Abstract
Learning analytics are an important tool for educators as they provide insight into educational trends and patterns based on real student data. This case study focuses on a capstone unit in business at a university in Western Australia. Instructors used learning analytics of average weekly eTest scores, overall average eTest scores, a benchmark assessment score, and study mode extracted from learning management system (LMS) reports to target areas where assessment integrity could be improved. It was found that academic integrity breaches were likely in various iterations of weekly eTests amongst students enrolled in the online study mode. Thus, in 2017, a proof-of-concept was undertaken to assess the suitability and practicality of using a browser-based remote invigilation system to be able to verify a student’s identity and monitor behaviour to better assure assessment integrity. Study success (in this case coursework comprehension and the subsequent attainment of an assessment grade) should not be a function of learning mode. This case study explains how remote invigilation allowed the researchers to achieve a higher degree of study success equivalence within the student cohort. Staff usage, technical challenges and student attitudes regarding webcam monitoring are also explored.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Amanullah, M., Zaman, G. S., Patel, A. A., & Mohanna, K. (2013). A comparative study of open book-open web (OBOW) exams and invigilated closed book-pen and paper (ICBPP) exams. Merit Research Journal of Education and Review, 1(4), 97–106.
Amigud, A., Arnedo-Moreno, J., Daradoumis, T., & Guerrero-Roldan, A.-E. (2017). Using learning analytics for preserving academic integrity. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(5), 192–210.
Brocato, B. R., Bonanno, A., & Ulbig, S. (2015). Student perceptions and instructional evaluations: A multivariate analysis of online and face-to-face classroom settings. Education and Information Technologies, 20(1), 37–55.
Carstairs, J., & Myors, B. (2009). Internet testing: A natural experiment reveals test score inflation on a high-stakes, unproctored cognitive test. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(3), 738–742.
Davis, A. B., Rand, R., & Seay, R. (2016). Remote proctoring: The effect of proctoring on grades. In Advances in accounting education (Vol. 18). Bingley, England: Emerald Group Publishing.
Engineering Institute of Technology. (2016). EIT internal R&D activity report - June 2015 to July 2016. Perth, Australia.
Engineering Institute of Technology. (2017). EIT internal R&D activity report - June 2016 to July 2017. Perth, Australia.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87–105.
Gregory, M. S.-J., & Lodge, J. M. (2015). Academic workload: The silent barrier to the implementation of technology-enhanced learning strategies in higher education. Distance Education, 36(2), 210–230.
Harris, D. M., & Parrish, D. E. (2006). The art of online teaching: Online instruction versus in-class instruction. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 24(2-3), 105–117.
James, R. (2016). Tertiary student attitudes to invigilated, online summative examinations. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13, 19.
Jefferies, A., Barton, K., Meere, J., Peramungama, S., Pyper, A., & Yip, A. (2017). Trialling online proctoring for e-assessments: Early outcomes from the Erasmus + OP4RE project. Paper presented at the European Conference on e-Learning, Porto, Portugal.
Jortberg, M. (2010). Experiences verifying the identity of distance learning students. In Third annual report on identity in distance learning. Little Rock, AK: Acxiom.
Karim, M. N., Kaminsky, S. E., & Behrend, T. S. (2014). Cheating, reactions, and performance in remotely proctored testing: An exploratory experimental study. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(4), 555–572.
Lilley, M., Meere, J., & Barker, T. (2016). Remote live invigilation: A pilot study. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1(6), 1–5.
Papadopoulos, A. (2017). The mismeasure of academic labour. Higher Education Research and Development, 36(3), 511–525.
Phillips, R., & Lowe, K. (2003). Issues associated with the equivalence of traditional and online assessment. Paper presented at the 20th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Adelaide, Australia.
Porter, A. L., Pitterle, M. E., & Hayney, M. S. (2014). Comparison of online versus classroom delivery of an immunization elective course. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 78(5), 96–104.
Schaffhauser, D. (2017). Nobody’s watching: Proctoring in online learning. Retrieved from https://campustechnology.com/articles/2017/07/26/nobodys-watching-proctoring-in-online-learning.aspx
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10.
Vioreanu, D. (2018). Distance learning course options get more popular every year. Retrieved from https://www.distancelearningportal.com/articles/393/distance-learning-course-options-get-more-popular-every-year.html
West, D., Luzeckyj, A., Searle, B., Toohey, D., & Price, R. (2018). The use of learning analytics to support improvements in teaching practice. Melbourne, Australia: Innovative Research Universities.
Woldeab, D., Lindsay, T., & Brothen, T. (2017). Under the watchful eye of online proctoring. In I. D. Alexander & R. K. Poch (Eds.), Innovative learning and teaching: Experiments across the disciplines. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing.
Yu, J., & Hu, Z. (2016). Is online learning the future of education? Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/09/is-online-learning-the-future-of-education/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Baird, M., Sefcik, L., Steyn, S., Price, C. (2019). Learning Analytics Leading to Remote Invigilation for eTests: A Case Study. In: Ifenthaler, D., Mah, DK., Yau, J.YK. (eds) Utilizing Learning Analytics to Support Study Success. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64792-0_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64792-0_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-64791-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-64792-0
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)