Teaching at CC: Grading policies

[Porridge]

I'd love to pick the brain(s) of the wise Hive Mind.

I will be teaching a class at our local CC this fall. The course is part of the pathway for students pursuing fields like medical assistant, medical billing.

The outgoing instructor thinks there was a lot of cheating (online, asynch class - she worried her question banks had been copied or compromised over the years).

I've been thinking through whether it's possible to structure grading policies in a way that incentivizes learning and disincentivizes cheating.

I'm thinking of allowing the students unlimited (or multiple?) attempts on homework (I'm using Pearson Mastering, so have a bank of questions and activities). 

I'm also thinking of giving the students a chance to take the final exam twice, where I take the higher of the two grades. (Final will likely be mostly MCQ from Pearson's bank + a few short answer Qs. I was thinking of letting them do the MCQ portion up to 2 times.  I wasn't going to let them attempt the short answer portion more than once because I can't feasibly grade 2 sets of exams).

Again, the idea would be to lower the stakes so they're more inclined to study and learn, and less likely to feel they had to resort to cheating.

I'd love your input.

[regentrude]

I have been teaching college for 20+ years. My experience:

"Lowering the stakes" won't accomplish anything besides grade inflation. If they can retake their assignments,  they have no incentive to do it right the first time. It won't induce people to study.

The only thing I found to induce students to actually do the homework themselves is to have them reproduce their homework in class for a grade without their notes. Every other way of giving points for homework encourages copying, or in case of online systems, students will take turns figuring out the formula and taking the hit, and the others just plug in their set of numbers. 

It is futile to attempt to control cheating. Even in an in-person exam - the cheating tech is so good and cheap, with ear pieces the size of a grain of rice and cameras in buttons, that the proctor cannot detect when students cheat right in front of them.

My advice would be to focus your energy on teaching as well as you can, so those students who want to learn get a good experience,  and stop wasting energy trying to prevent cheating by the students who only care about an easy grade. It's an unwinnable arms race, and you'll make yourself miserable.

ETA: the best examination is an in-person oral exam. That won't fly in this country. It was the standard where I went to college, and you can't fake or cheat your way out of that. 

 

Edited August 31 by regentrude

[regentrude]

One policy I found helpful: I drop the lowest exam score out of four. This way, students can miss or mess up one exam without penalty. They just have to take the comprehensive final, and if they do better, the low score is dropped.

We create different exams each semester and don't reuse the same ones.

When I had to do online multiple choice exams during Covid, I created ten extremely similar but slightly different versions for each problem that were assigned at random. That way, consulting other students during the exam didn't help, because they would have had to inpect the problems closely to determine whether they have the same question. (And if they could pay attention to detail, they wouldn't need to cheat). It was a lot of work; I wrote 800 problems for my question bank.

Edited August 31 by regentrude

[EKS]

37 minutes ago, regentrude said:

My advice would be to focus your energy on teaching as well as you can, so those students who want to learn get a good experience,  and stop wasting energy trying to prevent cheating by the students who only care about an easy grade. It's an unwinnable arms race, and you'll make yourself miserable.

This, especially for an online course.

That said, a way to reduce cheating on math type exams (which is what my most recent experience is with) is to have tight time limits and the requirement to write out all work.  You can do this even if the exam is through the Pearson site.  Keep in mind that writing out the work can take a while, so time yourself doing it and then double that (at a minimum). 

[fairfarmhand]

6 minutes ago, EKS said:

This, especially for an online course.

That said, a way to reduce cheating on math type exams (which is what my most recent experience is with) is to have tight time limits and the requirement to write out all work.  You can do this even if the exam is through the Pearson site.  Keep in mind that writing out the work can take a while, so time yourself doing it and then double that (at a minimum). 

Yeah,  this was what my stats professor did. We had to submit our written work after every exam. 

