Remote versus on-site proctored exam: comparing student results in a cross-sectional study

被引:24
作者
Andreou, Vasiliki [1 ]
Peters, Sanne [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Eggermont, Jan [4 ]
Wens, Johan [5 ]
Schoenmakers, Birgitte [1 ]
机构
[1] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Dept Publ Hlth & Primacy Care, Acad Ctr Gen Practice, Kapucijnenvoer 7,Box 7001, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
[2] EBMPracticeNet, Evidence Based Practice, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
[3] Univ Melbourne, Fac Med Dent & Hlth Sci, Sch Hlth Sci, Melbourne, Vic 3800, Australia
[4] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Dept Cellular & Mol Med, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
[5] Univ Antwerp, Ctr Gen Practice Family Med, Dept Primary & Interdisciplinary Care, B-2610 Antwerp, Belgium
关键词
General practice; Medical education; Summative evaluation; Online assessment; Remote proctoring; ONLINE EXAMS; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1186/s12909-021-03068-x
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Background The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected assessment practices in medical education necessitating distancing from the traditional classroom. However, safeguarding academic integrity is of particular importance for high-stakes medical exams. We utilised remote proctoring to administer safely and reliably a proficiency-test for admission to the Advanced Master of General Practice (AMGP). We compared exam results of the remote proctored exam group to those of the on-site proctored exam group. Methods A cross-sectional design was adopted with candidates applying for admission to the AMGP. We developed and applied a proctoring software operating on three levels to register suspicious events: recording actions, analysing behaviour, and live supervision. We performed a Mann-Whitney U test to compare exam results from the remote proctored to the on-site proctored group. To get more insight into candidates' perceptions about proctoring, a post-test questionnaire was administered. An exploratory factor analysis was performed to explore quantitative data, while qualitative data were thematically analysed. Results In total, 472 (79%) candidates took the proficiency-test using the proctoring software, while 121 (20%) were on-site with live supervision. The results indicated that the proctoring type does not influence exam results. Out of 472 candidates, 304 filled in the post-test questionnaire. Two factors were extracted from the analysis and identified as candidates' appreciation of proctoring and as emotional distress because of proctoring. Four themes were identified in the thematic analysis providing more insight on candidates' emotional well-being. Conclusions A comparison of exam results revealed that remote proctoring could be a viable solution for administering high-stakes medical exams. With regards to candidates' educational experience, remote proctoring was met with mixed feelings. Potential privacy issues and increased test anxiety should be taken into consideration when choosing a proctoring protocol. Future research should explore generalizability of these results utilising other proctoring systems in medical education and in other educational settings.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 29 条
  • [1] Proficiency testing for identifying underperforming students before postgraduate education: a longitudinal study
    Andreou, Vasiliki
    Eggermont, Jan
    Gielis, Guy
    Schoenmakers, Birgitte
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2020, 20 (01)
  • [2] Berkey D., 2015, CHEATING STUDENT AUT
  • [3] Implementing remotely proctored testing in nursing education
    Castano, Marinela
    Noeller, Connie
    Sharma, Rajrani
    [J]. TEACHING AND LEARNING IN NURSING, 2021, 16 (02) : 156 - 161
  • [4] Thematic analysis
    Clarke, Victoria
    Braun, Virginia
    [J]. JOURNAL OF POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2017, 12 (03) : 297 - 298
  • [5] Costello Anna B., 2005, PRACTICAL ASSESSMENT, V10, P7, DOI [10.7275/jyj1-4868, DOI 10.7275/JYJ1-4868]
  • [6] Comparing Student Performance on Proctored and Non-Proctored Exams in Online Psychology Courses
    Daffin, Lee William, Jr.
    Jones, Ashley A.
    [J]. ONLINE LEARNING, 2018, 22 (01): : 131 - 145
  • [7] Cheating in online courses: Evidence from online proctoring
    Dendir, Seife
    Maxwell, R. Stockton
    [J]. COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR REPORTS, 2020, 2
  • [8] Dunn T.P., 2010, International Journal of Technology, Knowledge Society, V6, P1, DOI [10.18848/1832-3669/CGP/v06i01/56033, DOI 10.18848/1832-3669/CGP/V06I01/56033]
  • [9] Field A., 2018, Discovering Statistics Using SPSS, V5th ed.
  • [10] Remote proctored exams: Integrity assurance in online education?
    Gudino Paredes, Sandra
    Jasso Pena, Felipe de Jesus
    de La Fuente Alcazar, Juana Maria
    [J]. DISTANCE EDUCATION, 2021, 42 (02) : 200 - 218