Online proctoring and surveillance

We talked a little about online proctoring tools and surveillance during our conversation with Lindsay Oliver, but this story gets into much more detail and is absolutely horrifying:

Academic librarians in particular need to be sounding the alarm about this. Anyone having this discussion with other library staff or faculty?

Invasive tools like these have certainly exploded at my institution over the last few months, not only with online proctoring systems, but now with applications like Feedback Fruits and Perusall that are designed to “encourage student productivity” through constantly monitoring and assessing every piece of the work that students complete in class, or as Perusall put it “proactively engages students with automated personalized guidance, ensuring continual motivation.”

A few years ago when the university proposed implementing Proctortrack (Through proprietary facial recognition algorithms, the platform automates proctoring by monitoring student behavior and action for test policy compliance. Proctortrack can detect when students leave their space, search online for additional resources, look at hard notes, consult with someone, or are replaced during a test.) there was a great deal of pushback from the faculty, but seems not enough as it is everywhere now- available through the CMS, on all the pages for teaching, though it appears that it may be optional when it was originally proposed as required. This is an excellent reminder for me to find out the status and see what discussions may be still be going on.

Same here, it’s awful, the library has been able to resist using these applications but not sure how long we can - a definite conflict between the university wanting to assess services and monitor student success and wanting to protect their privacy.