CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 10Academic integrity and plagiarismEducation during COVID-19 pandemicOnline and Blended Learning

Promoting Academic Integrity and Student Learning in Online Biology Courses

Open access
Hsu, Jeremy L.·2021·Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
DOI 10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2291PMC PMC8012047
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused an abrupt shift in biology courses, with many transitioning to online instruction. This has led to an increased concern about academic integrity and cheating in online courses.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2291

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The absence of observed increased cheating supports the notion that students are more focused on genuine collaboration during collaborative exams rather than searching for easy answers.

    “However, although we did not actively investigate the occurrence of academic dishonesty, we also did not observe any evidence of increased cheating, which supports the notion that students are more focused on genuine collaboration during collaborative exams rather than searching for easy answers (Hsu, 2021;Rieger & Heiner, 2014).”

    From Active learning through flexible collaborative exams: Improving assessments across disciplines (2026) · cites this paper as Hsu, 2021

    In “Structure assessments carefully” (page unavailable), Hsu says two-stage exams allow group collaboration and suggests students might cheat less when they know they will have a chance to collaborate. Hsu also says they know of no work examining cheating in two-stage exams; the paper does not report an observed lack of increased cheating or establish that students favor genuine collaboration over easy answers. The citing authors’ observation is their own, not Hsu’s. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The literature suggests that even during open-book two-stage exams, students discuss the exam rather than search for answers.

    “While one might think students could use the easing of instructor oversight to search for solutions using outside resources during an asynchronous collaborative exam, the literature suggests that even during open-book two-stage exams, students discuss the exam rather than search for answers (Hsu, 2021;Rieger & Heiner, 2014).”

    From Active learning through flexible collaborative exams: Improving assessments across disciplines (2026) · cites this paper as Hsu, 2021

    In “Structure assessments carefully” (page unavailable), Hsu says two-stage exams allow group collaboration but knows of no work examining their effect on cheating. The open-book-exams section suggests that open-book formats may reduce use of unauthorized resources, but does not report whether students discuss exam questions rather than search for answers. Neither passage establishes the attributed comparison. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 50

  1. [1]Guarracino DA 2020 Creative adjustments to an undergraduate chemical biology course from research-based in-person to all-remote education during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic J Chem Educ 97 2742 2748 10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00719 · DOI
  2. [2]Lord L Chioda D 1995 A look at student cheating in college science classes J Sci Educ Technol 4 317 324 10.1007/BF02211263 · DOI
  3. [4]Gilmore J Maher M Feldon D 2015 Prevalence, prevention, and pedagogical techniques: academic integrity and ethical professional practice among STEM students 729 748 Bretag T Handbook of Academic Integrity Springer
  4. [8]Kisamore JL Stone TH Jawahar IM 2007 Academic integrity: the relationship between individual and situational factors on misconduct contemplations J Bus Ethics 75 381 394 10.1007/s10551-006-9260-9 · DOI
  5. [9]Raje S Stitzel S 2020 Strategies for effective assessments while ensuring academic integrity in general chemistry courses during COVID-19 J Chem Educ 97 3436 3440 10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00797 · DOI
  6. [11]Nguyen JG Keuseman KJ Humston JJ 2020 Minimize online cheating for online assessments during COVID-19 pandemic J Chem Educ 97 3429 3435 10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00790 · DOI
  7. [13]Lancaster T Clarke R 2015 Contract cheating: the outsourcing of assessed student work 639 654 Bretag T Handbook of Academic Integrity Springer
  8. [14]Seeland J Stoesz BM Vogt L 2020 Preventing online shopping for completed assessments: protecting students by blocking access to contract cheating websites on institutional networks Cdn Persp Acad Integr 3 1 10.11575/cpai.v3i1.70256 · DOI
  9. [16]Durning SJ Dong T Ratcliffe T Schuwirth L Artino AR Boulet JR Eva K 2016 Comparing open-book and closed-book examinations: a systematic review Acad Med 91 4 583 599 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000977 26535862 · DOI
  10. [17]Agarwal PK Karpicke JD Kang SHK Roediger HL McDermott KB 2007 Examining the testing effect with open- and closed-book tests Appl Cogn Psychol 22 861 876 10.1002/acp.1391 · DOI
  11. [20]Phillips G 2008 Using open-book tests to strengthen the study skills of community-college biology students J Adolesc Adult Literacy 49 574 582 10.1598/JAAL.49.7.3 · DOI
  12. [21]Sato BK He W Warschauer M Kadandale P 2015 The grass isn’t always greener: perceptions of and performance on open-note exams CBE Life Sci Educ 14 2 ar11 10.1187/cbe.14-08-0121 25828402 PMC4477727 · DOI
  13. [22]Del Carlo DI Bodner G 2006 Dishonesty in the biochemistry classroom laboratory: a synthesis of causes and prevention Biochem Mol Biol Educ 34 338 342 10.1002/bmb.2006.494034052657 21638711 · DOI
  14. [23]Del Carlo DI Bodner G 2003 Student perceptions of academic dishonesty in the chemistry classroom laboratory J Res Sci Teach 41 47 64 10.1002/tea.10124 · DOI
  15. [24]Smith KC Sepulveda A 2018 Students’ perceptions of common practices, including some academically dishonest practices, in the undergraduate general chemistry classroom laboratory Chem Educ Res Pract 19 1142 1150 10.1039/C8RP00058A · DOI
  16. [25]Rigano DL Ritchie SM 1995 Student disclosures of fraudulent practice in school laboratories Res Sci Educ 25 353 363 10.1007/BF02357382 · DOI
  17. [28]Grinell F Dalley S Shepherd K Reisch J 2017 High school science fair and research integrity PLOS One 10.1371/journal.pone.0174252 PMC5362261 28328976 · DOI
  18. [29]Allen PJ Lourenco A Roberts LD 2015 Detecting duplication in students’ research data: a method and illustration J Ethics Behav 26 4 300 311 10.1080/10508422.2015.1019070 · DOI
  19. [30]Mazzaro D Page S Del Carlo D 2006 High school students’ perceptions of their laboratory classroom and the copying of laboratory work J Chem Educ 83 9 1362 10.1021/ed083p1362 · DOI
  20. [31]Brownell SE Kloser MJ 2015 Toward a conceptual framework for measuring the effectiveness of course-based undergraduate research experiences in undergraduate biology J Stud High Educ 40 3 525 544 10.1080/03075079.2015.1004234 · DOI
  21. [33]Anderman EM Koenka AC 2017 The relation between academic motivation and cheating J Theory Pract 56 95 102 10.1080/00405841.2017.1308172 · DOI · Paper page
  22. [34]Putarek V Pavlin-Bernardic N 2020 The role of self-efficacy for self-regulated learning, achievement goals, and engagement in academic cheating Eur J Psychol Educ 35 647 671 10.1007/s10212-019-00443-7 · DOI
  23. [36]Tas Y Tekkaya C 2010 Personal and contextual factors associated with students’ cheating in science J Exp Educ 78 440 463 10.1080/00220970903548046 · DOI
  24. [37]Cavanaugh AJ Chen X Bathgate M Frederick J Hanauer DI Graham MJ 2018 Trust, growth mindset, and student commitment to active learning in a college science course CBE Life Sci Educ 17 1 ar10 10.1187/cbe.17-06-0107 29378750 PMC6007784 · DOI
  25. [38]Whitley BE 1998 Factors associated with cheating among college students: a review Res High Educ 39 235 274 10.1023/A:1018724900565 · DOI · Paper page
  26. [39]Schraw G Olafson L Kuch F Lehman T Lehman S McCrudden MT 2007 Interest and academic cheating 59 77 Anderman EM Murdock TB Psychology of Academic Cheating Academic Press 10.1016/B978-012372541-7/50005-X · DOI
  27. [40]Steger D Schroeders U Wilhelm O 2020 Caught in the act: predicting cheating in unproctored knowledge assessment Assessment 1 14 10.1177/1073191120914970 32354221 · DOI
  28. [41]Putwain D 2008 Do examinations stakes moderate the test anxiety-examination performance relationship? J Educ Psychol 28 2 109 118 10.1080/01443410701452264 · DOI
  29. [42]Cotner S Ballen CJ 2017 Can mixed assessment methods make biology classes more equitable? PLOS One 12 e0189610 10.1371/journal.pone.0189610 29281676 PMC5744948 · DOI
  30. [43]Freeman S Haak D Wenderoth MP 2011 Increased course structure improves performance in introductory biology CBE Life Sci Educ 10 175 186 10.1187/cbe.10-08-0105 21633066 PMC3105924 · DOI · Paper page
  31. [44]Armbruster P Patel M Johnson E Weiss M 2009 Active learning and student-centered pedagogy improve student attitudes and performance in introductory biology CBE Life Sci Educ 8 203 213 10.1187/cbe.09-03-0025 19723815 PMC2736024 · DOI
  32. [46]Jensen JL McDaniel MA Woodard SM Kummer TA 2014 Teaching to the test…or testing to teach: exams requiring higher order thinking skills encourage greater conceptual understanding Educ Psychol Rev 26 307 329 10.1007/s10648-013-9248-9 · DOI
  33. [47]Handelsman J Miller S Pfund C 2007 Scientific Teaching MacMillan 19039122
  34. [48]Momsen JL Long TM Wyse SA Ebert-May D 2010 Just the facts? Introductory undergraduate biology courses focus on low-level cognitive skills CBE Life Sci Educ 9 435 440 10.1187/cbe.10-01-0001 21123690 PMC2995761 · DOI
  35. [49]Smith AC Stewart R Shields P Hayes-Klosteridis J Robinson P Yuan R 2005 Introductory biology courses: a framework to support active learning in large-enrollment introductory science courses CBE Life Sci Educ 4 143 156 10.1187/cbe.04-08-0048 PMC1103716 15917873 · DOI
  36. [50]Freeman S O’Connor E Parks JW Cunningham M Hurley D Haak D Dirks C Wenderoth MP 2007 Prescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology CBE Life Sci Educ 6 132 139 10.1187/cbe.06-09-0194 17548875 PMC1885904 · DOI · Paper page
  37. [51]Freeman S Eddy SL McDonough M Smith MK Okoroafor N Jordt H Wenderoth MP 2014 Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111 8410 8415 10.1073/pnas.1319030111 24821756 PMC4060654 · DOI · Paper page
  38. [53]Ueckert C Adams A Lock J 2011 Redesigning a large-enrollment introductory biology course CBE Life Sci Educ 10 164 174 10.1187/cbe.10-10-0129 21633065 PMC3105923 · DOI
  39. [54]Haak DC HilleRisLambers J Pitre E Freeman S 2011 Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology Science 332 1213 1216 10.1126/science.1204820 21636776 · DOI · Paper page
  40. [55]Chao KJ Hung IC Chen NS 2011 On the design of online synchronous assessments in a synchronous cyber classroom J Comp Assist Learn 28 379 395 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00463.x · DOI
  41. [56]Metz AM 2008 The effect of access time on online quiz performance in large biology lecture courses Biochem Mol Biol Educ 36 196 202 10.1002/bmb.20184 21591191 · DOI
  42. [57]Chen B West M Zilles C 2019 Analyzing the decline of student scores over time in self-scheduled asynchronous exams J Engineer Educ 108 574 594 10.1002/jee.20292 · DOI
  43. [58]Silver M West M Zilles C 2020 Measuring the score advantage on asynchronous exams in an undergraduate CS course 873 879 SIGCSE ’20: Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
  44. [59]Khong ML Tanner JA 2020 A collaborative two-stage examination in biomedical sciences: positive impact on feedback and peer collaboration Biochem Mol Biol Educ doi/10.1002/bmb.21392 32604475 · DOI
  45. [60]Cooke JE Weir L Clarkston B 2019 Retention following two-stage collaborative exams depends on timing and student performance CBE Life Sci Educ 18 2 ar12 10.1187/cbe.17-07-0137 31008674 PMC6755206 · DOI
  46. [61]Spear JA Miller AN 2012 The effects of instructor fear appeals and moral appeals on cheating-related attitudes and behavior of university students Ethics Behav 22 196 207 10.1080/10508422.2012.659603 · DOI
  47. [62]Tatum H Schwartz BM 2017 Honor codes: evidence-based strategies for improving academic integrity J Theory Pract 56 129 135 10.1080/00405841.2017.1308175 · DOI
  48. [63]Yang A Stockwell S McDonnell L 2019 Writing in your own voice: an intervention that reduces plagiarism and common writing problems in students’ scientific writing Biochem Mol Biol Educ 47 589 598 10.1002/bmb.21282 31225935 · DOI
  49. [65]Hylton K Levy Y Dringus LP 2016 Utilizing webcam-based proctoring to deter misconduct in online exams Comput Educ 92–93 53 63 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.002 · DOI
  50. [70]Hsu JL Goldsmith G 2021 Instructor strategies to alleviate student stress and anxiety among college and university STEM students CBE Life Sci Educ 20 1 10.1187/cbe.20-08-0189 33635124 PMC8108494 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hsu, J. L.
Affiliations
Chapman University (US)
Corresponding author
Hsu, Jeremy L.
ORCID
Hsu, Jeremy L.
Venue
Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
Publisher
American Society for Microbiology
Published
2021-04-30
Volume
22
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 1935-7877 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-7885
DOI
10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2291
PMC
PMC8012047
OpenAlex
W3154366062
Cited by
10
References
3
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1
FWCI
2.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Chapman University Digital Commons (Chapman University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Chapman University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education during COVID-19 pandemic
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
Keywords
academic integrity, cheating, online learning, COVID-19 pandemic, biology laboratory courses, student learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review