Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Learning Assessment Must Change in a World of Digital “Cheats”

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Phantom Ex Machina

Abstract

Digital disruption has touched almost every industry and sector imaginable including the education sector. One disruption in the education sector comes from the rise and acceptance of distance and online education, including massively open online courses (MOOCs), and the technological changes associated with course delivery and student interaction. Moreover, the rapid changes in digital technology have also led to the new breed of “cheats” who use the same digital technology causing disruption to cheat the system for better results. This paper looks at the evolution of cheating and suggests that the solutions may require a fundamental shift in how institutions conduct learning assessment in business education. Specifically, we posit that cheating is a function of two main factors: motivation and opportunities. While the motivation factor has not changed much by the digital advances, the opportunities for cheating have skyrocketed in this digital era, and it is this latter factor that warrants heightened attention. The paper, therefore, examines how digital technology has impacted the traditional assessment tools and how assessment can be modified in a digital world to ensure that students are achieving programme-learning goals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alam, L. S. (2004). Is plagiarism more prevalent in some forms of assessment than others? In Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE conference (pp. 48–57). Available from http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/perth04/procs/alam.html (accessed April 6, 2016).

  • Ashworth, P., Bannister, P., Thorne, P., & Students on the Qualitative Research Methods Course Unit. (1997). Guilty in whose eyes? University students’ perceptions of cheating and plagiarism in academic. Studies in Higher Education, 22(2), 187–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkins, T., & Nelson, G. (2001). Plagiarism and the internet: Turning the tables. The English Journal, 90(4), 101–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auer, N. J., & Krupar, E. M. (2001). Mouse click plagiarism: The role of technology in plagiarism and the librarian’s role in combating it. Library Trends, 49(3), 415–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bain, L. Z. (2014). How students use technology to cheat and what faculty can do about it. Proceedings of the Information Systems Educators Conference, Baltimore, Maryland. Available from http://proc.isecon.org/2014/pdf/3020.pdf (accessed April 6, 2016).

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, R., & Malcolm, J. (2006). Embedding plagiarism education in the assessment process. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 2(1), 38–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, R. (2005). Factors associated with student plagiarism in a post 1992 university. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(2), 137–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B. S. (1996). A comparison of the academic ethics of graduate business, education, and engineering students. College Student Journal, 30(3), 294–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calabrese, R., & Cochran, J. T. (1990). The relationship of alienation to cheating among a sample of American adolescents. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 23(2), 65–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, K. J., Davis, R., Toy, D., & Wright, L. (2004). Academic integrity in the business school environment: I’ll get by with a little help from my friends. Journal of Marketing Education, 26(3), 236–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comas-Forgas, R., & Sureda-Negre, J. (2010). Academic plagiarism: Explanatory factors from students’ perspective. Journal of Academic Ethics, 8(3), 217–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Common Sense Media. (2009). 35% of teens admit to using cell phones to cheat. Available from https://www.commonsensemedia.org/about-us/news/press-releases/35-of-teens-admit-to-using-cell-phones-to-cheat# (accessed April 6, 2016).

    Google Scholar 

  • Farisi, M. I. (2013). Academic dishonesty in distance higher education: Challenges and models for moral education in the digital era. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 14(4), 176–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao, Q. (2012). Biometric authentication to prevent e-cheating. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 9(2), 3–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, R. (2015). Anti-plagiarism strategies for research papers. VirtualSalt. Available from http://virtualsalt.com/antiplag.htm (accessed April 6, 2016).

  • Hart, L., & Morgan, L. (2010). Academic integrity in an online registered nurse to baccalaureate in nursing program. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 41(11), 498–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, N., & Introna, L. (2005). Cultural values, plagiarism, and fairness: When plagiarism gets in the way of learning. Ethics and Behavior, 15(3), 213–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, R. M. (2007). Understanding “Internet plagiarism”. Computers and Composition, 24(1), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ison, D. V. (2014). Does the online environment promote plagiarism? A comparative study of dissertations from brick-and-mortar versus online institutions. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(2), 272–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyer, R., & Eastman, J. K. (2006). Academic dishonesty: Are business students different from other college students? Journal of Education for Business, 82(2), 101–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karon, J. (2012). A positive solution for plagiarism. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Available from http://chronicle.com/article/A-Postiive-Solution-for/134498/ (accessed April 6, 2016).

