| Abstract: | While enrollment in online courses has tripled in ten years, little is known about the impact of different exam-taking environments on learning. A recent study of economics students found that online students taking un-proctored exams scored one letter grade higher than online students taking proctored exams. However, there were no apparent systematic safeguards against cheating in the un-proctored section. This study adds to the literature by comparing student’s performance in online classes with proctored exams to the performance of online students in a carefully controlled online testing environment (Respondus Lockdown Browser RLB]). Methods: Data refer to 287 students enrolled in a criminology course at a Carnegie research-extensive university. The experimental group consisted of students in online sections who were called back to campus to take exams in a proctored environment. The control group took exams off campus using RLB. All sections were taught by the same instructor. The dependent variable is the score on the standardized final examination. The central independent variable is the type of exam environment: proctored vs. the RLB environment. Results: Controlling for other constructs, there was no significant difference between student exam scores in the proctored sections and the sections employing RLB. Conclusion: The results suggest that the judicious use of RLB can level the playing field between exam scores in proctored vs. nonproctored online sections. Technology such as RLB, which minimizes opportunities for cheating online, may provide tools for fairness in grading. Future work is needed for other courses, other fields, and other types of academic institutions. |
