Friday, December 21, 2012

Online Proctoring: An attempt to lend credibility to online tests

An increasing number of universities and educational institutions are considering e-learning as a viable alternative to traditional campus based learning, and online courses and MOOCs have grown exponentially in recent years. This has led to concerns about the reliability of the certification or licensure granted at the end of such courses. 

As could be expected, technology has stepped in with measures to prevent cheating, by monitoring online tests - in short, online proctoringA variety of solutions have been devised, some by companies that were already active in the business of conducting tests, like Kryterion and ProctorU, and others by universities and individuals. 

Online proctoring tries to emulate the traditional methods of conducting an exam through real-time online monitoring of the test taking process. It involves human proctors who validate the identity of the test-taker by a variety of methods, including comparison of data, photo identification and asking questions. They visually (through cameras and mirrors) check the area surrounding the test-taker, and undertake remote video- and audio-monitoring of the test-taker's screen and computer by exercising some  degree of control over it. The online proctors not only monitor the exams, but are also available for the duration of the test to deal with any technical or procedural difficulties that may arise. 

This has led to a new job description: of an online proctor. Companies involved in online proctoring are recruiting and training people in this field. The recruits are usually college students themselves, who are good at multi-tasking and have fast responses (avid gamers are apparently preferred!). Each proctor usually monitors 5-6 online test-takers simultaneously. They are able to observe the test-taker's screen as well as the test-taker at all times, and can even take control of the keyboard and mouse if they deem fit. 

Companies like Kryterion and ProctorU provide a range of options, though for a price. Their clientele includes distance education providers, online universities and other certification institutes. Kryterion is the more expensive option, which has come up with many advanced options, like a software application that claims to create a secure, locked-down testing environment on the test-taker's computer. It virtually takes complete control of the test-taker's machine. It also requires the purchase of a specific camera and other patented software. The interesting aspect is that the camera provides a 360 degree view of the test-taker's physical environment, in an attempt to eliminate cheating. Despite its steep pricing, Kryterion has grown steadily, with more than 600 centres in over 90 countries. 


ProctorU, on the other hand, seems like an easier to use as well as a more affordable option. Besides prescribing a few basic minimum software and hardware requirements (most of which would be standard in a medium range computer today), it asks for authorization for its remote proctor to be able to access the test-taker's computer and screen. It also charges a fee (approximately $15-30) for each test of up to 2 hours. The cost does not seem to be a prohibitive factor as ProctorU has shown remarkable growth in a very short period of time. ProctorU also provides a large measure of flexibility by allowing the choice of day and time of test to the user. To watch the ProctorU video, you can click this link.

The services of both these companies are being advocated and promoted by many well known universities which offer online courses, especially from the US. 

Besides, some universities and individual professors have come up with home-grown solutions as well. These might involve the innovative use of pre-existing software and hardware, as also dedicated test-taking machines/centres or their own specific learning platforms to take the tests. In many cases, however, the cost of opting for a live proctored exam, going to a distant location to take an exam, or to organise a traditional exam in a testing centre proves to be more expensive.



The minimum hardware requirements to authenticate the test-taker are a webcam, a microphone and a reliable, high-speed internet connection. Other expensive options like advanced USB cameras that provide a wider view of the area are specified by some companies. A variety of software solutions like biometric technologies, facial recognition software for a digital photo match, identifying users based on the pattern of keystroke rhythms and browser lockdown systems are also being sold by these companies.

The students themselves have had a mixed response to this system. While many have given a positive feedback, others have expressed concerns about the security of their computer as well as an uncomfortable feeling of being watched constantly. Some feel that the proctors ask too many personal details and data to establish the authenticity of the test-taker. While on the one hand, detailed questions could be seen to help lend credibility to the test results, on the other, it raises many concerns about the misuse of the data and the trustworthiness of the proctors themselves.

It cannot be denied that online proctoring caters to a growing need and provides many benefits like convenience and flexibility to the test-taker. It makes available a very attractive option to those involved in the field of online education to validate their certification, by providing a solution to the vexing problem of  the reliability of online tests. However, the efficacy of this solution remains to be seen. Many issues like additional costs, technical glitches as well as security and privacy concerns have been raised. Right now, online proctoring is offered as one of many test-taking options and has generated a largely positive response, primarily because only those eager to try this option choose it. The move to make it compulsory though, as is being planned by some universities, might not go down so well.

1 comment:

  1. Anubha, thank you for this information. With our program analysis project in the curriculum development course, I have been thinking about how online exams can be adequately proctored, but had not found good solutions. The information you present here seems quite a nice resolution for the issues I've been considering. Still, I wonder if online proctoring is a good idea, as I see the privacy issues from the student perspective as valid. It also seems to be a step backward in self-regulation, but maybe a necessary one to ensure academic honesty for online testing. As with any innovation, the number of questions remains infinitely greater than the answers. Thanks again.

    ReplyDelete