与网络考试作弊有关的因素

IF 4.1 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Pub Date : 2022-11-11 DOI:10.1080/02602938.2022.2144802
Michael Henderson, Jennifer Chung, R. Awdry, Matthew Mundy, Mike Bryant, Cliff Ashford, K. Ryan
{"title":"与网络考试作弊有关的因素","authors":"Michael Henderson, Jennifer Chung, R. Awdry, Matthew Mundy, Mike Bryant, Cliff Ashford, K. Ryan","doi":"10.1080/02602938.2022.2144802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Online examinations are a common experience in higher education. Their security is a key concern for education communities, and has resulted in a variety of cheating countermeasures. There is broad consensus in the literature that there is no one measure, including proctoring, which eradicates cheating behaviours. As a result, this study is exploratory, seeking to add to our understanding of the range of factors that may interact with frequency of cheating behaviour in online examinations. This large-scale study (N = 7839) is based in one Australian university which pivoted to online examinations during the 2021 Covid-19 lockdowns. Students who reported cheating (n = 216) revealed a wide range of factors that may have influenced their behaviours. A key observation is that cheating, although less frequent than reported elsewhere, occurred regardless of the security measure, assessment design, examination condition, and across the spectrum of student demographic variables. However, there were statistically significant differences in relation to frequency of cheating according to certain demographics, examination conditions, motivations, attitudes and perceptions. Although some forms of proctoring did demonstrate reduced frequencies in self-reported cheating, they are demonstrably incomplete solutions due to the complexity of other variables.","PeriodicalId":48267,"journal":{"name":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","volume":"1 1","pages":"980 - 994"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors associated with online examination cheating\",\"authors\":\"Michael Henderson, Jennifer Chung, R. Awdry, Matthew Mundy, Mike Bryant, Cliff Ashford, K. Ryan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02602938.2022.2144802\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Online examinations are a common experience in higher education. Their security is a key concern for education communities, and has resulted in a variety of cheating countermeasures. There is broad consensus in the literature that there is no one measure, including proctoring, which eradicates cheating behaviours. As a result, this study is exploratory, seeking to add to our understanding of the range of factors that may interact with frequency of cheating behaviour in online examinations. This large-scale study (N = 7839) is based in one Australian university which pivoted to online examinations during the 2021 Covid-19 lockdowns. Students who reported cheating (n = 216) revealed a wide range of factors that may have influenced their behaviours. A key observation is that cheating, although less frequent than reported elsewhere, occurred regardless of the security measure, assessment design, examination condition, and across the spectrum of student demographic variables. However, there were statistically significant differences in relation to frequency of cheating according to certain demographics, examination conditions, motivations, attitudes and perceptions. Although some forms of proctoring did demonstrate reduced frequencies in self-reported cheating, they are demonstrably incomplete solutions due to the complexity of other variables.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48267,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"980 - 994\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2144802\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2144802","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

在线考试是高等教育中常见的一种体验。他们的安全是教育界关注的重点,并导致了各种各样的作弊对策。文献中有一个广泛的共识,即没有一种措施,包括监考,可以根除作弊行为。因此,这项研究是探索性的,旨在增加我们对可能与在线考试作弊行为频率相互作用的因素范围的理解。这项大规模研究(N = 7839)是在一所澳大利亚大学进行的,该大学在2021年Covid-19封锁期间转向在线考试。报告作弊的学生(n = 216)揭示了可能影响他们行为的各种因素。一个关键的观察是,尽管作弊比其他地方报道的要少,但无论安全措施、评估设计、考试条件和学生人口统计变量的范围如何,作弊都发生了。然而,根据某些人口统计、考试条件、动机、态度和观念,作弊频率在统计上存在显著差异。尽管某些形式的监考确实显示出自我报告作弊的频率降低,但由于其他变量的复杂性,它们显然是不完整的解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Factors associated with online examination cheating
Abstract Online examinations are a common experience in higher education. Their security is a key concern for education communities, and has resulted in a variety of cheating countermeasures. There is broad consensus in the literature that there is no one measure, including proctoring, which eradicates cheating behaviours. As a result, this study is exploratory, seeking to add to our understanding of the range of factors that may interact with frequency of cheating behaviour in online examinations. This large-scale study (N = 7839) is based in one Australian university which pivoted to online examinations during the 2021 Covid-19 lockdowns. Students who reported cheating (n = 216) revealed a wide range of factors that may have influenced their behaviours. A key observation is that cheating, although less frequent than reported elsewhere, occurred regardless of the security measure, assessment design, examination condition, and across the spectrum of student demographic variables. However, there were statistically significant differences in relation to frequency of cheating according to certain demographics, examination conditions, motivations, attitudes and perceptions. Although some forms of proctoring did demonstrate reduced frequencies in self-reported cheating, they are demonstrably incomplete solutions due to the complexity of other variables.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
15.90%
发文量
70
期刊最新文献
‘There was very little room for me to be me’: the lived tensions between assessment standardisation and student diversity Perceptions of feedback and engagement with feedback among undergraduates: an educational identities approach Feedback engagement as a multidimensional construct: a validation study Interacting with ChatGPT for internal feedback and factors affecting feedback quality Diversity of pedagogical feedback designs: results from a scoping review of feedback research in higher education
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1