Cheating and the Online Environment

Cheating is an ongoing concern and a reality in both face-to-face and online settings (Oosterhof, Conrad, & Ely, 2008). If it is more common online there are at least two possible explanations: one, the physical separation inherent in online learning facilitates cheating among those who are so inclined (Rowe, 2004); and two, online instructors may assess students more frequently in attempts to validate student performance (Oosterhof, Conrad, & Ely, 2008), and more frequent assessment means more frequent occasions to cheat.

The nature of cheating has changed from copying answers from a student at the next desk to deliberately “crashing” a timed test to gain more time, hacking into instructor accounts and previewing assessment questions, and even changing grades in online student records (Cizek, 2001). Our society's reliance on test scores has risen dramatically over the last decade – driven at least in part by technologies that enable the administration and scoring of broad-scale assessments quickly and cost-effectively - and with that has come a disturbing trend of educators cheating and enabling or encouraging students to cheat (Cizek, 2001). In this climate, cheating (for some) has become a form of political or social protest: “Generally, there appears to be a growing indifference on the part of educators toward the behavior and even an increasing sense that cheating is a justifiable response to externally-mandated tests” (Cizek, 2001, p. 17).

The steps to be taken to minimize cheating in an online environment depend on the nature of and motivation for the cheating. For the purposes of this discussion, I offer three “global” strategies: creativity, judgments, and software.
 
Creativity in instructional design can reduce the frequency of cheating. For example, it is more difficult to cheat on a group project, performance assessment or essay test than on a multiple-choice quiz (Rowe, 2004). Designers can also “build in” security with frequent opportunities for assessment throughout the course or training. This can be particularly helpful in online learning where instructors don't have the benefits of face-to-face contact for assessing their students.

Humans are hard-wired to make judgments. Online instructors need to consider what they know about individual students (including their demonstrated abilities and the quality of their work) and group assessment norms and trends, and make judgments about whether cheating may have occurred. Also, instructors should consider the amount and type of work they assign. Some students report that they cheat because the workload is too heavy or the assignments are boring or meaningless (Stephans & Wengaard, 2001).

Software exists that can help increase testing security and minimize cheating. Assessment Systems Corporation is one company (I'm sure there are others) that offers test authoring, hosting, and psychometric services.

Should the definition of cheating evolve along with the tools we use to produce work in an online environment? A week ago, I would have answered, “No. Cheating is cheating is cheating and it's wrong.” But Maher (2008) has changed my thinking. “If a student is going to talk with a bunch of other students and network with them to exchange information to produce a paper, isn't that a skill that we want them to take to the workplace? If I can find someone who is working in advertising and who knows how to push a product, and they can collect information from other sources and borrow and steal and put it together and reshape it, isn't that a skill that I want them to have?” (Maher, 2008).

So perhaps the definition of cheating should evolve to fit with current notions of “work” and “learning”. But where, then, is the line between “collaboration” and “copying”? Maher has this to say: “... say that you're going to do something else that you can look at other people's projects, but the way I assess what you're doing is going to take into account that you're going to look at what other people are doing. Your work still has to be original, but to get inspiration from other people and to craft your work in response to theirs or alongside theirs is not something that's necessarily a problem.”I love that idea on its own, and I love it even more when I overlay Cizek (2001): “From the broadest perspective, it may be useful to entirely reconceptualize testing so that successful test performance can be more consistently and directly linked to student effort and effective instruction, and so that unsuccessful performance is accompanied by sufficient diagnostic information about students’ strengths and weaknesses” (p. 10).

Sally

References

Cizek, G. J. (2001). An Overview of Issues Concerning Cheating on Large-Scale Tests. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, April 2001, Seattle, WA.

Maher, S. (2008). Interviews. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/kidsonline/interviews/maher.html#5

Oosterhof, A., Conrad, R.-M., & Ely, D. P. (2008). Assessing learners online. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

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

Stephans, J. M., & Wangaard, D. B. (2001). Teaching for integrity: Steps to prevent cheating in your classroom. Retrieved from http://www.ethicsed.org/programs/integrity-works/pdf/teachingforintegrity.pdf.

