Your search found 1136 results.

Descriptors:
Testing; Best Practices; Testing Problems; Integrity; Cheating; Prevention; Investigations; Educational Policy; Computer Assisted Testing; Conferences (Gatherings); State Departments of Education; School Districts

Abstract:
Educators, parents, and the public depend on accurate, valid, reliable, and timely information about student academic performance. Testing irregularities--breaches of test security or improper administration of academic testing--undermine efforts to use those data to improve student achievement. Unfortunately, there have been high-profile and systemic incidents of cheating in several school districts across the country in recent years. While every state has policies in place to address test administration, no "library of best practices" exists that could help state educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs) prevent, detect, and respond to irregularities in academic testing. The Department published a request for information (RFI) in the "Federal Register" on January 17, 2012, asking the public to submit best practices and policies regarding the prevention, detection, and investigation of irregularities in academic testing. This report draws upon three sources of information about practices that support the integrity of test results: the opinions of experts and practitioners as expressed in the RFI responses, the comments and discussions from the Symposium, and, where available, policy manuals or professional standards published by SEAs and professional associations. The RFI and Symposium are part of a broader effort by the Department to identify and disseminate practices and policies to SEAs, LEAs, and the testing companies that can assist them in their continuing efforts to improve the validity and reliability of assessment results. As was the case with the RFI and the Symposium, this summary focuses on four areas related to testing integrity: (1) the prevention of irregularities in academic testing; (2) the detection and analysis of testing irregularities; (3) the response to an investigation of alleged and/or actual misconduct; and (4) testing integrity practices for technology-based assessments. Appended are: (1) Testing Integrity Symposium Panelist Biographies; and (2) Request for Information (RFI) Responses. (Contains 101 footnotes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (367K)

Descriptors:
Higher Education; Cheating; Campuses; Disclosure; Faculty; Ethics; Social Responsibility; Peer Influence; Peer Relationship; Models; Conflict; Behavior Standards; Social Behavior; Interpersonal Communication; Communication Research; Goal Orientation; Motivation; Identification; Decision Making; Gender Differences; Moral Values; Group Membership; Sex

Abstract:
Academic misconduct is a serious, pervasive, communication phenomenon on college campuses. In this study, the goals-plans-action model (Dillard, 1990) was used as a theoretical framework to investigate peer confrontation of cheating and whistle-blowing to a course instructor. In an experiment, participants were asked to respond to measures of primary and secondary goals, plans, explicit confrontation of a peer, and whistle-blowing. The primary goal and secondary goal predicted explicit confrontation. Whistle-blowing was predicted by either the primary goal and the affect management secondary goal (for same-group peers) or the personal resource secondary goal (for peers in other class groups). (Contains 5 tables and 3 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Information Security; Business Education; Electronic Learning; Content Analysis; Research Methodology; Databases; Integrity; Internet; Telecommunications; Handheld Devices; Management Development; Citations (References); Classification; Cheating; Advertising; Crime; Banking; Retailing; Marketing; Privacy

Abstract:
Research on the topic of cell phones has proliferated over the past decade. Based on a review of the literature, it appears that the majority of the extant research on the topic resides in the technology, education, and social sciences fields. Recent reviews indicate that the scope of the research on cell/mobile phones is eclectic in nature (Piotrowski & Kass, 2013). In the field of Education, the focus of research on this topic has a focus on high school students or adolescents. Although there is emergent research on cell phones related to college-age business students, a review of this body of knowledge has not been reported. Thus, the purpose of the present study is to conduct a bibliometric content analysis of research on cell phones related to business students indexed in the business-management literature. The database ABI/Inform was the database selected as this scholarly file has been identified as a major bibliographic source in business education. A keyword search located 114 references; of these, 107 were research articles which then served as the bibliographic pool for further analyses. Results, based on a content analysis typology, showed the following major topical areas of focus: Academic integrity (online cheating), business education, phone upgrades, mode of data collection in research, advertising, and online instruction. Noteworthy areas that are de-emphasized by researchers include: cybercrime, online piracy, company database breaches, and identity theft. Conclusions: with regard to cell/mobile phones, there seems to be a discrepancy between topics stressed in the media versus areas of research interest by academic investigators. (Contains 1 table.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (335K)