  • Khan, Z. R., & Balasubramanian, S. (2012). Students go click, flick and cheat: E-cheating, technologies and more. Journal of Academic and Business Ethics, 6, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, D. L., & Case, C. J. (2014). E-cheating: Incidence and trends among college students. Issues in Information Systems, 15(1), 20–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanier, M. M. (2006). Academic integrity and distance learning. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 17(2), 244–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, K. (2006). Student integrity. The Business Review, Cambridge, 6(1), 297–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, D. (2013). Essay mills: University course work to order. Available from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/essay-mills-university-course-work-to-order/2007934.article (accessed April 6, 2016).

  • O’Connor, S. (2003). Cheating and electronic plagiarism–scope, consequences and detection. In Proceedings. Educause in Australia 03 Conference. Available from http://www.caval.edu.au/assets/files/Research_and_Advocacy/Cheating_and_electronic_plagiarism-scope_consequences_and_detection_EDUCASUE_May_2003.pdf (accessed April 6, 2016).

  • Park, C. (2003). In other (people’s) words: Plagiarism by university students—Literature and lessons. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(5), 471–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavela, G. (1997). Applying the power of association on campus: A model code of academic integrity. Journal of College and University Law, 24(1), 97–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, M. R., & Horton, V. (2000). Cybercheating: Has morality evaporated in business education? The International Journal of Educational Management, 14(4), 150–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pullen, D. R., Ortloff, D. V., Casey, D. S., & Payne, J. B. (2000). Analysis of academic misconduct using unobtrusive research: A study of discarded cheat sheets. College Student Journal, 34(4), 616–625.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, N. C. (2004). Cheating in online student assessment: Beyond plagiarism. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 7(2). Available from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer72/rowe72.html (accessed April 6, 2016).

  • Spaulding, M. (2009). Perceptions of academic honesty in online vs. face-to-face classrooms. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(3), 183–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swift, C. O., & Nonis, S. (1998). When no one is watching: Cheating behaviour on projects and assignments. Marketing Education Review, 8(1), 27–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szabo, A., & Underwood, J. (2004). Cybercheats: Is information and communication technology fuelling academic dishonesty? Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(2), 180–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarantino, K., McDonough, J., & Hua, M. (2013). Effects of student engagement with social media on student learning: A review of literature. The Journal of Technology in Student Affairs, 1(8), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trenholm, S. (2006–2007). A review of cheating in fully asynchronous online courses: A math or fact-based course perspective. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 35(3), 281–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, S. W., & Uludag, S. (2013). Student perceptions of cheating in online and traditional classes. In 2013 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1131–1137). IEEE. Available from http://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings/fie/2013/9999/00/06685007.pdf (accessed April 6, 2016).

  • Varble, D. (2014). Reducing cheating opportunities in online test. Atlantic Marketing Journal, 3(2), 131–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yates, R. W., & Beaudrie, B. (2009). The impact of online assessment on grades in community college distance education mathematics courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 23(2), 62–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Athabasca University, 201 - 13220 St. Albert Trail, Edmonton, AB, Canada, T5L 4W1

    Terry Beckman, Helen Lam & Anshuman Khare

Authors
  1. Terry Beckman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Helen Lam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anshuman Khare
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Helen Lam .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Athabasca University, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

    Anshuman Khare

  2. School of Computing, University of Eastern Finland, Joensuu, Finland

    Brian Stewart

  3. Alidade Strategies Inc., St. Albert, Alberta, Canada

    Rod Schatz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Beckman, T., Lam, H., Khare, A. (2017). Learning Assessment Must Change in a World of Digital “Cheats”. In: Khare, A., Stewart, B., Schatz, R. (eds) Phantom Ex Machina. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44468-0_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation