The first semester of 2020, which was chaotic due to the COVID-19 pandemic, ended and the second semester has already come. Last semester was conducted through online classes to help ensure social distancing, and attention was focused on how the final exams were conducted. On April 23rd, Chung-Ang University announced that the final exams were to be conducted face-to-face. But as the crisis of the infection continually rose, on June 3rd, the CAU Academic Board decided to conduct final exams online. After the announcement of Zoom-proctored exams on June 12th, however, many students complained about the problems of the exams and the university’s poor response. Why did the students express the voices of concern? Let’s take a look at the last final exam period.
Confusing Exam Period
Announcing ‘Final Exam Guide for Spring 2020’ on June 12th, the university also said that Zoom will be used for real-time supervision during the exams. Although some instructors conducted alternative exams such as open book tests or assignments, many students had to take their exams via Zoom according to the notice. The reason why the university chose Zoom was to prevent online cheating. In the non-face-to-face test where there is no proctor, the temptation to cheat increases and there may be students who cannot resist the temptation. But the students raised concerns over unclear guidelines. With the announcement about Zoom-proctored exams, the university provided guidelines for students in final exams. However, there was no explanation about how the real-time supervision of Zoom would be handled. It only said that 'the university will deliver the guide for the supervision of Zoom to the instructors separately, and students should be prepared according to the instructor’s guide.' A few days later, a guide which is claimed to be the guideline for instructors was leaked through Chung-Ang University Seoul Campus community ‘Everytime.’ Contents in the guideline caused controversy among students. First, it included content that ‘all screens transmitted through Zoom are to be recorded, and it is assumed that everyone participating in the program agrees with it.’ Students criticized that they cannot understand the unconsented recording and that doing so is an invasion of privacy. Also, attaching a photo of a student’s back and laptop, the guideline explained that ‘like this photo, all students have to show their desks, computer screens, and their faces simultaneously.’ About this, many students said that 'this is an unreasonable demand, and above all, we wonder why these guidelines were not disclosed to students.'
As the voices of criticism increased, the student council of Seoul campus requested an interview with related departments in the university. According to the student council’s announcement on June 17th, the university said that the guideline was an example for instructors who may have difficulty in conducting online exams. They also said that they didn’t advise or order the use of Zoom to instructors. But unlike the explanation, some students reported that their professors said that the school made the Zoom-proctored exams mandatory, which further sparked controversy. Students were caught off guard by different accounts in a situation where the exam was not far off.
The Problems of the Zoom-proctored exams
The Difficulties of Preparing Equipment
The Zoom-proctored exam itself also had many problems. After the leak of the guidelines for instructors, a lot of comments expressing concern over the exams were posted on ‘Blue Dragon Square', an official community site for CAU. One student said that the exam is unfair for students who don’t have equipment such as computers or smartphones and it is difficult to prepare equipment that can embody the angle of photo in the guideline. Another student who had been taking his classes in an internet café expressed his difficulty that he cannot take the Zoom-proctored exam there. In fact, students with financial difficulties may have a hard time preparing equipment. Most of the high-end laptops usually have their own camera, so students who have such equipment can take exams without special difficulty; but not all students have such equipment. Students who don’t have laptops or computers have to buy them just for the exams, which have too high price for students to pay.
The Difficulties Faced by Disabled Students
The Zoom-proctored exams were also unfair for disabled students. Their difficulties were identified in an official document of the student council of disabled students. The documents have complained of the disabled students’ difficulties in Zoom-proctored exams. First, it is hard for blind students to read the screen in Zoom. They also can’t focus their camera without someone’s help. Hearing-impaired students have difficulty in recognizing instructor’s spoken messages. Additionally, students who don’t want to reveal disabilities may have to reveal due to the exams.
The Limits of Ensuring Fairness
Even though the Zoom-proctored exam was a measure to ensure fairness by preventing cheating, there were still limits in ensuring fairness. First, cheating is still possible in Zoom-proctored exams. In the Blue Dragon Square, one student said that KakaoTalk chatting is possible using the function of making the KakaoTalk window transparent. And a proxy examination is also possible through TeamViewer’s remote-control function. Even if it’s not these common, it is hard to have perfect supervision in private spaces. Cheating is also possible by using camera blind spots or turning off the camera, simply saying ‘it was a mistake.’ There was also criticism that it is unfair for students who have not taken the real-time classes using Zoom. Contrary to the students who are familiar with Zoom, they had to prepare Zoom and related equipment right before the final exams.
The Ways Forward
As the voices of concern increased, university Provost Paik Joon-ki sent a message about the final exams on June 18th. He said that the university acknowledges that Zoom-proctored exams can cause inconveniences to students and there is a limit to prevent cheating perfectly. But he asked for cooperation since Zoom-proctored exams are one of the most practical methods to ensure fair exams. However, pushing ahead with this method against many students’ opposition itself was an unreasonable demand. As many students had explained, there were possibilities of cheating and limits that some students couldn’t join the program in Zoom-proctored exams. If online exams are conducted again in the second semester, these problems should not be repeated. As fairness is the most important factor in exams, the university should explore methods that are fair to all students. Many students asked for assignments or open book tests which are fair to everyone. In response, many instructors chose those alternative methods instead of Zoom-proctored exams. In fact, according to the data released by the university, alternative methods such as assignments accounted for 38.8% of final exams by June 18th. Also, transparent and prompt notifications are needed. Information that students need to know should be released to students first, not to the instructors. The problems related to the final exams happened just a week or two before the exams. The university should prepare prompt notifications so that students can concentrate on their exams during the exam period.
There are always trial and error with any new system. The first non-face-to-face operation would be difficult for the university, as well as for the students. But the confusion and inconvenience that the students suffered in the Zoom-proctored exams do not simply disappear. The final exams would have been better if the university had reflected students' opinions better. In the second semester, classes will be offered either in person or remotely. But many students will take online classes as they did during the first semester. These mistakes should be repeated. The CAH hopes that the university will work towards a solution where students can take the exams without anxiety and confusion.