CSCC Digital Education & Instructional Services

The Academic Testing Initiative


I. The Academic Testing Initiative:

In an effort to assist faculty with academic testing during the pandemic the college established the Academic Testing Committee. The committee’s purpose is to assist faculty in exploring an alternative testing model based on Active and Collaborative Learning that does not require proctored exams and to provide a model for test proctoring where alternative assessments may not be appropriate. The Committee is co-chaired by Tom Erney, PhD, Dean of Digital Learning and Diana Wisse, PhD, Director II Advising and Student Support.

At Columbus State Community College, technology goes far beyond being a solution to classroom issues; rather, it is part of our pedagogy. Because our learning environment has changed with the shift to increased distance learning, we are all thinking even more critically (and creatively) about the role of alternative assessments and technology in education. In addition, this increased on-line environment calls for a renewed focus on building trust in our academic community and having open dialogue about academic integrity.

To ensure that faculty are able to effectively incorporate assessment strategies during this time, an honest and critical audit of educational technologies has been conducted, taking into account the pedagogical environment our faculty and students work in. Important considerations in restructuring testing/assessment in the remote environment have been identified as:

  • Access to technology (hardware and software)
  • Dependability/reliability of internet connections
  • Academic misconduct concerns
  • Technology training for faculty and students
  • Ongoing technical support for faculty and students

Due to COVID-19, College Testing Centers are closed. Our audit has identified three main modes of testing/assessment that will be implemented by faculty Autumn Semester 2020:

  1. Employing alternative assessments that do not require proctoring.
  2. Maximizing the use of unproctored Blackboard testing features.
  3. Live-virtual proctoring of exams through software like Collaborate, Teams, Webex, and Zoom.
  4. Using Respondus Monitor/Lockdown Browser to proctor tests (reserved for limited, high-stakes testing/assessment).

We are committed to remaining flexible and caring and taking into consideration the chaotic environments for both our students and faculty during this time, and to establishing easy-to-access resources and services to support both faculty and students as we navigate these unexpected times together.

II. Academic Testing Committee Information:

Committee Purpose:

Strengthening virtual assessment and academic integrity by cultivating the use of alternative assessment methods while providing options for focused proctored assessment with purposeful attention towards student success, active and collaborative learning, equity and access.

Guiding Principles:

  • Academic integrity
  • Physical limitations
  • Digital equity
  • Accessibility
  • Data-driven decisions

Objectives:

  • Create a cross functional committee to address academic testing needs in this pandemic environment
  • Develop recommendations for the use of online alternative assessments
  • Develop recommendations for software-based proctoring
  • Establish a process and tool for guiding principles of student success that address equity, access, and academic integrity
  • Provide a framework for Academic Departments to evaluate their academic assessment methods

III. Academic Testing Committee Work:

Summer Pilot:

Respondus Monitor & Alternative Assessment
Focus on select courses to develop processes.

  1. Establish a working group that consists of faculty from the Testing Center Advisory Group and the TLTR DL Lead Faculty Testing Center Workgroup
  2. Propose pilot of Respondus Monitor to faculty groups that consists of academic programs that require proctoring and Math 1099 (A class with testing challenges due to the self-paced nature). Approximately 800 students in early summer pilot
  3. Propose parallel pilot of Alternative Assessment that involves volunteer faculty from the pilot workgroup to develop at least two alternative assessments for a course
  4. Assessment of use and feedback from students and faculty to provide data for planning

Considerations:

  • Accrediting Bodies (Provide documentation of accreditation needs)
  • Establishing standards for usage based on specific academic need that engages all deans and chairpersons and their faculty
  • Deciding what is “High Stakes”- (Example: Midterm and Final)
  • Survey faculty about proctoring needs to get a sense of needs moving forward
  • Continue to offer faculty direct staff assistance to put test in Blackboard for future testing needs and proctoring
  • Consider a Testing “Hotline or Chat function” for students to express any issues that are impeding their testing experience
  • Assuring Access/Equity (see section)
  • Explore ways to gradually open up usage based on established standards

