Earlier in my career, I served as a Dean of Distance Learning at two different institutions. I always enjoyed the work that took place during the middle of the summer. Typically, our enrollments would not be as high during the summer term, which afforded me an opportunity to do some planning for improvements to our program for the upcoming fall. Is that the case for you? If so, what improvements to your eLearning program are you planning for this upcoming academic year?
One facet of an eLearning program that you may be working to improve is the practices and processes related to proctoring. You may be wondering, “How can we be perfecting our proctoring?”
Watch this short video to learn tips on how to perfect your proctoring or scroll down to read the video overview below.
Video Overview:
Concerns that Schools are Expressing about Proctoring
At many institutions, proctoring is perceived as a necessary evil — not something that can be made better. Here are some of the concerns that we are hearing schools express about their proctoring program:
- Conformity: Our proctoring program seems to be one size fits all. We have one proctoring vendor, and all testing must conform to their method of proctoring.
- Scalability: We are having trouble scaling up our proctoring during the peak periods of mid-terms and finals. Students report not being able to schedule proctoring when they need it and long wait times even for scheduled sessions.
- Isolation: It seems like our eLearning department is in a battle against the rest of the institution in regard to proctoring.
- Experimentation: We would like to try some different proctoring practices, but with many vendors, it is an all-or-nothing enterprise-wide contract.
- Frustration: We are hearing from our students that the proctoring experience is frustrating them. We need a student-centered proctoring approach.
Continue reading to learn how each concern can be addressed to with tips on how to perfect your proctoring at your institution.
Concern #1: Conformity
Concerning the feeling of conformity, at SmarterServices, we strongly feel that proctoring should not be one size fits all. We understand that faculty need to have options of proctoring modalities based on the rigor of the exam. Students also need proctoring options along the continuum of cost versus convenience.
SmarterProctoring provides more proctoring modality choices than any other proctoring vendor — seven to be exact. We provide three virtual proctoring options – Automated Proctoring, Record and Review, and Live Virtual Proctoring. In addition to these virtual options, SmarterProctoring is the only proctoring platform that also allows you to also manage face-to-face proctoring options including testing centers, proctoring professionals, and instructors as proctors. Finally, our newest proctoring modality, Hybrid Virtual Proctoring, is the best of both worlds combining the use of artificial intelligence for anomaly detection with the use of staff from your institution reviewing the testing session in real-time with the ability to stop the exam if needed.
Concern #2: Scalability
One of the reasons schools feel that their proctoring program is not scalable during peak periods is related to the practice of providing a one size fits all proctoring program. When only one proctoring modality is offered, it is more likely to reach technical and human capacity during peak periods. With SmarterProctoring, the load is spread across seven modalities.
Concern #3: Isolation
We get it. Sometimes eLearning leaders feel like they are stuck on an island and that they are the only voices speaking up for fostering academic integrity. But now, through the use of our new proctoring modality, Hybrid Virtual Proctoring, the human resources of other departments can be utilized as well.
For example, for years, testing centers have done a great job proctoring in-person exams for persons with disabilities and/or make-up exams for tests missed by on-campus students. But even though they are the local experts in exam security, they have often not been engaged in proctoring for online students. Using Hybrid Virtual Proctoring, staff from a testing center can be used as the live, virtual proctor. This not only saves money but is a great quality assurance methodology since your school’s staff is doing the proctoring. Many testing centers are excited about this opportunity since it gives them the ability to expand their scope of services.
Concern #4: Experimentation
It is easy to get stuck in a rut of doing proctoring the same way for a long time. It is often also difficult to get out of that rut and try something different with proctoring. Many vendors require an expensive enterprise-wide adoption of their system. But with SmarterProctoring, using most learning management systems, just a few faculty can try out our platform without it being present in other courses.
Concern #5: Frustration
Students at many institutions are voicing that the proctoring process is frustrating. When students experience this additional stress, it can interfere with their ability to demonstrate their mastery of the course content. Students do not want to be told what they must do in regards to proctoring, but prefer to be given multiple options of proctoring modalities.
Many students due to physical or emotional disability or personal preference desire to take their exams in a face-to-face environment. This can be especially true for neurodiverse students who may experience a feeling similar to stage fright as they are being monitored by a stranger online. Students also prefer options related to scheduling requirements and cost. SmarterProctoring gives your students more proctoring options than any other proctoring provider. 
Start Working Smarter
As you ponder how to make your proctoring program more perfect, reach out and let us show you how the seven modalities of SmarterProctoring can help you start perfecting your proctoring by resolving the issues of conformity, scalability, isolation, experimentation, and frustration.
