Lessons from the Frontline: A Phenomenological Study into Faculty Members’ Experiences with Challenges of Remote Online Exams in Medical Sciences Universities

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Management Department, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economy, Vali-e-Asr University, Rafsanjan, Iran

2 Physiology-Pharmacology Research Center, Research Institute on Basic Sciences, Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, School of Medicine, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran

3 Department of Radiology, Faculty of Allied Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran

4 Vice-chancellor for Education, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran

5 Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran

10.30476/ijvlms.2025.105921.1330

Abstract

Background: The rapid shift to remote online examinations in medical sciences universities during the COVID-19 pandemic posed unprecedented challenges for faculty worldwide. This study aimed to explore faculty experiences with the challenges of remote online examinations at Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Iran.
Methods: This qualitative inquiry utilized a phenomenological framework to conduct an in-depth exploration of faculty perspectives. Conducted at Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences between September 2022 and February 2023, it involved 18 faculty members representing 15 various disciplines, with professional experience spanning four to thirty years. Purposeful sampling was implemented to ensure maximum diversity. Data were gathered through comprehensive, semi-structured interviews lasting between 60 to 90 minutes, conducted either face-to-face or through online platforms. All interviews were analyzed using the seven-step thematic content analysis approach developed by Diekelmann and colleagues, utilizing MAXQDA software.
Results: The thematic analysis of the interviews yielded four primary dichotomous concepts, eight principal themes (components), and 24 sub-themes. The four dichotomies identified were: online examination versus in-person examination, fundamental ultimate action versus constrained immediate action, resources versus impediments, and alleviating stress versus exacerbating stress. The eight principal components delineated were: essential substitution, unavoidable invalidity, fundamental ultimate action, constrained immediate action, online examination resources, online examination impediments, alleviation of stress, and exacerbation of stress. Faculty views on online exams varied, with some seeing them as a valuable alternative and others concerned that they negatively impact education because of cheating and reduced feedback. Benefits mentioned included quick results and cost savings, while worries focused on technical issues and fairness.
Discussion: Faculty experiences reveal a nuanced balance between the advantages and limitations of remote online examinations. While online assessments can improve logistical efficiency and reduce certain stressors, ongoing concerns about academic integrity, technical preparedness, and educational value persist. Addressing these issues requires investment in reliable infrastructure, comprehensive faculty training, and innovative valid assessment methods.

Highlights

Mostafa Hadavinejad (Google Scholar)

Foad Iranmanesh (Google Scholar)

Keywords

References

  1. Kentnor H. Distance education and the evolution of online learning in the United States. Curriculum & Teaching Dialogue. 2015;17:21-34.
  2. Maatuk AM, Elberkawi EK, Aljawarneh S, Rashaideh H, Alharbi H. The COVID-19 pandemic and E-learning: challenges and opportunities from the perspective of students and instructors. J Comput High Educ. 2022;34(1):21-38. doi: 10.1007/s12528-021-09274-2. PubMed PMID: 33967563; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8091987.
  3. Sharin AN. E-learning during COVID-19: a review of literature. Jurnal Pengajian Media Malaysia. 2021;23(1):15-28. doi:10.22452/jpmm.vol23no1.2.
  4. García-Peñalvo FJ, Corell A, Abella-García V, Grande-de-Prado M. Online Assessment in Higher Education in the Time of COVID-19. Education in the Knowledge Society (EKS). 2020;21:1-26. doi: 10.14201/eks.23086.
  5. Unesco U. COVID-19 Educational Disruption and Response. Paris: UNESCO; 2020. Available from: https://www.iiep.unesco.org/en/articles/covid-19-educational-disruption-and-response.
  6. Cumhur F, Çam SS. Digital Transformation in Assessment and Evaluation Course: The Effects of Web 2.0 Tools. J Pedagog Res. 2021;5(3):15-39. doi: 10.33902/JPR.2021370559.
  7. Gaafar AH. The effectiveness of digital assessment tools on the educational platforms based on science evaluation standards at the secondary stage. J Posit Sch Psychol. 2022;6(2):4972-5008. Available from: https://www.journalppw.com/index.php/jpsp/article/view/3011.
  8. Haleem A, Javaid M, Qadri MA, Suman R. Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review. Sustainable Operations and Computers (SUSOC). 2022;3:275-85. doi:10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004.
  9. Ballena CT, Feranil BS. Remote Learning Amid a Global Crisis: A Literature Review. Journal of Institutional Research South East Asia (JIRSEA). 2021;19(2):21-42.
  10. Lau PN, Chua YT, Teow Y, Xue X. Implementing alternative assessment strategies in chemistry amidst COVID-19: Tensions and reflections. Educ Sci. 2020;10(11):323. doi: 10.3390/educsci10110323.
  11. Elsalem L, Al-Azzam N, Jum'ah AA, Obeidat N. Remote E-exams during Covid-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study of students' preferences and academic dishonesty in faculties of medical sciences. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2021;62:326-33. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2021.01.054. PubMed PMID: 33520225; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7825891.
  12. Timmis S, Broadfoot P, Sutherland R, Oldfield A. Rethinking assessment in a digital age: Opportunities, challenges and risks. British Educational Research Journal. 2016;42(3):454-76. doi: 10.1002/berj.3215.
  13. Heil J, Ifenthaler D. Online Assessment in Higher Education: A Systematic Review. Online Learning. 2023;27(1):187-218. doi:10.24059/olj.v27i1.3398.
  14. Al-Hattami AA. E-Assessment of students performance during the E-Teaching and learning. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology. 2020;29(8):1537-47.
  15. Gikandi JW, Morrow D, Davis NE. Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Comput Educ. 2011;57(4):2333-51. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.004.
  16. Hattie J, Timperley H. The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research. 2007;77(1). doi: 10.3102/003465430298487.
  17. Gupta T, Shree A, Chanda P, Banerjee A. Online assessment techniques adopted by the university teachers amidst COVID-19 pandemic: A case study. Soc Sci Humanit Open. 2023;8(1):100579. doi: 10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100579. PubMed PMID: 37287633; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC10209442.
  18. Adedoyin OB, Soykan E. Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities. Interactive learning environments. 2023;31(2):863-75.doi:10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180.
  19. Onyesolu MO, Nwasor VC, Ositanwosu OE, Iwegbuna ON. Pedagogy: Instructivism to socio-constructivism through virtual reality. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl. 2013;4(9). doi:10.14569/IJACSA.2013.040907.
  20. Appiah M, Van Tonder F. E-assessment in higher education: A review. IJBMER. 2018;9(6). Available from: https://www.ijbmer.com/docs/volumes/vol9issue6/ijbmer2018090601.pdf.
  21. Ali L, Dmour NAHHA. The Shift to Online Assessment Due to COVID-19: An Empirical Study of University Students, Behaviour and Performance, in the Region of UAE. Int J Inf Educ Technol. 2021;11(5):220-8. doi: 10.18178/ijiet.2021.11.5.1515.
  22. Nancy A, Aravinthan S, Anton JD, Raj JB. Perception of medical students on the advantages and disadvantages of online assessment compared to traditional method in a tertiary level teaching hospital. Indian J Clin Anat Physiol. 2024;10(4):215-20. doi: 10.18231/j.ijcap.2023.050.
  23. Abedi P, Iranmanesh F, Seyed Bagheri S H, Rafiei M, Afshari H. Virtual Medical Education During COVID-19 Pandemic in Iran: A Qualitative Study of Perspectives on Challenges and Strategies. J Med Edu.2022;20(4):e121204. doi: 10.5812/jme.121204.
  24. Heydari M, Mousazadeh Y, Salmani R, Mehraeen E. Assessment of virtual education during the covid-19 pandemic from the perspective of faculty members and students: a cross-sectional descriptive study in northwest Iran. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):398. doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04378-y. PubMed PMID: 37268937; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC10235820.
  25. Moosavi S, Gholamnejad H, Hassan Shiri F, Ghofrani Kelishami F, Raoufi S. Challenges of Virtual education During the Pandemic of COVID-19: A Qualitative Research. IJN 2022; 35 (135) :94-105. doi: 10.32598/ijn.35.135.3030.
