You might think of online proctoring as a necessary evil, but what if it isn't? How can you help move your institution away from the "policing" mindset and toward the mindset of advocating for students' privacy and best interests?
We examine online proctoring through three perspectives: faculty, instructional design, administration.
You might think of online proctoring as a necessary evil, but what if it isn't? How can you help move your institution away from the "policing" mindset and toward the mindset of advocating for students' privacy and best interests?
We examine the question of online proctoring through three perspectives: faculty, instructional design, and administration.
How can these three viewpoints be used to move the conversation away from the fear of cheating and the use of invasive online proctoring tools toward the construction of better assessments instead?
The strategies in this session are designed to start a healthy discussion at your campus, and then build work practices to bring understanding and practicality to the design of online testing. Administrators have to start the discussion, and create campus norms and customs, instructional designers train and support the faculty's work, and faculty create and implement original, dynamic assessments that don't require online proctoring.
Including insights on student privacy, student perceptions, course design, and alignment, we will use research and data to help you unite faculty, administrators and instructional support staff in adopting best practices in dealing with this issue in a healthy and positive manner.
Online proctoring is a much-discussed topic, but for many is seen as a necessary evil. We're here to tell it that it's not necessary, as long as better assessments and practices are in place. Attendees will leave the session with a better understanding of the topic, and with ideas on how to approach the topic at their own institutions