IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uct/uconnp/2008-14.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is the Cheating Risk Always Higher in Online Instruction Compared to Face-to-Face Instruction?

Author

Listed:
  • Oskar Harmon

    (University of Connecticut)

  • James Lambrinos

    (Union Graduate College)

  • Judy Buffolino

    (University of Connecticut)

Abstract

This article analyzes the exposure to cheating risk of online courses relative to face-to-face courses at a single institution. For our sample of 20 online courses we report that the cheating risk is higher than for equivalent face-to-face courses because of reliance on un-proctored multiple choice exams. We conclude that the combination of a proctored final exam, and strategic use cheating deterrents in the administration of un-proctored multiple choice exams, would significantly reduce the cheating risk differential without substantially altering the assessment design of online instruction.

Suggested Citation

  • Oskar Harmon & James Lambrinos & Judy Buffolino, 2008. "Is the Cheating Risk Always Higher in Online Instruction Compared to Face-to-Face Instruction?," Working papers 2008-14, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Sep 2010.
    • Handle: RePEc:uct:uconnp:2008-14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://media.economics.uconn.edu/working/2008-14r.pdf
    File Function: Full text (revised version)
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://media.economics.uconn.edu/working/2008-14.pdf
    File Function: Full text (original version)
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen Buckles & John J. Siegfried, 2006. "Using Multiple-Choice Questions to Evaluate In-Depth Learning of Economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 48-57, January.
    2. Michelle Albert Vachris, 1999. "Teaching Principles of Economics without “Chalk and Talk”: The Experience of CNU Online," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(3), pages 292-303, January.
    3. William B. Walstad, 2001. "Improving Assessment in University Economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(3), pages 281-294, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mary Mathewes Kassis, 2011. "Distance Education: Course Development and Strategies for Success," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 14, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carlos Asarta & Ken Rebeck, 2011. "Measurement Techniques of Student Performance and Literacy: College and High School," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 29, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Ken Rebeck & Carlos Asarta, 2011. "Methods of Assessment in the College Economics Course," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 16, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Dahlgran, Roger A., 2002. "A Template For Online Homework: Frankenstein'S Monster Or Robo Ta?," 2002 Annual Meeting, July 28-31, 2002, Long Beach, California 36583, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    4. Stephen B. Deloach & Steven A. Greenlaw, 2005. "Do Electronic Discussions Create Critical Thinking Spillovers?," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(1), pages 149-163, January.
    5. Ishuan Li & Robert Simonson, 2016. "Capstone senior research course in economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(2), pages 161-167, April.
    6. Caroline Elliott & Vudayagi Balasubramanyam, 2016. "Assessing students: Real-world analyses underpinned by economic theory," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1151171-115, December.
    7. Nilss Olekalns, 2002. "The Teaching of First Year Economics in Australian Universities," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 848, The University of Melbourne.
    8. W. Robert Reed & Stephen Hickson, 2011. "More Evidence on the Use of Constructed-Response Questions in Principles of Economics Classes," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 10(2), pages 28-49.
    9. Sheryl B. Ball & Catherine Eckel & Christian Rojas, 2006. "Technology Improves Learning in Large Principles of Economics Classes: Using Our WITS," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 442-446, May.
    10. Lourdes Espinoza & Carlos Gustavo Machicado & Katia Makhlouf, 2007. "La Enseñanza de Economía en Bolivia y Chile," Development Research Working Paper Series 10/2007, Institute for Advanced Development Studies.
    11. Ambrose & Cheryl A. Kier, 2017. "On Students’ Perception of a Multi-Scheme Assessment Method," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center, vol. 17(1), pages 40-52, Spring.
    12. S. Cook & C. Elliott, 2016. "Innovations in Economics Education: An Introduction to Economic and Econometric Tools for Teaching and Learning," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1180038-118, December.
    13. Gordon Menzies & Jonathan Pratt & Susan Thorp & Peter Docherty, 2008. "Piloting a Peer Feedback Program in the Faculty of Business at UTS," Working Paper Series 154, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.
    14. David H. Dean & Robert C. Dolan, 2011. "Curricular and Co-curricular Aspects of the Economics Major at Highly Ranked Schools," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 69, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Hart Hodges & Yvonne Durham & Steve Henson, 2018. "Economic Education Production Functions for the Principles of Macroeconomics and the Principles of Microeconomics: Is There a Difference?," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center, vol. 18(2), pages 22-41, Fall.
    16. Steven C. Myers & Michael A. Nelson & Richard W. Stratton, 2009. "Assessing An Economics Programme: Hansen Proficiencies, ePortfolio, and Undergraduate Research," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 8(1), pages 87-105.
    17. Kuhn, Christiane & Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, Olga & Brückner, Sebastian & Saas, Hannes, 2018. "A new video-based tool to enhance teaching economics," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 24-33.
    18. Yvonne Durham & Thomas Mckinnon & Craig Schulman, 2007. "Classroom Experiments: Not Just Fun And Games," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(1), pages 162-178, January.
    19. Dahlgran, Roger A., 2008. "Online Homework for Agricultural Economics Instruction: Frankenstein’s Monster or Robo TA?," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 1-12, April.
    20. Diego Mendez-Carbajo, 2023. "The Effectiveness of Logical Distractors in an Online Module," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 49(1), pages 15-30, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Academic Dishonesty; Cheating; Online Instruction; Principles of Economics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uct:uconnp:2008-14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Mark McConnel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deuctus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.