Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
As more institutions of higher learning expand their offerings of online courses, the use of online assessments has become an important topic of discussion. Although the use of online assessments can be very beneficial, instances of cheating in the absence of a proctor poses a cost in protecting academic integrity. This has led to the development of many proctoring solutions to address this challenge. This paper presents two field experiments used to analyze the effects of proctoring methods on exam scores: one involving a face-to-face class and the other involving an online class. Also, two proctoring methods were used: live proctors and web-based proctors. In each class, best practices were used to minimize cheating and students were informed in advance which exams were proctored. Our results show that students whose exams were not proctored scored over 11% higher on average than those whose exams were proctored. However, the results varied significantly: the use of live proctors in the face-to-face class had a much larger effect on test scores than web-based proctors in the online class. We compare variables affecting each testing environment to uncover possible determinants, including the ease of collaboration, test anxiety, and information sharing over the testing period.