IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/revage/v31y2009i3p640-652..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Final Exam Scores in Introductory Economics Courses: Effect of Course Delivery Method and Proctoring

Author

Listed:
  • Cheryl J. Wachenheim

Abstract

Student performances on the final exam in introductory economics courses taught online and in the classroom were compared to consider the effect of proctoring the final exam. Students who took a course in the classroom did better on a proctored final exam than those taking the course online. Students in an online class taking a nonproctored final exam online scored more than one full letter grade higher than those taking a proctored final.

Suggested Citation

  • Cheryl J. Wachenheim, 2009. "Final Exam Scores in Introductory Economics Courses: Effect of Course Delivery Method and Proctoring," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(3), pages 640-652.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:revage:v:31:y:2009:i:3:p:640-652.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-9353.2009.01458.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kurt Stephenson & Anya McGuirk & Tricia Zeh & Dixie Watts Reaves, 2005. "Comparisons of the Educational Value of Distance Delivered versus Traditional Classroom Instruction in Introductory Agricultural Economics," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 27(4), pages 605-620.
    2. Oskar R. Harmon & James Lambrinos, 2008. "Are Online Exams an Invitation to Cheat?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(2), pages 116-125, April.
    3. Byron W. Brown & Carl E. Liedholm, 2002. "Can Web Courses Replace the Classroom in Principles of Microeconomics?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 444-448, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wuthisatian, Rattaphon, 2020. "Student exam performance in different proctored environments: Evidence from an online economics course," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 35(C).
    2. Gerardo P. Sicat & Kristine Joy S. Briones, 2009. "Determinants of Student Performance in the Introductory Economics Course in UP," UP School of Economics Discussion Papers 200906, University of the Philippines School of Economics.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mary Mathewes Kassis, 2011. "Distance Education: Course Development and Strategies for Success," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 14, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Oskar R. Harmon & James Lambrinos, 2006. "Online Format vs. Live Mode of Instruction: Do Human Capital Differences or Differences in Returns to Human Capital Explain the Differences in Outcomes?," Working papers 2006-07, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    3. Hoque, Nazmul & Basher, Syed Abul & A.K. Enamul, Haque, 2022. "Do Students Perform Better in Online Delivery of Education? Evidence from Bangladesh," MPRA Paper 112981, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Wuthisatian, Rattaphon, 2020. "Student exam performance in different proctored environments: Evidence from an online economics course," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 35(C).
    5. Wen-Chi Liao, 2005. "Outsourcing, Inequality, and Cities," 2005 Meeting Papers 904, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    6. M Paula Cacault & Christian Hildebrand & Jérémy Laurent-Lucchetti & Michele Pellizzari, 2021. "Distance Learning in Higher Education: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment [A Randomized Assessment of Online Learning]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 2322-2372.
    7. Adel Ben Youssef & Ludovic Ragni, 2008. "Uses of Information and Communication Technologies in Europe's Higher Education Institutions: From Digital Divides to Digital Trajectories," Post-Print halshs-00937212, HAL.
    8. David Figlio & Mark Rush & Lu Yin, 2013. "Is It Live or Is It Internet? Experimental Estimates of the Effects of Online Instruction on Student Learning," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(4), pages 763-784.
    9. Li, Yi & Zhang, Wei & Wang, Pengfei, 2021. "Working online or offline: Which is more effective?," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    10. Eric P. Bettinger & Lindsay Fox & Susanna Loeb & Eric S. Taylor, 2017. "Virtual Classrooms: How Online College Courses Affect Student Success," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(9), pages 2855-2875, September.
    11. Joshua M. Duke & Titus O. Awokuse, 2009. "Assessing the Effect of Bilateral Collaborations on Learning Outcomes," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(2), pages 344-358, June.
    12. Coates, Dennis & Humphreys, Brad R. & Kane, John & Vachris, Michelle A., 2004. ""No significant distance" between face-to-face and online instruction: evidence from principles of economics," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 533-546, October.
    13. Duncan Watson & Louise Parker, 2016. "The hullaballoo over e-learning? Technology and pluralism in economics," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1159813-115, December.
    14. Cassandra DiRienzo & Gregory Lilly, 2014. "Online Versus Face-To-Face: Does Delivery Method Matter For Undergraduate Business School Learning?," Business Education and Accreditation, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 6(1), pages 1-11.
    15. Young, Jeffrey S., 2020. "No Honor Among Cheaters: A “Prisoner’s Dilemma” Approach to Reduce Cheating in Online Classes," Applied Economics Teaching Resources (AETR), Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 2(5), December.
    16. Hardt, David & Nagler, Markus & Rincke, Johannes, 2022. "Can peer mentoring improve online teaching effectiveness? An RCT during the COVID-19 pandemic," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    17. Vasiliki Brinia & Panagiotis Kavaliarakis, 2016. "Educational results from blended learning: Using an educational platform in teaching Economics," International Journal of Learning and Development, Macrothink Institute, vol. 6(1), pages 136-148, March.
    18. Mann, John T. & Henneberry, Shida Rastegari, 2012. "Undergraduate Students’ Preferences and Willingness to Pay for College Course Attributes," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124946, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Dench, Daniel & Joyce, Theodore, 2022. "Information and credible sanctions in curbing online cheating among undergraduates: A field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 408-427.
    20. Carl Sherwood & Do Won Kwak, 2017. "New insights into an old problem – enhancing student learning outcomes in an introductory statistics course," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(56), pages 5698-5708, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:revage:v:31:y:2009:i:3:p:640-652.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press or Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.