Surveillance or Support? Rethinking Online Proctoring through Student Experience in Higher Education: A Pilot Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51278/aj.v8i4.3036Keywords:
Academic Integrity, Distance Education, Higher Education, Online Proctoring, PerceptionAbstract
The rapid expansion of online assessment in higher education has intensified concerns about academic integrity, fairness, and student experience. Online proctoring has emerged as a widely adopted solution, yet it remains controversial due to ethical and technological challenges. This study explores postgraduate students’ perceptions of online proctoring in an open and distance learning context. Using a qualitative design, data were collected through open-ended questionnaires from three students with direct experience in proctored examinations. Thematic analysis identified three major themes: academic integrity, technological barriers, and privacy considerations. The findings show that students generally perceive online proctoring as effective in maintaining fairness and preventing cheating. However, this positive perception is moderated by significant technological challenges, including unstable internet connections and multi-device requirements, which can affect performance and equity. Interestingly, participants reported comfort with surveillance, largely due to trust in institutional data practices, although this may reflect limited awareness of privacy risks. The study highlights the dual nature of online proctoring as both a necessary tool and a source of tension. It contributes to the literature by foregrounding student perspectives in a developing-country, distance education context and underscores the need for balanced, transparent, and context-sensitive assessment practices.
References
Babbar, M., & Gupta, T. (2021). Response of educational institutions to COVID-19 pandemic: An inter-country comparison. Policy Futures in Education, 20(4), 469–491. https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103211021937
Blackmon, S. J., & Major, C. H. (2023). Inclusion or infringement? A systematic research review of students’ perspectives on student privacy in technology-enhanced, hybrid and online courses. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54(6), 1542–1565. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13362
Chiang, F., Zhu, D., & Yu, W. (2022). A systematic review of academic dishonesty in online learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(4), 907–928. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12656
Coghlan, S., Miller, T., & Paterson, J. M. (2021). Good proctor or “Big Brother”? Ethics of online exam supervision technologies. Philosophy & Technology, 34(4), 1581–1606. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00476-1
Felsinger, D. N., Halloluwa, T., & Fonseka, C. L. I. (2023). Experiences of conducting online exam proctoring in low-resource settings: A Sri Lankan case study. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 93(1), 163–177. https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v93i1.5094
Fuchs, K., & Karrila, S. (2021). The perceived satisfaction with emergency remote teaching amidst COVID-19: An exploratory case study in higher education. Education and Science Journal, 23(5), 116–130. https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2021-5-116-130
Gamage, K. A. A., Silva, E. K. D., & Gunawardhana, N. (2020). Online delivery and assessment during COVID-19: Safeguarding academic integrity. Education Sciences, 10(11), 301. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10110301
Gasmalla, H. E. E., Mossa, A. H., Taha, M. H., Wadi, M., Shehzad, K., Abdalla, M. E., & Hadie, S. N. H. (2022). Promoting more future-ready anatomy education after the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review. Anatomical Sciences Education, 15(6), 1120–1137. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.2227
Gribbins, M., & Bonk, C. J. (2023). An exploration of instructors’ perceptions about online proctoring and its value in ensuring academic integrity. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54(6), 1693–1714. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13389
Han, S., Nikou, S., & Ayele, W. Y. (2023). Digital proctoring in higher education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Management, 38(1), 265–285. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-12-2022-0522
Hartnett, M., Butler, P., & Rawlins, P. (2023). Online proctored exams and digital inequalities during the pandemic. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(4), 1103–1115. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12813
Henry, J. V., & Oliver, M. (2021). Who will watch the watchmen? The ethico-political arrangements of algorithmic proctoring for academic integrity. Postdigital Science and Education, 4(2), 330–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-021-00273-1
Hilliger, I., Ruipérez-Valiente, J. A., Alexandron, G., & Gašević, D. (2022). Trustworthy remote assessments: A typology of pedagogical and technological strategies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(6), 1507–1520. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12755
Hussein, M. J., Yusuf, J., Deb, A. S., Fong, L., & Naidu, S. (2020). An evaluation of online proctoring tools. Open Praxis, 12(4), 509–525. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.12.4.1113
Hébert, C. (2021). Online remote proctoring software in the neoliberal institution: Measurement, accountability, and testing culture. In Education, 27(1), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.37119/ojs2021.v27i1.507
Infante-Moro, A., Infante-Moro, J. C., Gallardo-Pérez, J., & Martínez-López, F. J. (2022). Key factors in the implementation of e-proctoring in the Spanish university system. Sustainability, 14(13), 8112. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14138112
Jacobs, L., & Mncube, L. S. (2023). Proctoring as a human substitution for online summative assessments in open distance e-learning institutions. Independent Journal of Teaching and Learning, 18(2), 93–108.
