What is the student experience of remote proctoring? A pragmatic scoping review

IF 2.8 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY Pub Date : 2024-02-23 DOI:10.1111/hequ.12506
E. Marano, P. M. Newton, Z. Birch, M. Croombs, C. Gilbert, M. J. Draper
{"title":"What is the student experience of remote proctoring? A pragmatic scoping review","authors":"E. Marano,&nbsp;P. M. Newton,&nbsp;Z. Birch,&nbsp;M. Croombs,&nbsp;C. Gilbert,&nbsp;M. J. Draper","doi":"10.1111/hequ.12506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Remote or online proctoring (invigilating) is a technology primarily used to improve the integrity of online examinations. The use of remote proctoring increased significantly as the world switched to online assessment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Remote proctoring received negative media attention, including concerns about user privacy, discrimination and the accuracy of automated systems for detecting and reporting cheating. However, it is unclear whether these media concerns fully reflect the experiences of students. Online assessment offers a number of potential advantages to learners and education providers, and it seems likely that it is here to stay. It is essential to fully understand the learner experience of remote proctoring, with a view to ensuring it is as effective as possible while meeting the needs of all stakeholders, especially those being proctored. We undertook a scoping review of research into the student experience of online proctoring, with a pragmatic focus, aimed at developing guidance for higher education providers, based on the student experience. We reviewed primary research studies which evaluated the student experience of the use of remote proctoring for summative assessment in Higher Education. We used the Education Research Information Center database (ERIC) and Google Scholar. 21 papers were identified, from which the positives and negatives of the student experience were extracted, along with the main recommendations from the research. These were then synthesised into a series of summary recommendations by thematic analysis, by a team of researchers that included students and academic staff. We found that student experience was largely negative, influenced by concerns over privacy, technological challenges, fairness and stress. Recommendations were to include the student voice in decisions about how and why to use remote proctoring and limiting the use of remote proctoring. Working with students as partners and limiting the use of remote proctoring where possible, are key to ensuring a positive student experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":51607,"journal":{"name":"HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY","volume":"78 3","pages":"1031-1047"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hequ.12506","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hequ.12506","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Remote or online proctoring (invigilating) is a technology primarily used to improve the integrity of online examinations. The use of remote proctoring increased significantly as the world switched to online assessment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Remote proctoring received negative media attention, including concerns about user privacy, discrimination and the accuracy of automated systems for detecting and reporting cheating. However, it is unclear whether these media concerns fully reflect the experiences of students. Online assessment offers a number of potential advantages to learners and education providers, and it seems likely that it is here to stay. It is essential to fully understand the learner experience of remote proctoring, with a view to ensuring it is as effective as possible while meeting the needs of all stakeholders, especially those being proctored. We undertook a scoping review of research into the student experience of online proctoring, with a pragmatic focus, aimed at developing guidance for higher education providers, based on the student experience. We reviewed primary research studies which evaluated the student experience of the use of remote proctoring for summative assessment in Higher Education. We used the Education Research Information Center database (ERIC) and Google Scholar. 21 papers were identified, from which the positives and negatives of the student experience were extracted, along with the main recommendations from the research. These were then synthesised into a series of summary recommendations by thematic analysis, by a team of researchers that included students and academic staff. We found that student experience was largely negative, influenced by concerns over privacy, technological challenges, fairness and stress. Recommendations were to include the student voice in decisions about how and why to use remote proctoring and limiting the use of remote proctoring. Working with students as partners and limiting the use of remote proctoring where possible, are key to ensuring a positive student experience.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学生对远程监考的体验如何?务实的范围界定审查
远程或在线监考(监考)是一种主要用于提高在线考试完整性的技术。在 COVID-19 大流行期间,随着全球转向在线评估,远程监考的使用显著增加。远程监考受到了媒体的负面关注,包括对用户隐私、歧视以及自动系统检测和报告作弊的准确性的担忧。然而,目前还不清楚这些媒体关注是否充分反映了学生的经历。在线评估为学习者和教育提供者提供了许多潜在的优势,而且很有可能会持续下去。必须充分了解学习者在远程监考中的体验,以确保远程监考尽可能有效,同时满足所有利益相关者的需求,尤其是被监考者的需求。我们对学生在线监考体验的研究进行了一次范围界定审查,重点在于实用性,旨在根据学生的体验为高等教育机构提供指导。我们审查了对高等教育终结性评估中使用远程监考的学生体验进行评估的主要研究。我们使用了教育研究信息中心数据库(ERIC)和谷歌学术。确定了 21 篇论文,从中提取了学生体验的积极和消极因素,以及研究的主要建议。然后,一个由学生和教职员工组成的研究小组通过专题分析将这些内容归纳为一系列简要建议。我们发现,学生的体验主要是负面的,受到对隐私、技术挑战、公平性和压力等问题的影响。建议在决定如何以及为什么使用远程监考和限制使用远程监考时听取学生的意见。以合作伙伴的身份与学生合作,并尽可能限制使用远程监考,是确保学生获得积极体验的关键。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY
HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
9.10%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Higher Education Quarterly publishes articles concerned with policy, strategic management and ideas in higher education. A substantial part of its contents is concerned with reporting research findings in ways that bring out their relevance to senior managers and policy makers at institutional and national levels, and to academics who are not necessarily specialists in the academic study of higher education. Higher Education Quarterly also publishes papers that are not based on empirical research but give thoughtful academic analyses of significant policy, management or academic issues.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information The renovation of higher education in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Greater Bay Area Reclaiming & reasserting Third World womanhoods in U.S. higher education Exploring international students' perspectives on being ‘international’ International education hubs: A comparative study of China's Greater Bay Area and established hubs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1