Descriptors:
Majors (Students); Cheating; Ethics; Biographies; Public Relations; College Students; Citations (References); Credibility; Standards; Student Attitudes; Peer Influence; Surveys; Teaching Methods

Abstract:
Students cheat. For the field of public relations, which continually struggles for credibility, the issue of student cheating should be paramount, as the unethical students of today become tomorrow's practitioners. Through a survey of 170 public relations majors, this study examined the importance students place on the Public Relations Society of America Code of Ethics, the extent to which they cheat, and the types of cheating behaviors in which they participate. Results of the study indicated cause for concern as close to 80 percent of students admitted to cheating. Moreover, the extent to which students cheated was significantly related to the number of their friends and close acquaintances whom they perceived as engaging in such behaviors. (Contains 2 tables and 48 notes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Social Psychology; Comparative Analysis; Student Role; Student Motivation; Cheating; Self Concept; Theories; Role Perception; Predictor Variables; Moral Values; Statistical Analysis

Abstract:
Within sociological-social psychology values are an emerging topic of substantive interest. Building on identity theory this study tests the relative salience of values versus role-identities as a predictor of a student's participation in academic dishonesty. This study finds that for a general population of students values are a significant predictor of cheating as compared to a role-identity. However, managing the data to isolate the salience of the student role-identity shows that the role-identity is a better predictor of academic dishonesty. What matters is the relative salience. This suggests that values are structured in terms of salience, similar to roles. (Contains 2 figures, 2 tables and 7 endnotes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Higher Education; Campuses; Physical Environment; Laboratories; Attitudes; School Community Relationship; Learner Engagement; Barriers; Cheating

Abstract:
Traditional college campuses need to capitalize more effectively on the facts that they are a physical presence within a natural environment; that their presence plays host to many people working and living together in myriad formal and informal communities; that those communities are driven by educational, philosophical, economic, and sociological factors; and that those factors can be analyzed, understood, argued about, performed, and represented through the lens of just about every discipline under the sun. In this article, the author discusses how the courses and teaching can capitalize more effectively on the benefits of a physical campus. He proposes a "grounded campus" and a "grounded curriculum"--a radical reimagining of the campus and the town as a laboratory for more and more experiments in teaching and learning. His proposal includes learning experiences in which students not only study, explore, and represent their grounded environments but also make changes in them. He is proposing that educators think of the campus as a laboratory in which they have the option to rebuild the lab itself if they so choose. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Foreign Countries; Altruism; Cooperation; Cheating; Memory; Attitudes; Expectation; Context Effect; Human Body; Recognition (Psychology); Visual Discrimination; Classification; Hypothesis Testing

Abstract:
A popular hypothesis in evolutionary psychology posits that reciprocal altruism is supported by a cognitive module that helps cooperative individuals to detect and remember cheaters. Consistent with this hypothesis, a source memory advantage for faces of cheaters (better memory for the cheating context in which these faces were encountered) was observed in previous studies. Here, we examined whether positive or negative expectancies would influence source memory for cheaters and cooperators. A cooperation task with virtual opponents was used in Experiments 1 and 2. Source memory for the emotionally incongruent information was enhanced relative to the congruent information: In Experiment 1, source memory was best for cheaters with likable faces and for cooperators with unlikable faces; in Experiment 2, source memory was better for smiling cheater faces than for smiling cooperator faces, and descriptively better for angry cooperator faces than for angry cheater faces. Experiments 3 and 4 showed that the emotional incongruity effect generalizes to 3rd-party reputational information (descriptions of cheating and trustworthy behavior). The results are inconsistent with the assumption of a highly specific cheater detection module. Focusing on expectancy-incongruent information may represent a more efficient, general, and hence more adaptive memory strategy for remembering exchange-relevant information than focusing only on cheaters. (Contains 7 figures and 3 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Cheating; Test Validity; Test Construction; Consortia; Handheld Devices; Telecommunications; Computers; Test Items; Item Banks; Testing; Educational Technology; Evaluation

