This descriptive-analytical cross-sectional study was conducted after the approval of the proposal in the research council of the University and obtaining the ethical code (IR.bums.REC.1399.076) from the ethical committee of BUMS (Direct link:
ethics.research.ac.ir). All students participated in this project voluntarily, and the informed consent of all participants was obtained.
This study was held at BUMS, Birjand, Iran, from June to September 2020.
The inclusion criteria were informed consent to participate in the study, studying at one of the faculties of BUMS, and participation in at least one of the electronic exams (e-exams) held in the e-exam centers of BUMS (to answer the satisfaction questionnaire). The exclusion criteria included unwillingness to participate in the study and incomplete response to the questionnaire.
The sampling method was proportional to size (proportional to each faculty). The number of students in each faculty was obtained from the Department of Education, and the share of each faculty was determined based on the number of students in each faculty (gender proportion was also taken into account). Students' lists were used to select samples within each faculty.
The data collection tool was a questionnaire designed by the researcher to assess students' attitudes and satisfaction with e-assessment. Ganji's Arjenaki study (
4) influenced the attitude questionnaire, and Dermo's study (
6) influenced the satisfaction questionnaire. The content validity of the measurement tools was evaluated by consulting medical education experts regarding the degree of coordination between the tools and the purpose of the study. Therefore, qualitative and quantitative methods were considered for this purpose. Experts were asked to provide feedback after the qualitative review of the tool, based on which the cases were corrected. The relative content validity ratio (CVR) and the content validity index (CVI) were used to evaluate the content validity quantitatively, which was confirmed. The mean CVR of the entire questionnaire was 0.98, which was acceptable. The CVI calculation was based on the Walts and Basel validity index. The questions were retained when the CVI was more significant than 0.78. The questionnaire was given to 25 students, and Cronbach's alpha coefficient was equal to 0.9 to evaluate the reliability of the questionnaires. Therefore, the reliability of the questionnaire was confirmed. All participants in the study completed the Attitude Questionnaire, and students who had the experience of participating in the university e-exam completed the Satisfaction Questionnaire.
The questionnaire included three sections of demographic information (age, gender, semester, college, field of study, degree, and grade point average), attitude survey (six dimensions consisting of 19 questions), and satisfaction survey (nine dimensions consisting of 19 questions). The six dimensions of the Attitude Questionnaire included: (1) affective, (2) validity, (3) practical features, (4) reliability, (5) test security and counter-fraud, and (6) learning dimensions. The nine dimensions of the Satisfaction Questionnaire were based on: (1) test environment, (2) providing information about the test and knowledge of the test result, (3) exam stress, (4) quality of technical and software features of the system, (5) quality of hardware features of the system, (6) basic knowledge about e-exams, (7) test security and quality of counter fraud, (8) responsiveness, and (9) feeling satisfied with electronic tests.
The scoring of Attitude and Satisfaction Questionnaires was based on a 5-point Likert scale; strongly agree = 5, agree = 4, neither agree nor disagree = 3, disagree = 2, strongly disagree = 1. The scoring of the Satisfaction Questionnaire was very high = 5, high = 4, medium = 3, low = 2 and very low = 1. The minimum and maximum students‘ attitude score were 33 and 74, respectively (cut-off-point range score: 19 - 95). The mean score of students’ attitudes was 59.18 ± 7.99. The minimum and maximum students’ satisfaction score were 21 and 92, respectively (cut-off-point range score: 19 - 95). The mean score of students’ satisfaction was 65.73 ± 10.05.
The questionnaires were completed by the students after explaining the project objective by the same researcher, and the data were imported into the relevant statistical software.
The collected data was analyzed in SPSS Software Version 16. The mean, standard deviation, frequency, and frequency percentage were used to describe the data. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used for normality. The data were analyzed using an independent t-test and analysis of variance (ANOVA) to compare the mean score of students’ attitudes and satisfaction by gender, faculty, and degree at the significant level of 0.05. The correlation between age, grade point average, students’ attitudes, and students’ satisfaction was assessed using the Pearson correlation coefficient.