1 of 33

Academic integrity and access without surveillance: Strategies to reduce the harms of academic surveillance technologies

Sarah Silverman, PhD

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

2 of 33

Important notes

Please use this time, this space, and technology however you see fit

Session is planned for 1 hour and 15 minutes

Most of plans for today assume some familiarity with educational technology, the concept of surveillance and its harms, and familiarity with different technology enabled learning formats

3 of 33

About me

My name is Sarah (she/her)
Visual description: White woman with short brown hair wearing metallic glasses frames and a leopard print dress
I am an educator focusing on disability studies, pedagogy, and educational technology
I have been active in the movement to raise awareness about the harms of surveillance technology, with a focus on remote proctoring

4 of 33

Agenda

Review landscape of academic surveillance technology and its harms

Consider “fundamental values of academic integrity”

Introduce “harm reduction” framework

Apply learning to two case studies

Next steps and goal setting

5 of 33

Opening Reflection

6 of 33

Opening Reflection: Temperature check on Academic Integrity and Surveillance

In the past several years, especially related to the emergency remote teaching period of the pandemic, many teachers in higher ed have interacted with technologies that relate to academic integrity (such as remote proctoring software, plagiarism detection software, and more recently AI detection software). Coming in to the session today, how are you feeling about these products, or the general conversation around academic integrity and educational technology?

Write, draw, or simply think about your response. Verbal and non-verbal responses will be welcomed after the reflection period.

7 of 33

What has been will be again (article from 2002)

8 of 33

What has been will be again (2020 before COVID)

9 of 33

Activity 1: What is academic surveillance technology?

10 of 33

Academic Surveillance Technology: What is it?

Term introduced by Ian Linkletter - sued by company Proctorio for sharing what company deemed private videos about how the product works
I use to distinguish technologies that have a primary purpose to surveil and punish rather than educational purposes

Primary examples

Remote proctoring software
Plagiarism or AI detection software

Some technologies are edtech w/a side of surveillance

LMS
Social reading/annotation

11 of 33

Harms of Academic Surveillance Technology

They depend on the technology, but they are well documented

12 of 33

Harms of Academic Surveillance Technology

They depend on the technology, but they are well documented

13 of 33

Normality and Abnormality

Many academic surveillance technologies function on the assumption that “abnormality” can be used a proxy for wrongdoing.

From Proctorio documentation: “Abnormal behaviors are calculated with respect to the rest of the class and are factored into the suspicion level. Test taker’s who have behaviors that are slightly different from the rest of the exam session will be highlighted.”

Three implications for accessibility:

Disabled students can be actively harmed by increasing flagging and accusations
Assistive devices cannot be used without “permission”
The level of surveillance can result in forced disclosure

14 of 33

Consider the “Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity”

Honesty
Trust
Fairness
Respect
Responsibility
Courage

15 of 33

Taxonomy of AST

	Academic surveillance technology	Edtech that includes surveillance components (surveillance on the side)	General use technologies to use w/caution
Examples (feel free to add your own	Remote proctoring software Plagiarism detection software AI detection software (for education)	Most LMSs (e.g. Canvas, Blackboard) Textbook homework platforms Textbook apps (McGraw Hill Connect)	Google docs Zoom Teams

16 of 33

4th party surveillance

17 of 33

4th party surveillance

18 of 33

Activity 2: Possible responses to academic surveillance technology (and drawbacks)

19 of 33

Responses to Academic Surveillance Technology

	Benefits	Drawbacks
Going “low-tech” (e.g. pen and paper exams or assignments in class)
Denial (ignoring academic integrity concerns, not responding to legitimate evidence of cheating)
Abstinence/refusal (refusal to use any product that can harm students)
Course redesign/authentic assessment

20 of 33

Responses to Academic Surveillance Technology

	Benefits	Drawbacks
Going “low-tech” (e.g. pen and paper exams or assignments in class)	Avoids surveillance by companies and algorithms Doesn’t require technological knowledge Certainty (maybe) that students aren’t cheating Fairness but not equity May support other educational aims	Limited accessibility No benefits of technology-enhanced learning Labor drawback None of the benefits of “take home” or multiple formats, or mimicking professional settings
Denial (ignoring academic integrity concerns, not responding to legitimate evidence of cheating, or denying risks of surveillance)	Does not introduce “pedagogy of suspicion”	Loss of credibility with students who see academic integrity as a problem Does not create trust
Abstinence/refusal (refusal to use any product that can harm students)	No risks of surveillance Surveillance capabilities rapidly change (you may be using a “safe” product and it becomes unsafe)	Risk losing credibility with institution, colleagues, accrediting associations
Course redesign/authentic assessment	May match teaching philosophy (inclusive, feminist, critical) Brings focus to design rather than individual student/teacher failings	Not everyone has the time or resources to do it Ultimately it is a pedagogical choice that not everyone will make

21 of 33

Harm reduction as an approach to educational technology

Approach derived from substance use education and sex education

Rather than assuming people will engage in things safely and with consideration of risks, proactively provide education on risks, safety, navigating difficult situations
Alternative to abstinence/refusal and denial of risks

22 of 33

Why might a teacher or a student not be able to abstain from academic surveillance (or adjacent) technologies?

23 of 33

Activity 3: How to do harm reduction

24 of 33

Why harm reduction?

Technology is essential in education

Accessibility
Availability of knowledge and resources
Communication

Removing options out of fear creates barriers
(I believe) we shouldn’t endeavor to “go back in time” to before technology in education
Context is not the same for every teacher, student, and technology

25 of 33

Principles of Harm Reduction for AST

Take a proactive approach to minimize the harms of surveillance technology to students (rather than just ignoring them).
Whenever possible, offer options to avoid or reduce surveillance/invasion of privacy. Not all students and instructors will make the same decisions, and that is ok.
Critically evaluate options with equity in mind. For example, is the most private option also the least accessible?

26 of 33

Harm reduction steps/flowchart

Step	Details
Determine needs	Establish or problematize the “hierarchy of needs”
Determine options for meeting needs	Aim for several options
Attempt to transition from academic surveillance technologies to general edtechs or general technologies	E.g. Remote proctoring software to zoom E.g. Social reading edtechs to google docs w/comments
If Edtechs with surveillance capabilities must be used consider turning them off	Also notify students how the will and won’t be used
If academic surveillance tech must be used, focus on opt-out procedures, protecting students who refuse, and redress for any harms	Plan to confront people pushing the technologies once more harms have been documented

27 of 33

Harm reduction flow chart

Determine needs

Distinguish between teacher/student needs and administrative or policy needs
Establish or problematize the “hierarchy of needs”

Determine options for meeting needs - aim for multiple options
If technologies are being used, focus on transitioning from academic surveillance technologies to general technologies (e.g. remote proctoring software to Zoom, surveillant co-reading software to google docs)
If Edtechs “with a side of surveillance” must be used consider turning off surveillance features or notifying students how they will/won’t be used
If true academic surveillance technologies must be used (because of policy or external requirements) focus on availability of opt-out, protecting students who refuse, and redress for harms done

28 of 33

Activity 4: Case studies

29 of 33

Scenario 1: Jewel

A student in your class (Jewel) has an opportunity to visit her sister in another state who just had a baby. She approaches you and says this is a big moment for her family, and that she would like to go be with her sister. She will miss one week of class. You have already set up your own systems for students who can’t come to an on-site class (they can choose from remote attendance or completing alternative activities on their own). However, a one-hour, closed book exam is scheduled for one of the days she will miss. Ordinarily, you would just offer for Jewel to take the exam during your office hours next week, but you will also be physically off-site for a conference next week (and conducting classes by Zoom). Wanting to be helpful, she mentions that friends of hers have used Proctorio to do remote exams and suggests that this could be a convenient option. The student wants to complete their work but doesn’t want to introduce any suspicion of cheating since they are not under observation.

What are some ways to work through this situation?

30 of 33

Scenario 2: Nate

A student in your class (Nate) is entitled to an accommodation for timed exams (getting 1.5 times the regularly allotted amount). Typically, the student will take exams in the disability office, where they are proctored by one of the disability office staff members. Nate also needs to do the exams on a computer because of their disability,while the rest of the class uses a combination of a scantron sheet and pencil and paper for longer questions. As someone who is skeptical of the surveillance that students are subjected to through educational technology products, you haven’t been that interested in setting up technology enabled assessments.

A few days before an upcoming assessment, Nate comes to you and says that they have been informed that the disability office is implementing new academic integrity protocols in response to concerns about students using ChatGPT and other AI tools while they complete assessments in the office. Because of both staffing shortages (there are not enough staff members to proctor all the students) and these academic integrity concerns, students will now be monitored by video camera and or a remote proctoring tool if they take any assessment. Nate is disturbed by this development, concerned that they are being subjected to increased surveillance because of their disability. They ask for your help in either advocating for them at the disability office, or providing some other way to take the exam but still use their accommodations.

What are some ways to approach this situation?

31 of 33

Closing Reflection

32 of 33

Questions for the end of this session and the future

What were key takeaways from the session today in terms of

Information or new knowledge:

Strategies you might like to use:

Remaining questions or areas for further exploration: