By: Nestor B. Querido, Supervisor, CUOL
The advent of online learning in higher education is a key part of the 21st century learning experience. It is a period of change for many academic institutions, since access to education is now more competitive, open and global. The rise of MOOCs and the appeal of online courses offered [by the ranking academic institutions] to the global community are evident all over the realm of academia. In particular, the trend in which online learning seems to be heading impels the growth of various academic technology tools designed to assist in the learning and administration of the ‘global’ students.
Not surprisingly, a considerable proportion of students nowadays are more inclined toward taking online courses because of the expediency and the convenience that they offer. Many of them see this as effective solutions to meeting the demands of their personal, family and work commitments. This is where the need arises to integrate suitable technology that supports online learning and mitigates the ever-growing demands for online courses. Consequently, many institutions are trying to catch up to be in the forefront on this paradigm shift.
In my line of work, we deal with online students, and while there are good percentages that are on campus, many of them are distance learners. Proctoring their exams, particularly those that reside abroad or in remote areas of the country, has been challenging. Hence, maintaining the integrity of exams becomes even more essential and a primary concern for all three constituents: the university, the instructors and the administrators.
I’ll be talking more about all these three constituents later, but for now, my focus is on a technology that we are piloting this fall term. It is called Live Online Proctoring (LOP). This is a step forward to the current practice that we do for our ‘global’ students, the proctored secure-pdf exams.
Live Online Proctoring started in 2008, and since then almost 500 institutions in the U.S. and worldwide have implemented it. As far as I know, the post-secondary institutions in Canada in different stages of engaging with LOP include the University of Toronto, Memorial University, Royal Roads University and Wilfrid Laurier University, as well as a number of colleges. The feedback that I have received provided positive reviews and testimonials of the service.
We’ll be following suit with five different courses piloting this innovative proctoring service. International students will be proctored by a company based in Toronto and Atlanta. Remote-proctoring services rely on the same technology that has made it possible for people to earn college degrees without having to report to a campus.
How it works
Using his or her own computer and webcam, the student can take exams at home, at work, or anywhere they have internet access. LOP allows exam takers to complete their exam anywhere while still ensuring the integrity of the exam for the institution.
- The student will connect with a live proctor from one of the online proctoring centres in Toronto via web cam. The proctor will help the student through the exam processes—they are there to help if technical difficulties arise.
- The student then will connect his or her computer screen to the proctor. This allows the proctor to see the student’s screen and enables the proctor to assist with the setup before the start of the exam.
- The proctor will ask the student to show two photo IDs, preferably one Carleton ID. The proctor will then take a photo of student. Further authentication is necessary and the proctor will ask the student to answer a few questions. These questions are generated from the information we provide.
When the online exam begins, the proctor (ratio 1:4) watches the students throughout the entire duration of the exam and records any movements, sounds, keystrokes, etc. The proctor also has control of the student’s computer and can stop the exam if he or she notices any irregularities. An example from a Chronicle of Higher Education article on the subject mentioned tracking irregular eye movement— “one student attached a sticky note below the webcam, but a proctor caught him glancing up at the note and made him hold a mirror up to the screen. Busted.”
Understandably, there are concerns that LOP is insecure, that the integrity of the exam is compromised, and the authentication process is not trustworthy, factual or reliable. To dispel these concerns, I have further investigated and have considered these facts:
Pros
- A ratio of 1:4 as opposed to 1:50
- It is recorded instead of merely glancing at the student in the exam room
- The professor can review any incidents on video
- The proctor has control over the student’s computer. This is better than individual distance proctor
- Online exams are created through cuLearn, our own portal
- Proctoring of the proctors. Proctors are also monitored
- LOP seems more stringent than anything that takes place in a large lecture hall on test day. It takes the time and goes to these lengths to validate a test taker – not true in a room of 100+ students
Cons
- It’s invasive
- The proctors’ qualifications (I have requested documentation on the qualifications of their proctors)
- Authentication – a student could fool the proctor with fake ID
- There is the possibility that a proctor might try to collude with a test-taker to cheat, or jot down the content of a particular exam with the intention of selling it to future students taking the same course
- Proctors who work from home are liable to get distracted
Would this technology meet our criteria for proper invigilation? Reports from other institutions are positive, but we’ll have to be on the lookout. Appropriate invigilation requires finding the right balance among the constituents. The needs of the students, the [accessibility] requirements of legitimate proctors, and the university’s prescribed invigilation policies have to be met.
