American Journal of Educational Research
ISSN (Print): 2327-6126 ISSN (Online): 2327-6150 Website: http://www.sciepub.com/journal/education Editor-in-chief: Ratko Pavlović
Open Access
Journal Browser
Go
American Journal of Educational Research. 2015, 3(2), 255-258
DOI: 10.12691/education-3-2-20
Open AccessArticle

Online Testing: Comparison of Online and Classroom Exams in an Upper-Level Psychology Course

Sara A. Brallier1, , Kerry A. Schwanz2, Linda J. Palm2 and Laura N. Irwin2

1Department of Sociology, Coastal Carolina University, Conway, South Carolina, USA

2Department of Psychology, Coastal Carolina University, Conway, South Carolina, USA

Pub. Date: February 13, 2015

Cite this paper:
Sara A. Brallier, Kerry A. Schwanz, Linda J. Palm and Laura N. Irwin. Online Testing: Comparison of Online and Classroom Exams in an Upper-Level Psychology Course. American Journal of Educational Research. 2015; 3(2):255-258. doi: 10.12691/education-3-2-20

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare student performance on unproctored open book online exams to performance on traditional proctored paper and pencil exams. Data were collected over 12 semesters from students enrolled in a hybrid upper-level psychology course at a southeastern liberal arts university (N=274). In each semester the course was taught by the same instructor. During six semesters students completed the exams online and were allowed to use their textbook and notes; during the other six semester the students took the exams in the classroom, with the instructor present, and without access to their books and notes. Students scored significantly higher on the online exams compared to students who took the paper and pencil exams. Students who took the online exams scored significantly lower on the other course assignments compared to students who took the exams in the classroom. Additionally, students who took the online exams earned more As and Bs in the course than students who took the classroom exams. Implications for effectively incorporating online testing into a hybrid course are discussed.

Keywords:
hybrid courses online testing unproctored online exams

Creative CommonsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]  Alexander, M. W., Bartlett, J. E., Truell, A. D. and Ouwenga, K. “Testing in a computer technology course: An investigation of equivalency in performance between online and paper and pencil methods.” Journal of Career and Technical Education, 18. 69-80. Fall. 2001.
 
[2]  Bonham, S. “Reliability, compliance and security of web-based pre/post testing.” In Proceedings of 2006 Physics Education Research Conference, American Institute of Physics, 133-136. January. 2007.
 
[3]  Brallier, S.A., and Palm, L.J. “Proctored and unproctored test performance in traditional and distance courses.” International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, forthcoming, 2015.
 
[4]  Campbell, M., Floyd, J. and Sheridan, J.B. “Assessment of student performance and attitudes for courses taught online versus onsite.” The Journal of Applied Business Research, 18 (2). 45-51. March. 2002.
 
[5]  Carstairs, J. and Myors, B. “Internet testing: A natural experiment reveals test score inflation on a high-stakes, unproctored cognitive test.” Computers in Human Behavior, 25. 738-742. May. 2009.
 
[6]  Caufield, J. How to design and teach a hybrid course. Stylus Publishing, LLC, Sterling, Virginia, 2011.
 
[7]  DeSouza, E. and Fleming, M. “A comparison of in-class and online quizzes on student exam performance.” Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 14 (2). 121-134. Spring. 2003.
 
[8]  Escudier, M., Newton, T., Cox, M., Reynolds, P., and Odell, E. “University students' attainment and perceptions of computer delivered assessment; a comparison between computer-based and traditional tests in a 'high-stakes' examination.” Journal Of Computer Assisted Learning, 27 (5). 440-447. October. 2001.
 
[9]  Frein, S. “Comparing in-class and out-of class computer-based tests to traditional paper-and-pencil tests in introductory psychology courses.” Teaching of Psychology, 38 (4). 282-287. October. 2011.
 
[10]  Graham, J. M., Mogel, L. A., Brallier, S. A., and Palm, L. J. “Do you online?: The advantages and disadvantages of online education.” Bridges, 2. 27-36. Winter. 2008.
 
[11]  Harmon, O. R., and Lambrinos, J. “Are online exams an invitation to cheat?” Journal of Economic Education, 39 (2). 116-125. Spring. 2008.
 
[12]  Hollister, K. K., and Berenson, M. L. “Proctored versus unproctored online exams: Studying the impact of exam environment on student performance.” Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 7 (1). 271-294. March. 2009.
 
[13]  Khare, A., and Lam, H. “Assessing student achievement and progress with online examinations: Some pedagogical and technical issues.” International Journal on E- Learning, 7. 383-402. July. 2008.
 
[14]  Kinney, N. “A guide to design and testing in online psychology courses.” Psychology Learning and Teaching, 1 (1). 16-20. 2001.
 
[15]  Marks, D. “The Hybrid Course: Leaning Into the 21st Century.” Journal Of Technology Integration In The Classroom, 5 (1). 35-40. Spring. 2013.
 
[16]  Parsad, B., and Lewis, L. Distance Education at Postsecondary Institutions: 2006-07. First Look. NCES 2009-044. National Center For Education Statistics, Washington, D.C., 2008.
 
[17]  Rovai, A. P. “Online and traditional assessments: What is the difference?” The Internet and Higher Education, 3 (3). 141-151. 3rd Quarter. 2000.
 
[18]  Rowe, N. C. “Cheating in online student assessment: Beyond plagiarism”. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 7 (2). 1-10. Summer. 2004.
 
[19]  Schultz. M.C., Schultz, J.T., and Gallogly, J. “The management of testing in distance learning environments.” Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 4 (9). 19-26. September. 2007.
 
[20]  Stowell, J. D. & Bennett, D. “Effects of online testing on student exam performance and test anxiety.” Journal Of Educational Computing Research, 42 (2). 161-171. March. 2010.