Students who prefer face-to-face tests outperform their online peers in organic chemistry

Abstract

To test the hypothesis that students who complete remote online tests experience an ‘online grade penalty’, we compared performance outcomes of second-year students who elected to complete exams online to those who completed face-to-face, paper-based tests in an organic chemistry course. We pursued the following research questions: (RQ1) Are there performance gaps between students who elect to take online tests and those who take face-to-face tests? (RQ2) Do these two groups differ with respect to other affective or incoming performance attributes? How do these attributes relate to performance overall? (RQ3) How does performance differ between students who reported equal in-class engagement but selected different testing modes? (RQ4) Why do students prefer one testing mode over the other? We found that students who elected to take online tests consistently underperformed relative to those who took face-to-face tests. While we observed no difference between the two student groups with respect to their intrinsic goal orientation and incoming academic preparation, students who preferred face-to-face tests perceived chemistry as more valuable than students who preferred to complete exams online. We observed a positive correlation between performance outcomes and all affective factors. Among students who reported similar levels of in-class engagement, online testers underperformed relative to face-to-face testers. Open-ended responses revealed online testers were avoiding exposure to illness/COVID-19 and preferred the convenience of staying at home; the most common responses from face-to-face testers included the ability to perform and focus better in the classroom, and increased comfort or decreased stress they perceived while taking exams.