Online academic exams: Does multiplicity of exam versions mitigate cheating?

IF 1.3 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS
Flip Klijn , Mehdi Mdaghri Alaoui , Marc Vorsatz
{"title":"Online academic exams: Does multiplicity of exam versions mitigate cheating?","authors":"Flip Klijn ,&nbsp;Mehdi Mdaghri Alaoui ,&nbsp;Marc Vorsatz","doi":"10.1016/j.iree.2024.100305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We study academic integrity in a final exam of a game theory course with 463 undergraduate students at a major Spanish university. The exam is an unproctored online multiple-choice exam without backtracking. A key characteristic is that for each (type of) problem, groups of students receive different versions. Moreover, each problem version is assigned to one subgroup during one stage of the exam and to another subgroup during an immediately consecutive later stage. Thus, we can exploit grade points and timestamps to study students’ academic integrity. We observe a significant decrease in completion time at each later stage; however, surprisingly, there is no corresponding impact on average grade points. The precise number of different versions does not seem to have an effect on either variable. Our findings thus suggest that employing a limited number of distinct problem versions (as few as two) can diminish cheating effectiveness in online exams.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":45496,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Economics Education","volume":"48 ","pages":"Article 100305"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Economics Education","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477388024000239","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We study academic integrity in a final exam of a game theory course with 463 undergraduate students at a major Spanish university. The exam is an unproctored online multiple-choice exam without backtracking. A key characteristic is that for each (type of) problem, groups of students receive different versions. Moreover, each problem version is assigned to one subgroup during one stage of the exam and to another subgroup during an immediately consecutive later stage. Thus, we can exploit grade points and timestamps to study students’ academic integrity. We observe a significant decrease in completion time at each later stage; however, surprisingly, there is no corresponding impact on average grade points. The precise number of different versions does not seem to have an effect on either variable. Our findings thus suggest that employing a limited number of distinct problem versions (as few as two) can diminish cheating effectiveness in online exams.
在线学术考试:考试版本的多样性是否减少了作弊?
我们在西班牙一所主要大学的463名本科生的博弈论课程的期末考试中研究学术诚信。该考试是一个没有监考的在线选择题考试,没有回溯。一个关键的特点是,对于每种(类型)问题,不同的学生群体会收到不同的版本。此外,每个问题版本在考试的一个阶段分配给一个子组,在随后的阶段分配给另一个子组。因此,我们可以利用分数和时间戳来研究学生的学术诚信。我们观察到在每个后期阶段的完成时间显著减少;然而,令人惊讶的是,对平均成绩没有相应的影响。不同版本的确切数量似乎对这两个变量都没有影响。因此,我们的研究结果表明,使用有限数量的不同问题版本(少至两个)可以减少在线考试中的作弊效果。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.80%
发文量
26
审稿时长
28 days
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信