论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】The purpose of this paper is to look into the manner of cheating in online course environment and explore the prevention measures to stop cheating. This paper is designed to address two research questions： 1） What are the types of cheating happening in online classes from the perspectives of instructors or students in online classes？ 2） What are preventive measures to stop cheating in online classes？ The questionnaire used in this research tests the prevalence of academic dishonesty and the methods of cheating in online courses. Data will be collected through a survey from students who take online course during the 2013 spring semester. This paper will present practical suggestions to reduce the frequency of cheating among students enrolling in online courses.
【Key words】academic dishonesty ； online class
【中圖分类号】G642.0 【文献标识码】B 【文章编号】2095-3089（2015）7-0032-02
1.Introduction
According to the United States Department of Education， the growth of online education courses offered by universities in the United States experienced rapid growth since the 1990s （U.S. Department of Education， 2003）. Although positive benefits accrue from students taking e？鄄learning courses， there are some significant drawbacks. The most noted include： some students might be technophobic； students lack the required technologies； and， more importantly， students experience a reduction in social interaction， the suppression of communication mechanisms， and the elimination of peer？鄄to？鄄peer learning，the largest drawback to online learning is the possibility of academic dishonesty （Kruse， 2002）. Academic dishonesty in online class is an issue of concern for teachers， students， and institutions of higher education. Because students and faculty do not interact directly in web？鄄based classes， it is often perceived that cheating will be more abundant in these classes.
2.Literature Review
Because students and faculty do not interact directly in such classes， researchers claim that online classes will invite more cheating than traditional face to face classes （Grijalva， Kerkvliet， and Nowell， 2006）. Carnevale （1999） reports that “several colleges with extensive distance learning programs—including Michigan State University， Ohio University， the University of Texas system， Park College， and Pueblo Community college—report that they have had few， if any， cases where disciplinary action has been taken for cheating in online classes” （Roach， 2001）. In one example of plagiarism uncovered at Baker College in Michigan， an online instructor noticed marked improvement in one student？蒺s work， upon further inspection， the instructor noticed the paper contained almost no citations， entered the text into an internet search engine， and found that the student had copied eight page directly from a company report （Heberling， 2002）. According to a 2003 nationwide research study of 23 public and private colleges and Universities， conducted by DonaldL Mc Cabe， Internet plagiarism is on the rise that thirty？鄄eight percent of the under graduate students surveyed indicated that they had engaged in Internet plagiarism （as cited in Rimer， 2003）. In higher education much of the debate centers on where this behavior is most prevalent， in traditional or online courses. Although most will agree that any form of academic dishonesty should be eliminated， many speculate that the lack of face？鄄to？鄄face interaction in the online format contributes more to academic dishonesty among students in these courses （Rowe， 2004 and Wang，2008）. Some researchers disagree. Grijalva， Kerkvliet， and Nowell， （2006） found academic dishonesty in online courses to be the same as in traditional courses. Schmelkin， Gilbert， Spencer， Pincus， and Silva （2008） found that although faculty and students somewhat agreed on the offences of cheating considered to be less serious， they differed greatly on which offences of academic dishonesty were actually considered to be more serious offences. Similarly， Jordan （2001） found that while the students in their study indicated a belief that only 26.2% of students actually cheated， the results indicated that the rate of cheating was actually significantly higher at 54.9%. 3.Purpose of the Study
Online instructors are continually searching for various means to ensure that academic integrity is addressed and adhered to by all students in all courses. According to reviewing the literatures， we can found that academic dishonesty exist and may be expanded in the online class. It also told us the students engages cheating reasons. but， researchers found that the perception of conducting cheating behavior is different between teachers and students （Iyer & Eastman， 2006）. In their study when asked if students would take a stolen copy of a test， 62% of faculty felt the student would do so compared to 42% of students who indicated that they actually would take it. It is important for faculty to understand the differences in their own perceptions of academic dishonesty and the perceptions of their students because these perceptions influence behavior. Without this understanding， it is difficult to develop strategies that will successfully impact the problem of academic dishonesty. So， what is considered academic dishonesty in online courses？ Research defined that online academic dishonesty includes cheating on exams or assignments， internet plagiarism （Grijalva， Kerkvliet， and Nowell， 2006，） while they gave some ways to prevent dishonesty in online classes. Four practical courses of action are suggested for professors to reduce the amount of cheating by online students：（1）disseminate information to distant students； （2）change the process used by students to turn in written assignments； （3）change the process by which exams are administered； and （4）create a non？鄄sequential chapter assortment of questions （Chiesl， 2007）. Overall， the four ways？蒺 were very constructive. Though the following research， we can know if the four ways will reduce the cheating in online classes.
