For this brief research report, I want
to focus on two specific topics: (1) How to Prepare Instructors for Quality
Online Instruction; and (2) How to Discourage Academic Dishonesty in the Online
Environment.
There are many ways instructors can
prepare themselves for quality online instruction. Yi Yang, a Ph.D. candidate
at Mississippi State University, outlines several effective qualities for
effective online instruction. With a growing number of courses offered online
and degrees offered through the Internet, there is a considerable interest in
concerns and problems associated with online education, particularly as it
relates to the quality of online instruction (Allen & Seaman, 2003).
According to Twigg (2001) many problems that arise from online education as it
relates to quality include, but is not limited to: (a) the requirement of
separate quality assurance standards, (b) programs having low (or no) quality
standards, and (c) there being no consensus on what constitutes learning
quality (Yang para. 6-7).
While arguments have been made in
opposition to online education, there are proponents who are in support of this
mode of instruction. They suggest that the lack of face-to-face interaction can
be substituted by online discussions in bulletin board systems, online video
conferences or on listservs (Blake, 2000). Online education can also promote
students' critical thinking skills, deep learning, collaborative learning, and
problem-solving skills (Ascough, 2002; Rosie, 2000). Donlevy (2003) asserted
that online education may help schools expand curricula offerings with less
cost and can help graduates gain important technology skills to improve their
marketability. Proponents also argue that online education can encourage
non-discriminatory teaching and learning practices since the teachers and
students, as well as students and their classmates typically do not meet
face-to-face. Palloff and Pratt (1999) have concluded that because students
cannot tell the race, gender, physical characteristics of each other and their
teachers, online education presents a bias-free teaching and learning
environment for instructors and students (Yang para 11-12).
Alley
and Jansak (2001) have also identified 10 keys to quality online learning. The
authors suggested that online courses will be high quality when they are
student-centered and when:
·
Knowledge is constructed, not
transmitted.
·
Students can take full
responsibility for their own learning.
·
Students are motivated to want to
learn.
·
The course provides “mental white
space” for reflection.
·
Learning activities appropriately
match student learning styles.
·
Experiential, active learning
augments the Web site learning environment,
·
Solitary and interpersonal learning
activities are interspersed.
·
Inaccurate prior learning is
identified and corrected.
·
“Spiral learning” provides for
revisiting and expanding prior lessons,
·
The master teacher is able to guide
the overall learning process. (Yang, para 13)
Finally, to ensure the
quality of online instruction, the qualification of the instructors should be a
first consideration. Since the preparation of instructors is also paramount,
those who teach online courses should understand what their roles are and
adjust their attitudes for this role change. Second, it is important for
instructors to master, design, and delivery strategies, techniques, and methods
for teaching online courses. Third, the institution should provide technical
and financial support for faculty. Fourth, school administrators should also
realize what their role and responsibilities are in ensuring quality online
instruction. Critical to this process, administrators should recruit qualified
faculty or instructors for their online education programs (Yang para 16).
The second issue I would like to address in this
research report is preventing academic dishonesty in online classes. One of the
more pervasive issues that an educator faces is the "age-old concerns
about ethical practices in assessment (i.e., cheating)" (Abbott, Siskovic,
Nogues, and Williams 2000). In fact, recent studies are indicative that
academic dishonesty is on the rise (Niels). For example, McMurtry (2001) cites
a 1998 survey from Who’s Who Among American High School Students which
reported that out of 3,123 students, 80 percent of them "admitted to
cheating on an exam, a 10-point increase since the question was first asked 15
years ago" (Bushweller 1999). Furthermore, 50 percent of them "did
not believe cheating was necessarily wrong," and 95 percent of those who
had cheated "said they had never been caught" (Kleiner and Lord
1999). Such statistics clearly indicate the pervasiveness of cheating in our
schools (Olt para 2).
In Classroom Assessment: Concepts
and Application, Airasian presents a partial list (adapted from Cizek 1999)
of ways in which students cheat. Below is Airasian’s list:
1.
Looking at another pupil’s test
paper during a test.
2.
Dropping ones paper so that other
pupils can cheat off it.
3.
Dropping one’s paper and having
another pupil pick it up, cheat from it, and re-drop the paper so the original
dropper can reclaim his or her paper.
4.
Passing an eraser between two pupils
who write test information on the eraser.
5.
Developing codes such as tapping the
floor three times to indicate that a multiple-choice item should be answered
"C."
6.
Looking at pupils’ papers while
walking up to the teacher to ask a question about the test.
7.
Using crib notes or small pieces of
paper to cheat. Crib notes can be hidden in many ingenious places.
8.
Switching scratch paper-often
allowed by teachers during tests-with one’s own scratch paper that contains
test answers.
9.
Writing test information on the
desktop and erasing it after the test; a variation is to write information in
allowed reference or textbook pages prior to the test and use the information
during the exam.
10. Wearing a tee-shirt with useful test information written on
it.
11. Changing answers when teachers allow pupils to grade each
other’s papers.
12. Using resources forbidden by the teacher in take-home tests
or work.
Most of
these techniques are indeed foreign to most instructors! Here are the
strategies for minimizing academic dishonesty that Olt suggests:
1.
The
first strategy for minimizing academic dishonesty in online student assessments
is to acknowledge the disadvantages, and find ways to overcome them;
2.
A
second strategy for minimizing academic dishonesty in online student assessment
is to take the necessary time to design effective online assessments;
3.
According
to Van Belle (n.d.), a third strategy to reduce academic dishonesty is to
rotate the curriculum by assigning original assignments and readings, or even
considering alternative, project-based assessments which require creativity.
Obviously, the less frequently instructors modify assignments and assessments,
the easier it becomes for students to share graded papers from previous
semesters;
4.
A
final strategy to minimize academic dishonesty is to provide students with an
academic integrity/dishonesty policy. According to McMurtry (2001), instructors
should take the necessary time to discuss their academic policy with their
students. Unfortunately, a recent study reveals that few instructors take up
the topic of academic integrity/dishonesty with their students. In Dirks (1998,
p. 18), only "15 percent of the syllabi collected had academic policies in
them."
A big part of being a successful
instructor involves being aware of some important strategies for effective
online instruction as well as providing a positive learning environment for
students. Part of this challenge involves learning to prevent, or at least
minimize, academic dishonesty in our college classes.
