2022
DOI: 10.14569/ijacsa.2022.0130610
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Proctoring and Non-proctoring Systems

Abstract: This research describes learning achievement assessment technology, especially proctor technology. This study compares and contrasts proctoring and non-proctoring procedures used for online exams. The sample case used was the test scores of students enrolled in Hasanuddin University's Indonesian Arabic translation course. The research method used was a non-experimental quantitative method that compared students' online test results using proctoring and non-proctoring systems during online exams. The test score… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Goedl and Malla (2020) found unequal grade distributions in proctored and un-proctored exams and advised caution in using them to maintain grade equivalency. Baso (2022) reported lower scores in the proctored online system and found no influence of class or gender on performance.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Goedl and Malla (2020) found unequal grade distributions in proctored and un-proctored exams and advised caution in using them to maintain grade equivalency. Baso (2022) reported lower scores in the proctored online system and found no influence of class or gender on performance.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Goedl and Malla (2020) found unequal grade distributions in proctored and un-proctored exams and advised caution in using them to maintain grade equivalency. Baso (2022) reported lower scores in the proctored online system and found no influence of class or gender on performance. Lee (2020) and Andreou et al (2021) found no difference in students' performance in online and offline proctored exams and asserted that the exam proctoring environment is unlikely to be related to student performance.…”
Section: Category 2: Stakeholders' Concerns Of Using Digital Proctoringmentioning
confidence: 90%