Maximizing learning while minimizing cheating: New evidence and advice for online multiple-choice exams.

Scholarship of teaching and learning in psychology Pub Date : 2022-05-12 DOI:10.1037/stl0000242

B. Whisenhunt, Christie L. Cathey, Danae L. Hudson, Lydia Needy

{"title":"Maximizing learning while minimizing cheating: New evidence and advice for online multiple-choice exams.","authors":"B. Whisenhunt, Christie L. Cathey, Danae L. Hudson, Lydia Needy","doi":"10.1037/stl0000242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The sudden and unexpected need to transition all university courses to online formats as a result of COVID-19 in the spring of 2020 highlighted the challenges of developing and administering online multiple-choice exams. Because many more courses are expected to be taught online in the future, we sought to develop evidence-based recommendations for online multiple-choice exams. We analyzed data from our Spring 2019 and Spring 2020 introductory psychology courses to examine the impact of the shift from seated to online exams on exam grades and overall learning, as well as students' perceptions of online multiple-choice exams. Data from the COVID-19 Spring 2020 semester suggest that students performed better on online exams (open-note/open-book exams with no time limit) than they did on traditional face-to-face closed-note/closed-book exams. However, indices of learning suggested students learned less when the course content and exams were online. Using these data and the existing literature on best practices, we developed a set of recommendations for administering online multiple-choice exams designed to minimize cheating and maximize learning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)","PeriodicalId":74762,"journal":{"name":"Scholarship of teaching and learning in psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scholarship of teaching and learning in psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000242","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 6

Abstract

The sudden and unexpected need to transition all university courses to online formats as a result of COVID-19 in the spring of 2020 highlighted the challenges of developing and administering online multiple-choice exams. Because many more courses are expected to be taught online in the future, we sought to develop evidence-based recommendations for online multiple-choice exams. We analyzed data from our Spring 2019 and Spring 2020 introductory psychology courses to examine the impact of the shift from seated to online exams on exam grades and overall learning, as well as students' perceptions of online multiple-choice exams. Data from the COVID-19 Spring 2020 semester suggest that students performed better on online exams (open-note/open-book exams with no time limit) than they did on traditional face-to-face closed-note/closed-book exams. However, indices of learning suggested students learned less when the course content and exams were online. Using these data and the existing literature on best practices, we developed a set of recommendations for administering online multiple-choice exams designed to minimize cheating and maximize learning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

最大限度地学习，同时最大限度地减少作弊：在线多项选择题考试的新证据和建议。

2020年春季，由于新冠肺炎，突然出现了将所有大学课程转变为在线形式的意外需求，这突出了开发和管理在线多项选择题考试的挑战。由于预计未来还会有更多的课程在网上教授，我们试图为在线多项选择题考试制定基于证据的建议。我们分析了2019年春季和2020年春季心理学入门课程的数据，以研究从坐式考试转向在线考试对考试成绩和整体学习的影响，以及学生对在线多项选择考试的看法。新冠肺炎2020年春季学期的数据表明，学生在在线考试（无时间限制的开放式/开放式考试）中的表现优于传统的面对面封闭式/封闭式考试。然而，学习指数表明，当课程内容和考试在线时，学生学到的东西更少。利用这些数据和现有的最佳实践文献，我们制定了一套管理在线多项选择题考试的建议，旨在最大限度地减少作弊，最大限度地提高学习效率。（PsycInfo数据库记录（c）2022 APA，保留所有权利）

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Scholarship of teaching and learning in psychology

CiteScore

4.20

自引率

0.00%

发文量