Schools across the nation, and even the globe, have closed down in light of recent stay-at-home orders put in place to mitigate the impact of COVID-19. Because of this, most school districts have made the decision to switch to an online form of learning. Using various resources such as Canvas, Google Classroom and Zoom, students have switched to a technology focused curriculum. This new form of learning allows students to continue the education that they were receiving prior to the stay-at-home orders, though the prospect of testing has become somewhat of a controversy. Many classes and schools are starting to use online proctoring resources in order to give students tests during the current climate.
Although resources such as Canvas can record whether a student is opening a new tab or clicks off the page, making them somewhat cheat-proof, many kids have access to secondary devices such as smartphones. This means that students can easily bypass guidelines set in place and swerve around the measures that Canvas tests are equipped with. It doesn’t seem worth the time, or effort to continue with such tests. At a time like this, the ability to gauge how well a student is performing is inconsistent and unreliable. Working jobs outside of school or taking care of siblings can easily impact one’s capabilities to perform to a set standard. Many colleges and universities have also cut the SAT exam requirement when considering admissions in light of some students’ inability to take the test. If a test as big and important as the SAT is able to be pushed aside, the next physics exam can be as well.
“At a time like this, the ability to gauge how well a student is performing is inconsistent and unreliable”
Furthermore, our district has gone into a credit/no credit grading system. Taking this into account, it is apparent that tests are not really as important or significant as before. Because a D and A grade look the same, tests are almost irrelevant due to the new system implemented by the district.
Online proctoring sites do provide some test security by using various methods to confirm student identity, as well as cheating. These include typing tests to see if the students typing rhythm matches those that they presented the proctor with, students screens, camera access, and algorithms to ensure the no-cheating policy during tests is upheld. Sites like ProctorU usually offer various packages when it comes to their proctoring services, and there are three different ones in the case of ProctorU. The options are fairly similar with an algorithm that detects suspicious behavior in each, although one lacks review from a proctor.
When it comes to online proctoring, the system’s methods are somewhat unnerving. To allow for a cheat-proof test environment, one has to supply the proctor with access to their camera, microphone and ID. This is seen as necessary to validate the test-taker’s identity and catch moments in which the test-taker might be suspected of cheating, such as looking off-screen for too long. This could be a way to try to mitigate the number of people willing to cheat, but is it not somewhat subjective as well? One may have a certain motive for looking away that could easily be misinterpreted by the proctor, leading to a potentially failed exam. Furthermore, the algorithms used to detect suspicions scores are in reality just software. In the lockdown there could be hundreds of different situations that people are in, which the algorithm can’t really understand.
“In the lockdown there could be hundreds of different situations that people are in, which the algorithm can’t really understand”
The security aspect is what stands out most, however. Using these sites means allowing people to have access to your house and room, and also gives access to one’s voice. There are also various other proctoring sites besides ProctorU such as Proctorio, Examity, and Mercer’s Mettl proctoring service which work in a similar manner to the one already mentioned. The proctoring sites have you pan your room to make sure that there is no material that could be used to cheat. This is, yes, called for when trying to prevent cheating as much as possible, but is also somewhat of a safety risk, giving complete strangers access to your room and house.
But in the end, the use of online proctoring is provided more by the consent and agreement of the school rather than the students themselves. Because students must follow the curriculum even during such times, they are obligated to use such resources in order to pass the class. Having no say in whether you want to provide their ID to a complete stranger, is a bit disconcerting.
If it is truly necessary for a class to uphold tests and quizzes, then only those that are extremely vital to a course should be administered. The methods that The College Board is taking when it comes to AP exams are somewhat effective . By providing secure login codes, and various different digital tools, like a plagiarism detector, this form of test-taking also provides a secure environment with limited cheating opportunities. In addition, the tests are very flexible and can be taken on multiple devices and even on paper. By having a more adjustable system, taking tests like this would be a lot less stressful and unnerving than having a proctor constantly watch over you.
However, in light of the difficulties that have risen during the coronavirus pandemic, it is unnecessary to hold students to expectations like those that were in place before. In addition, requiring access to private settings, although allowing for a more detailed report of test-takers, is unsafe especially without full consent from those who are taking it. We are going through an uncertain time, in which everyone’s situation is different. Upholding each and every student to one standard, hoping they’d perform to the degree that they were previously, is just unrealistic during an event like this. Taking a step back, and looking at the whole situation in a broader sense, the most effective solution would most likely be to disregard such formal methods of test taking, or test taking in general. Because of the variability in everyone’s situation, creating the same testing environment is irrational.