  26. Zaer Sabet F, Besharati F, Ebrahiminia A. Comparing two methods of traditional and electronics tests based on attitude and experiences of medical students: A combined study. Res Med Edu. 2020;12(3):32-43. doi: ‎10.52547/rme.12.3.32.
  27. Diekelmann NL, Allen D, Tanner CA. The NLN criteria for appraisal of baccalaureate programs: A critical hermeneutic analysis. New York: National League for Nursing; 1989.
  28. Bouhidel H. Exploring Teachers’ Perceptions toward Online Assessment: Perspectives and Challenges. Afak for Sciences (ASJP). 2022;7(03).
  29. Wicaksono AL. Teachers' Perceptions towards the Practice of Assessment in Online Classroom during Pandemic of COVID-19. ELite Journal: International Journal of Education, Language, and Literature. 2022;2(4):211-8. doi: 10.26740/elitejournal.v2n4.p211-218.
  30. Tajjamal L, Rehan Q, Hafee F. Investigating Teachers’ Perceptions Regarding Online Assessment at Undergraduate Level. Journal of Education And Humanities Research (JEHR), University of Balochistan, Quetta. 2024;17(1):01-20. Available from: http://journal.uob.edu.pk/journal/index.php/jehr/article/view/472.
  31. Butler-Henderson K, Crawford J. A systematic review of online examinations: A pedagogical innovation for scalable authentication and integrity. Comput Educ. 2020;159:104024. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104024. PubMed PMID: 32982023; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7508171.
  32. Ghouali K, Benmoussat S, Ruiz Cecilia R. E-assessment on the spotlight: Present and future prospects. REIDOCREA. 2020;9:52-62 doi: 10.30827/Digibug.59151.
  33. Khoshbaten M, Marzabadi LR, Ranjbarzadeh FS, Ghorbani S, Salmasi SH, Ahmadian A. Management of Holding and Evaluating Comprehensive System of Electronic Clinical Reasoning Exams (Sajab) in the Sixth Nationwide Medical Sciences Students Olympiad. Res Dev Med Educ. 2015;4(2):159-64. doi: 10.15171/rdme.2015.028.
  34. Montenegro-Rueda M, Luque-de la Rosa A, Sarasola Sánchez-Serrano JL, Fernández-Cerero J. Assessment in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Sustainability. 2021;13(19):10509. doi: 10.3390/su131910509.
  35. Khan S, Kambris MEK, Alfalahi H. Perspectives of University Students and Faculty on remote education experiences during COVID-19- a qualitative study. Educ Inf Technol (Dordr). 2022;27(3):4141-69. doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10784-w. PubMed PMID: 34690525; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8524213.
  36. Rolim C, Isaias P. Examining the use of e‐assessment in higher education: teachers and students’ viewpoints. Br J Educ Technol. 2019;50(4):1785-800. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12669.
  37. Papanastasiou EC, Solomonidou G. Evaluating Emergency Remote Assessment Adaptations in Higher Education due to COVID-19: Faculty Insights and Challenges. Education Sciences. 2023;13(2):184. doi: 10.3390/educsci13020184.
  38. Selwyn N. Education and technology: Key issues and debates. London: Bloomsbury Publishing; 2021.
  39. Alsalhi NR, Qusef AD, Al-Qatawneh SS, Eltahir ME. Students’ perspective on online assessment during the COVID-19 pandemic in higher education institutions. Information Sciences Letters. 2022;11(1):37-46. doi:10.18576/isl/110106.
  40. Şenel S, Şenel HC. Remote assessment in higher education during COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education (IJATE). 2021;8(2):181-99. doi:10.21449/ijate.820140.
  41. Zahedi Z, Salehiniya H, Zarei A, Abbaszadeh H. Attitude and satisfaction towards electronic exams in medical sciences faculty members. Res Dev Med Educ. 2021;10:29. doi: 10.34172/rdme.2021.029.
  42. Motte-Signoret E, Labbé A, Benoist G, Linglart A, Gajdos V, Lapillonne A. Perception of medical education by learners and teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey of online teaching. Med Educ Online. 2021;26(1):1919042. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2021.1919042. PubMed PMID: 33871308; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8079026.
  43. Bilen E, Matros A. Online cheating amid COVID-19. J Econ Behav Organ. 2021;182:196-211. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2020.12.004. PubMed PMID: 36536874; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9754215.
  44. Wibowo S, Grandhi S, Chugh R, Sawir E. A pilot study of an electronic exam system at an Australian university. J Educ Technol Syst. 2016;45(1):5-33. doi: 10.1177/0047239516646746.
  45. Bawa P. Retention in online courses: Exploring issues and solutions—A literature review. SAGE Open. 2016;6(1):1-11. doi: 10.1177/2158244015621777.
  46. Deeley SJ. Using technology to facilitate effective assessment for learning and feedback in higher education. Assess Eval High Educ. 2018;43(3):439-48. doi:10.1080/02602938.2017.1356906.
  47. Saeed RH. Development and Examination Process of Electronic Exam Platform [dissertation]. Northern Cyprus: Near East University; 2019. Available from: https://docs.neu.edu.tr/library/6818763826.pdf.
  48. Meccawy Z, Meccawy M, Alsobhi A. Assessment in ‘survival mode’: student and faculty perceptions of online assessment practices in HE during COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Educ Integr. 2021;17:1-24. doi: 10.1007/s40979-021-00083-9.
  49. Khan S, Khan RA. Online assessments: Exploring perspectives of university students. Educ Inf Technol. 2019;24(1):661-77. doi:10.1007/s10639-018-9797-0.
  50. Alruwais N, Wills G, Wald M. Advantages and challenges of using e-assessment. Int J Inf Educ Technol. 2018;8(1):34-7. doi:10.18178/ijiet.2018.8.1.1008.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 15 February 2025
  • Revise Date: 04 June 2025
  • Accept Date: 07 June 2025
  • Publish Date: 01 June 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics