![\"A](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/ecampus.oregonstate.edu\/news\/assets\/note-taking-laptop.jpg?resize=744%2C419&ssl=1\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Until recently, when the COVID-19 pandemic caused the massive shift from on-campus to remote learning, there was little interest in online exam proctoring. Additionally, few resources were available on how to explore technology as a potential proctoring solution. However, online learning is here to stay (Capranos et al., 2022<\/a>) and the needs of institutions will vary.<\/p>\n Over the past 10 years at Oregon State University, I have worked with students, faculty and administrators on exam proctoring in higher education. I have also negotiated with proctoring vendors, led Oregon State Ecampus\u2019 transition to new proctoring practices<\/a> and consistently prioritized accessibility. Most recently, my focus has been on developing equitable online exam proctoring for diverse learners located around the world, facilitating\u00a0 approximately 50,000 exams in academic year 2022-2023.<\/p>\n Based on these years of experience, I created a framework for the process of examining technology as a potential proctoring solution \u2014 a framework that is focused on meeting students\u2019 needs. This article will help you identify the goals of your institution and provide a framework for analyzing proctoring tools.<\/p>\n Here are brief descriptions of the most common types of proctoring for online exams and how technology is often used with each of them.<\/p>\n Each type of proctoring could potentially use a lockdown browser, which is a technology that restricts a test-taker\u2019s ability to access other programs or navigate outside of the exam window during an exam session by ending an exam if that occurs.<\/p>\n Before diving into the world of technology solutions for online exam proctoring, consider these questions that can help you remain focused on the needs of your institution:<\/p>\n Your responses to these three questions can guide you as you begin to explore all of the technology available for proctoring online exams. For example, if you determine your major goal is to reduce costs for your students and increase affordability, you can quickly weed out options that either require students to pay or are over budget.<\/p>\n When exploring technology as a proctoring solution, some of the most important things to consider can be summarized as P.A.W.S. <\/strong>(P<\/strong>ricing models, A<\/strong>ccessibility, W<\/strong>orkflow\/integration, S<\/strong>upport\/customer service).<\/p>\n Pricing models are often separated into two main categories: institution-pay and student-pay. There is not one model that is guaranteed to work best for everyone, so determining what will work best for your students and your institution is key.<\/p>\n Keep in mind that using a student pay model increases the additional costs of education for students. If affordability is a top priority, I caution against using a student pay model without a thorough examination of how it could impact your students financially. It is important to consider the diverse needs of online learners who are typically older (Venable, 2022a<\/a>), balancing work, their education and family responsibilities (Aslanian et al., 2022<\/a>; Venable, 2022b<\/a>).<\/p>\n One solution could be to provide two options: a free proctoring technology option and a student-pay option, so students can choose which approved method will work best for them.<\/p>\n Many vendors will indicate that a product is accessible; however, the definition of accessibility differs across companies, geographic locations and industry standards. Additionally, one company\u2019s idea of an accessible product might not align with your institution\u2019s commitment to accessibility for students.<\/p>\n The following questions can be helpful to evaluate the accessibility of technology beyond minimum expectations.<\/p>\n Workflow\/integration for new technology can have both short-term and long-term effects on test-takers, faculty and staff, requiring a thorough examination when considering technology for proctoring solutions.<\/p>\n Consider the type of support each technology provider offers test-takers, faculty members, and staff members. For example, if you have asynchronous exams, support may be needed at different times than it would be for synchronous exams. Your test-takers and faculty members may both need 24\/7 access to support.<\/p>\n This framework is a starting point to assist you with analyzing the exam proctoring needs at your institution and assessing technology as a potential proctoring solution. I hope you will find these suggestions helpful as you consider how to explore technology as a proctoring solution for online exams.<\/p>\n Aslanian, C. B., Fischer, S., & Kitchell, R. (2022). Online college students report 2022. EducationDynamics. Capranos, D., Dyers, L., & Magda, A. J. (2022). Voice of the online learner 2022: Shifting preferences in post-pandemic online learning. Wiley University Services. https:\/\/universityservices.wiley.com\/voice-of-the-online-learner-2022<\/a><\/p>\n McEdwards, T. & Underhill, G.R. (2024). Online students\u2019 preferences for features and types of exam proctoring [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Ecampus, Oregon State University<\/p>\n Venable, M. A. (2022a). 2022 online education trends report. BestColleges.com.Types of proctoring<\/h2>\n
Automated proctoring<\/h3>\n
\n
Online proctoring<\/h3>\n
\n
In-person proctoring<\/h3>\n
\n
Know your goals<\/h2>\n
\n
P.A.W.S.<\/h2>\n
Pricing models<\/h3>\n
\n
Accessibility<\/h3>\n
\n
Workflow\/integration<\/h3>\n
\n
Support\/customer service<\/h3>\n
\n
\nReferences<\/h4>\n
\nhttps:\/\/insights.educationdynamics.com\/2022OnlineCollegeStudentsReport.html<\/a><\/p>\n
\nhttps:\/\/www.bestcolleges.com\/research\/annual-trends-in-online-education<\/a><\/p>\n