Contract cheating and assessment design: exploring the relationship

By Tracey Bretag, Rowena Harper, M. Burton, Cath Ellis, P. Newton, K. van Haeringen, S. Saddiqui, Pearl Rozenberg. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 2018

133 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract This paper reports on findings from a large Australian research project that explored the relationship between contract cheating and assessment design. Using survey responses from 14,086 students and 1147 educators at eight universities, a multivariate analysis examined the influence of a range of factors on the likelihood that different assessment types would prompt considerations of contract cheating in students. Perceptions of likelihood were highest among students who speak a language other than English at home. Perceptions of likelihood were also higher among students who reported there to be lots of opportunities to cheat, and amongst students who were dissatisfied with the teaching and learning environment. Perceptions of likelihood for certain assessment types were also higher in commerce and engineering than in any other discipline. Overall, four assessment types were perceived by students to be the least likely to be outsourced, however these are also the least likely to be set by educators. The analysis indicates that educators are more likely to use these assessment tasks when they report positively on organisational support for teaching and learning.

Subfields: Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/774a19a5fef24400bdc9967cef281cde8aff8462

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Safety Research

1. Rowena Harper
2. K. van Haeringen
3. Cath Ellis
4. Pearl Rozenberg
5. P. Newton
6. Tracey Bretag
7. S. Saddiqui

Citations in the corpus

• Cheating in e-exams and paper exams: the perceptions of engineering students and teachers in Norway (2020, unknown): “…in e-assessment during assignments submission (Wilkinson 2009; Owunwanne, Rustagi, and Dada 2010; Kocdar et al. 2018; Zhang, Yin, and Zheng 2018; Bretag et al. 2019), and on frequency of cheating and attitude towards cheating in examinations (De Lambert, Ellen, and Taylor 2006; Colnerud and…”
• Does authentic assessment assure academic integrity? Evidence from contract cheating data (2020, background): “As has been previously reported, at least two thirds of the students who procure work from others for the purpose of submitting it as their own ultimately go on to do so (Bretag et al., 2018).”