远程教育考试中的监控方法与学生表现

IF 2.4 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS International Journal of Information and Learning Technology Pub Date : 2023-02-20 DOI:10.1108/ijilt-04-2022-0085
Martha Rodríguez-Villalobos, Jessica Fernandez-Garza, Yolanda Heredia-Escorza
{"title":"远程教育考试中的监控方法与学生表现","authors":"Martha Rodríguez-Villalobos, Jessica Fernandez-Garza, Yolanda Heredia-Escorza","doi":"10.1108/ijilt-04-2022-0085","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":51872,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Information and Learning Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Monitoring methods and student performance in distance education exams\",\"authors\":\"Martha Rodríguez-Villalobos, Jessica Fernandez-Garza, Yolanda Heredia-Escorza\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ijilt-04-2022-0085\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51872,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Information and Learning Technology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Information and Learning Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijilt-04-2022-0085\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Information and Learning Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijilt-04-2022-0085","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的本研究的目的是比较远程教育中三种不同的考试监控方法——非监考的远程或在线考试、传统的面对面监考和使用软件的远程监考——以分析监控考试的方法是否会影响成绩。设计/方法/方法该实验是在远程教育模式下的管理硕士课程的研究生阶段进行的,共有296名学生在三个学期内参加,其中期末考试的监测方法各不相同,其他变量保持不变。本研究采用了一种定量方法,分析了等级的分布;并测试了每种方法的等级。最后,使用多元线性回归模型和二分变量,量化了每种方法对学生学习成绩的影响。结果表明,远程监考的在线考试成绩比传统方法低7分。这一结果并不意味着远程监考条件下的分数较低是因为更好地坚持学术诚实,这可能是由于考试焦虑、技术干扰或其他一些因素,这些因素会混淆最终考试分数的有效性。实践意义研究结果表明,与传统方法相比,非监考式在线考试在四分方面有利于成绩的提高。社会含义作者得出结论,支持推荐非监考在线考试,这可以更接近于传统方法,而不是带有软件监控的远程应用程序。原创性/价值没有另一篇论文比较远程教育背景下的三种不同的考试监控方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Monitoring methods and student performance in distance education exams
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Information and Learning Technology
International Journal of Information and Learning Technology COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS-
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
3.30%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: International Journal of Information and Learning Technology (IJILT) provides a forum for the sharing of the latest theories, applications, and services related to planning, developing, managing, using, and evaluating information technologies in administrative, academic, and library computing, as well as other educational technologies. Submissions can include research: -Illustrating and critiquing educational technologies -New uses of technology in education -Issue-or results-focused case studies detailing examples of technology applications in higher education -In-depth analyses of the latest theories, applications and services in the field The journal provides wide-ranging and independent coverage of the management, use and integration of information resources and learning technologies.
期刊最新文献
Development of an Automated Hall Effect Experimentation Method for the Electrical Characterization of Thin Films Deteksi Tingkat Kematangan Buah Pinang Menggunakan Metode Support Vector Machine Berdasarkan Warna Dan Tekstur Analisis Kinerja Mikrokomputer Raspberry Pi Pada Smart Greenhouse Berbasis Internet Of Things (IoT) Menggunakan Algoritma Naive Baye SISTEM PENDUKUNG KEPUTUSAN PENENTUAN GURU BERPRESTASI MENGGUNAKAN METODE TOPSIS (STUDI KASUS: DINAS PPO KAB. TTU) Analisis Kepuasan Pengguna Terhadap Penerapan Sistem Informasi Terpadu Layanan Prodi (SIPLO) Menggunakan End User Computing Satisfaction (EUCS)
×
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