An exploration of instructors' perceptions about online proctoring and its value in ensuring academic integrity

As universities moved to remotely taught courses during the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of maintaining academic integrity in online environments intensified. In response, this study explores instructors' perceptions about the role of online proctoring as a tool for their courses with the intent of enhancing the understanding of online proctoring's usefulness in ensuring academic integrity and the factors that may be swaying instructors' adoption decisions. An online survey was completed by 158 instructors at a variety of higher education institutions with 118 responding to an open-ended question that allowed respondents to share any additional thoughts about or experiences with using online proctoring. A thematic review of the qualitative comments illustrates the multifaceted impact of online proctoring on instructors and students. Results identified instructors' perceived benefits and challenges of online proctoring to them, their students and the learning process. In addition, instructors voiced numerous legal, ethical and social concerns about the use of online proctoring, including concerns related to students' privacy. Despite these concerns, some instructors identified strong use cases for online proctoring while others provided alternative strategies for ensuring academic integrity in online courses. As institutions consider the role of online proctoring in ensuring academic integrity, a holistic approach that balances instructional design best practices, student-friendly policies and proctoring tools is recommended to serve the complex needs and concerns of instructors, students and their institutions.

Practitioner notes

What is already known about this topic

• Prior research findings are mixed as to whether proctoring is valuable for ensuring academic integrity in online courses.
• Studies investigating grade performance in proctored versus unproctored exam settings have conflicting results; however, studies have found that students completing proctored formative exams perform better on summative exams than students completing non-proctored formative exams.

What this paper adds

• Qualitative data were collected to provide an overview of instructors' perceptions about and experiences with online proctoring.
• Analysis suggests that online proctoring is beneficial to some instructors, students and the overall learning process. At the same time, its use is also concerning to other instructors and students. Among the issues raised by instructors are concerns for student privacy, increases in student test anxiety and discriminatory proctoring practices.

Implications for practice and/or policy

• Institutions must be proactive in ensuring that the use of online proctoring aligns with their institutional values and the changing legal landscape.
• Institutional policies should strive to find a balance between ensuring academic integrity and promoting a positive experience for students and instructors. Since there are strong use cases for online proctoring, these policies should include flexibility whenever possible.

     

Video demonstrations can predict the intention to use digital learning technologies

The technology acceptance model (TAM) uses perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use to predict the intention to use a technology which is important when deciding to invest in a technology. Its extension for e-learning (the general extended technology acceptance model for e-learning; GETAMEL) adds subjective norm to predict the intention to use. Technology acceptance is typically measured after the technology has been used for at least three months. This study aims to identify whether a minimal amount of exposure to the technology using video demonstrations is sufficient to predict the intention to use it three months later. In two studies—one using TAM and one using GETAMEL—we showed students of different cohorts (94 and 111 participants, respectively) video demonstrations of four digital technologies (classroom response system, classroom chat, e-lectures, mobile virtual reality). We then measured technology acceptance immediately after the demonstration and after three months of technology use. Using partial least squares modelling, we found that perceived usefulness significantly predicted the intention to use three months later. In GETAMEL, perceived usefulness significantly predicted the intention to use for three of the four learning technologies, while subjective norm only predicted the intention to use for mobile virtual reality. We conclude that video demonstrations can provide valuable insight for decision-makers and educators on whether students will use a technology before investing in it.

Practitioner notes

What is already known about this topic

• The technology acceptance model helps decision-makers to determine whether students and teachers will adopt a new technology.
• Technology acceptance is typically measured after users have used the technology for three to twelve months.
• Perceived usefulness is a strong predictor of intention to use the technology.
• The predictive power of perceived ease of use for the intention to use varies from insignificant to strong.

What this paper adds

• For the four digital learning technologies (classroom chat, classroom response system, e-lectures and mobile virtual reality), we measure technology acceptance after a video demonstration and again after three months of usage.
• Using structural equation modelling, we are able to predict intention to use after three months, with perceived usefulness measured after the video demonstration.
• We replicate these findings with a second study using the general extended technology acceptance model.

Implications for practice and/or policy

• Short video demonstrations can provide information for educators to predict whether students will use a technology.
• Early impressions of perceived usefulness are very important and valuable to predict whether students will use a technology.