Cited by 61Academic integrity and plagiarismOnline Learning and AnalyticsAuthorship Attribution and Profiling

Using Learning Analytics for Preserving Academic Integrity

Open access
Amigud, Alexander, Arnedo-Moreno, Joan, Daradoumis, Thanasis, Guerrero-Roldan, Ana-Elena·2017·The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning

Abstract

This paper presents the results of integrating learning analytics into the assessment process to enhance academic integrity in the e-learning environment. The goal of this research is to evaluate the computational-based approach to academic integrity. The machine-learning based framework learns students’ patterns of language use from data, providing an accessible and non-invasive validation of student identities and student-produced content. To assess the performance of the proposed approach, we conducted a series of experiments using written assignments of graduate students. The proposed method yielded a mean accuracy of 93%, exceeding the baseline of human performance that yielded a mean accuracy rate of 12%. The results suggest a promising potential for developing automated tools that promote accountability and simplify the provision of academic integrity in the e-learning environment.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.3103

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Amigud et al. (2017) used machine learning algorithms to check academic integrity, by assessing the likelihood of student work being similar to their other work.

    “Amigud, Arnedo-Moreno, Daradoumis, and Guerrero-Roldan (2017) used machine learning algorithms to check academic integrity, by assessing the likelihood of student work being similar to their other work.”

    From Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? (2019) · cites this paper as Amigud, Arnedo-Moreno, Daradoumis, and Guerrero-Roldan (2017)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Amigud, A., Arnedo-Moreno, J., Daradoumis, T., & Guerrero-Roldan, A.-E.
Affiliations
Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (ES)
Venue
The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning
Published
2017-08-15
Volume
18
Issue
5
ISSN
1492-3831 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2747279489
Cited by
61
References
44
Citations by year
2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 5
FWCI
11.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Érudit (Université de Montréal) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • The Oberta in Open Access (Universitat Oberta de Catalunya) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RECERCAT (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Authorship Attribution and Profiling
Keywords
learning analytics, academic integrity, online learning, student identity verification, student-generated content, language use patterns, machine learning, writing assignments, graduate students, academic accountability

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