The Political Nature of Program Evaluation

Program evaluation is a political process. An evaluator who ignores, avoids, or mismanages the political realities of evaluation limits the effectiveness and usefulness of the process (Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen, 2010). Ethical complexities wind in and among the more overt political features of evaluation such as financial support, stakeholder allegiance, and social impact. Morris and Cohn (1993) detail several ways in which stakeholders may seek to influence evaluation outcomes, and Fitzpatrick et al. (2010) caution that evaluators also need to be aware of their own potential to taint the evaluative process.

If we accept that evaluation is political (and, therefore, ripe for ethical complication), then we must ask how best to balance the objectivity required in a program evaluation with the political interests of stakeholders. We must ask, “What ethical standards and values need to be emphasized in program evaluation?”

The American Evaluation Association’s (AEA) Program Evaluation Standards (Yarbrough, Shulha, Hopson, & Caruthers, 2011) and Guiding Principles for Evaluators (American Evaluation Association, 2004) provide a broad, somewhat obvious, framework for ethical conduct.

Fitzpatrick et al. (2010) are more specific, encouraging evaluators to be both self-reflective about their role in the evaluation process and circumspect about client requests, so as to minimize the potential for bias and ethical compromise: “…the client may be asking for what the client perceives as editing changes, but the evaluator sees as watering down the clarity or strength of the judgments made” (p. 81). And Schweigert (2007) roots evaluator responsibility in the notion of justice – public, procedural, and distributive.

From this we can extract answers to the question “What ethical standards and values need to be emphasized in program evaluation?” 

Ethical standards:

• Those detailed in the AEA’s and other professionally recognized codes of conduct.

Values:

• Commitment to truth – what Schweigert (2007) calls the priority of justice
• Cultural sensitivity
• Respect (for stakeholders, ourselves, and the evaluation process)

It seems that no professional code nor personal charter can do the whole job. No matter how pointed the professional standards, situational circumstance requires evaluators to make interpretations and best guesses (Schweigert, 2007), which are subject to bias and ethical compromise, as Weiss (2006) lays bare any illusions we may have that we are above or beyond the snare of bias and ethical confusion: “You never start from scratch. We pick up the ideas that are congenial to our own perspective. Therefore, people pick up this thought or that interpretation of a research report that fits with what they know or what they want to do” (p. 480).

I have thought about this a lot over the past few days, returning again and again to Sieber’s (1980) conclusion that “being ethical in program evaluation is a process of growth in understanding, perception, and creative problem-solving ability that respects the interests of individuals and of society” (p. 53). 

Sally Bacchetta

References
 

American Evaluation Association, 2004. Guiding principles. Retrieved from www.eval.org/Publications/Guiding Principles.asp.

Fitzpatrick, J., Sanders, J., & Worthen, B. (2010). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson

Morris, M., & Cohn, R. (1993). Program evaluators and ethical challenges: A national survey. Evaluation Review, 17, 621-642.

Schweigert, F. J. (2007). The priority of justice: A framework approach to ethics in program evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 30(4), 394–399.

Sieber, J. E. (1980). Being ethical: Professional and personal decisions in program evaluation. In R.E. Perloff & E. Perloff (Eds.), Values, ethics, and standards in evaluation. New Directions for Program Evaluation, No. 7, 51-61. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

Weiss, C. H., & Mark, M. M. (2006). The oral history of evaluation Part IV: The professional evolution of Carol Weiss. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(4), p. 474-483.

Fostering Behavior Change

In Fostering Behavior Change (Tulgan, 2013), Bruce Tulgan offers seven best practices for creating training that increases knowledge uptake and meaningful behavior change. Two-thirds of my way through a Master’s degree in Instructional Design and Technology, I first thought Tulgan’s tips were obvious. Simplistic. After thinking about it quite a bit, I’m sure they are. Why would Tulgan, an established training expert, tell us what we already know? Because it’s true. Because he’s right.  