[Arcadia]

2 hours ago, Porridge said:

I've been thinking through whether it's possible to structure grading policies in a way that incentivizes learning and disincentivizes cheating

The three CC classes I took that were hard to cheat had very few MCQs and majority personal assignments that people can ask for help for the technical aspects only. The finals is a personal assignment in the form of a business presentation for a computer science class and a portfolio for a fine arts class and a geography class. It is easy to cheat for MCQs as people can buy past year compilations from former students. It is harder to cheat for written assignments unless someone pay the same person to do all their assignments for them so that the writing style is the same.

Edited August 31 by Arcadia
typo

[chocolate-chip chooky]

59 minutes ago, regentrude said:

 

ETA: the best examination is an in-person oral exam. That won't fly in this country. It was the standard where I went to college, and you can't fake or cheat your way out of that. 

 

Yes, this. 

I work in higher ed, and this is what we do. One-on-one oral exam with an examiner. 

This is only manageable with smallish numbers of students sitting exams of course. 

[Bootsie]

IME multiple attempts on online questions enourages, rather than discourages, cheating.  Students take the quiz multiple times, simply guessing to see the questions.  They take pictures of the questions, quickly post them for other students, and then retake the quiz.  I have not found that students cheat because they are concerned they will not make a good grade if they don't; I have found that they cheat because they don't want to study/learn.  With most students I have taught, giving them two chances to take the final would not encouarge them to study for the first examination; it would encouarge them to just see if the exam was easy enough to pass the first time without much work.

[EKS]

1 hour ago, regentrude said:

the best examination is an in-person oral exam.

I forgot to mention that several of my instructors told us that if they had any suspicion of cheating they would require us to take an oral exam.

[Porridge]

So helpful! Thank you all!

These are valuable insights. I'm going to ditch the multiple-chances idea and probably let them drop the lowest chapter exam.

I also like the idea of saying that an in-person or oral exam may be required if there is suspicion for cheating.

I appreciate the insight to just focus on teaching well -- I don't have a lot of time to prep this course and you've given me "permission" not to sink time trying to address cheating but to focus on making a the best learning materials that I can.

 

Edited August 31 by Porridge

[fairfarmhand]

We had to go in person to the testing center for mid term and final exams for my online stats class last year. 

[ScoutTN]

3 hours ago, regentrude said:

I have been teaching college for 20+ years. My experience:

"Lowering the stakes" won't accomplish anything besides grade inflation. If they can retake their assignments,  they have no incentive to do it right the first time. It won't induce people to study.

The only thing I found to induce students to actually do the homework themselves is to have them reproduce their homework in class for a grade without their notes. Every other way of giving points for homework encourages copying, or in case of online systems, students will take turns figuring out the formula and taking the hit, and the others just plug in their set of numbers. 

It is futile to attempt to control cheating. Even in an in-person exam - the cheating tech is so good and cheap, with ear pieces the size of a grain of rice and cameras in buttons, that the proctor cannot detect when students cheat right in front of them.

My advice would be to focus your energy on teaching as well as you can, so those students who want to learn get a good experience,  and stop wasting energy trying to prevent cheating by the students who only care about an easy grade. It's an unwinnable arms race, and you'll make yourself miserable.

ETA: the best examination is an in-person oral exam. That won't fly in this country. It was the standard where I went to college, and you can't fake or cheat your way out of that. 

 

I had some oral exams in grad school and loved them. 

[Clemsondana]

I don't know if it will work for your subject, but I've learned over the past few years that AI is not yet good at filling in a crossword puzzle (I use them for vocab review).  It also doesn't seem able to fill in the blank (I write a paragraph leaving out some words, like '_______________ results in the formation of 2 cells while in ___________ 4 cells are produced.  Each of the 4 cells contains ___________ (give a number) of copies of the DNA.'  And, AI can't fill in a table.  So, instead of saying 'Give 1 similarity and 3 differences between mitosis and meiosis' I do the same thing as a table with columns for mitosis and meiosis and rows for similarities and differences.  I've always loved short answer questions instead of multiple choice or matching because it gives students a chance to showcase what they know with multiple different possible correct answers, but AI cheating is more common with open-ended questions so I'm reformulating and reformatting.  Whenever possible, I reference something in class like 'In last week's lab...' or We discussed 3 examples of...'.  