Alternative Assessment Focus

  1. Continue weekly faculty conversations on alternative assessment led by the Faculty Fellows in FPDi (Alternative Assessment is and ACL activity)
  2. Develop and implement training provided by faculty fellows in FPDi for faculty on the design and use of alternative assessment. (Pilot with incentive)
  3. Provide workshops to individual departments to help explore the use of alternative assessments in their areas
  4. Highlight and recognize faculty work in this area in the campus community and beyond
  5. Provide staff support to faculty for transitioning test to alternative assessment format and putting tests in Blackboard where appropriate
  6. Provide support to faculty for quality assessment (AQR) including research
  7. Renewed focus on Academic Ethics: Pedagogy for success. Developing professionals through building confidence in testing (examples: multiple opportunities for practice, exam study guides, options for notes used in test-taking), Academic Honesty pledges and ethics discussions at multiple points in class
  8. Develop a partnership between the Library and DEIS to provide a research service for faculty to explore Alternative Assessment in their content area
  9. Communicate with faculty why we think we need to move from the way we currently use the Testing Center

Autumn

Respondus Monitor & Alternative Assessment

Scenarios may include:

  1. All faculty have access to Respondus Monitor with guidelines and tips to guide use developed by faculty workgroups that continue to encourage alternative assessments and understanding that a mixed approach may be needed in some courses
  2. Tiered approach based on survey of proctoring needs

Based on pilot:

  1. Provide documentation, instructions, and tips for faculty on the use of Respondus Monitor
  2. Implement Student and Faculty support based on pilot
  3. Continued focus on access and equity through supports

Assessment and Planning:

  1. Follow use of proctoring software to gather data and make predictions for future needs and budget considerations
  2. Continued surveying of faculty and analysis of student experience related to proctoring to get a sense of needs moving forward

Alternative Assessment

  1. Continued training provided by faculty for faculty on the design and use of alternative assessment
  2. Provide workshops to individual departments to help explore the use of alternative assessments in their areas
  3. Highlight and recognize faculty work in this area in the campus community and beyond
  4. Provide staff support to faculty for transitioning test to alternative assessment format and putting tests in Blackboard where appropriate
  5. Renewed focus on Academic Ethics: Pedagogy for success. Developing professionals through building confidence in testing (Multiple opportunities for practice, exam study guides, options for notes used in test-taking, Academic Honesty pledges before each test and ethics discussions at multiple points in class, etc.)
  6. Provide support to faculty for quality assessment (AQR)

FOCUS ON ACCESS/EQUITY for Online Proctoring

  • Provide “No stakes quiz” at the beginning of semester to test technology and problem solve. (Syllabus quiz for example)
  • Questions asked about Technology, Space/Environment, Disability, Other Concerns. Consistent collection of this information is important
  • Response Map for what happens when unexpected things happen. Consistent practice for handling issues that come up. (Considering a pandemic environment, for example, child comes into the room, voices from other rooms, internet goes out)
  • Response Map for Chromebook users. (Since Respondus Monitor does not work with Chromebooks, alternatives need to be considered)
  • Response Map for Students with Accommodations; working close with Disability Services
  • Response Map for Students without other required technology. (No webcam. Slow/no internet, etc.)
  • Use of process evaluation and testing data to continuously evaluate the use of the tool/s and student success metrics to identify any issues relating to equity
  • Instructor is mindful of observational bias surrounding the testing environment.

Communication Plan:

  • Involve members of TLTR Faculty Workgroup on Testing and College Testing Advisory Group to participate in task groups around proctoring and Placement testing
  • Provide continuous updates on Summer Pilots and outlines for future work
  • Representative group will visit each department to discuss Respondus Monitor pilot
  • Work with Marketing and Communications on campus communications
  • Task Groups will provide detailed outlines of work to Academic Council for review including the proposed Summer pilots. Provide continuous updates on work for consideration