170 likes | 179 Views
Using technology to support our online distance learners taking assessments. Karen Barton Amanda Jefferies Jonathan Meere Sulanie Peramunagama Andrew Pyper Stilianos Vidalis Amanda Yip. Background.
E N D
Using technology to support our online distance learners taking assessments Karen Barton Amanda Jefferies Jonathan Meere Sulanie Peramunagama Andrew Pyper StilianosVidalis Amanda Yip
Background • University of Hertfordshire involved early on in the use of online test invigilation (proctoring) • Mariana Lilley, Jonathan Meere and Amanda Yip pioneered the use of live proctoring • Work provided a basis for European funding bid
Background – online proctoring • Record and Review, • Record and Review (with rear camera feed), • Record and Review with Live Authentication, • Live Authentication and Invigilation. • Live Invigilation with UH Invigilators (Deployment)
OP4RE • ERASMUS+ funding £450,000 for 7 European HEI partners and 1 commercial provider • 30+ associate partners across Europe and globally • 3 year project from September 2016 -August 2019 • 5 intellectual outputs being worked on by different partners
Aims • 5 Intellectual outputs- ours is Security and anti-fraud legislation protocols relating to online inviglation (remote proctoring) • Specifically: • develop protocols to support the validity of tests • establish the underlying security of the proctoring platform
Methodology • Test for vulnerabilities in the actual system • Identify the threats to validity in the process of conducting the test
Methodology- vulnerability test • To test for holes or vulnerabilities in the security of the proctoring provider’s platform. • Penetration Testing Execution Standard (PTES) • Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP) methodologies
Results- vulnerability test • No unauthorised access was possible • a denial of service attack did not succeed • No information leakage was detected.
Identify the threats to validity in the process of conducting the test
Methodology- identifying threats to validity • Analysis of the issues identified by the proctoring service itself • Additional analysis performed by members of the research team • Focus group with UH Exam invigilators
Interim results - analysis • The analysis indicates significant shortcomings in the record and review process with one camera • Limited number of issues logged by proctoring system when compared to research team members.
Interim results – focus group with invigilators • What do invigilators look for in exam hall contexts? • How do they respond to suspicious behaviour? • Forms of cheating they have detected • To what extent are they confident that they can they detect suspicious behaviour given an example record and review test?
Interim results – focus group with invigilators • Communication concerns • Environmental concerns • Undetected help (external to the exam environment itself) • Overall, not confident about outcome of test with standard one-camera record and review protocol • Caveat- open book may be ok
Thanks Any questions? Please contact Professor Amanda Jefferies a.l.jefferies@herts.ac.uk