Digital Examination in Higher Education Experiences from Three Different Perspectives.
INTRODUCTIONThe Swedish higher educational system is under pressure. Competition from international universities is becoming fiercer, the expansion of massive open online courses and demographic projections indicate that the number of students entering the university system is peaking right now (cf. Breslow et al. 2013; Mirriahi et al. 2015) At the same time, financial support from the government is decreasing and universities are trying to locate new revenue streams. In order to stay competitive, Swedish universities are trying to develop strategies for using these scarce resources in the optimal way. The challenge is to strike a balance between quality and efficiency in education (Kaiser et al. 2014; Njoku 2015).Over the past ten years much improvement has been made within the Royal Institute of Technology regarding quality and innovation in education. The numbers of pedagogical courses that are offered to the teaching staff within the university has multiplied, and these are now mandatory for teaching staff. Furthermore, the merits of educational experience have been emphasized in hiring new members of staff. Even though problem based learning, constructive alignment and peer instruction are common in most courses today, some other aspects of education and learning remain the same (cf. Biggs Tang 2007) One such conservative trait has to do with written examinations.Since the founding of the university in 1827, all written examinations have been carried out using paper and pen. The problems with using paper and pen are numerous and include problems with reading and grading because of poor handwriting, distribution of examinations between teachers in the same course, written exams getting lost. In comparison with other parts of the educational system, little has happened to improve quality and efficiency when it comes to written examinations (cf. Okonkwo 2010; Albugami Ahmed 2015).During 2013 and 2014 a number of teachers initiated a project to increase efficiency in written examinations. There was a general understanding that the final part of the courses consumed too much time and effort in relation to the other parts. On average, teachers spent 20 percent of the allocated course time in grading examinations. Hence, newly developed software for digital examinations was identified and a license purchased. The purpose of this paper is to describe and analyse the implementation of this new assessment system.THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTUREProfessionalism vs bureaucracyOver fifty years ago, there was a growing awareness that any university was home to two different ways of thinking: bureaucracy and professionalism, and that these two systems would at times conflict (Etzioni 1959) Among other things, it was shown that the experience of conflict between the two followed a U shaped curve: universities with a high degree of differentiation or a very low degree of differentiation experienced less conflict. A high degree of differentiation would lead to a separation between the professionals and the bureaucrats, while on the other hand a high integration of the two would lead to a situation where both were continuously involved in daily operations, working in close cooperation (Darkenwald 1971) This description of the harmonious coexistence of bureaucracy and professionalism is based on an ideal equilibrium. However, at times, most organizations need to change in order to survive in changing institutional environments (Drew 2010) Change is perceived very differently in the two systems.Legitimacy of change in the two systemsSomewhat simplified, the professional organization would be attuned to professional issues of teaching and research, based on a peer system where impulses for change can arise anywhere among grass root peers (Blackmore Sachs 2000) In comparison, bureaucracy is based on a strictly defined hierarchy, where impulses for change should adhere to the same command chains as every other strategic initiative.