Beyond Technophobia: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of the Persistent Crisis of Online Digital Assessment

While online and hybrid teaching have gradually stabilized in higher education, digital assessment remains a persistent source of faculty dissatisfaction. This study investigates whether resistance to online exams reflects temporary technophobia or a deeper structural crisis. Using a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, the analysis combines a large replication dataset from the SOULSS project (2023; N = 384) with a targeted diagnostic micro-survey conducted in 2025 (N = 18). Quantitative results confirm that dissatisfaction with online assessment remains chronically high (81.5%), showing only marginal improvement from the emergency phase. The qualitative probe identifies three recurrent friction points: academic integrity and cheating concerns, increased faculty workload, and technical instability. Among these, distrust in assessment validity emerges as the most consistent barrier across national contexts. Interpreted through the Technology Acceptance Model and construct validity theory, the findings suggest that the crisis of online exams is not primarily technological but epistemic and organizational. The paper argues that further investment in proctoring technologies yields diminishing returns and calls for a strategic shift toward assessment designs that preserve validity while reducing administrative burden.