Searching for "proctoring"

best practices in online proctoring

To catch a cheat: Best practices in online proctoring

As online education expands, students are bringing old-fashioned cheating into the digital age

According to the latest report from Babson Survey Research Group, nearly 6.5 million American undergraduates now take at least one course online

1. Listen to students and faculty. Every college, university, or online-learning provider has a different approach to online learning. At Indiana University, where more than 30 percent of students take at least one online course, the online education team has launched Next.IU, an innovative pilot program to solicit feedback from the campus community before making any major edtech decision. By soliciting direct feedback from students and faculty, institutions can avoid technical difficulties and secure support before rolling out the technology campus-wide.

2. Go mobile. Nine in 10 undergraduates own a smartphone, and the majority of online students complete some coursework on a mobile device. Tapping into the near-ubiquity of mobile computing on campus can help streamline the proctoring and verification process. Rather than having to log onto a desktop, students can use features like fingerprint scan and facial recognition that are already integrated into most smartphones to verify their identity directly from their mobile device.

For a growing number of students, mobile technology is the most accessible way to engage in online coursework, so mobile verification provides not only a set of advanced security tools, but also a way for universities to meet students where they are.

3. Learn from the data. Analytical approaches to online test security are still in the early stages. Schools may be more susceptible to online “heists” if they are of a certain size or administer exams in a certain way, but institutions need data to benchmark against their peers and identify pain points in their approach to proctoring.

In an initial pilot with 325,000 students, for instance, we found that cheating rose and fell with the seasons—falling from 6.62 percent to 5.49 percent from fall to spring, but rising to a new high of 6.65 percent during the summer.

++++++++++++
more on proctoring in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=proctoring

proctoring ideas

Digital Proctoring

I great exchange on ideas regarding digital proctoring in the Blended and Online Learning listserv:

STUDENTS

David Huckleberry

Coordinator of Digital Instruction – Physics & Astronomy

Purdue University

Office = PHYS 176

525 Northwestern Avenue

West Lafayette, IN 47907

dhuckleb@purdue.edu

++++++++++++

Proctorio

Scott Robison, Ph.D.
Associate Director, Digital Learning and Design
Portland State University

Portland, OR 97201
503-725-9118
@otterscotter
+++++++++++++++++
At University of Wisconsin – Superior – we have stopped offering proctoring for students.  Faculty, however, have come up with a way for online testing. They ask student to use Kaltura tto record their face and part of the test and then post the video in the dropbox.

Rebecca Graetz, EdD

Instructional Program Manager II

UW – Superior

rgraetz@uwsuper.edu

++++++++++++

ProctorU, an online proctoring service, with online courses that offered online exams and BioSig ID for courses that did not require exams.

Kelvin Bentley
Email: timelord33@gmail.com
Twitter: blacktimelord
++++++++++++++

+++++++++++++
more on proctoring in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=proctoring

proctoring online learning

Nobody’s Watching: Proctoring in Online Learning

There is no single best way to handle proctoring for digital courses, as this community college system pilot discovered.

By Dian Schaffhauser  07/26/17

https://campustechnology.com/articles/2017/07/26/nobodys-watching-proctoring-in-online-learning.aspx

The Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 lays out the rule: An institution offering “distance education” needs to have processes in place for verifying student identity to ensure that the student who registers for a class is the “same student who participates in and completes the program and receives the academic credit.”

OLC (Online Learning Consortium) Innovate conference and shared the solution: a combination of the use of an automated proctoring application and the creation of a network of colleges across the state that would provide no-cost proctoring on their campuses for students attending any of the member schools.

put together an online proctoring working group with “lots of faculty representation,” said Hadsell, which “paid off in the long run.” Other participants included people from testing centers and learning centers. Proctorio, the proctoring solution eventually recommended by the working group, is a web service that can be deployed through Canvas and installed by students with one click

++++++++++++++
more on proctoring in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=proctor

proctoring

Clemson University’s Centralized Proctoring Story

http://marketing.softwaresecure.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/10395/p/p-002f/t/page/fm/0

e-Campus news offers a proctoring model: http://www.ecampusnews.com/whitepapers/5-step-guide-to-how-clemson-university-online-is-centralizing-online-proctoring/ conveniently presented in a 5-step outline, webinar and “case study” paper.

According to them, you just “Follow their story and learn how the team at Clemson Online implemented RPNow, and how they’re planning to centralize remote proctoring to increase student convenience, faculty efficiency and reduce the costs of exam administration.”

