Earlier in July I spent several days at a central London venue running examinations for a client. Papers were checked, seating plans organised, ID confirmed, and slightly nervous but hopeful candidates spent several hours working hard with pens, pencils and calculators, keen to demonstrate their knowledge and hard work. As (among many other things) a long standing examination supervisor, this is a familiar part of my professional life, and a service I have regularly delivered for universities and professional bodies. So far, so normal.
Except of course, this scene is now anything but. That exams are taking place face-to-face at all is a rarity, and indeed at times it felt as though I must be the last person left in London doing this. There are many new considerations - masks are worn, temperatures checked, extra distance observed and additional cleaning provided. I should add that this exam session was delivered with comprehensive relevant support from the body and venue in question. We were in fact the first ‘business client’ back ‘on site’ at the venue after lockdown – so it was a learning experience for all concerned. But it was a success.
In the weeks before Lockdown, there was a virtual stampede by institutions to move to online assessment. In the case of some professional bodies, the new reality of the COVID-19 pandemic has merely accelerated a process already underway, and one which has been completed in 2020, instead of in 3-5 years time. In other cases, in particular perhaps those prominent universities that have in recent years held fast to a conventional pen and paper model of assessment, (often citing this as an example of the quality and robust nature of their provision), the flight to digital has been driven almost entirely by the shift to online teaching. It is clearly difficult to argue a case for the safety, of campus-based examinations, when the teaching that leads to them is wholly online, (although pre-pandemic, it was a model widely used by the Open University).
So, is this the end for the conventional examination hall?
Some within higher education have long argued that the traditional exam hall is a twentieth century relic, that has no place in a our contemporary digital world. This is sometimes supported by questioning how often in the workplace anyone is required to produce a lengthy and considered, handwritten, paper, in 2-3 hours, and without the aid of online sources. An extreme example, but an example nonetheless. So for those voices, the shift to online assessment, temporary or permanent, will be a welcome one.
However I’m not yet convinced this will be the whole story. I suspect that as the pandemic and its consequences progress through our lives, several factors will influence the direction institutions take on this. These will fall broadly into the extent to which the conventional exam hall is a) still a logistic possibility, and b) a desirable one.
Is a return to the exam hall logistically possible ? Well yes it is, but not at present as we know it – at least until there is an effective, safe, and widely available vaccine. Space is clearly a factor and possibly one of the most significant. The COVID-19 secure exam hall requires levels of space between candidates that from an integrity perspective have frankly probably always been desirable, but much less often achieved. Enhanced space requirements may well be possible with medium or smaller groups of candidates but are clearly more challenging to manage with larger numbers, and would be likely to result either in institutions renting more space (and therefore contracting more staff), or in significantly re-jigging the standard exam timetable to run less papers at a time. This in itself could result in the need to run (as some already do) exam sessions in the evenings or at weekends.
Additional requirements upon candidates, would be likely, including the wearing of masks and need to ‘pass’ a temperature check on arrival at the venue to gain admittance. And location may also be a factor. A short walk to the exam hall for campus-based institutions may be one thing. A tube or bus journey to travel to a city-based venue may be another.
The extent to which it is ‘desirable’ to return to an conventional exam hall setting will in part be driven by the logistical issues outlined above. But decision-makers will also be influenced by academic integrity and reputation, the perceptions of which will no doubt vary considerably. For some there will be fierce debate about the academic desirability of widespread continued online testing, and the voices of apparent modernity citing the out-dated nature of the pen and paper approach, may, or may not, win this one. The extent to which online teaching represents ‘value for money’ within the current higher education fee regime, is already being substantively questioned by students. Continued online assessment, in particular in the context of a full, or partial, return to face-to-face teaching will only add fuel to this.
And then there is the vexed question of cheating. Some colleagues I know are hopeful that online assessment will be a panacea for all ills in this area, In my (extensive) experience cheating tends to be prevented when candidates; a) understand what it is (in all its forms) and why its wrong b) believe (with good cause) that if doing so there is a good chance they will be caught (unsurprisinily I believe there is no substitute for experienced, well trained and motivated professional invigilation teams in achieving this!), and that c) the penalties for doing so will be sufficiently severe, to outweigh any perceived benefit. Online assessment of itself is no more likely than the traditional approach, to achieve this, and may well make other assessment offences (identity fraud, ‘phone a friend’) more, rather than less, likely.
Both of the above will also influence the extent to which institutions believe there may be a ‘reputational ‘hit’ in remaining with online assessment when more ‘normality’ is possible, as will perceptions about the direction the majority of institutions will take, and the merits (or not) of standing out from the crowd on this one.
And finally the elephant in the room – equality. A well managed exam hall (and appropriate additional arrangements for those with certified need) can be a great level playing field. Indeed some would argue that is precisely the point of it. Sadly not all candidates will have access to the ‘ideal' or indeed 'standardised' conditions in which to take their exams, that campus- or venue-based provision can deliver. As in so many other areas, it may be those in greatest need who could be disadvantaged the most in the post pandemic world.
So as ever we live in interesting times.
“Should we remain online?, return to tradition?, or develop a blended approach?. Discuss”.
You may now turn over your papers, or enter your pin code, and begin…
Sue Carrette, 29th July 2020
Comments