“Out of my control”: science undergraduates report mental health concerns and inconsistent conditions when using remote proctoring software

IF 3.8 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Annika Pokorny, Cissy J. Ballen, Abby Grace Drake, Emily P. Driessen, Sheritta Fagbodun, Brian Gibbens, Jeremiah A. Henning, Sophie J. McCoy, Seth K. Thompson, Charles G. Willis, A. Kelly Lane
{"title":"“Out of my control”: science undergraduates report mental health concerns and inconsistent conditions when using remote proctoring software","authors":"Annika Pokorny, Cissy J. Ballen, Abby Grace Drake, Emily P. Driessen, Sheritta Fagbodun, Brian Gibbens, Jeremiah A. Henning, Sophie J. McCoy, Seth K. Thompson, Charles G. Willis, A. Kelly Lane","doi":"10.1007/s40979-023-00141-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Efforts to discourage academic misconduct in online learning environments frequently include the use of remote proctoring services. While these services are relatively commonplace in undergraduate science courses, there are open questions about students’ remote assessment environments and their concerns related to remote proctoring services. Using a survey distributed to 11 undergraduate science courses engaging in remote instruction at three American, public, research-focused institutions during the spring of 2021, we found that the majority of undergraduate students reported testing in suboptimal environments. Students’ concerns about remote proctoring services were closely tied to technological difficulties, fear of being wrongfully accused of cheating, and negative impacts on mental health. Our results suggest that remote proctoring services can create and perpetuate inequitable assessment environments for students, and additional research is required to understand the efficacy of their intended purpose to prevent cheating. We also advocate for continued conversations about the broader social and institutional conditions that can pressure students into cheating. While changes to academic culture are difficult, these conversations are necessary for higher education to remain relevant in an increasingly technological world.","PeriodicalId":44838,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Educational Integrity","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Educational Integrity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-00141-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Efforts to discourage academic misconduct in online learning environments frequently include the use of remote proctoring services. While these services are relatively commonplace in undergraduate science courses, there are open questions about students’ remote assessment environments and their concerns related to remote proctoring services. Using a survey distributed to 11 undergraduate science courses engaging in remote instruction at three American, public, research-focused institutions during the spring of 2021, we found that the majority of undergraduate students reported testing in suboptimal environments. Students’ concerns about remote proctoring services were closely tied to technological difficulties, fear of being wrongfully accused of cheating, and negative impacts on mental health. Our results suggest that remote proctoring services can create and perpetuate inequitable assessment environments for students, and additional research is required to understand the efficacy of their intended purpose to prevent cheating. We also advocate for continued conversations about the broader social and institutional conditions that can pressure students into cheating. While changes to academic culture are difficult, these conversations are necessary for higher education to remain relevant in an increasingly technological world.

Abstract Image

“我无法控制”:理科生在使用远程监控软件时报告了心理健康问题和不一致的情况
在在线学习环境中阻止学术不端行为的努力通常包括使用远程监考服务。虽然这些服务在本科理科课程中相对普遍,但关于学生的远程评估环境和他们对远程监考服务的担忧仍存在悬而未决的问题。通过对2021年春季在三所美国公立研究型机构进行远程教学的11门本科科学课程进行的调查,我们发现大多数本科生报告在次优环境下进行测试。学生对远程监考服务的担忧与技术困难、担心被错误地指控作弊以及对心理健康的负面影响密切相关。我们的研究结果表明,远程监考服务可以为学生创造和维持不公平的评估环境,并且需要进一步的研究来了解其防止作弊的预期目的的有效性。我们还提倡继续讨论可能迫使学生作弊的更广泛的社会和制度条件。虽然改变学术文化是困难的,但这些对话对于高等教育在一个日益科技化的世界中保持相关性是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal for Educational Integrity
International Journal for Educational Integrity EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
26.10%
发文量
25
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信