Abstract :

University curriculum all over the world contain a set of learning outcomes to be achieved through different learning and teaching modes. The achievement of the Learning Outcomes is measured using some form of assessment, usually in the form of University examinations. The traditional teaching has been face-to- face, and therefore many examinations have also been conducted in a face to face manner. One of the challenges of any examination setting is cheating amongst University students, which implies that the examinations must be properly invigilated or proctored. Since the introduction of ICT in Education, there have been attempts to introduce Online examinations, although these are yet to gain full traction. In Kenya, the ODEL standards lean more towards blended learning, where each course has to have a face to face element. Many Universities have therefore been conducting their examinations in a traditional setting. The onset of COVID-19 created a different situation as the social distancing and the restricted movement meant that learners could not attend a physical class. The movement to Remote Emergency Teaching created a challenge on how examinations could be conducted and proctored. Several Universities decided to do the teaching but wait for resumption of face to face studies to conduct their exams, and this had a negative impact on the University Almanac. This paper looks at the case of one Private University that decided to complete a whole semester online but also went on to conduct examinations via the Learning Management System. Using a triangulation of Interviews, Observation and Document Reviews, staff and students who had participated in conducting and taking online examinations were interviewed. The online examinations processed was observed and documents and software used in online examinations and proctoring were reviewed. Reorganization of the examination processes, organizational and cultural change management, ICT technical issues, extensive training, software selection and communication were identified as the key requirements for successful online examinations and proctoring to take place. The use of Proctoring Systems that are integrated with the LMS give a shorter learning curve and are easier to learn and use.

---

Keywords :

COVID; Examinations integrity; Online; Proctoring; Technology.

---

References :

1. M. Guangul , Suhail, A. H., Khalit, M. I., & B. A. Khidhil. Challenges of remote assessment in higher education in the context of COVID-19: a case study of Middle East College. Educational assessment, evaluation and accountability, 32(4), 519-535.2020
2. G K. A. Gamage , Pradeep, R. G., & de Silva, E. K. Rethinking Assessment: The Future of Examinations in Higher Education. Sustainability, 14(6), 3552.2022
3. B., Williams& A. Wong. The efficacy of final examinations: A comparative study of closed‐book, invigilated exams and open‐book, open‐web exams. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 227-236.2009.
4. ,William. What is assessment for learning?. Studies in educational evaluation, 37(1), 3-14.2011
5. [5] L. Slusky Cybersecurity of online proctoring systems. Journal of International Technology and Information Management, 29(1), 56-83.2020
6. H. Reisenwitz . Examining the necessity of proctoring online exams. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 20(1), 118-124.2020
7. Jr, L. Daffin , &  A. A. Jones. Comparing Student Performance on Proctored and Non-Proctored Exams in Online Psychology Courses. Online Learning, 22(1), 131-145.2018
8. S. Bloom. The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational researcher, 13(6), 4-16.1984
9. Dendir & R. S. Maxwell. Cheating in online courses: Evidence from online proctoring. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 2, 100033.2020
10. Spence Ward, R., Wooden, S., Browne, M., Song, H., Hawkins, R., & M.Wojnakowski,. Use of resources and method of proctoring during the NBCRNA continued professional certification assessment: Analysis and outcomes. Journal of Nursing Regulation, 10(3), 37-46.2019.
11. , Raman, Vachharajani, H., & P. Nedungadi Adoption of online proctored examinations by university students during COVID-19: Innovation diffusion study. Education and information technologies, 26(6), 7339-7358, 2021
12. M. Almutawa. Students Perspective Towards Online Proctoring in Exams  During COVID-19. Journal of Engineering Research. 2021
13. A.Weiner, , & G. M. Hurt., A comparative study of online remote proctored versus onsite proctored high-stakes exams. Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 18 (1), 13-20.2017
14. Stanley C. Reliability. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement, (2nd ed., pp. 356-442).Washington, DC: American Council on Education.1971
15. Arnò, A. Galassi;  M. Tommasi.,  A. Saggino., & P. Vittorini, (2021). State-of-the-art of commercial proctoring systems and their use in academic online exams. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies (IJDET), 19(2), 55-76.2021
16. Lee, & M. Fanguy. Online exam proctoring technologies: Educational innovation or deterioration?. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(3), 475-490. 2022
17. Coghlan, ., Miller, T., & P J. Patterson. Good proctor or “big brother”? Ethics of online exam supervision technologies. Philosophy & Technology, 34(4), 1581-1606, 2021
18. F. Kharbat, & Abu Daabes, A. S. E-proctored exams during the COVID-19 pandemic: A close understanding. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 6589-6605.2021