Pandemic Times Call For New Assessment Measures (Essay Sample)

In the wake of the COVID-19 global pandemic in 2020, college on-site classes had to be substituted by their online counterparts across the country. In an attempt to grant all students the opportunity to continue with their studies, the School of Humanities at Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata (UNMDP) established new policies regarding attendance and assessment. For example, midterm exams have to be asynchronous and students have at least 72 hours to complete them. This has sparked an intense debate among teachers of the English Teaching Training Program (ETTP). While some are concerned with asynchronous written exams’ validity and authenticity, some others believe that this way of assessment can bring many benefits. Despite these antithetical views, a close analysis of the matter proves that midterm exams should definitely be asynchronous.

Some opponents of asynchronous exams argue that this type of exam automatically becomes open-book, open-web (OBOW), and, as such, an invalid tool to evaluate students. That is, it is not possible to assess to what extent students have learned if they can consult the class bibliography and resort to different online sources if there is something they do not know while they are taking the test. This seemingly valid argument does not consider that this is only the case if the exams aim at assessing the students’ capacity to recall information. If, on the contrary, the students are asked to use their critical thinking skills to relate concepts or to develop personal connections to the topic, they will hardly find the answers in their material or online. In fact, William and Wong (2009) explain that OBOW exams, far from being invalid, are particularly effective because they are “grounded in an authentic context, and learners have an opportunity to apply their newly constructed knowledge in a meaningful way” (230). For example, in Didactica and Curriculum, students have to design a didactic sequence of activities and write a rationale to justify their pedagogic choices. By applying the concepts in a way that resembles what they will have to do in their professional careers, they demonstrate a deep understanding of the topics.

Another criticism of asynchronous exams is that they fuel academic dishonesty, particularly plagiarism. Teachers who are against this type of exam assert that students will be more tempted to copy and paste someone else’s work because they are unsupervised. Although this might be true in some cases, this argument underestimates most students’ ethical values and fails to acknowledge that academic dishonesty can also be a problem during synchronous tests. In other words, the minority of students who do not take their professional development seriously enough to cheat are likely to do so regardless of the type of exam. However, and most importantly, if exams are purposefully designed, the scope for academic dishonesty will be limited. For instance, in Comunicacion Integral, students have to analyze a media product in the light of the different categories and in relation to their life experiences. Such analyses are so personal that there is little room for plagiarism.

In conclusion, midterm exams in the ETTP at UNMDP should continue to be asynchronous. Although some teachers may consider that it is a capricious measure, giving students at least 72 hours to complete their exams can be highly beneficial since they are able to show a deeper understanding of the topics. Even knowing that a small number of students are likely to try to cheat, the main concern should be to obtain better quality learning results of the majority. College teachers should not only recognize the positive impact of asynchronous exams in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic but also consider implementing them even after on-site classes are resumed.