Online testing: University students’ perspectives

Le Chau Anh Le Dien * , Nguyễn Thị Thanh Hà , Nguyễn Thái Bảo Trân , & Đặng Thị Tuyết Trang

* Correspondence: Le Chau Anh Le Dien (email: ledienchauanh@gmail.com)

Article Sidebar

PDF
Received: 08 May 2023
Revised: 24 Jun 2023
Accepted: 30 Jun 2023
Published: 05 Jul 2023
DOI: 10.58810/vhujs.9.2.2023.676
Views
0
Downloads
0
How to Cite
Lê , A. Điền C., Nguyễn Thị, H. T., Nguyễn Thái, T. B., & Đặng Thị, T. T. (2023). Online testing: University students’ perspectives. Van Hien University Journal of Science 9(2), 95-110.
Issue
Volume 9 - Issue 2 (2023)
Section

Main Article Content

Abstract

Online testing is becoming increasingly common in Vietnam and the world, but the number of studies on the quality of this testing mode in Vietnam is still limited. Therefore, the current research was conducted in order to examine university students' perceptions of some main factors determining the quality of online testing. The online survey method via Google form was employed to collect data from students of the Faculty of Foreign Languages ​​of four private universities in Ho Chi Minh City and received 721 valid answer sheets, of which selecting ten students continued to participate in in-depth interviews via telephone. The results showed that the majority of participants highly evaluated the practicality of online testing, but they did not consider this testing mode very reliable and valid. In addition, the research results also demonstrated that online testing negatively affects students' learning and exam preparation.
Keywords: Online testing, practicality, reliability, vaidity, washback

Article Details

References

Alderson, J. C., and Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied linguistics, 14(2): 115-129. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/14.2.115

Bachman, L. F., and Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford University Press.

Bradley, B. D. (2005). Legal Implications of Online Assessment: Issues for Educators. In S. L. Howell and M. Hricko. (Eds), Online Assessment and Measurement: Foundations and Challenges. IGI Global: 182-199. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140-720-1.ch009

Bartley, J. M. (2005). Assessment is as Assessment Does: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Online Assessment and Measurement. In M. Hricko and S. L. Howell, (Eds.), Online assessment and measurement: Foundations and challenges. IGI Global: 1-45. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140-720-1.ch001

Brown, H. D. (2004). Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. New York, Longman.

Cassady, J. C., and Gridley, B. E. (2005). The Effects of Online Formative and Summative Assessment on Test Anxiety and Performance. The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 4(1). https://ejournals.bc.edu/index.php/jtla/article/view/1648

Clark, S. J., Reiner, C. M., and Johnson, T. D. (2006). Online Course-Ratings and the Personnel Evaluation Standards. In D. Williams, M. Hricko and S. L. Howell, (Eds.), Online Assessment, Measurement and Evaluation: Emerging Practices. IGI Global: 61-75. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140-747-8.ch005

Cohen, L., Manion, L., and Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th Ed). Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.

Escudier, M. P., Newton, T. J., Cox, M. J., Reynolds, P. A., and Odell, E. W. (2011). University students’ attainment and perceptions of computer delivered assessment; a comparison between computer-based and traditional tests in a ‘high-stakes’ examination: Student online assessment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(5): 440-447. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00409.x

Fraenkel, J. và Wallen, N. (2008). How to design and evaluate research in education (7th Ed). McGraw-Hill

Goertler, S., and Gacs, A. (2018). Assessment in Online German: Assessment Methods and Results. Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 51(2): 156-174. https://doi.org/10.1111/tger.12071

Goldberg, A. L., and Pedulla, J. J. (2002). Performance Differences According to Test Mode and Computer Familiarity on a Practice Graduate Record Exam. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62(6): 1053-1067. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164402238092

Hewson, C. (2012). Can online course‐based assessment methods be fair and equitable? Relationships between students' preferences and performance within online and offline assessments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(5): 488-498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00473.x

Hewson, C., Charlton, J., and Brosnan, M. (2007). Comparing online and offline administration of multiple choice question assessments to psychology undergraduates: Do assessment modality or computer attitudes influence performance? Psychology Learning and Teaching, 6(1): 37-46. https://doi.org/10.2304/plat.2007.6.1.37

Hewson, C., and Charlton, J. P. (2019). An investigation of the validity of course-based online assessment methods: The role of computer-related attitudes and assessment mode preferences. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(1): 51-60. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12310

Hickman, C. J., Bielema, C., and Gunderson, M. (2005). Challenges in the design, development, and delivery of online assessment and evaluation. In In M. Hricko and S. L. Howell, (Eds.), Online assessment and measurement: Foundations and challenges. IGI Global: 132-164.

