The Management Of Testing In Distance Learning Environments

Schultz, Marian C.; Schultz, James T.; Gallogly, James

doi:10.19030/tlc.v4i9.1543

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Carstairs and Myors [5] also reported a significant difference in performance on proctored and unproctored exams in a lecture-based upper-level psychology course, with students scoring an average of five points higher on an unproctored exam than on a proctored paper and pencil exam. Schultz, Schultz, and Gallogly [19] had comparable findings; they examined performance of students in distance marketing, management, and accounting classes on proctored paper and pencil exams and unproctored online exams and found that students performed three to four points higher on the unproctored exams.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…As a result, students often complete online exams outside of the classroom without supervision and therefore with access to their course textbook and notes. A primary concern regarding unsupervised online exams is that exam results will be inflated if students are allowed to consult course materials, each other, or other resources [5,11,19,17]. There has not been a great deal of research examining the effects of allowing students to use their notes or other resources during unproctored online exams compared to proctored in-class exams where students cannot access notes, books and other resources.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Online Testing: Comparison of Online and Classroom Exams in an Upper-Level Psychology Course

Brallier¹,

Schwanz²,

Palm³

et al. 2015

EDUCATION

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to compare student performance on unproctored open book online exams to performance on traditional proctored paper and pencil exams. Data were collected over 12 semesters from students enrolled in a hybrid upper-level psychology course at a southeastern liberal arts university (N=274). In each semester the course was taught by the same instructor. During six semesters students completed the exams online and were allowed to use their textbook and notes; during the other six semester the students took the exams in the classroom, with the instructor present, and without access to their books and notes. Students scored significantly higher on the online exams compared to students who took the paper and pencil exams. Students who took the online exams scored significantly lower on the other course assignments compared to students who took the exams in the classroom. Additionally, students who took the online exams earned more As and Bs in the course than students who took the classroom exams. Implications for effectively incorporating online testing into a hybrid course are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Online Testing: Comparison of Online and Classroom Exams in an Upper-Level Psychology Course

Brallier¹,

Schwanz²,

Palm³

et al. 2015

EDUCATION

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies have been carried out with the belief that the absence of monitoring in the NPR method increases the probability of cheating, which produces higher grades than the PFTF method; however, no consensus has been reached. Ardid et al (2015), Brallier and Palm (2015), Carstairs and Myors (2009), Fask et al (2014), Harmon and Lambrinos (2008) and Schultz et al (2007) find that there are significant statistical differences in grades, while Beck (2014), Hollister and Berenson (2009) and Stuber-McEwen et al (2009) do not find any differences. Recently, some studies have compared the NPR method to the RP method, for which various tools have been used.…”

Section: Monitoring Methods and Student Performancementioning

confidence: 88%

“…(2015), Brallier and Palm (2015), Carstairs and Myors (2009), Fask et al . (2014), Harmon and Lambrinos (2008) and Schultz et al . (2007) find that there are significant statistical differences in grades, while Beck (2014), Hollister and Berenson (2009) and Stuber-McEwen et al .…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 94%

Monitoring methods and student performance in distance education exams

Rodríguez-Villalobos

Fernandez-Garza

Escorza

2023

IJILT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe objective of this study was to compare three distinct methods of test monitoring in the context of distance education—non-proctored remote or online tests, traditional face-to-face proctored tests and remotely proctored tests using software—to analyze if the method in which tests are monitored influences the obtained grades.Design/methodology/approachThe experiment was carried out at the postgraduate level in the Master's Degree in Administration program in the modality of distance education, with a total of 296 students during three terms wherein the monitoring method of the final exam varied, keeping the other variables constant. This study used a quantitative method in which the distribution of grades was analyzed; and the grades from each method were tested. Finally, using a multiple linear regression model with dichotomous variables, the impact on students' academic performance with each method was quantified.FindingsThe results indicated that the remotely proctored online test grades were seven points lower with respect to the traditional method. This result does not mean that the lower scores in the remote proctored condition were due to better adherence to academic honesty, maybe this could be due to test anxiety, technology interference or a number of other factors that would confound the validity of the final test score.Practical implicationsThe results indicated that the non-proctored online test favored the grade in four points with respect to the traditional method.Social implicationsThe authors conclude to support recommending non-proctored online test, this can be a closer substitute to the traditional method than remote application with software monitoring.Originality/valueNot exist another paper to compare three distinct methods of test monitoring in the context of distance education.

show abstract

“…However, there are mixed findings in terms of student performance in online-proctored exams. Schultz et al (2007) in their study reported that students who took the non-proctored online exams performed significantly higher than did those in the proctored settings. Similarly, Alessio et al (2017), Richardson and North (2013), Wellman and Marcinkiewicz (2004) and Carstairs and Myors (2009) reported the same findings with non-proctored test scores being significantly better than proctored test scores in their respective studies.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 89%

An Evaluation of Online Proctoring Tools

Hussein¹,

Yusuf²,

Deb³

et al. 2020

Open Praxis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

COVID’19 is hastening the adoption of online learning and teaching worldwide, and across all levels of education. While many of the typical learning and teaching transactions such as lecturing and communicating are easily handled by contemporary online learning technologies, others, such as assessment of learning outcomes with closed book examinations are fraught with challenges. Among other issues to do with students and teachers, these challenges have to do with the ability of teachers and educational organizations to ensure academic integrity in the absence of a live proctor when an examination is being taken remotely and from a private location. A number of online proctoring tools are appearing on the market that portend to offer solutions to some of the major challenges. But for the moment, they too remain untried and tested on any large scale. This includes the cost of the service and their technical requirements. This paper reports on one of the first attempts to properly evaluate a selection of these tools and offer recommendations for educational institutions. This investigation, which was carried out at the University of the South Pacific, comprised a four-phased approach, starting with desk research that was followed with pilot testing by a group of experts as well as students. The elimination of a tool in every phase was based on the ‘survival of the fittest’ approach with each phase building upon the milestones and deliverables from the previous phase. This paper presents the results of this investigation and discusses its key findings.

show abstract

The Management Of Testing In Distance Learning Environments

Abstract: ABSTRACT

Cited by 5 publications

References 2 publications

Online Testing: Comparison of Online and Classroom Exams in an Upper-Level Psychology Course

Online Testing: Comparison of Online and Classroom Exams in an Upper-Level Psychology Course

Monitoring methods and student performance in distance education exams

An Evaluation of Online Proctoring Tools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About