An official website of the United States government
The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic changed the landscape of education and led to increased usage of remote proctoring tools that are designed to monitor students when they take assessments outside the classroom. While prior work has explored students' privacy and security concerns regarding online proctoring tools, the perspective of educators is under explored. Notably, educators are the decision makers in the classrooms and choose which remote proctoring services and the level of observations they deem appropriate. To explore how educators balance the security and privacy of their students with the requirements of remote exams, we sent survey requests to over 3,400 instructors at a large private university that taught online classes during the 2020/21 academic year. We had n=125 responses: 21% of the educators surveyed used online exam proctoring services during the remote learning period, and of those, 35% plan to continue using the tools even when there is a full return to in-person learning. Educators who use exam proctoring services are often comfortable with their monitoring capabilities. However, educators are concerned about students sharing certain types of information with exam proctoring companies, particularly when proctoring services collect identifiable information to validate students' identities. Our results suggest that many educators developed alternative assessments that did not require online proctoring and that those who did use online proctoring services often considered the tradeoffs between the potential risks to student privacy and the utility or necessity of exam proctoring services.
more »
« less
Students’ Perceptions of and Experience With Online Test Preparation (Rehearsal) and Testing
This study investigates students’ perceptions of rehearsal (test preparation) and testing after the pandemic forced increased online teaching use and experimentation. Data was gathered from information and decision sciences (IDS) students in an underrepresented minority (URM) serving university. Responses from 136 participants were analyzed and revealed four major findings. The single most interesting finding was that students, on average, preferred graded rehearsal activities over optional activities. Second, rehearsal activities were more important in online than face-to-face settings. Third, students overwhelmingly prefer online exams, on which they feel they perform better and which they find less anxiety-producing. Finally, despite research showing the importance of online proctoring for major defined-answer testing, instructor use of proctoring and monitoring is split between those who do and do not use concrete methods, with lockdown browser being common and live webcam less common. These interconnected findings are discussed.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2225206
- PAR ID:
- 10659048
- Publisher / Repository:
- IGI Global
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- International journal of adult education and technology
- ISSN:
- 2643-7996
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Due to ethical and practical concerns, no large representative randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes in fully online versus face-to-face courses have occurred. However, the circumstances presented by the COVID-19 pandemic created a unique opportunity to explore hypotheses about the relationship between the online course medium and course outcomes. The City University of New York (CUNY) was one of the first large U.S. public universities to shift all courses completely online. This study used a dataset consisting of all courses taken by students enrolled in either fall 2019 or spring 2020 at any of the two and four-year colleges of CUNY to determine whether taking online courses affect course completion rates. Findings show that both two- and four-year colleges, students were significantly less likely to successfully complete fully online than traditional mode courses. Moreover, within the same term, students were less likely to successfully complete courses that they originally chose to take fully online than in-person, regardless of whether those courses were then subsequently taught fully online or not. Students were also significantly more likely to take elective courses fully online and significantly more likely to take major requirements as traditional courses; they were roughly equally likely to take distributional requirements as fully online or traditional courses. Courses that were either elective or distributional requirements had significantly lower rates of successful completion than major requirement courses.more » « less
-
Video-based analysis of practice models have gained prominence in mathematics and science teacher education inservice professional learning. There is a growing body of evidence that these intensive professional learning (PL) models lead to positive impacts on teacher knowledge, classroom instructional practice, and student learning (Roth et al., 2018; Taylor et al., 2017), but they are expensive and difficult to sustain. An online version would have several benefits, allowing for greater reach to teachers and students across the country, but if online models were substantially less effective, then lower impacts would undercut the benefits of greater accessibility. We designed and studied a fully online version of the face-to-face Science Teachers Learning from Lesson Analysis (STeLLA) PL model (Roth, et al., 2011; Roth et al., 2018; Taylor et al., 2017). We conducted a quasi-experimental study comparing online STeLLA to face-to-face STeLLA. Although we found no significant difference in elementary student learning between the online and face-to-face versions ( p = .09), the effect size raises questions. Exploratory analyses suggest that the impact of online STeLLA on students is greater than the impact of a similar number of hours of traditional, face-to-face content deepening PL, but less than the impact of the full face-to-face STeLLA program. Differences in student populations, with higher percentages of students from racial and ethnic groups underserved by schools in the online STeLLA program, along with testing of the online STeLLA model during the pandemic, complicates interpretation of the findings.more » « less
-
Abstract Efforts to discourage academic misconduct in online learning environments frequently include the use of remote proctoring services. While these services are relatively commonplace in undergraduate science courses, there are open questions about students’ remote assessment environments and their concerns related to remote proctoring services. Using a survey distributed to 11 undergraduate science courses engaging in remote instruction at three American, public, research-focused institutions during the spring of 2021, we found that the majority of undergraduate students reported testing in suboptimal environments. Students’ concerns about remote proctoring services were closely tied to technological difficulties, fear of being wrongfully accused of cheating, and negative impacts on mental health. Our results suggest that remote proctoring services can create and perpetuate inequitable assessment environments for students, and additional research is required to understand the efficacy of their intended purpose to prevent cheating. We also advocate for continued conversations about the broader social and institutional conditions that can pressure students into cheating. While changes to academic culture are difficult, these conversations are necessary for higher education to remain relevant in an increasingly technological world.more » « less
-
In this Lessons Learned paper, we explore the themes uncovered from a series of facilitated faculty discussions on moving their course back to face to face teaching after the switch to online. The Institute at Anonymous University administrates over 100 faculty whose primary department appointments and teaching assignments are in either engineering or education. Over the last two years, the Institute hosted numerous conversations for faculty members to share experiences, research, and assessments of teaching successes and concerns as they changed instructional modalities, both with the initial move online and the subsequent move back face to face. From these conversations, faculty agree that some things during the move to online instruction, such as office hours, video archives of lectures, and some activities in break-out rooms appear to enhance student learning. Yet data showed that students believed the online experience was less desirable than face to face courses. Now that we have had a near complete semester where most classes were required to be held in the face to face mode, we are hosting conversations with faculty to understand the changes they are now making to their teaching because of the experiences from online instruction.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- The DOI is not currently available.