First, we need to look at the needs of the students. When the shipping cost of an exam exceeded the course fee, we were prompted to find better ways to invigilate our distance students. As a step forward, we have implemented proctored secure PDF exams [password protected]. This currently meets our standard for proctoring our ‘global’ students. We know the exam is closely guarded. At present, this is the best way to our knowledge to preserving the integrity of the exam for distance students.
Second, the concerns of our faculty members must be in the forefront. I will give a specific detailed example. At the CUOL’s AGM on Aug. 29, we proposed a pilot project on Live Online Proctoring (LOP). There were three questions that were asked, specifically:
- How does the proctor address a power outage during an online exam? What is the proper protocol for handling this situation?
- What’s the procedure if a student asks for a washroom break during an online exam?
- If you allow a washroom break (which you really must, given how our bodies work), how do you guard against cheating?
Getting the answers to these questions provides some assurance to our faculty members (all answers are quoted from the exam proctor provider, except for one, as indicated).
- A power outage for the student less than 5 minutes long is automatically reconnected to their proctor when they get their internet back. Beyond 5 minutes they will need to call and reschedule.In a power outage for the proctor, the student is automatically reassigned to another available proctor, and in most cases the student doesn’t even realize this. Once the original proctor is back up, the student is transferred back.
- Have or conduct a 2-part exam; after completing the first part, have a washroom break and then resume by releasing the second part of the exam (suggested by an internal staff). You have to make the call on Bio-breaks. We enter a “yes” or “no” in our scheduler as to allowing it or not. It is specific to the exam, so if you have some profs who allow it and some that don’t, we can accommodate.
- We are aligned on the policy for cheating. We send the professor an exception notification via email that we suspect a student is cheating. The professor can contact us for a copy of the video and make that determination themselves. This way the exam is completed and the decision is left in the hands of the professor after they review the video files. We do a room scan when they return. You will have to make the decision to allow or not allow breaks though. Also, if your testing center has a policy today on bio breaks, we should try to use that.
And finally, we have to be heedful at the set of rules and regulations the university has given us. Whatever solutions we come up with, they must conform to the university’s requirements and adhere to the policies that are put in place.
Because the infrastructure for LOP has greatly improved, the old biases against online proctoring are diminishing and the companies that offer remote-proctoring services are now facing acceptance from many universities. Many however still feel that proctoring should be entrusted to legitimate proctors (physically present) to preserve the integrity of the exams and should not be entrusted to online proctors who are often thousands of miles from the students. This is a legitimate concern. So, we’ll install a series of protocols aimed at making LOP as airtight as possible.
Early on in my blog I mentioned the importance of using appropriate technology in academics is paramount. For years now, since 2008, LOP has been extensively used by universities and colleges in the US and worldwide. Certainly, five or six years ago, there was a big debate about whether online proctoring was ready for academic institutions. We can continue to debate this, but today I want to share with you another indication that in terms of the future, and with the advent of MOOCs, that I think we will see LOP infrastructure unfold. And then many of our doubts and uncertainties will disappear. For now I am equally mindful that finding solutions to these concerns is important, as is ensuring that we always keep the important set of values we observed when we proctored our distance students.
Concerns, myths and uncertainties aside, we’re thrilled to be incorporating Live Online Proctoring into our CUOL curriculum this fall. For more information on the service or if you have any questions, please email me at nestor.querido@carleton.ca.