ABSTRACT

To slow the spread of COVID-19, many universities have had to move to online teaching, which entails changing exams from in-person to online. Online exams can facilitate cheating when there is no direct proctoring. To provide some form of control in unproctored exams, Cluskey et al. (2011) suggested having substantial time pressure; yet there are no clear recommendations on how to implement it. We conducted an experiment comparing three implementations of time pressure (individual allocation of time, equal time for each task, and time-based on task length) in a low-stakes educational sciences exam. Students differed in their answering strategies and objective performance but not in their evaluations of the different conditions. We suggest having equal time for each task to maximize students’ performance with minimal opportunities to cheat.

摘要

为了减缓 COVID-19 的传播，许多大学不得不转向在线教学，这需要将考试从面对面改为在线考试。在没有直接监考的情况下，在线考试可以促进作弊。为了在未经监督的考试中提供某种形式的控制，Cluskey 等人。(2011) 建议有很大的时间压力；然而，没有关于如何实施它的明确建议。我们进行了一项实验，比较了低风险教育科学考试中时间压力的三种实施方式（个人时间分配、每项任务的时间相同和基于任务长度的时间）。学生在回答策略和客观表现上存在差异，但在对不同条件的评价上没有差异。我们建议为每项任务分配相同的时间，以最大限度地提高学生的表现，同时尽量减少作弊机会。