Post on 27-Nov-2014
description
Electronic Proctoring and Identity Validation in Online Programs
Motives for pilot testing
• Reduce costs
• Manage growth
• Provide anywhere/anytime online experience
• Ensure legitimacy and integrity of programs
• Address possible 2008 HEOA requirements
Goals of pilot testing
• Conduct basic proof of concept
• Determine burden on students, faculty, and staff
• Articulate institutional requirements
• Develop strategies for implementation
Key technical components
Model 1 • Asynchronous video/audio monitoring• Physiological biometrics• Secure lock-down• Full exam creation, delivery, and management.
Key technical components Model 2
• Synchronous video/audio monitoring
• Behavioral biometrics
• Secure lockdown
• Full exam creation, delivery, and management
Key technical components Model 3
• Synchronous video/audio monitoring
• Non-biometric authentication
• Control of screen by live proctor
Key technical components Model 4
• Behavioral biometrics (authentication using a
computer mouse)
Internal study of evaluative assessment
at UMUC
• Role of high-stakes final proctored exam
• Stakeholder perspectives
• Key conclusions:– External pressures for testing
– Internal pressures for testing
– Decoupling academic and academic integrity decisions
Conclusions and next steps for UMUC
• Results of pilot testing
• RFP preparation: determining institutional requirements– Example: “Integration” questions
• Relationship between electronic proctoring and authentication solutions
Overall lessons from UMUC experience
• Conduct institution-wide conversation on quality online teaching and learning
• Use pilot testing to help determine and refine institutional requirements
• Please contact me:
Matthew Prineas
mprineas@umuc.edu
301-985-7931