Remote versus onsite proctored exams: comparing students’ results in physical fitness testing

IF 0.8 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Aiman A Sarhan, Faisal A Barwais
{"title":"Remote versus onsite proctored exams: comparing students’ results in physical fitness testing","authors":"Aiman A Sarhan, Faisal A Barwais","doi":"10.15561/20755279.2023.0605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Study Aim. Since the outbreak of COVID-19, distance learning has become a widespread practice in educational institutions worldwide, leading to the adoption of remote electronic examinations (e-exams) as a primary method of assessment. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of admission tests for the sport sciences department, contrasting traditional face-to-face onsite testing with online-based remote testing. Material and Methods. A total of 500 students applied (n =177 distance learning students, n =323 onsite students). From the tests, differences in levels of physical fitness (long jump, sit-ups, burpees, and pull-ups/push-ups) were compared between the remote and the onsite participants. Results. According to univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA), there was a significant difference in the level of physical fitness (long jump, sit-up, burpees, and pull-up/push-up tests) between the remote participants (154.01 ± 83.1 cm; 13.85 ± 8.21 reps/60 sec; 6.76 ± 6.52 reps/30 sec; 11.36 ± 8.0 pull-ups/push-ups, respectively) and the onsite participants (172.34 ± 27.0; 15.28 ± 4.01 reps/60 sec; 27.29 ± 6.61 reps/30 sec; 14.76 ± 9.47 pull-ups/push-ups, respectively). Conclusions. The results of the present study indicate that the outcomes of physical fitness tests were significantly higher among onsite participants compared to remote participants. Despite the successful implementation of admission test procedures in the distance sport sciences department, the findings suggest a preference for physical fitness tests among onsite participants due to various factors, including 1) increased motivation, 2) model friction, and 3) competitive atmosphere.","PeriodicalId":51897,"journal":{"name":"Physical Education of Students","volume":"98 20","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical Education of Students","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15561/20755279.2023.0605","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Study Aim. Since the outbreak of COVID-19, distance learning has become a widespread practice in educational institutions worldwide, leading to the adoption of remote electronic examinations (e-exams) as a primary method of assessment. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of admission tests for the sport sciences department, contrasting traditional face-to-face onsite testing with online-based remote testing. Material and Methods. A total of 500 students applied (n =177 distance learning students, n =323 onsite students). From the tests, differences in levels of physical fitness (long jump, sit-ups, burpees, and pull-ups/push-ups) were compared between the remote and the onsite participants. Results. According to univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA), there was a significant difference in the level of physical fitness (long jump, sit-up, burpees, and pull-up/push-up tests) between the remote participants (154.01 ± 83.1 cm; 13.85 ± 8.21 reps/60 sec; 6.76 ± 6.52 reps/30 sec; 11.36 ± 8.0 pull-ups/push-ups, respectively) and the onsite participants (172.34 ± 27.0; 15.28 ± 4.01 reps/60 sec; 27.29 ± 6.61 reps/30 sec; 14.76 ± 9.47 pull-ups/push-ups, respectively). Conclusions. The results of the present study indicate that the outcomes of physical fitness tests were significantly higher among onsite participants compared to remote participants. Despite the successful implementation of admission test procedures in the distance sport sciences department, the findings suggest a preference for physical fitness tests among onsite participants due to various factors, including 1) increased motivation, 2) model friction, and 3) competitive atmosphere.
远程考试与现场监考:学生体能测试结果比较
背景和研究目的。自COVID-19疫情爆发以来,远程教育已成为全球教育机构的普遍做法,从而导致采用远程电子考试(e-exam)作为主要的评估方法。本研究旨在比较体育科学系入学考试的结果,将传统的面对面现场考试与基于网络的远程考试进行对比。材料与方法共有 500 名学生申请(n = 177 名远程学习学生,n = 323 名现场学生)。通过测试,比较了远程和现场参与者在体能(跳远、仰卧起坐、伏地挺身和引体向上/俯卧撑)水平上的差异。结果显示根据单变量方差分析(ANOVA),远程参与者的体能水平(跳远、仰卧起坐、伏地挺身和引体向上/俯卧撑测试)与现场参与者(154.01 ± 83.1 厘米;13.85±8.21次/60秒;6.76±6.52次/30秒;11.36±8.0个引体向上/俯卧撑)与现场参与者(分别为172.34±27.0;15.28±4.01次/60秒;27.29±6.61次/30秒;14.76±9.47个引体向上/俯卧撑)之间存在显著差异。结论本研究结果表明,与远程参与者相比,现场参与者的体能测试结果明显更高。尽管远程体育科学系成功实施了录取测试程序,但研究结果表明,由于各种因素,现场参与者更倾向于体能测试,这些因素包括:1)动机增强;2)模型摩擦;3)竞争氛围。
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
Physical Education of Students
Physical Education of Students EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 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