Online proctored exams: rhetoric vs reality

References

• Alessio, H. M., Malay, N., Maurer, K., Bailer, J., & Rubin, B. (2017). Examining the effect of proctoring on online test scores. Online Learning, 21(1), 146–161. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i1.885
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold, I. J. M. (2016). Cheating at online formative tests: Does it pay off? The Internet and Higher Education, 29, 98–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bearman, M., Dawson, P., Bennett, S., Hall, M., Molloy, E., Boud, D., & Joughin, G. (2017). How university teachers design assessments: A cross-disciplinary study. Higher Education, 74(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0027-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bedford, D. W., Gregg, J. R., & Clinton, M. S. (2011). Preventing online cheating with technology: A pilot study of remote proctor and an update of its use. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 11, 41–58. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct = true&db = eue&AN = 69631386&authtype = sso&custid = deakin&site = eds-live&scope = site
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
   Google Scholar
• Butler-Henderson, K., & Crawford, J. (2020). A systematic review of online examinations: A pedagogical innovation for scalable authentication and integrity. Computers and Education, 159, 104024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coghlan, S., Miller, T., & Paterson, J. (2021). Good proctor or” Big Brother"? Ethics and online exam supervision technologies. Philosophy and Technology, 34(4), 1581–1606. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00476-1
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dawson, P. (2020). Defending assessment security in a digital world. Preventing e-cheating and supporting academic integrity in higher education. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• D’Souza, K. A., & Siegfeldt, D. V. (2017). A conceptual framework for detecting cheating in online and take-home exams. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 15(4), 370–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12140
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fask, A., Englander, F., & Wang, Z. (2014). Do online exams facilitate cheating? An experiment designed to separate possible cheating from the effect of the online test taking environment. Journal of Academic Ethics, 12(2), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-014-9207-1
   Google Scholar
• Flaherty, C. (2020, May 11). Online proctoring is surging during COVID-19. Inside Higher Educations. Retrieved August 31st, 2021 https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/05/11/online-proctoring-surging-during-covid-19
   Google Scholar
• Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2012). Integrating qualitative and quantitative data. In G. Guest (Ed.), Applied thematic analysis (pp. 187–216). SAGE Publications, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Harmon, O., & Lambrinos, J. (2008). Is the cheating risk always higher in online instruction compared to face-to-face instruction? Research Gate. Retrieved August 31st 2021, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/24141676_Is_the_Cheating_Risk_Always_Higher_in_Online_Instruction_Compared_to_Face-to-Face_Instruction
   Google Scholar
• Hylton, K., Levy, Y., & Dringus, L. P. (2016). Utilizing webcam-based proctoring to deter misconduct in online exams. Computers and Education, 92-93, 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, R. (2016). Tertiary student attitudes to invigilated, online summative examinations. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13(19), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-016-0015-0
   Google Scholar
• Janke, S., Rudert, S. C., Petersen, Ä, Fritz, T. M., & Daumiller, M. (2021). Cheating in the wake of COVID-19: How dangerous is ad-hoc online testing for academic integrity? Computers & Education Open, 2, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100055
   Google Scholar
• Jha, M. (2022, July 4). If Unis stick with online assessment after COVID, they’ll have do more to stop cheating. The Conversation. Retrieved September 6th, 2022 https://theconversation.com/if-unis-stick-with-online-assessment-after-covid-theyll-have-do-more-to-stop-cheating-185762
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3700093.
   Google Scholar
• Karim, M., Kaminsky, S., & Behrend, T. (2014). Cheating, reactions, and performance in remotely proctored testing: An exploratory experimental study. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(4), 555–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9343-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kharbat, F. F., & Daabes, A. S. A. (2021). E-proctored exams during the COVID-19 pandemic: A close understanding. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 6589–6605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10458-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitahara, R. T., & Westfall, F. (2007). Promoting academic integrity in online distance learning courses. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 3(3), 265–276.
   Google Scholar
• Langenfeld, T. (2020). Internet-based proctored assessment: Security and fairness issues. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 39(3), 24–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12359
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lilley, M., Barker, T., & Meere, J. (2016). Remote live invigilation: A pilot study. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.408
   Google Scholar
• Logan, C. (2020). Refusal, partnership, and countering educational technology’s harms. Hybrid Pedagogy, https://hybridpedagogy.org/refusal-partnership-countering-harms/
   Google Scholar
• Moro, J. (2020). Against cop shit. Retrieved February 4, 2022, from https://jeffreymoro.com/blog/2020-02-13-against-cop-shit/
   Google Scholar
• Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2006). Linking research questions to mixed methods data analysis procedures. The Qualitative Report, 11, 474–498. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR11-3/onwuegbuzie.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Raman, R. B., Vachharajani, H., & Nedungadi, P. (2021). Adoption of online proctored examinations by university students during COVID-19: Innovation diffusion study. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 7339–7358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10581-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selwyn, N., O’Neill, C., Smith, G., Andrejevic, M., & Gu, X. (2021). A necessary evil? The rise of online exam proctoring in Australian universities. Media International Australia, 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X211005862
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Bearman, M., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Jorre de St Jorre, T. (2022). Assessment for inclusion: Rethinking contemporary strategies in assessment design. Higher Education Research and Development, 42(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2022.2057451
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teodorczuk, A., Fraser, J., & Rogers, G. D. (2018). Open book exams: A potential solution to the “full curriculum”? Medical Teacher, 40(5), 529–530. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2017.1412412
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woldeab, D., & Brothen, T. (2019). 21st century assessment: Online proctoring, test anxiety, and student performance. International Journal of E-Learning and Distance Education, 34. Retrieved September 20th, 2022, from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1227595.pdf
   Google Scholar