It is, of course, sponsored by the company, who will be paid for the proctoring
http://www.softwaresecure.com/product/remote-proctor-now/

Here are my issues with the proposal:

  1. step 5 of the five-step outline: “Take control of the payment model. Institutional payment (as opposed to student pay) creates a better experience for the student and cost savings for all.”
    so, if the institution pays, then student don’t pay? I find this and illusion, since the institution pays by using students’ tuition. which constantly grows. so, the statement is rather deceptive.
  2. As with the huge controversy around Turnitin (e.g., this 2009 article, and this 2012 article), “mechanizing” the very humane process evaluation is outright wrong. The attempt to compensate the lack of sufficient number of faculty by “outsourcing” to machines is en vogue with the nationwide strive of higher ed administration to create an “assembly line” type of education, which makes profit, but it is dubious if it teaches [well].
  3. Pedagogically (as per numerous discussions in the Chronicle of Higher Education and similar sources), if the teaching materials and exams are structured in an engaging way, students cheat much less. The “case study” paper claims reduction of cheating, but it is reduction based on fear to be caught, not based on genuine interest in learning.

 

proctoring

How to Secure Your Online Testing

November 4th, 2015  |  02:00 PM EDT  | 11:00 AM PDT

https://event.on24.com/eventRegistration/EventLobbyServlet?target=lobby20.jsp&eventid=1062657&sessionid=1&partnerref=ecampus&key=C2DA1A7D321C3D295D4AAE257CFCB844&eventuserid=128438299

Please click the link below to attend.

http://event.on24.com/wcc/r/1062657/C2DA1A7D321C3D295D4AAE257CFCB844

@Software_Secure
@eCampusNews
#eCNWebinar

webinar proctoring certificate of attendance

it is a sale pitch for http://www.softwaresecure.com/product/remote-proctor-now/

 http://www.softwaresecure.com/

used with BB, Sakai, Moodle as LMS

feedback on proctoring

rollout process feedback on proctoring

Is software installed on the student side to monitor all of their activities on the computer during the exam?
RPNow record’s the student’s desktop throughout the exam and reviewed by our proctors. There is also a lock-down capability to prevent access to 100s of applications that could be used to cheat.

difference between surveillance and monitoring

q&a

q&a

 

new D2L Brightspace features

What: Overview of new D2L Brightspace features
When: Monday, April 9 at 10:00 AM
Please join us to learn about the new features that will be available in D2L Brightspace as of June 2, 2018. The session will be recorded.

D2L cloud is the big news. stcloudstate.learn.minnstate.edu will be the link to log into the cloud.

Here are the latest updates on Minnesota State’s move to D2L Brightspace cloud services.
Review a recording (44:07) or slides from the session.  A comprehensive list of features is also available for faculty. This document will be updated again after April 10 and May 7 releases are available at our QA cloud sites.

To explore these new features on your own, go to your “quality assurance” (QA) test site in D2L’s cloud available athttps://YourCampusQA.brightspace.comhttps://stcloudstate.brightspace.com

Quizzes, HTML editor and intelligent agents have videos featuring new stuff.

  • HTML Editor – Edit images in the editor. See video (2:30)
  • Intelligent Agents – See video (4:36)
  • Quiz/Question Library – The ability to search the text of quiz questions. See video (7:00)
  • Quizzes – Add a quiz due date, in addition to a start and end date.
  • Quiz Taking – Students start and submit a quiz with fewer clicks.
  • Manage Dates Tool –  ‘Due Dates’ are now included.
  • Additional features will be rolled out to the QA cloud on April 10 (version 10.8.0) and May 7 (version 10.8.1)
  • ePortfolio -“A digital showcase for the learning journey. It helps you document the experience, reflect on it, and share ideas and achievements as they happen.”  D2L has provided an overview video and a video to help you navigate this new tool for Minnesota State campuses.  Look for an invitation to an overview session on April 18.

IP restriction, which is supposed to alleviate proctoring issues. But this will work only for oncampus quizzes. not for online classes.

The Quiz library being moved to the cloud. Does this mean that the Quiz Library can be shared across institutions? E.g. if faculty from one university is teaching biology and has developed a quiz library content, it can be shared with the content of a faculty from another university? All bells and whistles so far are only secondary to the fact that content generation remains most important for faculty and if faculty can share their test banks, I see this as the most advantageous of moving to a cloud.

eportfolio – new D2L tool. April 18 overview scheduled. so, isn’t in collision with TK20? I, personally, think that LInkedIn is the way to go. I will not mention eFolio MN, since it is a losing bet.
So, how we reconcile the existence of several platforms for eportofolio?

