Student acceptability of high-stakes e-assessment in dental education: using privacy screen filters to control cheating.

Acceptability is a required quality for a sound assessment. For students, acceptability of a test is strongly influenced by perception of fairness. Computer-based assessment has been reported to be preferred by students provided that strict controls to prevent cheating are in place. This may be difficult to achieve as e-assessments are often taken in learning environments where computer screens are close together. In this study, 138 Year 5 dental students completed an e-assessment followed by an onscreen post-assessment questionnaire about the acceptability, fairness, and effectiveness of using privacy screen filters installed in front of their monitors to prevent cheating. Ninety-one percent of students in this study considered that taking a summative e-assessment with privacy screen filters was acceptable, 86 percent expressed the view that filters contributed to a fairer test, and 54 percent reported the filters made it easier or did not make any difference to read the screen. In addition, 60 percent gave positive comments and feedback, mainly focused on prevention of cheating. These findings suggest that privacy filters, originally developed for data protection in banks, medicine, and business, have potential in e-assessment in higher education. They provide an effective way of hampering cheating and improve student acceptability and confidence in the fairness of computer-delivered assessments.

[1]  D. Shanahan,et al.  The academic environment: the students' perspective. , 2008, European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe.

[2]  R. Masella Renewing professionalism in dental education: overcoming the market environment. , 2007, Journal of dental education.

[3]  C. Bertolami Why our ethics curricula don't work. , 2004, Journal of dental education.

[4]  O. Harlem,et al.  TOMORROW'S DOCTORS , 1972 .

[5]  Reg Dennick,et al.  Online eAssessment: AMEE Guide No. 39 , 2009, Medical teacher.

[6]  J. Newton,et al.  The attitudes of dental students towards socially acceptable and unacceptable group working practices. , 2007, European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe.

[7]  P. McCoubrie Improving the fairness of multiple-choice questions: a literature review , 2004, Medical teacher.

[8]  S. Rennie,et al.  Are “tomorrow's doctors” honest? Questionnaire study exploring medical students' attitudes and reported behaviour on academic misconduct , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  Jean D.M. Underwood Rethinking the Digital Divide: Impacts on Student-Tutor Relationships. , 2007 .

[10]  Joanna Bull,et al.  The Mass Implementation and Evaluation of Computer‐based Assessments , 1998 .

[11]  Roy B. Clariana,et al.  Paper-based versus computer-based assessment: key factors associated with the test mode effect , 2002, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[12]  R. Duvivier,et al.  Criteria for good assessment: Consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference , 2011, Medical teacher.

[13]  Lambert Schuwirth,et al.  How to Design a useful Test: The Principles of Assessment , 2010 .

[14]  Rachel Ellaway,et al.  e-Learning in medical education Guide 32 Part 2: Technology, management and design , 2008, Medical teacher.

[15]  G. Norman,et al.  Pitfalls in the pursuit of objectivity: issues of validity, efficiency and acceptability , 1991, Medical education.

[16]  H. Fred Dishonesty in medicine revisited. , 2008, Texas Heart Institute journal.

[17]  N. Joseph,et al.  Academic dishonesty among undergraduates from private medical schools in India. Are we on the right track? , 2011, Medical teacher.

[18]  T. David,et al.  Unprofessional behaviour in medical students: A questionnaire-based pilot study comparing perceptions of the public with medical students and doctors , 2011, Medical teacher.

[19]  A. Teherani,et al.  Disciplinary action by medical boards and prior behavior in medical school. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  K. Masters,et al.  AMEE Guide 32: e-Learning in medical education Part 1: Learning, teaching and assessment , 2008, Medical teacher.

[21]  The level playing field: the impact of assessment practice on professional development , 2012, Medical education.

[22]  Joanna Bull,et al.  Quality assurance of computer‐assisted assessment: practical and strategic issues , 2000 .

[23]  Jean Underwood,et al.  Academic offences and e-learning: individual propensities in cheating , 2003, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[24]  G. Conole,et al.  A review of computer-assisted assessment , 2005 .

[25]  C. Stosch,et al.  Can computer-based assessment enhance the acceptance of formative multiple choice exams? A utility analysis , 2012, Medical teacher.

[26]  Tim Swanwick,et al.  Understanding Medical Education: Evidence, Theory and Practice, 1st edn , 2011 .

[27]  J. Rudland,et al.  Moving a formative test from a paper-based to a computer-based format. A student viewpoint , 2011, Medical teacher.

[28]  C. V. D. Vleuten,et al.  The assessment of professional competence: Developments, research and practical implications , 1996 .

[29]  Erle C H Lim,et al.  Computer-based versus pen-and-paper testing: students' perception. , 2006, Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore.

[30]  L W T Schuwirth,et al.  Selecting performance assessment methods for experienced physicians , 2002, Medical education.

[31]  Mary G Harper,et al.  High tech cheating. , 2006, Nurse education in practice.

[32]  M. J. Cox,et al.  University students' attainment and perceptions of computer delivered assessment; a comparison between computer-based and traditional tests in a 'high-stakes' examination , 2011, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..