Kelly, D. and Baxter, J. and Anderson, T. (2010). Engaging first‐year students through online collaborative assessments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(6): 535 - 548. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00361.x

Kingston, N. M. (2008). Comparability of Computer- and Paper-Administered Multiple-Choice Tests for K–12 Populations: A Synthesis. Applied Measurement in Education, 22(1): 22-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957340802558326

Larkin, C., Szabo, S., and Mintu-Wimsatt, A. (2017). Academic integrity of graduate online students in a curriculum and instruction program. International Research in Higher Education, 2(4): 1-8. https://doi.org/10.5430/irhe.v2n4p1

Llamas-Nistal, M., Fernández-Iglesias, M. J., González-Tato, J., and Mikic-Fonte, F. A. (2013). Blended e-assessment: Migrating classical exams to the digital world. Computers and Education, 62(1): 72-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.021

Lorenzetti, J. P. (2008). Combating online dishonesty with communities of integrity. In C. Hill (Ed), Promoting Academic Integrity in Online Education. Distance Education Report, Magna Publications. https://my.mhu.edu/pluginfile.php/17347/mod_resource/content/0/promoting-academic-integrity-in-online-edu%20copy.pdf

Meccawy, Z., Meccawy, M., and Alsobhi, A. (2021). Assessment in ‘survival mode’: student and faculty perceptions of online assessment practices in HE during Covid-19 pandemic. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 17(1): 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-021-00083-9

Nguyen, J. G., Keuseman, K. J., and Humston, J. J. (2020). Minimize online cheating for online assessments during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(9): 3429-3435. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00790

Nguyễn Tấn Đại (2020). Đảm bảo chất lượng trong đào tạo trực tuyến: Đề xuất cách tiếp cận mới tại Việt Nam. Hội thảo “Cải tiến chất lượng trong quản trị đại học”, Trường Đại học Khoa học Xã hội và Nhân văn, Đại học Quốc gia Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh.

Padayachee, P., Wagner-Welsh, S., and Johannes, H. (2018). Online assessment in Moodle: A framework for supporting our students. South African Journal of Higher Education, 32(5): 211-235. https://doi.org/10.20853/32-5-2599

Pearson (2022, January 18). 5 Advantages of Using Online Assessment Tools to Evaluate Students. https://in.pearson.com/content/region-growth/india/pearson-india/en/blog/2022/01/5-advantages-of-using-online-assessment-tools-to-evaluate-studen.html

Rath, A., Wong, M. L., and Pannuti, C. M. (2021). Blackboard‐based online assessment during COVID‐19 era: A new leaf to an old tree. Journal of Dental Education, Advancing Through Innovation, 86(S1): 804-807. https://doi.org/10.1002/jdd.12737

Ricketts, C., and Wilks, S. J. (2002). Improving student performance through computer-based assessment: Insights from recent research. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5): 475-479. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293022000009348

Tsagari, D. (2007). Review of washback in language testing: How has been done? What more needs doing? Institue of Education Sciences. https://eric.ed.gov/?q=review+of+washback+in+language+testing%3a+how+has+been+done%3f+what+more+needs+doing%3f&ft=on&id=ED497709

Walsh, K. (2015). Point Of View: Online Assessment in Medical Education – Current Trends and Future Directions. Malawi Medical Journal, 27(2): 71. https://doi.org/10.4314/mmj.v27i2.8

Warburton, B. (2009). Quick win or slow burn: modelling UK HE CAA uptake. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(3): 257-272. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930802071080

Zhang, C., Yan, X., and Wang, J. (2021). EFL Teachers’ Online Assessment Practices During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Changes and Mediating Factors. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30(6): 499-507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00589-3