SSO. single sign on. Adobe Connect, Mediaspace and service desk are already on SSO. signing in one application allows to move to D2L without having to sign on again.

https://mnscu.sharepoint.com/sites/ims/SitePages/Home.aspx

on that site, there are resources for faculty: https://mnscu.sharepoint.com/sites/IMS/SitePages/Faculty%20Resources.aspx

Advancing Online Education in Minnesota State

Advancing Online Education in Minnesota State

Advancing Online Education – Full Report-1s94jfi

Defining Online Education
The term “online education” has been used as a blanket phrase for a number of fundamentally different  educational models. Phrases like distance education, e-Learning, massively open online courses (MOOCs),  hybrid/blended learning, immersive learning, personalized and/or adaptive learning, master courses,  computer based instruction/tutorials, digital literacy and even competency based learning have all colored the  definitions the public uses to define “online education.”

online education” as having the following characteristics:

  • Students who enroll in online courses or programs may reside near or far from the campus(es) providing the course(s) or program.
  • A student’s course load may include offering where attendance is required in person or where an instructor/students are not required to be in the same geographic location.
  • Students may enroll in one or more individual online course offerings provided by one or more institutions to that may or may not satisfy degree/program requirements.
  • Student may pursue a certificate, program, or degree where a substantial number of courses, perhaps all, are taken without being in the same geographic location as others.

Organizational Effectiveness Research Group (OERG),

As the workgroup considered strategies that could advance online education, they were asked to use the primary and secondary sources listed above to support the fifteen (15) strategies that were developed

define a goal as a broad aspirational outcome that we strive to attain. Four goal areas guide this document. These goal areas include access, quality, affordability and collaboration. Below is a description of each goal area and the assumptions made for Minnesota State.

  1. Access
    Over twenty percent of existing Minnesota State students enroll in online courses as a way to satisfy course requirements. For some students, online education is a convenient option; for others, online is the only option available
  2. Quality
    The Higher Learning Commission (HLC) accreditation guidelines review the standards and processes institutions have in place to ensure quality in all of educational offerings, including online.
    There are a number of ways in which institutions have demonstrated quality in individual courses and programs including the evaluation of course design, evaluation of instruction and assessment of student
  3. Affordability
    a differential tuition rate to courses that are offered online. If we intend to have online education continue to be an affordable solution for students, Minnesota State and its institutions must be good stewards of these funds and ensure these funds support online education.
    Online education requires different or additional services that need to be funded
    transparency is important in tuition setting
  4. Collaboration
    Distance Minnesota is comprised of four institutions Alexandria Technical & Community College, Bemidji State University, Northland Community & Technical College, and Northwest Technical College) which collaborate to offer student support services, outreach, e-advising, faculty support, and administrative assistance for online education offerings.

 Strategies

strategies are defined as the overall plan used to identify how we can achieve each goal area.

Action Steps

Strategy 1: Ensure all student have online access to high quality support services

students enrolled in online education experiences should have access to “three areas of support including academic (such as tutoring, advising, and library); administrative (such as financial aid, and disability support); and technical (such as hardware reliability and uptime, and help desk).”
As a system, students have access to a handful of statewide services, include tutoring services through Smarthinking and test proctoring sites.

Strategy 2: Establish and maintain measures to assess and support student readiness for online education

A persistent issue for campuses has been to ensure that students who enroll in online course are aware of the expectations required to participate actively in an online course.

In addition to adhering to course expectations, students must have the technical competencies needed to perform the tasks required for online courses

Strategy 3: Ensure students have access to online and blended learning experiences in course and program offerings.

Strategy 4: These experiences should support and recognize diverse learning needs by applying a universal design for learning framework.

The OERG report included several references to efforts made by campuses related to the providing support and resources for universal design for learning, the workgroup did not offer any action steps.

Strategy 5: Expand access to professional development resources and services for faculty members

As online course are developed and while faculty members teach online courses, it is critical that faculty members have on-demand access to resources like technical support and course assistance.

5A. Statewide Faculty Support Services – Minnesota State provide its institutions and their faculty members with access to a centralized support center during extended hours with staff that can assist faculty members synchronously via phone, chat, text/SMS, or web conference

5C. Instructional Design and Technology Services – Establish a unit that will provide course design and instructional technology services to selected programs and courses from Minnesota State institutions.

Quality

Strategy 1: Establish and maintain a statewide approach for professional development for online education.

