Regarding proctoring, faculty want choices. Students also want choices. But often administrators have to limit those choices. Why?
One of the tenants of academic freedom is that faculty members should have the liberty to determine what they teach, methods they use to teach it and how mastery is assessed. However, at many institutions the options offered to faculty members for how high stakes exams can be proctored are limited. Faculty members often have strong perspectives about the applicability of various proctoring modes. Some faculty members are comfortable with virtual proctoring services. Other faculty members are most comfortable when their exams are proctored at a local testing center or by a vetted human proctor. Faculty members in some disciplines such as math need to collect testing materials such as scrap paper to document the process by which an answer was determined. But many times an institution only provides faculty with one or two proctoring options.
Students would also like options for their testing environments. Just as students have learning styles, they also have testing styles. Some persons are comfortable taking an exam in the presence of many others, such as in a testing center. Other students prefer the solitude of a virtual testing option to limit distractions. Some students are comfortable in the presence of a human proctor, others are distracted by it. But many times schools and/or faculty dictate to students the proctoring modality.
Why are schools limiting the choices of their faculty and students? One of the most common reasons is the administrative nightmare of offering more than one proctoring modality.
There is a different work flow for each proctoring modality. If a student is using a local testing center, they have to schedule it at a time when a testing station is available. Competition for testing stations can be tough in the high-volume final exam season. If a student is using a virtual proctoring solution they have to download the software and test their Internet connection. If a student is using a human proctor they have to get the proctor approved by their school. Keeping track of where each student is in the process for each testing modality is a huge administrative burden. Some large schools which can afford it have staff persons who do nothing but this. But at many institutions this administrative burden falls on the faculty member. Not only is there a different workflow for the student for each modality, there is also a different workflow for the instructor and administration as well. As is said, “The devil is in the details.”
SmarterProctoring is the first ever Proctoring Process Management System (PPMS). It allows the school to offer multiple testing modalities because it streamlines the workflow and reduces the administrative burden for tracking where each student is in the process. Through dashboards integrated into the Learning Management System the faculty and administration can see in real time which modality each student is using and exactly where they are in the work flow. The system automates the sending of reminders (emails and texts) to students prompting them on their next steps and reminding them of deadlines. Exceptionality reports are immediately provided to the faculty member.
Schools can configure SmarterProctoring to provide the proctoring modalities which they consider appropriate. Because SmarterProctoring is integrated into the LMS now students can complete tasks such as scheduling a testing session at a testing center, starting a virtual proctoring session or finding a human proctor right from within the course room.
At SmarterServices we are pleased with the strong response to SmarterProctoring. We are confident that it is a solution that is meeting a need and will offer more choices for schools, faculty and their students. Plus through the use of either annual or per-exam proctoring management service charges to the student the service can be provided at no-cost to the institution.
Find out more at https://www.smarterproctoring.com/.