I've caught more than one cheater when their beautiful, graduate student-level answers for an open-ended question doesn't seem plausible when they leave completely blank charts about basic info, the kind I include so that struggling students get something correct. 

When my kid took asynchronous online CC classes, kid felt like cheating was probably common because it would have been so easy to do, and friends who took DE at the local high school confirmed this.  2 of the classes required tests (all 4 for one class, the midterm and final for another) to be taken at the testing center during a certain time frame.  Kid liked that, because the tests were more straightforward since the instructor wasn't worried about cheating as much.  

[Bootsie]

Be aware of what you can or cannot require if you suspect cheating at the school where you teach.  If it is an online, ansynchronous course, are you allowed to require an in-person exam?  Can you require student you suspect of cheating to come in for an in-person or oral exam?  Or, would you need to require all students to take an in-person or oral exam?  Would this replace an exam already given, or would it be the procedure you would implement for the next exam?  I have taught at schools where a professor who suspected cheating could implement penalties (which a retake eam under different cicrcumstances would be considered) and a student would have to appeal having those penalties implemented.  I have taught at other schools at which a professor must report a student who was suspected of cheating (and provide a suggested penalty), to a academic dishnesty officer who would decide whether the student was guilty and whether the penalty could be implemented.  

[regentrude]

16 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

Be aware of what you can or cannot require if you suspect cheating at the school where you teach.  If it is an online, ansynchronous course, are you allowed to require an in-person exam?  Can you require student you suspect of cheating to come in for an in-person or oral exam?  Or, would you need to require all students to take an in-person or oral exam?  Would this replace an exam already given, or would it be the procedure you would implement for the next exam?  I have taught at schools where a professor who suspected cheating could implement penalties (which a retake eam under different cicrcumstances would be considered) and a student would have to appeal having those penalties implemented.  I have taught at other schools at which a professor must report a student who was suspected of cheating (and provide a suggested penalty), to a academic dishnesty officer who would decide whether the student was guilty and whether the penalty could be implemented.  

I was going to come back and say something similar.
At my school, we can give a zero for that assignment if we have proof of cheating. We cannot impose penalties based on the suspicion of cheating. We must report the case to an office; what measures they take is not specified in any policies and will not be divulged to the instructor. For all I know, perhaps they make the student write "I shall not cheat" a hundred times - it's a black box. 

Edited August 31 by regentrude

[Laura Corin]

On 8/31/2024 at 3:05 AM, EKS said:

I forgot to mention that several of my instructors told us that if they had any suspicion of cheating they would require us to take an oral exam.

We do this also for Masters dissertations.  There are compulsory meetings with the supervisor throughout the writing process, which the student has to document with submitted reports. If there's any suspicion that there has  been undeclared help with the  final dissertation, we reserve the right to set a viva voce/oral exam.

[Ausmumof3]

On 8/31/2024 at 11:06 AM, EKS said:

This, especially for an online course.

That said, a way to reduce cheating on math type exams (which is what my most recent experience is with) is to have tight time limits and the requirement to write out all work.  You can do this even if the exam is through the Pearson site.  Keep in mind that writing out the work can take a while, so time yourself doing it and then double that (at a minimum). 

This would definitely hurt students like my DS who is a slow writer (I suspect maybe mild dysgraphia that has been hidden by one on one of homeschooling - lots of years of random capitalisation and letter inversions etc - still very untidy) and would be very difficult for many of my tutor students (although they mostly have diagnoses so you’d know they need accommodations) 

[Laura Corin]

29 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

This would definitely hurt students like my DS who is a slow writer (I suspect maybe mild dysgraphia that has been hidden by one on one of homeschooling - lots of years of random capitalisation and letter inversions etc - still very untidy) and would be very difficult for many of my tutor students (although they mostly have diagnoses so you’d know they need accommodations) 

At the university where I work,  maths tests are tightly timed and in person. As you say, people with disabilities get extra time in a separate room. Cheating is so rampant in online or 'just fill in the answers' tests that we have no choice.

The situation sucks, but the university does encourage people from the moment of application to get some kind of disability registration if they will need accommodations.

[Hannah]

On 8/31/2024 at 2:53 AM, regentrude said:

 

ETA: the best examination is an in-person oral exam. That won't fly in this country. It was the standard where I went to college, and you can't fake or cheat your way out of that. 

 

2 hours ago, Laura Corin said:

We do this also for Masters dissertations.  There are compulsory meetings with the supervisor throughout the writing process, which the student has to document with submitted reports. If there's any suspicion that there has  been undeclared help with the  final dissertation, we reserve the right to set a viva voce/oral exam.

My daughter just sat her oral exam with a panel of three examiners and a moderator last week. I'm not sure what the equivalent level is in the USA, but here its called an honours degree - 18 months after a 3 year bachelors.  There are 20 students in her class.

In the final year of bachelors there were up to 700 students in a course and after the pandemic all courses are back to in-person exams - with a combination of essay-type, fill-in-the blank, and multiple choice questions, depending on the course.  

[regentrude]

On 8/30/2024 at 8:36 PM, EKS said:

That said, a way to reduce cheating on math type exams (which is what my most recent experience is with) is to have tight time limits and the requirement to write out all work.  You can do this even if the exam is through the Pearson site.  Keep in mind that writing out the work can take a while, so time yourself doing it and then double that (at a minimum).

Then why bother with the online system at all and not simply have written exams? 

Our exams have fully worked-out problems. We grade students on procedure and not just obtaining the final answer. Yes, grading exams for 500 students sucks. But it's still the best system for assessing mastery (if orals aren't possible)

 

[EKS]

1 hour ago, regentrude said:

Then why bother with the online system at all and not simply have written exams? 

Probably because the work wasn't actually graded and was just used to confirm that the person could produce the work.  

1 hour ago, regentrude said:

Yes, grading exams for 500 students sucks.

In our case, there were only about 25 students, though some instructors were teaching more than one class.

[Porridge]

@Bootsie at least for this year, my mandate is to keep this course fully online and asynch. So I cannot mandate in person assessments. The outgoing prof did have a policy that a student under suspicion of cheating on an exam would have to come in for an in-person exam.  AFAIK she never invoked it. But you raise some important points - I don't actually know the CC's exact procedural polices for academic dishonesty. Adding that to my list of things to research...

[EKS]

8 hours ago, Ausmumof3 said:

This would definitely hurt students like my DS who is a slow writer (I suspect maybe mild dysgraphia that has been hidden by one on one of homeschooling - lots of years of random capitalisation and letter inversions etc - still very untidy) and would be very difficult for many of my tutor students (although they mostly have diagnoses so you’d know they need accommodations) 

Yes, I absolutely agree.  I'm not saying it is a wonderful solution, just that it makes it so you don't have as much time for cheating.

I had one calculus final where I knew the material cold (to the point that I was asked to be an undergraduate TA the following semester).  I was writing as fast as I could for the entire three hours, with no time to check anything.  If I had had to actually stop and think, I would not have finished.

[Bootsie]

4 hours ago, Porridge said:

@Bootsie at least for this year, my mandate is to keep this course fully online and asynch. So I cannot mandate in person assessments. The outgoing prof did have a policy that a student under suspicion of cheating on an exam would have to come in for an in-person exam.  AFAIK she never invoked it. But you raise some important points - I don't actually know the CC's exact procedural polices for academic dishonesty. Adding that to my list of things to research...

I think previously you said that the outgoing professor was suspicious that there was a good deal of cheating occuring,  If this professor had a policy that a student under suspicion of cheating would have to come in for an in-person exam, but this did not seem to be occurring, this can signal to students that the cheating will be tolerated.  Strong polices against cheating that are not enforced do not discourage cheating, and IME can even appear to to condone cheating.