Faculty perceptions regarding the extent to which the online course environment affects academic honesty
by Patnaude, Kathleen A., Ed.D., UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON, 2008, 133 pages; 3323556

Abstract:

The purpose of this study was to design and implement an instrument to measure faculty perceptions regarding the extent to which the online course environment affects academic honesty. Recent studies have indicated that academic dishonesty is a long-standing concern in higher education (Bolin, 2004; Chapman, Davis, Toy and Wright, 2004; Kennedy, Nowak and Raghuraman, 2000; Rowe, 2004) and distance education is a rapidly growing trend that is unlikely to decline in the near future. Research is mixed with some reporting that it will increase along with this rapid growth, (Baron and Crooks, 2005; Clement, 2001; Gibbons, 2002; Varvel, 2005) while others claim it does not impact online education (Grijalva, Nowell and Kerkvliet, 2006; Kelley and Bonner, 2005; Scanlon, 2003). The study described the design of an instrument in which exploratory principle component (PC) factor analysis was used to extract factors in order to determine useable items and establish reliability. The instrument was administered to a convenience sample of faculty members who teach online courses at the four campuses of the University of Houston (UH) System and 172 usable responses were collected.

The results indicated that two factors emerged: “faculty perceptions of the level of cheating in online courses” and “faculty perceptions of the frequency of acts of academic dishonesty”. A majority of the respondents believed that the online environment encouraged cheating, and the results from a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated that faculty who teach at a university that has an honor code, perceived that cheating in online courses was statistically significantly higher than faculty who teach at a university that does not have an honor code. Recommendations for the prevention of academic dishonesty online which include identity software and increased communication are discussed, and implications for future research include: increasing the sample size, creating additional survey items; and clarifying the difference between academic dishonesty policies and honor codes.

 
Advisor
SchoolUNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON
SourceDAI/A 69-07, p. , Oct 2008
Source TypeDissertation
SubjectsEducational technology; Curriculum development; Higher education
Publication Number3323556
Adobe PDF Access the complete dissertation:
 

» Find an electronic copy at your library.
  Use the link below to access a full citation record of this graduate work:
  http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl%3furl_ver=Z39.88-2004%26res_dat=xri:pqdiss%26rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation%26rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:3323556
  If your library subscribes to the ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) database, you may be entitled to a free electronic version of this graduate work. If not, you will have the option to purchase one, and access a 24 page preview for free (if available).

About ProQuest Dissertations & Theses
With over 2.3 million records, the ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) database is the most comprehensive collection of dissertations and theses in the world. It is the database of record for graduate research.

The database includes citations of graduate works ranging from the first U.S. dissertation, accepted in 1861, to those accepted as recently as last semester. Of the 2.3 million graduate works included in the database, ProQuest offers more than 1.9 million in full text formats. Of those, over 860,000 are available in PDF format. More than 60,000 dissertations and theses are added to the database each year.

If you have questions, please feel free to visit the ProQuest Web site - http://www.proquest.com - or call ProQuest Hotline Customer Support at 1-800-521-3042.