Abstract:
Tony Alpert, chief operating officer for the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC), ponders whether to allow tablet computers--and particularly iPads--to be used for summative testing online. As Alpert points out, not only would student cheating compromise the validity of the individual student's test event, "worse yet, it could expose elements of the item bank which would be very expensive for the consortium and would compromise the validity of other students' tests." SBAC is one of the two consortia funded by the US Department of Education to manage the development of the next generation of assessments that will measure student progress in math and English and language arts. The other, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC), covers 25 million students in 23 states and the District of Columbia. Some states participate in both organizations. Apple publicly claims that 1,000 schools--both K-12 and higher ed--now have iPad programs in place, and more are coming online every month. So both SBAC and PARCC are considering the challenges of security, usability, and content that might arise when students are taking tests on tablet devices and discussing how these might be resolved. What they decide over the next two years may forge the profile of equipment purchases in schools for years to come. As more schools invest in student iPad programs, one question still unanswered is whether or not those devices can be used for the high-stakes online tests coming in 2014. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Influence of Technology; Video Games; Factor Analysis; Cheating; Problem Solving; Middle School Students; High School Students; Graduate Students; Undergraduate Students; Ethics; Educational Environment; Business; Preferences; Vignettes; Work Environment; Personality Traits; Student Behavior; Correlation; Student Surveys; Online Surveys

Abstract:
In this study, an online survey was utilized to investigate relationships among participants' willingness to cheat in academic or business settings and the strategies they tend to utilize in video game play. 113 participants completed the survey, and 86 students (23 middle school, 44 high school, 8 college undergraduate, and 11 graduate) yielded complete data. Participants were located throughout the United States, with the majority located in the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic states. The survey asked about participants' strategies and preferences in video game play, as well as their problem-solving strategies for homework and business scenarios. Categorical principal components analysis revealed factors that predict an individual will be more likely to cheat in academics or business. Those who were willing to cheat in school or the workplace tended to use similar problem-solving strategies in those two contexts, as well as in video game play. These were strategies to make problem-solving easier, and to bypass difficult tasks instead of working through them, as well as being more likely to give up when a task was difficult. This suggests that cheating behavior may be a pervasive approach that is more highly related to personality or habits than to any influence from video game play, though the strategies used in video games are reflective of the strategies used in other contexts. (Contains 2 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; Foreign Countries; Athletes; Team Sports; Sanctions; Cheating; Adapted Physical Education; Physical Activities; Attitudes toward Disabilities; Disability Identification; Disability Discrimination; Participation

Abstract:
Athletes with learning disabilities have had a difficult time being included in the Paralympics. They have faced a lot of discrimination, including from other disabled athletes, and just when they were finally included (at the Sydney games in 2000), the Spanish Basketball team cheated by having players on their team who did not have learning disabilities. This led to those with learning disabilities being banned from the games altogether. After 12 years of being left out, this year, in London 2012, athletes with learning disabilities were back in the games; they felt included, had a great time, and even won some medals! The blanket ban had been imposed, in 2000, after the games in Sydney, Australia, when Carlos Ribagorda, an undercover journalist competing in the Spanish Basketball team, wrote about how he and most of his colleagues did not have a learning disability. He alleged the Spanish Federation for Mentally Handicapped Sports had signed up nondisabled athletes in the quest for more medals. Ribagorda also claimed other Spanish competitors, in other sports, did not have a learning disability either. The incident was investigated; the president of the Federation resigned, and the gold medals were ordered to be returned in what was described as one of the "most outrageous sporting moments" in history. For the author, what followed was more outrageous, athletes with learning disabilities, through no fault of their own, were banned from the Paralympics. In this article, the author discusses these events with Tracey McCillen, the Chief Executive of the UK Sports Association for People with Learning Disability (UKSA). Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website