Online proctored exams: rhetoric vs reality

Abstract

Remote proctoring of exams is one of the most divisive issues in higher education. Critiques of remote proctoring abound, and there are a variety of perspectives particularly in relation to the advantages and disadvantages of this type of assessment, and opportunities for cheating. However, these perspectives are largely based on rhetoric with limited empirical data to support or refute the value of remote proctoring. This study used mixed-methods to investigate the experiences, and perceptions of cheating in open-book online proctored exams. An online questionnaire and interviews were conducted with students and academics. Data analysis revealed that the experience of online proctored exams was generally positive although there were mixed preferences for online versus on-campus exams. A variety of advantages and disadvantages of online proctored exams were also identified. Whilst both students and academics reported that they believed students would cheat, actual instances of cheating (as reported by students or academics) were minimal. This may have been because of the use of open-book exams. Based on these findings we comment on the reality versus the rhetoric relating to online proctored exams and suggest a range of ways forward for universities.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 17 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.