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.
Subject
Computer Science Applications,Education
Reference40 articles.
1. Exploratory factor analysis of technostress among university students;International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development,2021
2. Future of education post covid-19 pandemic: reviewing changes in learning environments and latest trends;Solid State Technology,2020
3. Investigating characteristics of learning environments during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review;Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology,2022
4. Enhancing student-centered learning through introducing module for STEM development and assessment;International Journal of STEM Education for Sustainability,2023
5. Interaction of proctoring and student major on online test performance;The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning,2018
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献