Remote versus onsite proctored exams: comparing students’ results in physical fitness testing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15561/20755279.2023.0605Keywords:
coronavirus, physical education admission tests, physical fitness tests, remote electronic examinations, traditional onsite face-to-face testsAbstract
Background and Study Aim. Since the outbreak of COVID-19, distance learning has become a widespread practice in educational institutions worldwide, leading to the adoption of remote electronic examinations (e-exams) as a primary method of assessment. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of admission tests for the sport sciences department, contrasting traditional face-to-face onsite testing with online-based remote testing. Material and Methods. A total of 500 students applied (n =177 distance learning students, n =323 onsite students). From the tests, differences in levels of physical fitness (long jump, sit-ups, burpees, and pull-ups/push-ups) were compared between the remote and the onsite participants. Results. According to univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA), there was a significant difference in the level of physical fitness (long jump, sit-up, burpees, and pull-up/push-up tests) between the remote participants (154.01 ± 83.1 cm; 13.85 ± 8.21 reps/60 sec; 6.76 ± 6.52 reps/30 sec; 11.36 ± 8.0 pull-ups/push-ups, respectively) and the onsite participants (172.34 ± 27.0; 15.28 ± 4.01 reps/60 sec; 27.29 ± 6.61 reps/30 sec; 14.76 ± 9.47 pull-ups/push-ups, respectively). Conclusions. The results of the present study indicate that the outcomes of physical fitness tests were significantly higher among onsite participants compared to remote participants. Despite the successful implementation of admission test procedures in the distance sport sciences department, the findings suggest a preference for physical fitness tests among onsite participants due to various factors, including 1) increased motivation, 2) model friction, and 3) competitive atmosphere.References
Fehr AR, Perlman S. Coronaviruses: an overview of their replication and pathogenesis Coronaviruses 2015; 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2438-7_1
Yu J, Jee Y. Analysis of online classes in physical education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Educ Sci. 2020; 11(1):3. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010003
Domokos C, Domokos M, Mirică SN, Negrea C, Bota E, Nagel A. Being a student at the faculty of sports and physical education in COVID-19 pandemic times – A moment in life. Timisoara Physical Education & Rehabilitation Journal. 2020; 13(24): 45-50. https://doi.org/10.2478/tperj-2020-0007
Erdugan F. Investigating readiness levels of sports science faculty students towards e-learning. Afr Educ Res J. 2020; 8(2):272–279. https://doi.org/10.30918/AERJ.82.20.070
Öncen S, Tanyeri L. Evaluation of the physical activity levels of the students in a physical education and sports science department before and during the coronavirus pandemic. Int Educ Stud. 2020; 13(10):148–156. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v13n10p148
Barwais FA. Physical activity at home during the COVID-19 pandemic in the two Most-affected cities in Saudi Arabia. Open Public Health J. 2020;13(1): 470–476. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874944502013010470
Barwais FA. Assessing physical activity and sedentary time during the COVID-19 pandemic using self-reported measurement. Natl. J. Physiol. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2020;10(11):1019–1024. https://doi.org/10.5455/njppp.2020.10.09241202001102020
Podstawski R, Kasietczuk B, Boraczyński T, Boraczyński M, Choszcz D. Relationship between BMI and endurance-strength abilities assessed by the 3 minute burpee test. Int J Sports Sci. 2013; 3(1):28–35. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.sports.20130301.06
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988.
WHO. Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. World Health Organization technical report series. 2000 (894). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021932003245508
Fluck AE. An international review of eExam technologies and impact. Comput Educ. 2019; 132:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.12.008
12. Birch E, De Wolf M. A novel approach to medical school examinations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Med Educ Online. 2020; 25(1):1785680. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2020.1785680
Kondric M, Sindik J, Furjan-Mandic G, Schiefler B. Participation motivation and student’s physical activity among sport students in three countries. J Sports Sci Med. 2013; 12(1):10.
Karaba-Jakovljević D, Popadić-Gaćeša J, Grujić N, Barak O, Drapšin M. Motivation and motoric tests in sports. Med Pregl. 2007; 60(5–6):231–236. https://doi.org/10.2298/MPNS0706231K
Sahu P. Closure of universities due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Impact on education and mental health of students and academic staff. Cureus. 2020; 12(4). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7541
Andreou V, Peters S, Eggermont J, Wens J, Schoenmakers B. Remote versus on-site proctored exam: Comparing student results in a cross-sectional study. BMC Med Educ. 2021; 21(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-03068-x
Dunn T, Meine M, McCarley J. The remote proctor: An innovative technological solution for online. International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society. 2010; 6(1):1832–3669. https://doi.org/10.18848/1832-3669/CGP/v06i01/56033
Chen V, Sandford A, LaGrone M, Charbonneau K, Kong J, Ragavaloo S. An exploration of instructors’ and students’ perspectives on remote delivery of courses during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Br J Educ Technol. 2022; 53(3):512–533. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13205
Gudiño Paredes S, Jasso Peña FdJ, De La Fuente Alcazar JM. Remote proctored exams: Integrity assurance in online education? Distance Educ. 2021; 42(2):200–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2021.1910495
Jaap A, Dewar A, Duncan C, Fairhurst K, Hope D, Kluth D. Effect of remote online exam delivery on student experience and performance in applied knowledge tests. BMC Med Educ. 2021; 21(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02521-1
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Aiman A Sarhan, Faisal A Barwais

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright Holder - Author(s). more
Abstract views: 395 / PDF downloads: 460