1B. Faculty Mentoring – Provide and sustain faculty mentoring programs that promote effective online pedagogy.

1C. Professional development for support staff – including instructional designers, D2L Brightspace site administrators and campus trainers, etc.)

+++++++++++
more on online education in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=online+education

topics for IM260

proposed topics for IM 260 class

  • Media literacy. Differentiated instruction. Media literacy guide.
    Fake news as part of media literacy. Visual literacy as part of media literacy. Media literacy as part of digital citizenship.
  • Web design / web development
    the roles of HTML5, CSS, Java Script, PHP, Bootstrap, JQuery, React and other scripting languages and libraries. Heat maps and other usability issues; website content strategy. THE MODEL-VIEW-CONTROLLER (MVC) design pattern
  • Social media for institutional use. Digital Curation. Social Media algorithms. Etiquette Ethics. Mastodon
    I hosted a LITA webinar in the fall of 2016 (four weeks); I can accommodate any information from that webinar for the use of the IM students
  • OER and instructional designer’s assistance to book creators.
    I can cover both the “library part” (“free” OER, copyright issues etc) and the support / creative part of an OER book / textbook
  • Big Data.” Data visualization. Large scale visualization. Text encoding. Analytics, Data mining. Unizin. Python, R in academia.
    I can introduce the students to the large idea of Big Data and its importance in lieu of the upcoming IoT, but also departmentalize its importance for academia, business, etc. From infographics to heavy duty visualization (Primo X-Services API. JSON, Flask).
  • NetNeutrality, Digital Darwinism, Internet economy and the role of your professional in such environment
    I can introduce students to the issues, if not familiar and / or lead a discussion on a rather controversial topic
  • Digital assessment. Digital Assessment literacy.
    I can introduce students to tools, how to evaluate and select tools and their pedagogical implications
  • Wikipedia
    a hands-on exercise on working with Wikipedia. After the session, students will be able to create Wikipedia entries thus knowing intimately the process of Wikipedia and its information.
  • Effective presentations. Tools, methods, concepts and theories (cognitive load). Presentations in the era of VR, AR and mixed reality. Unity.
    I can facilitate a discussion among experts (your students) on selection of tools and their didactically sound use to convey information. I can supplement the discussion with my own findings and conclusions.
  • eConferencing. Tools and methods
    I can facilitate a discussion among your students on selection of tools and comparison. Discussion about the their future and their place in an increasing online learning environment
  • Digital Storytelling. Immersive Storytelling. The Moth. Twine. Transmedia Storytelling
    I am teaching a LIB 490/590 Digital Storytelling class. I can adapt any information from that class to the use of IM students
  • VR, AR, Mixed Reality.
    besides Mark Gill, I can facilitate a discussion, which goes beyond hardware and brands, but expand on the implications for academia and corporate education / world
  • IoT , Arduino, Raspberry PI. Industry 4.0
  • Instructional design. ID2ID
    I can facilitate a discussion based on the Educause suggestions about the profession’s development
  • Microcredentialing in academia and corporate world. Blockchain
  • IT in K12. How to evaluate; prioritize; select. obsolete trends in 21 century schools. K12 mobile learning
  • Podcasting: past, present, future. Beautiful Audio Editor.
    a definition of podcasting and delineation of similar activities; advantages and disadvantages.
  • Digital, Blended (Hybrid), Online teaching and learning: facilitation. Methods and techniques. Proctoring. Online students’ expectations. Faculty support. Asynch. Blended Synchronous Learning Environment
  • Gender, race and age in education. Digital divide. Xennials, Millennials and Gen Z. generational approach to teaching and learning. Young vs old Millennials. Millennial employees.
  • Privacy, [cyber]security, surveillance. K12 cyberincidents. Hackers.
  • Gaming and gamification. Appsmashing. Gradecraft
  • Lecture capture, course capture.
  • Bibliometrics, altmetrics
  • Technology and cheating, academic dishonest, plagiarism, copyright.

