done. Quite relevant to our digital age as well as our pandemic days. Increased academic dishonesty is certainly one of the side-effects of Covid-19. I particularly liked how this OER addressed technical and non-technical methods to prevent cheating. I found the mitigative/preventative strategies relevant. Having said this, a question crossed my mind as I was reading your OER. Would we need to look at cheating from a pedagogical perspective, or a technological one? I almost feel like an educator should not focus on how to stop cheating, rather, the focus should always be on creating a meaningful and positive learning experience which would encourage students to learn authentically. In other words, to stop cheating, we would need to be better educators. What are your thoughts on this? I know we have a number of seasoned educators in this class, and I would love to collect their feedback on this question. Thank you. Saeid
Thanks for your feedback Saeid. I tried to juggle the concepts of how cheating is both a pedagogical and technical challenge for educators within the OER. Since this course is all about mobile and open learning, I thought it was important to emphasize the technical challenges while referencing the pedagogical implications.
Not sure that educators need to be better to address cheating, but it is the approach to assessment that needs to compliment curriculum that requires improve. Do we need to test learners in the same way that has been done for centuries? Can we take a fresh or different approach? Would that stop cheating? Probably not. The risk analysis for students about the perceived benefits of cheating (as discussed in several articles cited in the OER) suggests that students often don’t even recognize cheating as cheating. The majority of the literature did suggest that authentic learning was one of the pillars to combating cheating, but a shift in assessment techniques and approaches would go further towards reducing or eliminating cheating.