Utilizing webcam-based proctoring to deter misconduct in online exams

Hylton, Kenrie; Levy, Yair; Dringus, Laurie P.

doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.002

Cited by 161 publications

(126 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

117

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Students who take longer to complete exams may be engaging in forms of academic dishonesty, such as looking up answers or consulting with a peer. A study by Hylton, Levy, and Dringus (2016) randomly assigned students to either a treatment or control group. Both groups were enrolled in the same course at a private university in Jamaica and took their exams online from the same pool of questions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some indicate that the rate of cheating is no higher online than in the classroom, with classroom being higher at times (Grijalva et al, 2006;Stuber-McEwen et al, 2009;Spaulding, 2009). Other studies show that students perform better when taking an online non-proctored exam than when taking an online proctored exam (Milliron & Sandoe, 2008;Wellman & Marcinkiewicz, 2004;Richardson & North, 2013;Harmon & Lambrinos, 2008;Stack, 2015;Hylton et al, 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The purpose of this study is to add to the body of literature investigating performance differences between proctored and non-proctored exams, and to expand on this research, much like Hylton et al (2016), by offering an objective measure of why such differences exist. We hypothesize that students will perform better on non-proctored exams than on proctored exams, and that students will take more time to complete non-proctored exams than proctored exams.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparing Student Performance on Proctored and Non-Proctored Exams in Online Psychology Courses

Daffin

Jones

2018

OLJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As online education becomes a more popular and permanent option for obtaining an education after high school, it also raises questions as to the academic rigor of such classes and the academic integrity of the students taking the classes. The purpose of the current study is to explore the integrity issue and to investigate student performance on online examinations. Utilizing a sample of about 1,700 students who took online psychology classes of varying difficulty at Washington State University from spring 2015 to spring 2016, we found that students performed 10-20% better and took about twice as long on non-proctored versus proctored exams. The effect held when we compared our in-house proctoring service used during this time against ProctorU, used for one semester in fall 2012. To ensure the most robust design possible, we also rotated the proctored exam in each class at least once and then compared performance on an exam when it was proctored versus when the same exam was non-proctored. Results showed better performance when the exam was non-proctored than when it was proctored. Finally, since instructors changed over the four semesters our study ran, we wanted to ensure that the results were not due to differences in teaching style. This potential confounding variable was eliminated. We discuss possible reasons for the difference in performance, to include student academic misconduct, and offer suggestions for ensuring we have both academic rigor and integrity in online courses.Online/distance learning has become an increasingly popular method of receiving a higher education, often serving an off-campus population who cannot attend class on campus. The platform allows for flexibility for the student (Stack, 2015), and as Hannay and Newvine (2006) found in a 22-question survey of 217 students taking undergraduate criminal justice courses, 88% of students said they take online classes because classroom course schedules do not always fit into their busy lives, while 20% said the choices of traditional classes are at times

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing Student Performance on Proctored and Non-Proctored Exams in Online Psychology Courses

Daffin

Jones

2018

OLJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is also important to note that faculty and administrators have taken to technology to identify instances of academic dishonesty by using software products like Turnitin that spot plagiarism and Proctortrack that monitors behavior in online test taking through a webcam (Barthel, ). Case study data on the use of Remote Proctor, software that identifies online test takers through biometric and photographic comparison data, suggest that the use of virtual proctors is effective (Bedford, Gregg, & Clinton, ; 2011; Hylton, Levy, & Dringus, ). Despite the increase in online courses, researchers have just recently sought to examine academic dishonesty.…”

Section: Academic Uses Of Social Mediamentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Media in Higher Education

Rowan-Kenyon¹,

Alemán²,

Gin³

et al. 2016

ASHE Higher Education Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…On the other hand, the topic of cheating continues to dominate the UIT research agenda (Guo & Drasgow, 2010;Hense, Golden, & Burnett, 2009;Hollister & Berenson, 2009;Hylton, Levy, & Dringus, 2016;Kaminski & Hemingway, 2009;Kantrowitz & Dainis, 2014). Even though it appears researchers have accepted the reality that UIT is now an integral part of the recruitment process, especially for high volume hiring, there is some skepticism with regards to the efficacy, fairness, and ethicality of UIT.…”

Section: Uit -Issues and Concernsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unproctored Internet Testing in Personnel Selection: A Test of Cheating Deterrence Strategies

Eren¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unproctored Internet testing (UIT) has become increasingly popular in the context of personnel recruitment and selection. Despite the widespread use of UIT, its fairness and overall impact on the hiring process is still called into question (Ryan & Ployhart, 2014). In consideration of the issues surrounding UIT, the purpose of this thesis was to examine job applicant cheating behaviour. Job candidates (n=110) were recruited through a series of job advertisements. Mild deception was used to cover up the true purpose of the research. Participants were administered a cognitive ability and cheating detection test as part of the regular recruitment process, and upon completion were invited to complete a follow-up survey. Contrary to popular practice, cheating deterrence strategies in the form of warning messages did not prevent candidate cheating.Furthermore, cheating was associated with overall lower cognitive ability. These results are discussed in relation to the Theory of Planned Behaviour, as well as the implications for future research.

show abstract

Utilizing webcam-based proctoring to deter misconduct in online exams

Cited by 161 publications

References 29 publications

Comparing Student Performance on Proctored and Non-Proctored Exams in Online Psychology Courses

Comparing Student Performance on Proctored and Non-Proctored Exams in Online Psychology Courses

Social Media in Higher Education

Unproctored Internet Testing in Personnel Selection: A Test of Cheating Deterrence Strategies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About