Jiang, X., Goh, T., Chen, X., Liu, M., & Yang, B. (2023). Investigating university students’ online proctoring acceptance: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 39(2), 47–64. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8121
Johri, A., & Hingle, A. (2023). Students’ technological ambivalence toward online proctoring. Journal of Engineering Education, 112(1), 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20504
Khalil, M., Prinsloo, P., & Slade, S. (2022). In the nexus of integrity and surveillance: Proctoring reconsidered. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(6), 1589–1602. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12713
Khan, Z. R., Priya, J., & Tuffnell, C. (2022). Culture of integrity: Institutional response during COVID-19. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-022-00118-9
Langenfeld, T. E. (2020). Internet-based proctored assessment: Security and fairness issues. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 39(3), 24–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12359
Looi, K. H. (2023). Ameliorating emergency web-enabled teaching. Information Discovery and Delivery, 52(3), 289–304. https://doi.org/10.1108/IDD-01-2023-0005
Marano, E., Newton, P. M., Birch, Z., Croombs, M., Gilbert, C., & Draper, M. (2024). What is the student experience of remote proctoring? Higher Education Quarterly, 78(3), 1031–1047. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12506
Muchemwa, S. (2023). Integrity of university online assessment. Eureka Journal of Educational Research, 1(2), 67–73.
Noorbehbahani, F., Mohammadi, A., & Aminazadeh, M. (2022). Cheating in online exams: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 27(6), 8413–8460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10927-7
Nurpeisova, A., Shaushenova, A., Mutalova, Z., Ongarbayeva, M., Niyazbekova, S., Bekenova, A., ... & Zhumasseitova, S. (2023). Research on the development of a proctoring system for conducting online exams in Kazakhstan. Computation, 11(6), 120. https://doi.org/10.3390/computation11060120
Patael, S., et al. (2022). Remote proctoring: Lessons learned. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(6), 1554–1573. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12746
Portugal, D., Faria, J. N., Belk, M., Martins, P., Constantinides, A., Pietron, A., ... & Fidas, C. A. (2023). Continuous user identification in distance learning: a recent technology perspective. Smart learning environments, 10(1), 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00255-9
Sato, S. N., Condes Moreno, E., Rubio-Zarapuz, A., Dalamitros, A. A., Yañez-Sepulveda, R., Tornero-Aguilera, J. F., & Clemente-Suárez, V. J. (2023). Navigating the new normal: Adapting online and distance learning in the post-pandemic era. Education Sciences, 14(1), 19.
Selwyn, N., O’Neill, C., Smith, G., Andrejevic, M., & Gu, X. (2021). A necessary evil? Online exam proctoring. Media International Australia, 186(1), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X211005862
Silverman, S., Caines, A., Casey, C., Garcia de Hurtado, B., Riviere, J., Sintjago, A., & Vecchiola, C. (2021). What happens when you close the door on remote proctoring? Moving toward authentic assessments with a people-centered approach. To Improve the Academy 39 (3):115–131. https://doi.org/10.3998/tia.17063888.0039.308
Tweissi, A., Etaiwi, W., & Al-Eisawi, D. (2022). Accuracy of AI-based proctoring. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 20(4), 419–435. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.20.4.2600
Vijayan, R. (2021). Teaching and learning during COVID-19. Education Sciences, 11(7), 347. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070347
Woldeab, D., & Brothen, T. (2024). Exploring the Impact: How Online Exam Proctoring Reduces Cheating and Enhances Course Legitimacy. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 39(1), n1. https://doi.org/10.55667/10.55667/ijede.2024.v39.i1.1327
Ye, T. (2022). Assessment in the post-COVID-19 era. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 41(2), 7–11.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Maya Puspitasari
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