There is no magic to training, and all the cool whiz-bang technology in the world doesn’t change the fact that effective training is a product of sound design and delivery. Tulgan’s tips should seem obvious, because he is reminding instructional designers and trainers of what we already know, yet sometimes fail to execute. We need to leverage needs assessments to align instructional objectives with identifiable skill and knowledge gaps, link instructional content to real-life, and deliver content to multiple memory centers. Sticky training offers actionable solutions and learning extensions. Finally, we need to follow up and cultivate support for ongoing learning.

We know this. We need to do it. Every time.

Make a great day,

Sally Bacchetta

Reference
 

Tulgan, B. (2013, January/February). Fostering behavior change. Training, 50(1), p. 9.

Managing Your Project Schedule

One of the most challenging aspects of instructional design project management is managing the project schedule. The schedule must be rigid enough to provide structure, yet fluid enough to allow for the inevitable inevitabilities of project work. One way to develop your own scheduling style is to read and learn about what works for other people, so here is my two cents.

As often as possible I work back-to-front to draft my ideal network diagram, beginning with the end date of the final deliverable and working backwards to identify prerequisite (predecessor) activities and deliverables, time requirements, and event deadlines, based on required, procedural, and logical relationships (Portny et al., 2008).

I then compare my ideal network diagram to what I call “probable reality,” which is a consideration of my experience with:

• Projects in general
• Similar projects
• What I know about this client
• What I know about this project team
• My own schedule and workload

Probable reality reflects my best guess of project limitations and unknowns (Portny et al., 2008) and their anticipated impact on the project. For example, let’s assume that my project team has 21 days to submit a deliverable of a module outline with instructional objectives. I consider my experience with projects in general and similar projects, and determine that I need 14 days (span time) to complete the deliverable.

In my ideal network diagram I allow 3 days for the client to review and approve the outline (17 days). However, I know this client is slow to review and approve materials, so I build an extra 2 days into the activity phase (19 days). That leaves the team only 2 days to review client feedback, make revisions, and re-submit the outline to the client.

If I know the project team is highly organized and on point, I may take a risk and go with that. But if I don’t know the project team well, or if I know them to be slow or unorganized or very busy, I will decide that it’s not enough time and I need to cut some time somewhere else in the process.

Every activity eats up time (Laureate Education, Inc., 2012), and when time is tight, my first choice is to cut time on my end where I have the most control. I then consider my schedule and workload to find a way to complete the deliverable in less than 14 days.

Freelance work can be very patchwork, and I sometimes function as ID, writer, and PM all in one. In those situations I can track everything with a simple Word document and an Excel spreadsheet. When working with a team, however, project management software is almost essential (Fabac, 2006). It facilitates consistent communication and sharing of timelines, milestones, progress, and changes between team members and clients.

Project work is a wild ride every time. It can be stressful, but the feeling of success is a rush!

Sally Bacchetta

References

Fabac, J. N. (2006). Project management for systematic training. Advances in Developing
Human Resources, 8(4), 540–547.

Laureate Education, Inc., (Producer). (2012). Creating a project schedule. [Multimedia Program]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E.
(2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Review of Canvas CMS

The fields of instructional design and distance learning are in turbo-growth mode, with new technology (and improvements to "old" technology) barreling out from every direction. I've just recently begun exploring CMS (Content Management Systems), also called LMS (Learning Management Systems), and I've decided to share my very informal reviews here. First up, Canvas (http://www.instructure.com).

I liked Canvas right away. The site is attractive, and the intuitive navigation enabled me to feel comfortable and competent almost immediately. Canvas cleanly blends Web 2.0 tools and other technologies into features that distance learners want and need, like:

• Mobility – “Users can receive Canvas notifications via Facebook, SMS text messaging, email and other communication channels” (http://www.instructure.com).
• Outcomes to Objective – “With Canvas, you can connect each learning action to a specific goal—which means results are demonstrated in clearly measurable ways” (http://www.instructure.com).
• Managed Hosting – “Canvas eliminates the time and expense of setting up, configuring and maintaining your own servers” (http://www.instructure.com)
• Analytics – Built-in tools help designers and instructors evaluate the effectiveness of their instruction and specific content, which I could use to demonstrate ROI and justify my design decisions to clients, and more importantly, make changes as necessary to achieve desired outcomes.
• Open Source – Software can be tweaked and freely shared with others.

One of the most attractive features to me is Integrated Multimedia, which makes it easy to “Insert audio, video, text, images and more at every learning contact point” (http://www.instructure.com). I should say it seems easy. I can’t really tell without signing up for an account, which brings me to the major limitation I find. Canvas only offers a free two-week trial, which is not long enough for me to complete either a client project or my own exploration, which is a shame. I would be more likely to segue from a free trial to a paid membership if I were given more time to explore the system.

Sally Bacchetta

Brain-Stretching Resources for Instructional Designers

As a freelance writer and instructional designer, I have limited opportunities for guided professional development and enrichment, which is one of the reasons I am pursuing a Master’s degree in Instructional Design and Technology at Walden University. At the suggestion of one of my Walden professors, I recently began exploring online resources in or related to the field of instructional design. Here is a round up of some of my favorite sites:

Learning Solutions Magazine
Subscription to the magazine is free, but I would gladly pay for it if I had to. (Note to the folks at Learning Solutions Magazine: Please keep your subscription free!) Marc J. Rosenberg’s June, 2012 article Marc My Words: Seven Questions eLearning Developers and Managers Should Answer… Every Time is one example of the topical enrichment I find in abundance at Learning Solutions Magazine. Based on the diversity of subject matter and contributor background, I believe this is a professional resource I can grow with for a long time.

TED blog With blog posts that include Conflict as Thinking, In praise of cooperation without coordination, and Everything is a Remix, I find this blog personally and professionally irresistible. “So we’re building here a clearinghouse that offers free knowledge and inspiration from the world's most inspired thinkers, and also a community of curious souls to engage with ideas and each other. This site, launched April 2007, is an ever-evolving work in progress, and you're an important part of it. Have an idea? We want to hear from you.” (www.ted.com/pages/view/id/5. Accessed 062912.) Oh, you will, TED. You will!

The Chronicle Blog Network “This digital salon, sponsored by The Chronicle of Higher Education, features leading bloggers from all corners of academe.” (www.chronicle.com. Accessed 062912.) In addition to informed opinion pieces, this blog features news, statistics, and online forums to expand my understanding of learning theory and application. The resources on this site are rich and varied.

Learn at Vivid blog I was drawn in by a June 25th blog post titled What works in real life, works in eLearning. From there I went on to explore the company website, and I found enough interesting content to make me want to visit again. Vivid Learning Systems is a provider of online training programs, and although their customer base is different than mine, I believe I can apply some of their strategies and resources to my own work. One of the ways I differentiate myself in the freelance market is by offering strategies to increase ROI of my customers’ training budgets. I am looking forward to learning more about Vivid Learning System’s “integrated retention tools that are built-in to every course, including interactive exercises, random test banks and multi-modal delivery templates.” (www.learnatvivid.com/company. Accessed 06/29/12.)

The Physics Suite: Peer Instruction Problems I love that this site is housed in the physics department at the University of Maryland, because my work does not touch the realm of physics, and I have no connection to Maryland, and therein lies the beauty of online learning. Technology facilitates connections that would not otherwise be made and delivers to my desk more and better resources than I could find using traditional methods of research. The site features information about the Peer Instruction technique, which is “a method created by Eric Mazur to help make lectures more interactive and to get students intellectually engaged with what is going on.” (http://www.physics.umd.edu/perg/role/PIProbs/. Accessed 062912.) Engagement is a fundamental issue for instructional designers, educators, and trainers. I am already considering ways I can incorporate Peer Instruction into the corporate training workshops I design.

Thanks for stopping by. I hope you will share your favorite sites with me here.

Sally Bacchetta

Welcome to the Instructional Design Hub

Welcome to the Instructional Design Hub. I am a freelance writer and instructional designer, currently earning a Master's degree in Instructional Design and Technology at Walden University. I look forward to getting to know you and exchanging perspectives on all that is relevant and exciting in the world of instructional design. Make a great day!

Sally Bacchetta - Freelance Writer / Instructional Designer