Examinations in schools were an unexpected victim of this year’s disruption, and one of the most surprising. Whoever thought they would see students on the news actually lamenting their cancelled exams. But rightfully with the spaces closed for safety purposes, national examinations such as GCSEs, A-Levels and university exams have all fallen by the wayside this year. But spare a thought for small examinations, tests and assessments – often delivered in test centres as and when they are required – who have faced enormous disruption this year; and may face further issues ahead.
this year could represent a two-fold setback – an extended period of being unable to administer exams; followed by an accelerated rise of a larger existential threat, online proctoring
There are large numbers of professional exams that have suffered as part of lockdown measures; for example, qualifications for drivers, construction workers, project managers and specialists; and in areas like music, drama and modern languages. These examinations are often delivered on a ad hoc or on-demand basis at professional test centres worldwide. In some cases, exam administrators received advanced warning as they cancelled overseas tests in the Far East during January and February as China, Hong Kong and Korea started their lockdowns and test centres were forced to close. Furthermore, with furloughs and changes to working patterns, many have struggled to respond rapidly with the ever-changing advice and guidance. As a result, many tests and examinations face a tough road ahead as they try to clear their backlogs of candidates and find a safe route forward.
One emerging effect of the global lockdowns is the huge increase in online proctored exams. Even before coronavirus struck, there was an increasing appetite to administer examinations remotely with a number of products emerging in the market, and some securing hefty investments. Recent events have supercharged this trend especially in the US in the higher education sector. It has prompted a number of small-scale assessments to consider this route for themselves.
Requiring tests and exams to be delivered in person is always problematic. It forces tests to work with a third party (the exam centre) and it significantly increases the cost of delivery to the candidate. Though there is nothing inherently wrong with working with third parties, it is the additional factor of risk that can trouble the assessments. Who will invigilate? Are the test centres safe? Will they follow the instructions, the rules, the procedure? Is Student A in New York getting the same experience as Student B in Kathmandu? These risks can be mitigated and audited, but it is a lot of work and certainly remains a challenge for any examination, regardless of the size or scale.
The advent of online proctoring may come as a welcome step for assessments who are used to these challenges. Though risks still remain, there is the feeling that if they can be mitigated through software solutions, that it might be a more cost-effective way forward and improve the experience for candidates. The opportunities to run online ID checks and instructional videos on how to complete the test are most welcome. The delivery of tests that are marked automatically – resulting in much faster processing – are welcomed by assessments and candidates alike. Delivering results and official certificates through online portals cuts through slow human-administrative work. Overall online exam delivery has enormously positive effects, however there remain some major hurdles that need to be negotiated on route to an automated nirvana.
There is an excellent article I posted about a few months ago in Vox magazine, describing the vastly variable experiences of US university students sitting online proctored exams. There are large questions about the accessibility of stable high-speed internet and up-to-date devices. Increasingly, there are concerns about safeguarding; particularly in fully proctored exams where video and/or images of the test taker are sent over the internet and stored. These processes, and legal T&Cs that support them are still relatively green in legal terms. Many candidates (and assessments) are cautious of these intrusions and where responsibilities lie; and this issue is prevalent in use-cases involving consenting adults – imagine if your assessment works with minors.
Safeguarding issues aside, setting up tests [to be delivered online] takes investment and time – two elusive factors for many low-volume assessments right now
For test centres, this year could represent a two-fold setback – an extended period of being unable to administer exams; followed by an accelerated rise of a larger existential threat, online proctoring. Nevertheless, I believe things are not as bad as they may seem in the long term. I think many tests and exams have a long way to go before they will be entirely comfortable with delivering their exams entirely online. Safeguarding issues aside, setting up tests in this way takes investment and time – two elusive factors for many low-volume assessments right now.
Secondly, in an international setting, assessments have relied on test centres as advocates and supporters on the ground in far away locations, and this support will be necessary in the future. In many cases, I believe it most likely there will be a hybrid test delivery solution that will suit exams better than online proctoring. One that automates much of the administrative elements of invigilation (ID checking, exam instruction videos, explaining rules and regulations) but still uses a test centre to host the assessment for essential verification and reliability. If this is the case, then it might result in an improved experience for all parties.
If you are interested in delivering exams for low-volume professional exams, then join our network of exam centres: enquiries@intac.network
Comments