Indiana University Plagiarism Tutorials and Tests: 14 Years of Worldwide Learning Online

  • Theodore Frick
  • Cesur Dagli
  • Kyungbin Kwon
  • Kei Tomita
Chapter

Abstract

We briefly tell our story about the Indiana University Plagiarism Tutorials and Tests (IPTAT) from the original design and development in 2002 through 2016. Widespread cheating on the Certification Test in 2012–2013 required us to redesign the test. The changes resulted in a structure that offered billions and trillions of test combinations for undergraduate and graduate students. These more difficult tests indicated a need for improving the tutorial and for incorporation of First Principles of Instruction. Next, we briefly illustrate how each principle was implemented. Finally, we summarize the usage of the redesigned IPTAT in 2016 and empirical findings on instructional effectiveness.

Keywords

Plagiarism tutorial Student learning assessment Instructional design Student cheating First Principles of Instruction MOOC Online instruction Online testing Instructional effectiveness 

References

  1. Andrews, D. H., Hull, T. D., & Donahue, J. A. (2009). Storytelling as an instructional method: Descriptions and research questions. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3(2). Retrieved 31 Dec 2016 from https://doi.org/10.7771/1541–5015.1063
  2. Barrett, A. (2015). Facilitating variable-length computerized classification testing via automatic racing calibration heuristics (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University Bloomington.Google Scholar
  3. Dagli, C. (2017). Relationships of first principles of instruction and student mastery: A MOOC on how to recognize plagiarism (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University Bloomington.Google Scholar
  4. Frick, T. (1990). Analysis of patterns in time (APT): A method of recording and quantifying temporal relations in education. American Educational Research Journal, 27(1), 180–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Frick, T., Chadha, R., Watson, C., Wang, Y., & Green, P. (2009). College student perceptions of teaching and learning quality. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(5), 705–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Frick, T., Chadha, R., Watson, C., & Zlatkovska, E. (2010). Improving course evaluations to improve instruction and complex learning in higher education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 115–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Frick, T., & Dagli, C. (2016). MOOCs for research: The case of the Indiana University plagiarism tutorials and tests. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 21(2), 255–276. Retrieved December 31, 2016 from: http://rdcu.be/mEvf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research & Development, 50(3), 43–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Merrill, M. D. (2013). First principles of instruction: Identifying and designing effective, efficient, and engaging instruction. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Theodore Frick
    • 1
  • Cesur Dagli
    • 1
  • Kyungbin Kwon
    • 1
  • Kei Tomita
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Instructional Systems Technology, School of EducationIndiana University BloomingtonBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations