Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Providing online exams for online learners: Does it really matter for them?

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Online learning has grown in popularity, leading to more widespread utilization of online exams. Online exams have started to become a preferred method of assessment in both online and traditional learning environments. They provide various benefits for the learning process and learners when used appropriately within online learning programs. The current study aims to investigate the academic achievement of online learners in online exams as compared to traditional exams and to analyze their perceptions towards online exams. The study was conducted at a state university in Turkey during the 2018 spring semester. Participants of the study are 163 vocational college level online learners. This research has been designed as a mixed method study. In this regard, learners’ academic achievement and perceptions have been considered as quantitative data and learners’ opinions as qualitative data. Through the use of quantitative analysis methods, it is shown that learners report positive attitudes towards online exams and that there was no statistically significant difference in the students’ academic achievement in online and traditional exams. The majority of the learners pointed out that online exams are efficient, usable, and reliable while others indicated a level of insufficiency related to exam duration, as well as concerns about potential technical problems that may occur during the implementation of online exams. Understanding the benefits and challenges of online exams will help the institutions in planning their institutional road map.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adnan, I. (2016). Online assessment at Universitas Terbuka (Indonesia Open University). ICERI2016 Proceedings, 4928–4936.

  • Al-Mashaqbeh, I. F., & Al Hamad, A. (2010). Student’s perception of an online exam within the Decision Support System Course at Al al-Bayt University. In Proceedings Second International Conference on Computer Research and Development, ICCRD 2010 (pp. 131–135). IEEE. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCRD.2010.15

  • Al-Shalabi, E. (2016). An automated system for essay scoring of online exams in Arabic based on stemming techniques and levenshtein edit operations. International Journal of Computer Science Issues, 13, 45–50.

  • Alsadoon, H. (2017). Students’ perceptions of e-Assessment at Saudi Electronic University. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 16(1), 147–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ardid, M., Gómez-Tejedor, J. A., Meseguer-Dueñas, J. M., Riera, J., & Vidaurre, A. (2015). Online exams for blended assessment. Study of different application methodologies. Computers & Education, 81, 296–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atoum, Y., Chen, L., Liu, A. X., Hsu, S. D., & Liu, X. (2017). Automated online exam proctoring. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 19(7), 1609–1624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandele, S. O., Oluwatayo, J. A., & Omodara, M. F. (2015). Opinions of undergraduates on the use of electronic examination in a Nigerian University. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2 S1), 75. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n2s1p75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayazit, A., & Askar, P. (2012). Performance and duration differences between online and paper-pencil tests. Asia Pacific Educational Review, 13(2), 219–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-011-9190-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boevé, A. J., Meijer, R. R., Albers, C. J., Beetsma, Y., & Bosker, R. J. (2015). Introducing computer-based testing in high-stakes exams in Higher Education: Results of a field experiment. PLoS One, 10(12), e0143616. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Böhmer, C., Feldmann, N., & Ibsen, M. (2018). E-exams in engineering education — online testing of engineering competencies: Experiences and lessons learned. Paper presented at the 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363281

  • Cabı, E. (2016). The perception of students on E-Assessment in Distance Education. Journal of Higher Education & Science [Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi], 6(1), 94–101. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2016.146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chu, R. J. (2010). How family support and Internet self-efficacy influence the effects of e-learning among higher aged adults – Analyses of gender and age differences. Computers & Education, 55(1), 255–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.01.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comber, C., Colley, A., Hargreaves, D. J., & Dorn, L. (1997). The effects of age, gender and computer experience upon computer attitudes. Educational Research, 39(2), 123–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188970390201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, D., & Openo, J. (2018). Assessment Strategies for Online Learning: Engagement and Authenticity. AU Press: Athabasca University. doi:https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781771992329.01

  • Ćukušić, M., Garača, Ž., & Jadrić, M. (2014). Online self-assessment and students’ success in higher education institutions. Computers & Education, 72, 100–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dermo, J. (2009). e-Assessment and the student learning experience: A survey of student perceptions of e-assessment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00915.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dong, J. Q., & Zhang, X. (2011). Gender differences in adoption of information systems: New findings from China. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 384–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.08.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D'Souza, K. A., & Siegfeldt, D. V. (2017). A Conceptual Framework for Detecting Cheating in Online and Take-Home Exams. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 15(4), 370–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrús, M., & Costa-Jussà, M. R. (2013). Automatic evaluation for e-learning using latent semantic analysis: A use case. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(1), 239–254. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i1.1389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gvozdenko, E., & Chambers, D. (2007). Beyond test accuracy: Benefits of measuring response time in computerised testing. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(4), 542–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillier, M. (2014). The very idea of e-Exams: student (pre) conceptions. In B. Hegarty, J. McDonald, & S.-K. Lok (Eds.), Rhetoric and Reality: Critical perspectives on educational technology. Proceedings Ascilite, Dunedin 2014 (pp. 77–88). Ascilite.

  • Jawaid, M., Moosa, F. A., Jaleel, F., & Ashraf, J. (2014). Computer based assessment (CBA): Perception of residents at Dow University of Health Sciences. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 30(4), 688–691. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.304.5444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B. C., & Kiviniemi, M. T. (2009). The effect of online chapter quizzes on exam performance in an undergraduate social psychology course. Teaching of Psychology, 36(1), 33–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280802528972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, G. (2006). Optional online quizzes: College student use and relationship to achievement. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology [La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie], 32(1). https://doi.org/10.21432/T2J300.

  • Jr, G. R. C., Ehlen, C. R., & Raiborn, M. H. (2011). Thwarting online exam cheating without proctor supervision. Journal of Academic and Business Ethics., 4, 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karay, Y., Schauber, S. K., Stosch, C., & Schüttpelz-Brauns, K. (2015). Computer versus paper—Does it make any difference in test performance? Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 27(1), 57–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2014.979175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, N., & Grieve, R. (2014). Face-to-face or face-to-screen? Undergraduates’ opinions and test performance in classroom vs. online learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1278. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kesici, S., Sahin, I., & Akturk, A. O. (2009). Analysis of cognitive learning strategies and computer attitudes, according to college students’ gender and locus of control. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 529–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.11.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

  • Laine, K., Sipilä, E., Anderson, M., & Sydänheimo, L. (2016). Electronic exam in electronics studies. Paper presented at the SEFI Annual Conference 2016: Engineering Education on Top of the World: Industry University Cooperation. Tampere, Finland.

  • Mellar, H., Peytcheva-Forsyth, R., Kocdar, S., Karadeniz, A., & Yovkova, B. (2018). Addressing cheating in e-assessment using student authentication and authorship checking systems: teachers’ perspectives. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 14(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-018-0025-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, Q., Rienties, B., Toetenel, L., Ferguson, R., & Whitelock, D. (2017). Examining the designs of computer-based assessment and its impact on student engagement, satisfaction, and pass rates. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 703–714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orr, R., & Foster, S. (2013). Increasing student success using online quizzing in introductory (majors) biology. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 12(3), 509–514. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-10-0183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozden, M. Y., Erturk, I., & Sanlı, R. (2004). Students’ perceptions about online assessment: A case study. Journal of Distance Education, 19(2), 77–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parshall, C. G., Spray, J. A., Kalohn, J. C., & Davey, T. (2002). Practical considerations in computer-based testing. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rovai, A. P. (2000). Online and traditional assessments: what is the difference? The Internet and Higher Education, 3(3), 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(01)00028-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, B., & Caputi, P. (2007). Cognitive interference model of computer anxiety: Implications for computer-based assessment. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1481–1498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2005.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorensen, E. (2013). Implementation and student perceptions of e-assessment in a Chemical Engineering module. European Journal of Engineering Education, 38(2), 172–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2012.760533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terzis, V., & Economides, A. A. (2011). Computer based assessment: Gender differences in perceptions and acceptance. Computers in Human Behaviour, 27(6), 2018–2122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.06.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y., Wu, M., & Wang, H. (2009). Investigating the determinants and age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40, 92–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00809.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werhner, M. J. (2010). A comparison of the performance of online versus traditional on-campus earth science students on identical exams. Journal of Geoscience Education, 58(5), 310–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yılmaz, Ö. (2016). Çevrimiçi Sınav Görüş Anketi. e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(3), 26–33.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We want to thank to Instructor Mesut Sevindik, who helped us during data collection process.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Distance Education Center, Ankara University, 06830, Ankara, Gölbaşı, Turkey

    Hale Ilgaz & Gülgün Afacan Adanır

Authors
  1. Hale Ilgaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gülgün Afacan Adanır
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hale Ilgaz.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ilgaz, H., Afacan Adanır, G. Providing online exams for online learners: Does it really matter for them?. Educ Inf Technol 25, 1255–1269 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10020-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10020-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation