Vol. 36 No. 1 (2021)
Research Articles

Video Surveillance of Online Exam Proctoring: Exam Anxiety and Student Performance

Daniel Woldeab
Metropolitan State University, Twin Cities, MN, USA
Bio
Thomas Brothen
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, MN, USA
Bio
Published July 16, 2021
How to Cite
Woldeab, D., & Brothen, T. (2021). Video Surveillance of Online Exam Proctoring: Exam Anxiety and Student Performance . International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education / Revue Internationale Du E-Learning Et La Formation à Distance, 36(1). Retrieved from http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/1204

Abstract

Recent media stories have reported that online webcam-based exam proctoring have wrongly flagged students for cheating, causing tremendous anxiety and frustration, and thus disadvantaging students. This study assesses if online webcam-based exam proctoring in the age of COVID-19 disadvantages students (particularly those who are non-white and with different ethnic and socio-economic status), and whether worry about being wrongly flagged for cheating may affect students’ exam performance. This survey-based study was conducted using 237 undergraduate students enrolled in a public land-grant research university in the upper Midwest region of the United States, who took their exams through Proctorio. Our study supports – as is widely reported by the media –that students are experiencing anxiety and fear of being wrongly flagged during online proctoring. However, we show that students’ anxiety about online proctoring is associated with their general level of anxiety; this correlation to “trait” anxiety supports our previous study. We further find that worry over being wrongly flagged did not directly impede students’ exam performance. We discuss how students and faculty alike face challenges, especially those who had not used online webcam exam proctoring prior to COVID-19 stay-at-home directives. For faculty, it is not only having to adapt to an unfamiliar teaching environment that requires new technologies, but also being expected to utilize webcam-based online proctoring for high stakes exams. An in-depth look is needed into the kind of support students and faculty need using online proctoring into the future. Furthermore, the academic world in general, and US colleges and universities in particular, should initiate a conversation on how best to regulate this industry so that students and institutions are well served.

Keywords: online, exam, proctoring, anxiety, students, performance 

References

  1. Alawamleh, M., Al-Twait, L. M., & Al-Saht, G. R. (2020, August 24). The effect of online learning on communication between instructors and students during Covid-19 pandemic. Asian Education and Development Studies. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-06-2020-0131
  2. Anderi, E., Sherman, L., Saymuah, S., Ayers, E., & Kromrei, H. T. (2020, August 6). Learning communities engage medical students: A COVID-19 virtual conversation series. Cureus, 12(8), Article Number: e9593. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.9593
  3. Baum, S. (2015). The Federal Pell Grant and reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. Journal of Student Financial Aid, 45(3), Article 4, 22–34. https://ir.library.louisville.edu/jsfa/vol45/iss3/4/
  4. Brothen, T., & Peterson, G. (2012, February). Online exam cheating: A natural experiment. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 9(2), 15–20. http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Feb_12/Feb_12.pdf
  5. Chin, M. (2020, April 29). Exam anxiety: How remote test-proctoring is creeping students out. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/29/21232777/examity-remote-test-proctoring-online-class-education
  6. Dennon, A. (2021, March 18). How trade schools are weathering COVID-19. BestColleges. https://www.bestcolleges.com/blog/how-trade-schools-are-adapting-to-covid-19/
  7. Driscoll, R. (2007, March 1). Westside Test Anxiety Scale Validation. Online Submission. ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED495968
  8. Fox, K., Bryant, G., Lin, N., & Srinivasa, N. (2020, July 7). Time for class–COVID-part 1: A national survey of faculty during COVID-19. Tyton Partners and Every Learner Everywhere. https://tytonpartners.com/library/time-for-class-covid19-edition-part-1/
  9. Ginder, S., Kelly-Reid, J., & Mann, F. (2019). Enrollment and employees in postsecondary institutions, Fall 2017; and financial statistics and academic libraries, Fall 2017. U.S. Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/ .
  10. Harwell, D. (2020, November 12). Cheating-detection companies made millions during the pandemic. Now students are fighting back. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/11/12/test-monitoring-student-revolt/
  11. Hong, E., & Karstensson, L. (2002, April). Antecedents of state test anxiety. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(2), 348–367. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2001.1095
  12. The Insight Partners. (2020, December). Online exam proctoring market forecast to 2027 - COVID-19 impact and global analysis by type (advanced automated proctoring, recorded proctoring, and live online proctoring) and end user (schools and universities, enterprises, and government). Research & Markets, ID: 5237901. https://www.theinsightpartners.com/reports/online-exam-proctoring-market
  13. Kadakia, C., & Bradshaw, A. A. (2020, May 6). Equitable exams during COVID-19. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2020/05/06/changes-instructors-should-consider-administering-and-grading-exams-during-covid
  14. Kulik, C., Kulik, J., & Bangert-Drowns, R. (Summer 1990). Effectiveness of mastery learning programs: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 60(2), 265–285. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170612
  15. Lederman, D. (2019, December 11). Online enrollments grow, but pace slows. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2019/12/11/more-students-study-online-rate-growth-slowed-2018
  16. Means, B., & Neisler, J. (2020, July). Suddenly online: A national survey of undergraduates during the COVID-19 pandemic. Digital Promise. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12265/98
  17. Morgan, G. (2020, April 28). Market guide for remote proctoring services for higher education (Report ID. G00723213-15 2020-04). Gartner. https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/3984283
  18. Online proctoring / remote invigilation – Soon a multibillion dollar market within eLearning & assessment. (2019, February 19). LearningLight.com. https://www.learninglight.com/remote-proctoring-invigilation-market
  19. Pascarella, E. T., Pierson, C. T., Wolniak, G. C., & Terenzini, P. T. (2004). First-generation college students: Additional evidence on college experiences and outcomes. The Journal of Higher Education, 75(3), 249–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2004.11772256
  20. Redden, E. (2021, February 5). A spike in cheating since the move to remote? Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/02/05/study-finds-nearly-200-percent-jump-questions-submitted-chegg-after-start-pandemic
  21. Woldeab, D., & Brothen, T. (2019). 21st century assessment: Online proctoring, test anxiety, and student performance. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 34(1), 1–10. http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/1106/0
  22. Woldeab, D., Lindsay, T., & Brothen, T. (2017). Under the watchful eye of online proctoring. In I. E. Alexander & R. K. Poch (Eds.), Innovative Learning and Teaching: Experiments Across the Disciplines (pp. 147–160). University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing.
  23. Woldeab, D., Yawson, R. M., & Osafo, E. (2020, June 1). A Systematic Meta-Analytic Review of Thinking beyond the Comparison of Online Versus Traditional Learning. e-Journal of Business Education & Scholarship of Teaching, 14(1), 1–24. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342661075_A_Systematic_Meta-Analytic_Review_of_Thinking_beyond_the_Comparison_of_Online_Versus_Traditional_Learning