As online test-taking becomes increasingly normal at colleges across the country, academics worry that un-proctored online exams will make it easier for students to cheat.

These fears are backed by the results of a recent study focused on cheating, published in this fall’s edition of the Journal of Distance Learning. It concluded that courses that rely upon un-proctored multiple-choice exams are at a higher risk of student dishonesty than a similar test administered by a proctor face-to-face.

According to a 2008 study conducted by I. Elaine Allen and Jeff Seaman, academic technology researchers from Babson College, the number of students enrolled in at least one online course increased by 46 percent from 2002 to 2007. This indication that online instruction is here to stay makes the issue of cheating in these courses all the more important

For University of Massachusetts students, this is particularly relevant, as many of the school’s on-campus courses now contain an online portion. Whether it is Owl, Spark or an external learning environment provided by the textbook, online education is now an integral part of the UMass academic experience.

The opportunity for cheating created by online testing is not being overlooked by professors here.

Professor Robert Moll teaches Computer Science 121, Introduction to Problem Solving with Computers – a class that could be almost entirely completed out-of-the-classroom if the student desires. The class has optional twice-weekly lectures and a discussion section, but the textbook, homework assignments and midterms are all online, without guidance.  The one exception to this trend is the in-class final, which must be completed in-person by each student at the end of the semester.

According to Moll, this is the control factor for the course.

“If you don’t pass the final, you don’t pass the class,” he said.

He believes this to be an effective deterrent to cheating because it takes the pressure off of TA’s to catch cheaters while grading the large volume of online work throughout the semester. When asked his opinion on students cheating in his class, Moll said, “You’d have to be a fool to take this class not to learn it.”

He feels confident that any student that did not complete the assigned work over the semester would not be able to receive a passing grade on the final.

Many students on-campus seem to believe that cheating is not a fair choice. Ben Ficociello, sophomore psychology major summed the issue up well, when he said, “I think everybody has a small inclination to cheat to varying degrees.  The question is: Do you compromise your moral integrity to save your grade?”

There are some students who can able to handle this moral dilemma, putting their grades above their conscience. One University student who wished to remain unnamed said, “I have acted on my urges to cheat before. Though I usually only do it if I am really worried about the assignment.”

Cameron MacKeen, a physics major, stated, “Have I cheated in college? No. When you are presented with an opportunity to work in a group, it is called being resourceful.” He continued, “It is not like the theory of General Relativity just [expletive deleted] dawned on Einstein, to be human is to collaborate.”

Responses such as these leave some wondering weather or not online work is an effective method of learning.

Moll contested that it is, saying, “Lectures are overrated. Everything you learn, you learn by yourself, regardless of weather it’s in class or online.”

Zach Weishar can be reached at [email protected].