Cheat-proof Exams
Each time we teach the quiz/test section of this course, a professor with a background in the traditional classroom questions the reliability of the tool as they consider it would be difficult to acertain who was taking the test. Therefore we highlight several options here to get you to think outside the box.
Dr. Tom Goodwin, a biology professor at Andrews University, programs several versions of the same quiz to his students and allows them to retake it several times with the goal of subject mastery. Each time the quiz is slightly different. He considers the quiz helpful to their overall learning in his course. He has experimented giving a final exam in a computer lab to a traditional class using the WebCT database and releasing the test to the students when he is present in the room. The students appreciate the immediate feedback they receive from a computer generated test,the ability to have a test in color and with some animation. The teacher appreciates that he only has to grade the essay portion of the exam as the scoring for the objective questions are done by the machine with a function built into the quiz tool that allows him to re-grade or re-weight the question if needed. A video of Dr. Goodwin explaining how he uses the quiz/testing tool is available from the Office of Instructional Support and Innovation in the School of Education at A.U.
Examples follow for those not wishing to use electronic means and wishing to submit a pencil and paper exam to a geographically distant student:
Many adult education centers and schools have staff who are willing to proctor an exam if the instructor makes arrangements with the center well in advance. The student must have a picture ID to present to the proctor. The instructor needs to have forwarded the name of the student, student's school ID number, instructions for administering and returning the exam and the test materials in a sealed envelope to the proctor. Sometimes there is a fee for services rendered. When that is the case, you would need to decide who would pay that fee in advance of sending the student there and include the details in your on-line syllabus.
The DEOS-L (listserv) from the University of Pennsylvania is a very active list of individuals involved in distance education. The following suggestion from Lucia is taken with permission of the author herself as an example of how one marketing professor at the upper division level makes learning happen through cheat-proofing her exam:
Lucia wrote:
"I'll give a brief outline of how I structure my final exam.
Background:
"I teach upper division management course for two institutions. Both institutions require proctored exams and I consider this proctored exam to be a fundamental requirement to preserve the integrity of the degree my students earn. My students are scattered around the world and the final
examination testing is done over a one week period. Students schedule their exam with approved proctors. They will also have to show an established picture ID to take their exam. For instance, this week is final examination week and students from my DE class may live in Japan, England, Iceland, Germany, Italy, etc. and will take the exam at different times with their respective proctors.
The examinations were mailed to each separate "center" about four weeks ago. The proctors will return the completed exams to me in Victoria B.C. where I will grade them and transmit grades to my institution.
"The final examination is comprehensive and contains the following:
Part 1. Terms and concepts - roughly 50 which have been culled from the over 200 new terms from the discipline.
Part 2. An essay from each chapter of the text - 16 essay questions
Part 3. A case from the text.
"The examination is typed in Word and will include Part 1 and 2. I send the examination out to everyone via email -for all to see. The students all know each other because they have been actively involved in group assignments and have posted all assignments on the class bulletin board for peer evaluation. They can and do collaborate in studying for the exam. The base exam is the same.
"No surprises yet. Everyone can now focus on pulling the material together so that they can respond in a thoughtful and knowledgeable way to make sense out of the concepts and be able to write with conviction. The learning "heats" up in cyberspace.
"Here is the catch which makes the test "cheat proof". I tell the students what I will do with each test to make each test unique-no test will be the same.
1. Each student's test will be customized as it is prepared for mailing to their proctor.
a. Each student will have 4 specific/terms concepts to write on. I highlight those 4 specific terms on the examination which contains at least 50 terms overall. I keep a separate record of each student's customized test. The responses to the terms are evaluated in a 3 step process including: definition, application and its relationship to the discipline
b. The same method is used for the essay. Here I will highlight 3 and give them a choice to write on 2 out of the 3.
c. A case from the text is included. I may have 2 - 4 different cases. Everyone has had a chance to read the cases and think them through ahead of time, but no one knows which one they will get.
2. In a nutshell. When a student opens the exam at their testing Center, the exam is different from all the others. It would not serve any purpose to email a student and tell that student what was on the exam because no exam is the same. They do all study for the exams thoroughly and in the end, really know their stuff! #;-] When students reach this part of the course they are well prepared. They have submitted assignments each week - for all to see and critique. This generates a dynamic which I never experience in a f2f classroom. The final exam pulls it all together and having guidelines provides a focus which results in depth and breadth in the responses I am privileged to read .
Kind regards, Lucia"
Even though the WebCT quiz/test function might need to be replaced by a student submitting an e-mail exam, my (Carole here again) personal favorite is from Bill on the same list serv.
"Teachers could greatly diminish cheating if they generated tests which demanded application of what was being presented to real world situations personal to the student. This would mean that the students would be doing something else than parroting what was presented in class or in the book. Then we wouldn't have graduate students who were unable to think.
--- Bill"
So, there you have it. As you think of ideas, why not post them to a new thread in the discussion forum?
Bulletin board posting by Carole Kilcher in a class on WebCT, summer of 1999. Used with permission.