Academics find algorithmic surveillance just isn’t worth it
A committee at the University of Texas in Austin has advised against using AI software to oversee students’ online tests, citing the psychological toll on students and the financial toll on academic institutions. Acknowledging that some form of online proctoring is necessary to discourage academic misconduct, the committee concluded, « we strongly recommend against the use of AI-based software like Proctorio and ProctorU. » The Report of the Academic Integrity Committee about Online Testing and Assessment, spotted by Megan Menchaca, education reporter for the Austin-American Statesman, is said to have been included in a university official’s recent message to faculty. AI-based software to watch over remote students as they take online tests – « academic surveillance software » to detractors – has flourished during the COVID-19 pandemic. Large numbers of students have been studying remotely and schools believe they need a way to prevent cheating. But the software that’s been deployed has been widely criticized by students and privacy advocates. The concern centers around the inability to audit the software source code and the possibility that these systems rely on flawed algorithms and biased or arbitrary signals to label students cheaters. Critics also worry that the software can’t account for varied student living conditions and is vulnerable to racial bias – eg, motion tracking that produces different results with different skin tones – and cognitive bias such as gaze tracking that flags ADHD behaviors as suspicious. Such criticism last year led UC Berkeley [ PDF] and Baruch College in New York to stop using remote proctoring products.
