DOI: https://doi.org/10.63345/ijre.v14.i6.1
Anirudh Dwivedi
Maharaja Agrasen Himalayan Garhwal University
Uttarakhand, India
Abstract
Equity in access to online assessments remains a critical concern for government schools that educate large and socio-economically diverse populations. When educational systems pivot toward digital testing—whether for large-scale summative accountability, competency tracking, or formative progress monitoring—unaddressed inequities in infrastructure, device access, connectivity, language, disability support, assessment design, and teacher facilitation compound existing learning gaps. This expanded study investigates these equity layers through a convergent mixed-methods design spanning 20 government schools across urban, peri-urban, and rural clusters. Quantitative survey data from 500 students (Grades 6–10) and 100 teachers were combined with platform analytics (uptime, submission errors, completion rates, latency) and semi-structured interviews with 10 policy and technology stakeholders. The study was guided by an equity-in-assessment framework organized across four domains: (1) enabling conditions (devices, connectivity, shared community infrastructure); (2) human capacity (digital literacy, teacher assessment design readiness, student test navigation skills); (3) inclusive assessment experience (language accommodation, device-agnostic interaction models, low-bandwidth resilience, accessibility for students with disabilities); and (4) data justice (fair interpretation, reporting transparency, and equity monitoring indicators). Findings reveal sharp access divides: personal device availability and reliable connectivity remain the strongest predictors of participation and on-time submission. Rural completion rates lag urban completion by large, statistically significant margins, and low-income households experience compounded risk through shared device overload and irregular power supply. Teachers with limited digital confidence were less likely to assign preparatory practice items, indirectly narrowing student familiarity and inflating test-time anxiety. Platform telemetry confirmed reliability gaps: session drop-offs clustered in low-bandwidth zones, and error logs correlated with underpowered mobile devices common in government school populations. Stakeholders called for interoperable, multilingual, mobile-first, and offline-capable assessment ecosystems integrated with school accountability dashboards that include equity metrics.
Keywords
Equity, Online Assessments, Government Schools, Digital Divide, Educational Policy
References
- Anderson, J. (2019). Digital equity in education: Challenges and policy solutions. Journal of Educational Technology, 12(3), 145–162.
- Bates, A. W., & Sangrà, A. (2020). Managing technology in higher education: Strategies for online assessment. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(1), 1–17.
- Brown, C. (2018). Bridging the digital divide: Government initiatives for school connectivity. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 26(5), 1–20.
- Castro, M., & Calvo, H. (2021). Adaptive assessment platforms: Design principles and equity considerations. Computers & Education, 160, Article 104052.
- Desai, N. (2020). Teacher readiness and online assessment: A comparative study. Journal of Online Learning Research, 6(2), 89–108.
- Evans, L. (2019). Infrastructure investments in rural schools: Impact on student outcomes. Rural Education Journal, 34(4), 221–239.
- Franklin, R., & Li, P. (2021). Digital literacy programs for marginalized communities. Journal of Community Informatics, 17(1), 45–63.
- Gonzalez, R., & Torres, A. (2022). Equity metrics in educational dashboards. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 41(2), 35–50.
- Harris, S. (2018). Low-bandwidth assessment tools: Opportunities and limitations. Online Learning Journal, 22(4), 79–98.
- Ivanov, K., & Petrova, M. (2020). Assessing the impact of device availability on online test performance. Journal of Educational Measurement, 57(3), 303–319.
- Jackson, T., & White, S. (2021). Professional development models for digital education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 48(1), 53–75.
- Kim, J. (2019). Cultural bias in online assessments and its implications. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 26(5), 566–584.
- Lee, A., & Fletcher, L. (2020). Public-private partnerships for school connectivity. International Journal of Educational Development, 75, Article 102132.
- Miller, D. (2018). Policy coherence in digital education: A global perspective. Comparative Education Review, 62(2), 147–168.
- Nguyen, P., & Habib, Z. (2022). Offline modes for online assessments: Implementation and user experience. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 31(3), 365–380.
- O’Donnell, C. (2021). Community learning centers as digital hubs. Community Education Journal, 29(2), 99–115.
- Patel, S., & Kaur, R. (2019). Digital inequality and student achievement in government schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 39(3), 421–436.
- Rao, V., & Singh, K. (2022). Monitoring equity in online assessments: Data strategies. Educational Data Science, 3(1), 17–32.
- Taylor, L., & Bhatt, S. (2023). Universal design approaches to large-scale digital testing. Assessment & Technology Review, 5(1), 27–58.
- Zhang, Y. (2020). Designing inclusive online assessments: Frameworks and best practices. Journal of Learning Analytics, 7(2), 12–26.