The literatures only focused on the phenomenon of academic dishonesty. As to how to prevent academic dishonesty is still a blank. The purpose of this paper will look into the manner of cheating in online course environment and explore the prevention measures to stop cheating. This study will fill this blank and give some ideas to online instructor in order to help design their curriculum.
This research will be guided by two questions：
1） What are the types of cheating happening in online classes from the perspectives of instructors or students in online classes？
2） What are considered preventive measures to stop cheating in online classes？ The variables is the methods of academic dishonest. The constant is students who involve in the online course.
4.Methodology
（1）Measurement
This study measured the methods of academic dishonesty by a questionnaire of students in the online class. Students have more online instructional cheating videos， detailing clever methods to cheat， are populating the Internet daily. Cheating methods have gone viral （Netter， 2010）. Therefore， a questionnaire about the main methods of academic dishonesty was designed by Jones， D. Their study was conducted with a group of 48 students enrolled in an online business communication course during fall semester， 2010. According to this method， the prevalence and methods of academic dishonesty in online course were surveyed.
Participants completed the Survey of Student Academic Misconduct （Hard et al.， 2006） for online courses. The questionnaire measured the frequency in which students participated in academic misconduct and how to engage in academic dishonesty？ Construct validity was established for The Survey of Student Academic Misconduct by Hard et al.， （2006）. Questions were based on the research of Ashworth and Bannister （1997） concerning student perspectives on academic dishonesty. The survey consists of 24 items in which students identified how frequently they have engaged in various means of academic misconduct. The survey was based on a 5？鄄Likert scale： 1 = never， 2 = seldom （once or twice）， 3 = occasionally （several times）， 4 = often （5-10 times） or 5 = very often （more than 10 times） （Spaulding， 2009）， the phenomenon of cheating is very serious when the title score is high （See Appendix）.
（2）Sample
Respondents will be the senior students of the education program in the University of Akron. It will be focus on the students with online class. The undergraduate is younger than graduate， though the UA official report， undergraduate students？蒺 average age is 19 to 25. the students has no more work or live experience. The undergraduate students？蒺 honesty is higher than graduate students and Graduate students always have many work and live experiences， they has little time in campus. It is difficult to collect data. The another characteristic of the students is their major all is Education . Because， these students need to submit some theses and examinations though online. For example： blackboard， springboard. Undergraduate course formats involve all the same assignments， if the students chose the same course and teacher， and the course tests will be administered through springboard. Other science students have less online course in UA， it is difficult to collect data if this study chose science students. The total number of participants will be 120 senior students in the six different online programs. （3）Data Collection
The respondents only need to submit the surveys without their name. During the spring 2013， the questionnaire will be developed that asked Education college deans to indicate their perceptions of various aspects of student academic dishonesty at their college. The questionnaire will email to deans using to address some teachers？蒺 questions. Though this way， this study can earn the teachers？蒺 support. In the last mouth of spring semester， the questionnaire will be sent to 120 students in Education College. In order to encourage more students to reply the questionnaires， the teachers will randomly to give students the corresponding course bonus， but the teachers only know who submit this questionnaires， they do not know the their content. It will use a logistic regression model to estimate the probability of cheating and explain their cheating behavior. If the number of the survey is less 65%， this study only need to collect the data though the faculties. In this case， the teachers in the online course will have a set of meetings about this topic.
（4）Limitation
In this study， the attitude of students is the internal cause， the authenticity of the survey will be difficult to control. Collecting data on cheating behavior maybe is difficulty. Students always don？蒺t want to talk this topic. So this study will need to some prizes for this students. The process privacy is a external cause， every step must to keep the confidentiality for students. If the information of students revealed， they will noncooperation or write some dishonest information. In this process， the workers in this study will sign the confidentiality agreement.
References
[1]Baron， J.& Crooks， S. M. （2005）. Academic Integrity in Web Based Distance Education. TechTrends Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning， 49（2）， 40-45.
[2]Chiesl， N. （2007）. Pragmatic methods to reduce dishonesty in Web-Based Courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education， 8（3）， 203-211.
[3]Grijalva， T. C.， Nowell， C.& Kerkvliet， J. （2006）. Academic honesty and online courses. College Student Journal， 40（1）， 180-185.
[4]Hard， S. F.， Conway， J. M.， & Moran， A. C. （2006）. Faculty and college students’ beliefs about the frequency of student academic misconduct. The Journal of Higher Education， 77（6）， 1058-1080.
[5]Kiernan， V. （2003）. A survey documents growth in distance education in late 1990s. The Chronicle of Higher Education， 49（48）， 28.
[6]Kruse， K. （2002）. The benefits and drawbacks of elearning. Retrieved July 17， 2006， from http：// www.e-learningguru.com/articles/art1_3.htm
【Key words】academic dishonesty ； online class
【中圖分类号】G642.0 【文献标识码】B 【文章编号】2095-3089（2015）7-0032-02
1.Introduction
According to the United States Department of Education， the growth of online education courses offered by universities in the United States experienced rapid growth since the 1990s （U.S. Department of Education， 2003）. Although positive benefits accrue from students taking e？鄄learning courses， there are some significant drawbacks. The most noted include： some students might be technophobic； students lack the required technologies； and， more importantly， students experience a reduction in social interaction， the suppression of communication mechanisms， and the elimination of peer？鄄to？鄄peer learning，the largest drawback to online learning is the possibility of academic dishonesty （Kruse， 2002）. Academic dishonesty in online class is an issue of concern for teachers， students， and institutions of higher education. Because students and faculty do not interact directly in web？鄄based classes， it is often perceived that cheating will be more abundant in these classes.
2.Literature Review
Because students and faculty do not interact directly in such classes， researchers claim that online classes will invite more cheating than traditional face to face classes （Grijalva， Kerkvliet， and Nowell， 2006）. Carnevale （1999） reports that “several colleges with extensive distance learning programs—including Michigan State University， Ohio University， the University of Texas system， Park College， and Pueblo Community college—report that they have had few， if any， cases where disciplinary action has been taken for cheating in online classes” （Roach， 2001）. In one example of plagiarism uncovered at Baker College in Michigan， an online instructor noticed marked improvement in one student？蒺s work， upon further inspection， the instructor noticed the paper contained almost no citations， entered the text into an internet search engine， and found that the student had copied eight page directly from a company report （Heberling， 2002）. According to a 2003 nationwide research study of 23 public and private colleges and Universities， conducted by DonaldL Mc Cabe， Internet plagiarism is on the rise that thirty？鄄eight percent of the under graduate students surveyed indicated that they had engaged in Internet plagiarism （as cited in Rimer， 2003）. In higher education much of the debate centers on where this behavior is most prevalent， in traditional or online courses. Although most will agree that any form of academic dishonesty should be eliminated， many speculate that the lack of face？鄄to？鄄face interaction in the online format contributes more to academic dishonesty among students in these courses （Rowe， 2004 and Wang，2008）. Some researchers disagree. Grijalva， Kerkvliet， and Nowell， （2006） found academic dishonesty in online courses to be the same as in traditional courses. Schmelkin， Gilbert， Spencer， Pincus， and Silva （2008） found that although faculty and students somewhat agreed on the offences of cheating considered to be less serious， they differed greatly on which offences of academic dishonesty were actually considered to be more serious offences. Similarly， Jordan （2001） found that while the students in their study indicated a belief that only 26.2% of students actually cheated， the results indicated that the rate of cheating was actually significantly higher at 54.9%. 3.Purpose of the Study
Online instructors are continually searching for various means to ensure that academic integrity is addressed and adhered to by all students in all courses. According to reviewing the literatures， we can found that academic dishonesty exist and may be expanded in the online class. It also told us the students engages cheating reasons. but， researchers found that the perception of conducting cheating behavior is different between teachers and students （Iyer & Eastman， 2006）. In their study when asked if students would take a stolen copy of a test， 62% of faculty felt the student would do so compared to 42% of students who indicated that they actually would take it. It is important for faculty to understand the differences in their own perceptions of academic dishonesty and the perceptions of their students because these perceptions influence behavior. Without this understanding， it is difficult to develop strategies that will successfully impact the problem of academic dishonesty. So， what is considered academic dishonesty in online courses？ Research defined that online academic dishonesty includes cheating on exams or assignments， internet plagiarism （Grijalva， Kerkvliet， and Nowell， 2006，） while they gave some ways to prevent dishonesty in online classes. Four practical courses of action are suggested for professors to reduce the amount of cheating by online students：（1）disseminate information to distant students； （2）change the process used by students to turn in written assignments； （3）change the process by which exams are administered； and （4）create a non？鄄sequential chapter assortment of questions （Chiesl， 2007）. Overall， the four ways？蒺 were very constructive. Though the following research， we can know if the four ways will reduce the cheating in online classes.
The literatures only focused on the phenomenon of academic dishonesty. As to how to prevent academic dishonesty is still a blank. The purpose of this paper will look into the manner of cheating in online course environment and explore the prevention measures to stop cheating. This study will fill this blank and give some ideas to online instructor in order to help design their curriculum.
This research will be guided by two questions：
1） What are the types of cheating happening in online classes from the perspectives of instructors or students in online classes？
2） What are considered preventive measures to stop cheating in online classes？ The variables is the methods of academic dishonest. The constant is students who involve in the online course.
4.Methodology
（1）Measurement
This study measured the methods of academic dishonesty by a questionnaire of students in the online class. Students have more online instructional cheating videos， detailing clever methods to cheat， are populating the Internet daily. Cheating methods have gone viral （Netter， 2010）. Therefore， a questionnaire about the main methods of academic dishonesty was designed by Jones， D. Their study was conducted with a group of 48 students enrolled in an online business communication course during fall semester， 2010. According to this method， the prevalence and methods of academic dishonesty in online course were surveyed.
Participants completed the Survey of Student Academic Misconduct （Hard et al.， 2006） for online courses. The questionnaire measured the frequency in which students participated in academic misconduct and how to engage in academic dishonesty？ Construct validity was established for The Survey of Student Academic Misconduct by Hard et al.， （2006）. Questions were based on the research of Ashworth and Bannister （1997） concerning student perspectives on academic dishonesty. The survey consists of 24 items in which students identified how frequently they have engaged in various means of academic misconduct. The survey was based on a 5？鄄Likert scale： 1 = never， 2 = seldom （once or twice）， 3 = occasionally （several times）， 4 = often （5-10 times） or 5 = very often （more than 10 times） （Spaulding， 2009）， the phenomenon of cheating is very serious when the title score is high （See Appendix）.
（2）Sample
Respondents will be the senior students of the education program in the University of Akron. It will be focus on the students with online class. The undergraduate is younger than graduate， though the UA official report， undergraduate students？蒺 average age is 19 to 25. the students has no more work or live experience. The undergraduate students？蒺 honesty is higher than graduate students and Graduate students always have many work and live experiences， they has little time in campus. It is difficult to collect data. The another characteristic of the students is their major all is Education . Because， these students need to submit some theses and examinations though online. For example： blackboard， springboard. Undergraduate course formats involve all the same assignments， if the students chose the same course and teacher， and the course tests will be administered through springboard. Other science students have less online course in UA， it is difficult to collect data if this study chose science students. The total number of participants will be 120 senior students in the six different online programs. （3）Data Collection
The respondents only need to submit the surveys without their name. During the spring 2013， the questionnaire will be developed that asked Education college deans to indicate their perceptions of various aspects of student academic dishonesty at their college. The questionnaire will email to deans using to address some teachers？蒺 questions. Though this way， this study can earn the teachers？蒺 support. In the last mouth of spring semester， the questionnaire will be sent to 120 students in Education College. In order to encourage more students to reply the questionnaires， the teachers will randomly to give students the corresponding course bonus， but the teachers only know who submit this questionnaires， they do not know the their content. It will use a logistic regression model to estimate the probability of cheating and explain their cheating behavior. If the number of the survey is less 65%， this study only need to collect the data though the faculties. In this case， the teachers in the online course will have a set of meetings about this topic.
（4）Limitation
In this study， the attitude of students is the internal cause， the authenticity of the survey will be difficult to control. Collecting data on cheating behavior maybe is difficulty. Students always don？蒺t want to talk this topic. So this study will need to some prizes for this students. The process privacy is a external cause， every step must to keep the confidentiality for students. If the information of students revealed， they will noncooperation or write some dishonest information. In this process， the workers in this study will sign the confidentiality agreement.
References
[1]Baron， J.& Crooks， S. M. （2005）. Academic Integrity in Web Based Distance Education. TechTrends Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning， 49（2）， 40-45.
[2]Chiesl， N. （2007）. Pragmatic methods to reduce dishonesty in Web-Based Courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education， 8（3）， 203-211.
[3]Grijalva， T. C.， Nowell， C.& Kerkvliet， J. （2006）. Academic honesty and online courses. College Student Journal， 40（1）， 180-185.
[4]Hard， S. F.， Conway， J. M.， & Moran， A. C. （2006）. Faculty and college students’ beliefs about the frequency of student academic misconduct. The Journal of Higher Education， 77（6）， 1058-1080.
[5]Kiernan， V. （2003）. A survey documents growth in distance education in late 1990s. The Chronicle of Higher Education， 49（48）， 28.
[6]Kruse， K. （2002）. The benefits and drawbacks of elearning. Retrieved July 17， 2006， from http：// www.e-learningguru.com/articles/art1_3.htm