biometric authentication online ed

Wiklund, M., Mozelius, P., Westing, T., & Norberg, L. (2016). Biometric Belt and Braces for Authentication in Distance Education. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309548915_Biometric_Belt_and_Braces_for_Authentication_in_Distance_Education
Abstract
a need for new techniques to handle the problem in online environments. To achieve zero cheating is hard (or impossible) without repelling not only cheaters but also those students who do not cheat, where a zero ‐ tolerance emphasis also would risk inhibiting students’ intrinsic motivation. Several studies indicate that existing virtual learning environments do not provide the features needed to control that the intended student is the one taking the online exam. Biometric Belt and Braces for Authentication in Distance Education.
One approach to prevent student’s dishonesty is the university code of honour. This is a set of rules describing what actions are not permitted and the consequences for students taking such actions. Another way of preventing cheating is the use of proctors during written exams. Even while using such codes of honour and proctors, universities still have found many students to cheat. Biometric Belt and Braces for Authentication in Distance Education.
Neutralisation is the phenomenon when a person rationalises his or her dishonest behaviour with arguments like “I can do this because the work load within this course is just too overwhelming” or “I can do this because I have a half ‐ time job on the side which gives me less study time than the other students have”. By doing so the student puts the blame for cheating on external factors rather than on himself, and also protects himself from the blame of others (Haines et al. 1986). This neutralises the behavior in the sense that the person’s feelings of shame are reduced or even eliminated. Haines et al. (1986 Biometric Belt and Braces for Authentication in Distance Education.
Simply asking participants to read a code of honour when they had the opportunity to cheat reduced dishonesty. Also whether one signed the code of honour or just read it influenced cheating. The Shu et al. (2011) study suggests that opportunity and knowledge of ethical standards are two factors that impact students’ ethical decision about cheating. This is in line with the results in (McCabe, Trevino and Butterfield 2001), showing that if students regularly are reminded of the university’s code of honour, they are less likely to cheat Biometric Belt and Braces for Authentication in Distance Education.
For an online course setting, Gearhart (2001) suggest that teachers should develop a guideline for “good practices”.
In online examination there are reports of students hiring other persons to increase their scores (Flior & Kowalski, 2010) and there is a need for new enhanced authentication tools (Ullah, Xiao & Lilley, 2012). For companies and Internet environments the process of authentication is often completed through the use of logon identification with passwords and the assumption of the password to guarantee that the user is authentic (Ramzan, 2007), but logins and passwords can be borrowed (Bailie & Jortberg, 2009). The discussion on how to provide enhanced authentication in online examination has led to many suggested solutions; four of them are: Biometric Belt and Braces for Authentication in Distance Education.
  • Challenge Questions: with questions based on third ‐ party data ƒ
  • Face ‐ to ‐ Face Proctored Exam: with government or institution issued identification ƒ
  • Web Video Conference Proctor: audio and video conference proctoring via webcam and screen monitoring service with live, certified proctors ƒ
  • Biometrics and Web Video Recording: with unique biometrics combined with the recording of student in exam via webcam

An idea for online courses is that assessment should not only be a one way process where the students get grades and feedback. The examination process should also be a channel for students’ feedback to teachers and course instructors (Mardanian & Mozelius, 2011). New online methods could be combined with traditional assessment in an array of techniques aligned to the learning outcomes (Runyon and Von Holzen, 2005). Examples of summative and formative assessment in an online course could be a mix of: Biometric Belt and Braces for Authentication in Distance Education.

  • Multiple choice questions (MCQ) tests, automatically corrected in a virtual learning environment ƒ
  • Term papers or essays analysed by the course instructors ƒ
  • Individual or group assignments posted in digital drop ‐ boxes ƒ
  • Oral or written tests conducted in the presence of the instructor or through videoconferences (Dikli, 2003)

Authors’ suggestion is a biometric belt and braces model with a combination of scanned facial coordinates and voice recognition, where only a minimum of biometric data has to be stored. Even if the model is based on biometrics with a medium to low grade of uniqueness and permanence, it would be reliable enough for authentication in online courses if two (or more) types of biometrics are combined with the presented dialogue based examination using an interaction/obser ‐ vation process via web cameras. Biometric Belt and Braces for Authentication in Distance Education.

++++++++++++++++++
more on identification in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=identification

++++++++++++++++
more on proctoring and detecting cheating:

http://www.wgu.edu/blogpost/innocent-red-flags-caught-by-online-exam-proctors

voices from the other side:
http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2013/04/how-to-cheat-online-exam-proctoring.html

https://campustechnology.com/articles/2016/04/06/how-students-try-to-bamboozle-online-proctors.aspx

http://www.usnews.com/education/online-education/articles/2014/06/17/think-twice-before-cheating-in-online-courses

Right Click on Websites

How to Enable the Right Click on Websites That Disable It

Considering this feature in D2L

right_click_D2L

right_click_D2L

 

, it seems that it is feeble option for proctoring, if the Web shares plenty of information how to circumvent right-click
+++++++++

more on proctoring in this IMS blog:

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=proctor